Is it real? (9)

"Is it real?"

That's the question children ask when they read or hear a story.

For grown-ups (which is not necessarily a better or richer stage of life than childhood) the question becomes, "Is it true?"

We all know that Smaug isn't real (or do we...?), but could he possibly by true? That is, is Smaug a dragon as dragons should be, a monster with meaning, an enemy that must be carefully considered?

Some readers - including me - would argue that The Hobbit is TRUE even if it is not REAL. One thing that makes The Hobbit true for me is the scene between Gandalf and Beorn. Gandalf's clever manipulation of the dwarves' entry, his ability to string Beorn along with a stop-start-stop-start narrative, his wit in choosing just the right word to spin things his way - these are all things that I've seen in "real" life. The strategy, tone, and style are all familiar in their own way.

Is The Hobbit true for you? Why or why not? Please steer clear of simplistic generalizations: "I just really love it, you know?" Provide a clear example and explanation for your judgment. And avoid using broad examples that can't be pinned down. Pick a specific character, scene, conversation, setting, or description, and then break down for us how that example = true.

Comments are due by MIDNIGHT, MONDAY 3 DECEMBER.

Read vs See (8)

In his essay "On Fairy Stories," Tolkien argues that a fantasy subcreation - a Secondary World - is best experienced as text. That is, it should be read, not viewed.

So then books beat out dramas and movies. For fantasy, at least. In a visual world such as ours, that's a strong stance to maintain.

Do you agree? Do you disagree? (It's totally fair to disagree. Tolkien was a genius in many ways. That doesn't mean he was right about everything.)

Tell us why you think Tolkien is right or wrong  about fantasy in written form versus fantasy in visual form. Provide a concrete example. Don't fall back on "I just like movies better" or "books are the best." Such statements say nothing at all of substance. (We've had enough of that in this election year, don't you think?)

Your example need not be of a fantasy that exists in both written and visual form. Many fantasy books haven't been adapted for the screen, and many cinematic fantasies did not start as written stories. Whatever your example - movie, book, or both - give us some specific reasons for how it influences and supports your opinion of Tolkien's thesis.

Comments are due by MIDNIGHT, THIS FRIDAY 16 November

Tombs in Context (7)

The Tombs of Atuan is hard to pin down. What exactly is it? What is it doing? What is it saying? Where is it going?

All of those questions defy simplistic answers, which perhaps explains in part why the book is beloved by so many readers and esteemed by so many critics.

One way of beginning to answer these questions is to consider Tombs alongside others texts. Sometimes we can only see what something is and what it's doing in light of something else.

Identify a parallel between Tombs and one of our previous novel-length texts (A Wrinkle In Time, Out of the Silent Planet, The Silver Chair). These can range from a character to a plot element to a motif to a specific scene to a phrase to any other textual or authorial detail. Briefly summarize the comparison (providing page references for each) and then talk about how the similar elements shed light on Tombs (and perhaps the other text, too), either by clarifying, narrowing, or enriching your understanding of and engagement with the story (or stories).

Comments are due by noon on MONDAY, OCTOBER 22nd.

The Joy of Re-reading (5)

There's no denying that Puddleglum is one of Lewis's most endearing characters. His delightful pessimism is just one reason that many readers return to The Silver Chair over and over again - they enjoy being in his company, listening to his morbid observations, and inwardly chuckling at how very, very wrong he is in most cases.

Re-reading is an interesting phenomenon. What motivates us to read something that no longer offers the element of surprise or suspense or novelty or newness?

Tell us what book (or series) you've re-read and then offer a thoughtful reason for your decision to do so (beyond "I really liked it"). Then tell us how the second reading experience was different from the first. Did you react differently? Notice different plot elements? Pay more attention to things previously overlooked? Enjoy it more? Enjoy it differently?

Since your chosen book is unlikely to be one of our course texts, you don't need to cite pages or include specific quotes, but include enough details to make your point clearly. Avoid broad generalizations (which are such a bore to read and say nothing in the end except blahblahumblahblahwellblahblaherblahblah). "I noticed more scenery details" is one such yawner-of-a-statement. 

If you have never re-read a book, tell us what book you might consider re-reading and why, based on our classroom discussions about fiction, narrative, characters, donegality, and more.

Comments are due by midnight on SUNDAY, OCTOBER 14th.

Audience awareness (4)

Map of Jill, Eustace, and Puddleglum's journey.

In terms of age, the intended audience for The Silver Chair is arguably quite different than for Out of the Silent Planet, even though there are likely just as many (or more) adults who read (and reread) Silver Chair as there are children.

Lewis was very aware of his audience. As you're reading SC, what do you notice about the narrative tone, style, and structure that points to this awareness? Specifically, how can you tell (assuming you can tell) that he was writing for a young audience? Please don't point out the obvious (the protagonists are children; the story is full of fairy-tale elements; there are colored pictures; etc.). Rather, point to a specific moment or scene or description or conversation (or whatever) in SC that illustrates this narrative awareness and then, if possible, tell us how Lewis dealt with the same type of moment or scene or description or conversation differently in OSP. 

Comments are due by noon FRIDAY 28 SEPTEMBER.

Timeless terseness (3)

Out of the Silent Planet is full of terse and pithy phrases that extend far beyond their immediate context and even, in some cases, far beyond the book itself. For example:

"You cannot see things till you know roughly what they are." (43)

"Small claims must give way to great." (29)

"The love of knowledge is a kind of madness." (56)

"A pleasure is full grown only when it is remembered." (74)

This is just a tiny sample of worthy phrases.

For this post, find one such phrase (be sure to include page number) and give its immediate contextual meaning, then discuss how its larger meaning extends to other parts of the text and even to life beyond the text. 

You could write entire books on many of these phrases - but you have only one blog post. Be precise, concise, organized, and economical with your writing. Don't waste any words on vague generalities or meaningless intro sentences. Jump right into the task at hand and say something insightful and interesting.

Some rules:

1. You may use one of the phrases listed above if you'd like. 
2. Phrases may be used no more than FIVE times each, so pay attention to previous posts.
3. Comments are due by NOON next Thursday, Sept. 20.

Show (and so tell) (2)

C.S. Lewis believed that a good author must use an economy of words (nothing extra), must be diligent about accuracy of vocabulary (use the word that conveys the exact meaning), and must show beauty / sublimity / ferocity / etc. rather than simply saying "The sky was beautiful" or "The heavens were sublime" or "The dragon was fierce."

Boring. Blah. Ungood. 

Lewis shows us countless things in Out of the Silent Planet - the personalities of the main characters, the overwhelming heavens, the sublime landscape, and more.

Find a specific moment in the text when Lewis 'shows' us something about either a character or a setting. Be sure to include the phrase from the text (referenced with page number) and then tell us (...yes, it's okay to tell us...) what exactly that reference shows us. 

Comments are due by this Thursday (9-13) at noon.

A (Timeless) Wrinkle in Time (1)

"It was a dark and stormy night..."

50 years after first being published, A Wrinkle in Time is still a top-selling book for both children and adults. Why? What is it about this story that continues to captivate readers of all ages? After all, it has a very specific, though subtle, historical context: Meg does math homework using paper and pencil, sans calculator (48-49). Calvin calls home on a land line (46). Charles Wallace wears  Dr. Dentons (12). 

In spite of these details, WIT feels surprisingly contemporary in many respects. For this blog post, first identify one thing that dates the book (language, detail, attitude, etc.) being sure to reference it by page number. Then, and most importantly, identify some element of the book (whether a theme, character, or other) that transcends the boundaries of America-in-the-early-60s and offer an explanation for its timelessness.

Be sure to reference the text directly. You may respond to other comments as long as you also include your own original thoughts.

Comments should be about 250 words, articulate, thoughtful, and error-free. Due by MIDNIGHT, 28 Tuesday October.