Wednesday, May 8, 2013

I Want a Divorce, and a Great One!

Reflections on The Great Divorce by C. S. Lewis. 

This book has the ability to simultaneously terrify one of the dangers of this world while inspiring hope for supreme happiness.  Each Ghost's version of Hell is relatable, whether I experience it myself or through another. And the author makes the pitfalls so obvious that one can't but expect to better avoid them on the next encounter.

Below are some of the quotes that stood out to me throughout the book, with a few thoughts following each.

Capitalism as slavery

"Capitalism did not merely enslave the workers, it also vitiated taste and vulgarised intellect." (pg. 7, the Tousle-Headed Poet)

I have been a slave to Capitalism for 23 years on this planet.  I give in to impulse buys, eat high-priced frozen yogurt, desire video games I see in advertisements.  In the last year, I've been struggling hard against the desire to consume.  To avoid impulse buys, I won't go into stores.  I mute commercials, avoid looking at billboards, whatever I can to block it out.  In a way, it hijacks your brain.  But I am slowly building up the antibodies to capitalism.

My brother is buying a new car.  He wants a BMW, but is afraid of appearing ostentatious.  He wants to appear successful but retain likability   He tells me "I've never met anyone under 30 that drives a BMW and isn't a prick."  It is probably not the BMW that makes someone a prick.

He wouldn't drive my parents' Nissan Quest (minivan) because he was afraid of being judged by his new coworkers.  He spends hours viewing cars online, reading reviews, asking friends.  He paces the floor of our living room, talking to me (sometimes more to himself) about why the Infiniti q50 is right for him.  He calls my Dad, explains how easy it will be to finance the purchase.  Later he wakes up screaming in the middle of the night, dreaming of over-sized spiders biting him and he is bleeding out in the sheets.

Is this slavery?

The Fountain of Egolessness

"When you have drunk of it you forget forever all proprietorship in your own works.  You enjoy them just as if they were someone else's: without pride and without modesty." (pg. 85, the Spirit)

A beautifully Buddhist concept, egolessness.  The self is an illusion.  We are all composed of the same pieces, all striving for the same goal.  When we release the illusion of self (when we drink of the Fountain), happiness and joy and peace become much more commonplace.

I am consistently wrong

"We've all been wrong!  That's the great joke.  There's no need to go on pretending one was right!  After that we begin living." (pg. 102, the Spirit)

I used to always be right.  Even when I was wrong, in my mind I was right.  Somehow, I justified it.  Actually believed I was.  How could I have not been right all the time?  I had straight A's, I was labeled the "smart" kid, described as "witty".

Looking at my past actions through a more objective lens, I was maybe right, maybe, about 20% of the time.  Yes, I was (and still am) wrong about 80% of the time.  Maybe not all of it escapes my mouth - I am frequently wrong in my mental judgement.  But I can tell you that with this realization, life is more peaceful.  I am no longer inclined to argue, to blindly defend a point.  And I am more open to new ideas.

What is love?

"But what we call love down there [on earth] was mostly the craving to be loved." (pg. 125, Sarah Smith)

I have come closer to bliss by freely giving love without reservations or expectations.  When I hold expectations in return for my love, they are usually not met, and thus giving love results in suffering.  When I expect nothing in return, the joy of giving love is bliss in itself.

How to Win Friends and Influence Ghosts

If I haven't mentioned it yet, Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People is currently my favorite work of nonfiction.  If you haven't read it yet, it will change your life.  Every human interaction after reading it will be smoother.  I promise.

But these Spirits in The Great Divorce, they are not skilled in the ability to influence.  At times they openly laugh at their Ghost colleague for being ridiculous rather than showing sympathy and understanding for their feelings of despair.  If the Spirits had read Carnegie's amazing classic, there would have been many fewer failed conversions throughout the narrators journey through Heaven.  It seems like the Spirits could sell infinite happiness a bit better, be slightly more convincing that eternal bliss is really a good thing.  It is, isn't it?

Questions for all!
Wade (and anyone who will answer), here are some questions I wanted to ask you while reading:

  1. On page 1, when the narrator is still in Hell, he finds "bookshops of the sort that sell The Works of Aristotle."  Why Aristotle?  Why do you suppose C.S. Lewis chose this example?
  2. On page 43, when the narrator is listening to the "fat ghost with the cultured voice" speak with a Spirit, the ghost poses a wonderful hypothetical situation.

    "I'm going to point out how people always forget that Jesus (here the Ghost bowed) was a comparatively young man when he died.  He would have outgrown some of his earlier views, you know, if he'd lived.  As he might have done, with a little more tact and patience.  I am going to ask my audience to consider what his mature views would have been."

    Having studied the man and his teachings for 4 years, what do you think his mature views would have been had he lived to be, say, 80 years old (instead of 33)?
  3. On page 75, George MacDonald (the narrator's Spirit match) justifies why the Spirits do not descend to Hell to save others.

    "And it would be no use to come further even if it were possible.  The sane would do no good if they made themselves mad to help madmen."

    Would it not be easier to help a madman if one could become temporarily mad in order to better understand his ailment?  Or put another way, would it not be easier to help one escape the pitfalls of Hell with firsthand experience escaping the same temptations and delusions?
  4. On page 136, George MacDonald sums up the battle between good and evil and ends it with:

    "I know it has a grand sound to say ye'll accept no salvation which leaves even one creature in the dark outside.  But watch that sophistry or ye'll make a Dog in a Manger the tyrant of the universe."

    What does he mean by his "Dog in a Manger" warning?

 

10 comments:

  1. Noah,
    Great to hear how much you enjoyed the Great Divorce. A couple quick responses to your questions.
    1) I am not sure why he placed Aristotle in the mix. I will ask my C.S Lewis professor and get back to you!
    2) I do not believe it is really necessary to try to think about what Jesus may have taught/ could have taught if he lived to be 80 years old. To do so would be an antithesis to His purpose and mission. If we place Jesus in the category of moral Teacher and Guide, then we can draw out several different conclusions from His teachings. (Although His teachings themselves are much more radical and confusing than we actually know because we do not read Him with 1st century Jewish eyes).
    Jesus' mission was not to be a good Teacher but rather a great Savior. Jesus as Teacher will kill you spiritually beacuse he says stuff like this: "Don't lust after another woman. Because if you do lust after her, you have already committed adultery. Therefore, pluck out your eye if it is causing you to sin." Or- "Be perfect as my Heavenly Father is perfect." You see, Jesus as simply a Teacher will crush us with the weight of impossible moral standards. Hence the reason His purpose was to save humanity from the plight of sin and give them new hearts filled with His supernatural power to love others and love God the way were were created to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Plucking out the eye may be a metaphor for rooting out desire. He seemed like a very metaphorical dude.

      Delete
  2. Also, it is important to recognize that Christ is the Only "Teacher" who predicted His own death and resurrection as CENTRAL to His vocation. Jesus Himself taught that the reason He came to earth was to die and rise again so that humanity could be reconciled to God and establish the rule of God's goodness on earth as it is in heaven. A great book for better understanding Jesus is by a guy named N.T. Wright-- Simply Jesus. He is an expert on 1st Century Judaism and an impressive scholar of understanding the identity and mission of Jesus. Simply Jesus is a book that will give you a better understanding of who Jesus was and is.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I asked my C.S. Lewis professor to help me out on a couple of your questions because I do not know Lewis enough to give you a solid answer.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey bro! Here are my professors responses to some of your questions. He is one of the best Lewis scholars alive today.

    1. Aristotle and Plato were rough contemporaries who represent the two main divides in world views. Aristotle stressed logic and ethics from a humanistic core, whereas Lewis, in I, Part 3, says morality is not arbitrary and is grounded in something bigger than humanity, since all humanity is beholden to the same moral law (this is the argument of The Abolition of Man and the point of the very useful appendix that draws from religions and civilizations spread throughout human history. Morality flows from who God is--His character, if you like. Plato also stressed the foundational belief in a metaphysical world. Remember when Professor Kirk is asked by the Pevensies about whether another world like Narnia might exist? He says something like "nothing is more likely and that it's all in Plato; what do they teach in school these days." Lewis is affirming Plato's supposition of the supernatural and of another world.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In response to your question on pg. 75- the descent to hell to save others.Would it not be easier to help a madman if one could become temporarily mad in order to better understand his ailment? Or put another way, would it not be easier to help one escape the pitfalls of Hell with firsthand experience escaping the same temptations and delusions?

    2. (p. 75) Well, no. Don't you want to go to a psychiatrist would is well and healthy, not one who is paranoid or so guilt-ridden he/she projects and transfers? And in the case of Jesus, the only one who can forgive sin and the only one who judges sin, he did "descend into Hell," as the Apostles' Creed says. He "bore our sins in his body" and suffered the separation from God in his spirit which is the deepest definition of Hell. NO ONE need go to Hell--because He did. And all who seek find.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. However, if I were combating clinical depression, I would rather go to a psychiatrist who had once battled depression herself and overcome it than one who doesn't have such firsthand experience.

      Delete
  6. Neither I nor my professor know what he means by "Dog in a Manger". Sorry bro!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Now please reply to the responses!!! your turn to review my answers and my professors answers!!!

    ReplyDelete