I have my second Tutorial today. I am also going to be mailing out postcards and doing laundry. Definitely will be doing laundry...
Here is my Second Tutorial Essay:
Introduction:
Here is my Second Tutorial Essay:
What is ‘myth’
according to C.S. Lewis, and how useful is it as a category for reading
literature?
Prepared for Dr.
Jonathan Kirkpatrick
with the SCIO Oxford
Summer Programme
by Veronica Schneider
Introduction:
C.S.
Lewis has a rather unique connection with myth. When he was a young child he
found great enjoyment in reading mythology form the northern areas of Europe.
He fondly called it the “Northerness”. He would use these myths as an escape
from the everyday and they helped him stumble upon the all illusive joy.
Later
in life though, the concept of myth led him to greater things. It was myth,
Lewis claims in Surprised by Joy, which led him to find Christianity again. “If
ever a myth had become fact, had been incarnated, it would be just like this
(Christianity).” (pg. 274)
Lewis
revered myth not for what it could promise him but because it was so awe
inspiring in itself. This later helped him revere God in a similar way. Lewis
states in Surprised by Joy “God was to be obeyed simply because he was God.
Long since, through the gods of Asgard, and later through the notion of the
Absolute, He had taught me how a thing can be revered not for what it can do
for us but for what it is in itself.” (pg. 269) He did not limit myth to just
that of the bible though. According to William Gray, Lewis thought that “Other
myths could have some measure of 'truth' insofar as they referred unconsciously
to the 'true' myth of Christ. This is the old Christian idea of the Greek poets
being—like the Hebrew prophets—a preparatio evangelica”
Myth According to Lewis
“The stories I am
thinking of always have a very simple narrative shape – a satisfactory and
inevitable shape” C.S. Lewis[1]
One
may think of the gods of the North with their rough and tough appearances or
the Greek and Roman gods who seemed to play human chess with us on earth, when
the word myth is mentioned. The Greek definition for myth is a collection of
stories. In my Intro to Folklore and
Mythology class the professor termed myth as being derived from mythos
meaning truth. C.S. Lewis describes myth a little differently. He took more
care in the explanation of myth so that it may be used as a categorization
aid.
When
Lewis is clarifying his description for myth he begins by talking about a
story. He describes this type of story as “a particular kind of story (which) has
a value in itself – a value independent of its embodiments in any literary
work.”(pg. 41) This story does not need a particular author to tell it or
artist to shape it. It is its own independent form and the artists seem to be
able to capture it in various forms.
In
trying to describe these exquisite stories Lewis did not think that the word
myth as it had been defined earlier was quite the word that he was looking for
because it is such a general term. He thought using the term myth though was
better than coining his own term. So he set himself to the task of defining
myth.
There are six
parts to Lewis’ definition of myth:
1.
Myths are extra literary not due to the
Highest Common Factor (H.C.F). They have a mythical experience in common.
C.S.
Lewis thinks that under all mythical texts and stories there is a “great myth”
that is underlying. It seems to be an idea similar to Carl Jung’s theory of a
generalized archetype. The great myth is there and everyone has some bits and
pieces but not enough historical fact to make their myth the true myth. Hinduism
was, according to Lewis, close to achieving the true myth status in his eyes
but was not quite as developed as Christianity in the end.
2.
When you first hear a myth it gives you a
permanent object of contemplation which works upon you like a peculiar flavor
or quality.
Lewis
elaborates “The pleasure of myths depends hardly at all on such unusual
narrative attractions [such] as suspense or surprise.”(pg. 43) This is
interesting because in Surprised by Joy (which was published 6 years earlier)
Lewis talks about his experience in literary criticism and the effects of the
gospel as myths. “I was now too experienced in literary criticism to regard the
gospels as myths...They had not the mythical taste.”(pg. 274) Taste seems to
have been a factor that Lewis had been contemplating for some while.
3.
“Human sympathy is at a minimum”
projection into characters is not strong. “We feel indeed that the pattern of
their movements has a profound relevance to our own life, but we do not imaginatively
transport ourselves into theirs.” (pg. 44)
In
Lewis’ Till we have faces: a myth retold
he seems to disregard this clarifying point. He creates strong characters in
the text that you could transport yourself into rather than seeing a pattern. Taken
from a quote in our handout Lewis explains in a letter to Mrs. D Jessup why he
may have done this. Lewis writes “If there is more pity and depth in my last
book [Till we have faces] than its predecessors, perhaps my own recent life has
something to do with it.” This letter was written in 1957 which was around the
time that he married Joy Davidman. His recent marriage may have been what he
was alluding to in his letter.
4.
Myth is fantastic; it deals with
impossibles and preternaturals.
It
is interesting that Lewis choose to include the term preternatural in his
definition of myth. Preternatural as we discussed in class is the observation
that there is a phenomenon that is outside of the natural realm but does not
involve the supernatural powers of a deity. Yet in his sixth point of the myth
definition he points out that it is numinous which means that the myth must be
supernatural. What is the significance of Lewis’ inclusion of the preternatural
in this definition? If the supernatural is involved then would not one assume
that fantastic things will happen? It appears that he wants no assumptions that
one characteristic would be covered by another. Lewis has a clear idea on what myth entails
and he wants no mistake about that.
5.
The myth is always grave.
Lewis does not
mean that it cannot include joy within the text but there is no myth in his
mind that can be considered ‘comic’ myth. It seems to fall in line with the
thought that myth is spiritual and deeply awe inspiring for Lewis. He made a
point of it in his definition of myth. Gray brings up the possibility that myth
“represents a pathetic attempt by the middle-aged Lewis to console himself with
fantasy for the blighting of his emotional life by the death of his mother”
(pg. 163) in which case he would not want myth to be taken lightly.
6.
It also inspiring and numinous.
In order for a myth to be numinous it requires the
presence of the supernatural or divinity. Lewis does not a term that would
restrict it to require the myth to have God in it because that would defeat the
purpose that myth can represent the true myth, Christianity. He leaves it up to
the author to portray the numinous side of myth.
Myth as a Literary Category
Lewis’
intentions were not concerned with how myths came about. He was “concerned with
the effects of myths as the act on the conscious imagination...” “... It alone
exists as an object of contemplation.” “It is one more effort to seize, to
conceptualise, the important something which myth seems to suggest” (pg. 45)
Lewis
does however want to clarify that he is trying to provide a definition for
categorizing myths, he is basing it on the effects that it has on individuals,
and because of that he wants to further explain the two types of readers
(literary and unliterary) and how this definition for categorization will be
appreciated by one but not the other.
The
literary man will be able to distinguish that myth cannot be held to the same standard
as other literary works because myth is not dependent upon the literary form
like other types of stories are. There are so many other forms in which the
myth is expressed that the literary man will be able to see the myth in not
only poorly written pieces but also great works of literature and art. If the
words or author fail the true fantastic, numinous nature of the myth it does
not matter because the literary man will be able to spot it anyway.
The Unliterary man cannot appreciate this
though. Lewis claims that the unliterary man relies far too heavily on the author
and the literary form to carry them through the story. My colleague Katie
Ootsman and I were discussing a point which I had not thought about when
reading the term unliterary. We found the term “unliterary” can have a negative
connotation if the individual thinks that it is the same as “illiterate” which
means that the person has no form of education. This does not appear to be the
case that Lewis was trying to make. As Katie put it, it is like an
archaeologist and a national geographic photographer. The former is digging
into the story to find the myth underneath while the latter is looking for the
prettiest picture they can make in their mind.
Michael
Ward in Planet Narnia talks about
something that Lewis mentions in An
Experiment in Criticism, contemplation. Ward elaborates on the difference
between the two terms “Enjoyment, for Lewis, was to be distinguished from Contemplation...”
(pg. 16) Ward goes on to explain that C.S. Lewis wrote an essay on the
differences between the two titled ‘Meditation in a toolshed’. Lewis writes
about looking at a sunbeam in a dark toolshed. He makes the following
observation “Looking along the beam and looking at the beam are very different
experiences.” (pg. 17) He was heavily influenced by Samuel Alexander in this
regards.
If
you try to contemplate rather than enjoy a myth Ward says you can find the “quality
going dead and cold” (pg. 18) He goes on to say that “In the Alexander sense:
the atmosphere should be entered into so that it comprises our whole
imaginative vision.”(pg. 18) This goes back to our discussion in the literary
and unliterary man. One man, the unliterary, is looking at the beam and can only
contemplate what he sees right there in front of him. The other man, the
literary, looks along the sunbeam to see the wonderful world that has been
opened up for him by enjoying the myth and finding the true myth in the
literary work.
Conclusion
“...the
degree to which any story is a myth depends very largely on the person who
hears it or reads it.” (pg. 48) How useful then is it to have Lewis’ definition
of myth be the categorizer for literary works? Unless you can have a standard
categorization that is fairly universal then you will continue to have debates
on which works are or are not myths.
One
of Lewis’ requirements for myths is the second one in which the myth gives you
a peculiar taste or flavor. Ward points out that Lewis describes romanticism in
a similar way and how he states “...It is notoriously difficult to put these
tastes into words” (pg. 16) shows that while trying to describe a myth you
cannot always quantitatively nor qualitatively accomplish it. It is based on
the effects and emotions each individual feels. Is this truly a good way to
categorize literature? Leaving it up to the literary reader to feel whether or
not this specific text tastes like a myth?
It
does not appear to a definition that can be used universally. Although it does
provide more clarification on the subject of myth, it cannot be used to
categorize myths because it is too individualized. One person or even group
will feel that this work has myth in it and another individual or group might
think differently. What would the usefulness be to others to measure myth if
the definition on categorization changes depending on the person? While C.S.
Lewis provides wonderful insight on the subject of myth, his definition is too indescribable
to be able to categorize myths.
Word Count: 2045
The
above essay is all my own work: the source of all material used in its
compilation has been duly cited, and all help received is acknowledged. The
essay does not substantially duplicate material previously or simultaneously
submitted to academic staff at any academic institution.
Signature_______________________________________ Date_____________________
Works Cited
Gray, William.
"Death, Myth and Reality in C.S. Lewis." Journal of Beliefs &
Values:
Studies
in 18.2 (1997): 147-154. Taylor and
Francis Online. Web. 27 June 2013.
<http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1361767970180202>.
Lewis, C. S. An Experiment in Criticism.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1992.Print.
Lewis, C. S. Surprised
by Joy. Great Britain: Geoffrey Bles, 1955. Print.
Lewis, C. S. Till
We Have Faces: A Myth Retold. London: Fount , 1998. Print.
Ward, Michael. Planet Narnia. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
