Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Re: [mythsoc] Pullman about Lewis

Expand Messages
  • David S. Bratman
    ... John Goldthwaite. It s a stunning book - stunningly bad, in my opinion. His denunciation of Narnia outdoes anything I ve seen elsewhere from even the most
    Message 1 of 9 , Nov 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Sophie Masson wrote:

      > I know that Philip thought quite a lot of Peter Goldthwaite's book, The
      > Natural History of Make-Believe, which is actually written by a man with a
      > Christian point of view, but which is rather scathing about both Tolkien and
      > Lewis(but complimentary say about Greene or Collodi). I've bought the book
      > and read it; it's interesting and wellwritten though I'm not convinced by
      > Goldthwaite's arguments. Basically he doesn't like the idea of sub-creation,
      > as Tolkien put it.

      John Goldthwaite. It's a stunning book - stunningly bad, in my opinion.
      His denunciation of Narnia outdoes anything I've seen elsewhere from even
      the most fanatical anti-Narnian, including Pullman. His argument against
      Tolkien's theory of sub-creation is to charge that Tolkien was a bad
      Christian by advancing it, since to subcreate is (Goldthwaite says) to
      imply that there is something insufficient about God's primary creation,
      and thereby to insult God and accuse Him of imperfection.

      Goldthwaite also spends pages upon pages on a bizarre theory of Lewis
      Carroll's writerly motivations that I can't even try to summarize.

      David Bratman
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.