I have read bios of both J R R Tolkien and C S Lewis and both attribute Tolkien to being a huge influence as to why Lewis converted. Upon looking at the characters in the story he is not mentiond as being a character, is this true? And why leave out the greatest person to convince him to become Christian?
shareThere is only so much "story" one can comfortably fit into a feature film. I think the writer decided to concentrate on the relationship between Lewis and Joy. Perhaps one day someone will write a movie script that tells Lewis's life story? This would include his conversion from atheism to Christianity of course. He is so well known to most people from his writings, maybe they tried to avoid boring audiences with well worn info...
shareLewis and Tolkien had a big falling out and never spoke again. The story might take place after that happened. Or they just didn't have time to include it.
"I pardon you." Schindler's List
really? never heard about that before
Peter: Chris everything I say is a lie...except that...and that...and that
I've heard Lewis's literary executor Walter Hooper say that the producers of the film wanted to turn Tolkien into the villain of the piece. In fact of course there was no falling out between them. Tolkien didn't approve of Lewis's marriage because Joy was a divorcee. But he and Lewis disagreed about religion as well, and he hated Narnia, but they didn't fall out about these things either. Tolkien didn't actually argue with Lewis about his marriage. He just felt that Lewis's argument (that Joy's husband Gresham was himself a divorcee) was logical but also self-serving.
The real problem with "no Tolkien" in the film, though, is that the film gives Lewis lots of made up friends who aren't really his friends in the film anyway, and they're all awful. In real life Tolkien liked Joy and he liked Americans. And Joy herself was hardly the wholesome, innocent person portrayed by Miss Winger. (The producers were embarrassed about her, actually. According to Hooper they were embarrassed that in real life she wore a fur coat. They were also embarrassed about Lewis's Christianity -- for example, that he had an image of the Turin Shroud in his bedroom.)
Indeed there's one bit in the film when Joy says "You don't look like CS Lewis." Well duh! Not only does Hopkins not look like Lewis but he doesn't sound like him or act at all like him either. Lewis was a fat, jolly, bald man, who had a very deep voice and a very warm, funny, outgoing personality. According to Douglas in real life, you could hardly be with him for ten minutes without laughing. His personality also comes across in almost all his books: he's almost always very cheerful and ebullient. The character Anthony Hopkins plays is almost the complete opposite of CS Lewis. In fact he really is almost more like Tolkien than Lewis, because Tolkien was a much quieter, less extrovert character than Lewis was. His life would also make a better love-story than Lewis's, and it would have to have much more to do with his writing.
And that's the real problem. At the time the play was first written, Lewis's Christian writing was very unpopular with non-Christians. (It still is, but now it has a greater following amongst Christians and there is a bigger "CS Lewis fanbase".) Tolkien's stories were likewise very unpopular with snobbish, trendy people. The result was a play in which the seriousness of Lewis' faith, which in part grew out of his relationship with Tolkien, is seriously downplayed. So are his Narnia stories, which themselves grew out of Tolkien's Middle-earth stories. The result, in fact, is a run-off-the-mill Hollywood love-story, albeit one for older audiences that doesn't have any sex-scenes in it. (And why not? one wonders.) It's beautifully done, of course. Hopkins sounds lovely as usual, Oxfordshire looks beautiful, the 1950s setting is charming, Edward Hardwicke is just as comforting and reassuring as he was as Dr Watson in Granada's Sherlock Holmes series, even Debra Winger is bearable and Joseph Mazzello is simply delightful. But it's not nearly as interesting as what really happened!
well since the falling out betwixt the two friends occurred specifically because of Joy, i'm pretty sure that it did not take place after the events in the film.
shareI was wondering the same thing when I heard this story adapted as a radio drama a few nights ago. I'm not sure about the "falling out" between them, but I would agree that the story was probably more focused on the relationship between Jack and Joy. I'd personally be much more upset if they made a Ralph Vaughan Williams story and left Holst out of it... But then again, it's only in my mind that a "RVW story" would ever exist... o.0
--Tuiereol
He has a footprint on his face because he has been kissing the ground you walk upon.
I've read quite a lot about Tolkien and his works and his relations...
You can be sure, there was "a falling out" between them. And Tolkien did dislike Narnia books a lot... ("hate" imho is a bit too strong word)
But that reading was some time ago... so I don't remember when exactly that falling out happened (so whether it was at that time or not).
Though, I think the "leaving out JRRT" had little to do with such things. An average movie-goer obviously does not know about such details (and doesn't care!).
However, it is a lot more likely that an average movie-goer knows who JRR Tolkien was. So, imo leaving out Tolkien was wise because it would have torn attention from the story to the "famous writer". (And JRRT is DEFINITELY many-many times more famous in the world than CS Lewis.)
Oh... thanks!
He has a footprint on his face because he has been kissing the ground you walk upon.
(And JRRT is DEFINITELY many-many times more famous in the world than CS Lewis.)
As a tuba player and great fan of Ralph..... we can always hope :)
shareTolkien rightfully hated Narnia. I hate it myself, for the exact same reasons.
I never knew there was a "falling out" between Tolkien and Lewis. Do you have any sources?
__________________________
"Let me give that oatmeal
some brrrowwn shugah!"
-GOB
In the Lewis biography titled "C.S. Lewis Through the Shadowlands", on which this film is based, the author touches briefly on the falling-out between Tolkien and Lewis. I don't have my copy handy, so I'm just going by memory here, but it did have something to do with Lewis's marriage to Joy Gresham. As a very devout Catholic, Tolkien didn't approve of Lewis marrying a divorcee.
Because the film centers on the relationship, and ultimately marriage, between Lewis and Gresham, having Tolkien as a character would not make much sense, given his feelings toward the situation.
It could be that Tolkien was left out of the film because the filmmakers were unable to obtain permission to portray him. Just a guess, though.
Tolkien and Lewis had a period of "coolness", not a complete end to their friendship. They later reconciled completely and vistited during the last months of Lewis' life.
shareActually, I seem to remember from "Surprised by Joy" that the Lewises and the Tolkiens had dinners together and they played Scrabble over 7 different languages.
Tolkien, as a Catholic, may well have disagreed with Lewis marrying a divorcee, but as others point out, they disagreed on a lot of things. That doesn't translate into a falling out.
You mean you hate it because its a Christian allegory?
Now, I'm not Christian, but that part of it never bothered me. The things I don't like about it have more to do with the dated, sexist attitudes to everything. I must admit to not like CS Lewis's characters, I think Edmund is the only remotely interesting character out of the main four, with Peter being a smug, annoying little ****...little person, Susan being about as 'damsel in distress' as you could be and Lucy obviously born without a spine. Poor girl.
What reason did Tolkien give to hate Narnia?
These two seem like two old ???? no, I won't say it, but for writers
of fantasy I wonder why they would not be more supportive of each
other.
Personally given a choice I would never read fantasy ... not that
every work is not fantasy to some extent ... but I life to at least
try to get something close to reality. Perhaps that is why I did not
enjoy this movie as much as I would have liked ... it seemed to
contorted.
I don’t know what chasingafterthe_wind was a talking about specifically and I wish I could answer your question with a greater certainty, but all I know is that Tolkien didn’t like the way Lewis mixed all sorts of literary and mythological elements together. I believe Tolkien felt he himself focused overwhelmingly on Anglo-Saxon mythology in The Lord of the Rings in a more thorough and consistent manner, and he didn’t like Lewis combining various mythological creatures with talking animals. For Lewis’s part he had been fascinated with talking animals since he was a little child (the talking animal short stories that he wrote as a child have even been published in a book entitled “Boxen,” a sort of prototype for Narnia). The inspiration for the idea of the children in Narnia in armor fighting like medieval knights probably came from his brother Warnie, who specialized in medieval history and who would always inject such stories into their games together as children. Lewis himself was also particularly interested in what life was like in the Middle Ages in Europe (see his “The Discarded Image”). Like Tolkien, Lewis was particularly fascinated by Germanic/Norse mythology (especially Wagner’s retelling of these stories), as well as with ancient Greek and Roman mythology (his own favorite of his books is a retelling of the mythological story of Cupid and Psyche in novel form, entitled “Till We Have Faces”). All three of these aspects (talking animals, medieval knights/costumes, and various mythologies) he combined to make Narnia. Tolkien did not like such eclecticism.
I also suspect that Tolkien looked down on the Narnia books as being too childish and not thorough enough in creating a new world of their own. Tolkien loved the idea of figuring out all the details of his imaginary world, even figuring out details and background information about Middle Earth that he never used in his books. He believed that the best fantasy should read as if it really happened, almost like a narrative of a true story. Lewis, on the other hand, just wrote his Narnia books quickly and came up with only as much information about Narnia as he could use for each book.
And just to note: Lewis was quite supportive of Tolkien’s Ring books. Tolkien, who wrote very slowly, may never have finished them, if it were not for Lewis’s encouragement and interest. Tolkien, for his part, was supportive of many of Lewis’s other writings.
For the record, Warnie's focus was not medieval history, but the French court in the 17th century. He published seven books on the subject, which is no small feat.
share
And that's the real problem. At the time the play was first written, Lewis's Christian writing was very unpopular with non-Christians. (It still is, but now it has a greater following amongst Christians and there is a bigger "CS Lewis fanbase".) Tolkien's stories were likewise very unpopular with snobbish, trendy people. The result was a play in which the seriousness of Lewis' faith, which in part grew out of his relationship with Tolkien, is seriously downplayed.
I've always felt that in a way Christopher Riley was supposed to be a Tolkienesque figure, in that Christopher's two most important attributes in the film, that he disapproved of Jack and Joy's relationship and that he couldn't stand Lewis's Narnia books, were also characertistics of Tolkien. Of course, I mean this very loosely, as naturally Tolkien was a Christian and not pompous and sarcastic like Christopher. Clearly, though the group with Lewis at the pub was intended to represent the Inklings.
shareI think that many people are missing the most salient points here...perhaps there was no Tolkien in the movie because putting him in would have shifted the natute of the film. It wasn't about Lewis and Tolkien, nor was it, really, anything to do with Lewis' conversion to Christianity, wihich happened long before his marriage to Joy Gresham, at any rate.
More to the point, No David Gresham? I wonder what reason the producers would give for having one of the Gresham children just disappear?
Well, not having David Gresham in the movie was not the fault of the producers, it was the fault of the play upon which they based the movie. I imagine the playwrite thought that a stronger relationship could be built between Lewis and the boy and the boy and his mother, if there was only one child. Furthermore, child actors can be more complicated to work with on the stage. Also, like you pointed out, the main focus of the film is the relationship between Jack and Joy. The fewer other characters the more focus that can be put on the two main ones. Of the two children, Douglas was the natural one to pick because he was closer to Lewis.
shareTolkien wasn't in the film because storywise, his influence in Jack's life was more dramatic before the events in this story took place (Jack's conversion to Christianity). And also, the Tolkien estate would have had to been paid. They are very protective of how his image is used.
Tolkien didn't like the Narnia stories (especially LL&W) because the allegory was too simple for him. Each character represented only one person or concept. There weren't enough layers and depth for his literary taste.
You should read Lewis' Space Trilogy: Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and "That Hideous Strength. The main character, Dr. Elwin Ransom, is based on Tolkien. He is an Oxford Don, and a philologist (language expert).
In the introduction to LOTR, Tolkien says that he doesn't like allegory at all. Tolkien wrote his stories like they were history, deeper meaning to events was up to the reader to decide, and interpretations can vary from reader to reader. Lewis in the Narnia books wrote a very specific allegory, things very specifically represent things decided upon by Lewis, and are not open to the interpenetration of the individual reader.
I personally enjoy both series, although Narnia does feel a little more childish in its style now that I'm older.
After Lewis died in 1963, Tolkien said in his letters to family and friends that they had ceased to be close about 10 years before, due first to Lewis's friendship with Charles Williams and then by his marriage "of which he never even told me; I learned of it long after the event" (letter to Michael Tolkien November or December 1963).
- That passed the time.
- It would have passed in any case.
Interesting, different-drummer. I wonder if he was referring to their first marriage ceremony or their second. Since the first was primarily just about keeping Joy from being deported, I can imagine Lewis not spreading the news about it. At any rate, it's too bad that these two great literary figures grew apart in later years.
shareThe mixing of talking animals, medieval culture and various mythologies is what I enjoy most from the Narnia books. Tolkien seems too particular. Why can't he write what he wants to write in his fantasy and let other people write what they want in their fantasy.
**********
“We must try not to sink beneath our anguish, Harry, but battle on.” -Albus Dumbledore
[deleted]
Another author he knew at Oxford was Arthur C. Clarke
shareIn the Lewis biography titled "C.S. Lewis Through the Shadowlands", on which this film is based,
__________________________________________________________
The book was based on the movie!
Another author he knew at Oxford was Arthur C. Clarke
___________________________________________________________
Clarke wasn't at Oxford!
While there was never what could be called a "falling-out" between Tolkien and Lewis, their once very close friendship certainly cooled. Some reasons have been given here. I will add a few more:
1. We must not forget that Lewis was raised as an Ulster protestant. Tolkien may have had some hopes that Lewis would join him as a fellow Catholic after his conversion from atheist/agnostic, and he was probably a bit hurt and disappointed that he never did, but sometimes let slip unfavourable remarks
about Catholicism.
2. While Lewis' friendship was enormously important to Tolkien, Lewis himself was ever ready to embrace new friends, among them Charles Williams whom Tolkien quite disliked albeit him being a fellow Christian, but with a bent for the occult. He did not like seeing Lewis' friendship shared so freely.
3. He must have been hurt by Lewis not confiding in him about marrying Joy. As an old friend, who wouldn't be? Furthermore, their circle of friends was all male, and it was never suggested that anyone should bring his wife, say for a meeting with the Inklings. Still, when Jack met and befriended Joy, he was very impressed with her and wanted/expected his friends to be the same and accept her into their circle. Apparently, many of Lewis' friends rather disliked Joy's brashness, Tolkien also.
So there were more than one reasons for the cooling off of their friendship. Lewis was aware of this, but not of the reason why. He even asked Christopher, Tolkien's son about it, but he declined to say though he may have known.
Clarke wasn't at Oxford!
[deleted]