Till We Have Faces: C. S. Lewis's Textual Metamorphosis
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Till We Have Faces: C. S. Lewis’s Textual Metamorphosis by Tamar Patricia Zehr A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts in English - Literary Studies Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2012 © Tamar Patricia Zehr 2012 Author’s Declaration I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii Abstract C. S. Lewis’s novel, Till We Have Faces, has been misunderstood by both scholars and readers alike. This paper seeks to read the text through the lens of Lewis’s own literary criticism. It begins by presenting Lewis’s fundamental dilemma of the mind, the rift between the rational and the imaginative faculties. Lewis posits myth as a “partial solution” to this problem. This paper traces Lewis’s ideas from his early position on myth as “beautiful lies” to the more nuanced, later position where myth is connected with terms like “truth,” “reality,” “fact” and “history.” Using the text of “On Stories,” and the chapter “On Myth” from Lewis’s book An Experiment in Criticism, this paper argues that Lewis, because of the basic elusiveness of mythic experience, steps into the use of story or narrative as a provisional solution for the dilemma of the mind. This is then applied to Till We Have Faces, arguing that the story is not a myth or an allegory, but a realistic novel with a hidden mythic reality, a Lewisian narrative that fulfills his requirements of Story. A close reading of Till We Have Faces connects the text with Lewis’s realism of content and realism of presentation. This reading then places the text within the problem of rationality set against imaginative reception. Till We Have Faces is a test case for Lewis’s extensive ideas about Divine Myth, its hiddenness behind and within narrative, and its power to heal a divided mind. The narrative of Till We Have Faces, for the main character Orual, as well as for the receptive reader, comes to embody the transformative power of extra- literary myth within the containment of word-dense, tensed story. iii Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the gentle encouragement and support from my supervisor, Dr. John North. His patience and understanding throughout the entire process was essential for the completion of this project. In addition, a special thank you to Dr. Norman Klassen for his excellent reading and review of the thesis. I would like to thank the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and the University of Waterloo for financial assistance that enabled me to concentrate on this project. I also must thank my husband, Matthew Zehr, for all his support, and I appreciate the invaluable encouragement from both our families. Special mention to those who provided childcare, especially to my parents, Frank and Pat McCurdy. The help and support from Anna Zehr and Esther Bean deserves special mention—they tackled many grammatical details early in the writing of this paper. iv Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my husband, Matthew Zehr. His patience and encouragement has made the work worthwhile. v Table of Contents Author’s Declaration ........................................................................................................................ ii Abstract ............................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... iv Dedication ............................................................................................................................................ v List of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................... vii Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter1: The Dilemma of a Divided Life………………………………………………………………..6 Reason and Imagination ........................................................................................................................... 6 Myth as the “Partial Solution” ............................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 2: Lewis’s Mythic Focus ................................................................................................ 24 Pagan Mythology ....................................................................................................................................... 24 The Turn: Myth + Fact .............................................................................................................................. 29 Chapter 3: The Dilemma of Elusive Mythic Tasting ............................................................. 37 Story: Human Narrative as a Vessel for Divine Myth .................................................................... 37 Story: A Provisional Solution ................................................................................................................ 45 Chapter 4: Till We Have Faces ..................................................................................................... 53 Textual Metamorphosis: Pagan Myth Retold as Story .................................................................. 53 Till We Have Faces: Realisms ................................................................................................................. 64 Chapter 5: Story as Transformation ......................................................................................... 77 Orual: A Divided Life ................................................................................................................................ 77 Orual: Learning to Taste ......................................................................................................................... 89 Bibliography .................................................................................................................................. 103 vi List of Abbreviations AL The Allegory of Love AMR All My Road Before Me CL I, II, III Collected Letters, Vol. I, II, and III DT The Dark Tower and other stories EC Essay Collection: Faith, Christianity and the Church EIC An Experiment in Criticism EL English Literature in the Sixteenth Century FL The Four Loves GD The Great Divorce GID God in the Dock GMD George MacDonald: An Anthology GO A Grief Observed LM Prayer: Letters to Malcolm M Miracles MC Mere Christianity OTOW Of This and Other Worlds Pere Perelandra Poems Poems PPL A Preface to ‘Paradise Lost’ PR The Pilgrim’s Regress R Rehabilitations and Other Essays RP Reflections on the Psalms SBJ Surprised by Joy SIB Spirits in Bondage SLE Selected Literary Essays SMR Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Literature TLB The Last Battle TST They Stand Together TWHF Till We Have Faces VDT The Voyage of the Dawn Treader WG The Weight of Glory and other Addresses vii Introduction Dabney Adams Hart has correctly identified myth as the key component of C.S. Lewis’s works, noting, “Lewis’s idea about the function of myth in the human imagination was the heart and core of all his writing in every form” (Through 8-9). Myth is, one might say, the “master key” to Lewis’s ideas, just as myth itself, according to Lewis, is the “master key” hidden within a story that can be used on any door in a reader’s imaginative realm that he might wish (OTOW 115). Defining myth, however, has proven to be both divisive and elusive, eliciting a whole range of reactions, from the negative dismissal of myth as a fabricated (and thus meaningless) structure of primitive religion to the search for the mythopoeic and the creation of modern-day mythologies in an attempt to escape an abstracted world.1 The prevailing equation within most of these definitions, and among the first reactions to the word myth itself, posits myth as the equivalent to falsehood, unreality, and baseless assertion. Many dictionaries, including the OED, list a bipartite definition, labeling myth either as a “traditional story” (usually with supernatural components) that explains or justifies the beliefs, history, or rituals within a particular society or as an “erroneous story,” a fiction that results in a “misrepresentation of the truth” (“myth” 1a, 2a). The mid-twentieth century bulge in myth-criticism within literary theory is positioned around thinkers like Mircea Eliade, Joseph Campbell, and Northrop Frye2 following the earlier 1 The recent surge of mythopoeic entertainment in pop culture is an example of the mass-market appeal of alternate worlds that contain their own mythological underpinnings. Examples include the Harry Potter books and movies, the re-workings of fairy tales like Snow White, and the recent surge in vampire-themed novels and movies. 2 Hart, in her work titled Through The Open Door: A New Look at C. S. Lewis, considers Lewis to be “avant-garde as a critic” who positions myth as primary in literature before Joseph Campbell, Mircea Eliade and Northrop Frye’s work on myth (12). Michael Ward, in Planet Narnia also mentions these three scholars in conjunction with Lewis’s view that “there are certain foundational archetypes that recur in cultures the world