In the process of reading Surprised by Joy, C.S. Lewis's autobiographical account of his religious journey. In the course of things, I find myself comparing his way of writing to that of J.R.R. Tolkien, who was his close friend and colleague.
As much as I love both authors, I have alwys found Lewis's work to be deeper, more mature, and more profound than Tolkien's. Lewis always seems to have a thoughtfulness and a reflectiveness that his colleagues just doesn't seem to have for me. Tolkien's epics are grand and poetic and powerful, but they never seem to thematically go as deep. But I think it comes from the way the two men think. Tolkien had the disadvantage of having lived comfortably in his beliefs for the entirety of his life; he never had any need to dig or wrestle with anything, and it shows in the way his work just seems to take certain concepts for granted as truths of the universe. Lewis, on the other hand, is much more reflective-- he had to struggle to any surety under the exacting criticism of his own standards. Lewis, if you read any of what I call his personal works, those written about his personal matters, is an intensely self-aware man, and you can tell he came to it only by the stark and ruthless self-examination he enforced in his struggle toward understanding of his life and his philosophy as it related to God and the universe. I think this difference in the two men shows very much so in their writing. It's the reason why I love Lewis, in fact, and the reason I would say I prefer him to Tolkien.
0 comments:
Post a Comment