On the Fall of Tor and Tinidril

Just to warn you, dear reader, from the beginning, this post will be more geared toward asking questions rather than offering my thoughts. Having said that, I did find Perelanda to be filled with beautiful imagery, marvellous characters, and fantastic ideas. If the work was not meant to be such an obvious analogue to the Fall of Man on Earth, its hinting toward the Adam and Eve account would have been heavy handed, to say the least. However, Lewis successfully walked the fine line he set out for himself, and pulled it off smartly.

Now on to the questions. Obviously, I do not expect an answer to these questions, considering the unfortunate complication that the author is no longer living. I cannot see why that should nonetheless stop me from asking them.

What did Lewis believe was the purpose of the Fall? Did he consider it necessary? What would he have suggested would have happened if it had not occurred? Did he reject the idea that the two first humans could not have born children without the Fall occurring? Where did he believe the adversary came from? What did he think of Eve and her choice? What about Adam and his? Did he think that the resurrection simply restores the soul and body to the state like unto those that our first parents possessed before the Fall?

I'm sure that he has answers to some of these recorded in other works in a fair amount of detail. Now it's my job to go find them.

Reading Old Books

Ah, old books. Truth be told, if a book is initially inviting and intensely riveting, it really doesn't concern me when it was published. However, I think Clive Staples (did anyone ever call him either of those names?) makes an excellent point in "On the Reading of Old Books" that we should be mindful to intersperse our enjoyment of modern novels with those published in an earlier time. His reasoning is, at least in part, that there are ideas and elements in societies that change with the passing of time, and to think that our own ideas and elements are the best that could possibly exist would be just as foolish as if the Greeks or the Romans thought the same thing. Thus acknowledging that our modern philosophies are imperfect, we would then do well to discover what superior gems may be found from past cultures (since those from the future are sadly unavailable) so we might thereby be further enlightened.

I think this is both an excellent observation and a valuable piece of advice.Nevertheless, I actually think it could be taken further. I believe that time is not the only barrier that separates individuals from new philosophies. Divides cultural, political, and lingual also do a fine job splitting people, and consequently ideas, apart. Even though I would do well to heed my own advice, many great things can be learned from our contemporaries in other lands and of other languages. In fact, I think Lewis' suggestion of switching off from old and new books could benefit from the insertion of foreign works into the rotation as well.

A Little Off Topic

Alright, so this is admittedly a tangent based on the readings for this week, specifically from the first paragraph of "Myth Became Fact." Unfortunately I'm under a time crunch so I won't be able to give the topic even the smallest bit of attention it deserves. Scratching the surface it is, then.

When Lewis was beginning his essay, he introduced the accusation levelled by his friend Cornelius that original Christianity is little, if anything, like modern day Christianity. This struck me as being very similar to a few works I've been reading lately that have discussed how Mormonism in Joseph Smith's time differed from current Mormonism. While I do not think the ramifications of the suggestions are even close to the same (in Mormonism's case, the suggestion does not disprove the validity of the religion), there is definitely some value in discussing what differences exist and why the differences came to be.

I wish that I had the time to pick apart the assertions I've read, but again, time does not allow for it. Hopefully there will be an opportunity to do so in the future.

On a Personal Note

I've been kicking the topic of this post around, trying to decide whether I actually wanted to record it here. However, I finally decided that part of the ideal learning experience involves sharing parts of yourself that you might prefer to leave untouched. The issue in question concerns why Lewis felt relieved when he initially apostatized from Christianity, specifically how he hated going to bed each evening because he would inevitably have to attend to what he thought were mandatory obligations in prayer. These obligations would extend the lengths of his prayers to unreasonably long durations, thus provoking the aforementioned misery about attending to them.

I honestly was astounded to hear him discuss this topic, mainly because I've found that I have been struggling with something very similar. What I had, until reading Lewis' account, been demanding of myself every night also made me avoid going to bed, which combined with the time requirement to complete my obligations, had resulted in perpetual sleep deprivation. I found myself wishing to avoid my communion with Heavenly Father simply because of how long it took, Furthermore, my prayers got to the point where they did not feel like conversations and instead felt like repetitions that were sincere, but were nonetheless repetitions.

Thankfully, Lewis' record prompted me to recognize that I was not conducting myself as I should be, and should thus cut down on the number of items that I need to pray about every day. Although I'm still working at improving my prayers, I have noticed progress and have discovered that I do not dread starting them anymore.