Title: The Abolition of Man
Author: C. S. Lewis
Category: Foundational
No, these books of my first awakening are indispensable to what I have become, such as it is — to my reactions, my determinations, my choices, my discernment. Whatever those have been (conditioned by all my faults, of course), they are thanks largely to ideas I've come across in great works — to the extent that I sometimes have that feeling, “What if I hadn't found this book at just that moment when my mind reached for answers? What would my intellect be without the clarity they gave me?”
Some of these are the books that come up in conversation (and blog posts) often, although some are on the bookshelf, and it's only when I'm dusting them that I remember with gratitude what I learned.
They are markers when I meet someone who becomes a kindred spirit. When it turns out that she has read one of these books or he exclaims when he sees it on the shelf, then we — The Chief and I — know that we can safely allude to the contents in passing, leaping over the necessity for explanation, confident that our intellectual, moral, and spiritual shorthand will be understood. That in itself is a great gift — the delight and joy of sharing a body of reading with others, with, of course, the ancillary joy of discovering those books they love that we haven't seen yet.
corina says
I have just finished “The Abolition of Man” a few days ago, and started it all over again. It is exactly as you said, a foundational book! I have encountered the ideas of objective truth and natural law before, but this book struck me with so much clarity and gave me a vision through which I cand ponder educational philosophies. I told my husband he has to read it too, because I do think it will be important to discuss it when we will have to make decisions about the education of our children in this very ideological cultural climate.
I had to order the book from the USA, in English, because neither the Romanian, nor the Italian editions were no longer available on the market. So sad!
corina says
I wanted to add that of course I have bought this book at your recommendation (in a previous post about education), as I did with books by Josef Pieper or John Senior – so thank you very much! I appreciate so much this kind of guidance and I don't think I would have found them without your blog.
Rachael says
I love the Chronicles of Narnia, but much of what Lewis wrote is a bit tainted for me as he ultimately decided (and it is reflected in the Narnia tales) that he was a universalist… that it didn't take a belief in the saving work of Jesus to be saved… that all good men (women) go to heaven. Anyhoo, perhaps I shouldn't let this influence me that much and just read this one. It does sound good.
_Leila says
Rachael, I don't think it's as simple as you make it to be. I don't agree with Lewis's theology completely (for different reasons — that I am a Catholic and he remained an Anglican). There is not space in the comments to argue the point of his view of salvation, which I think he was learned enough to know would descend to mere philosophical paganism if he thought that doing good was all that was necessary for salvation. The fact that the Calormen soldier (who represents the unbaptised in Narnia) is saved *on entering the stable* is enough to prove to me that Lewis knew just what he was doing there.
Be that as it may, and I would never recommend lowering standards in this area, The Abolition of Man is valuable for its teaching on natural law, not for theology (which it does not really touch upon).
Mama Rachael says
I'm learning how to read when I don't agree, and its good to know what Lewis was writing about (in The Abolition of Man). I'll look for it at the library.
I was actually quite disappointed and confused when reading The Last Battle, because of the 'salvation' of the Calormen soldier, and Alsan's statement that anything good was done to him, and all evil was done to Tash. I understand that comments aren't a good place to discuss this, and I bet its been discussed somewhere already. I'm married to a philosopher, who has really taught me to think, so I ought to seek out these discussions. Again, you challenge me and point me towards a good activity! Thank you!
_Leila says
Rachael, it's not that it's not a good place, it's just that I can't do it justice here! and I'm not necessarily well qualified…
Aslan says that any “service” done to Tash he accounts as service done to him (Aslan). This is in the context of the Calormene being a seeker of truth, to the extent that he is willing to enter the stable, despite the effects of the journey on the cat!
The soldier explicitly asks if this is because Tash and Alsan are one, and “Aslan growled so that the earth shook (but his wrath was not against me) and said, It is false.” They are opposites, he explains.
And there ensues the nuance that I think is difficult to explain here without recourse to theology explicated by Popes in encyclicals regarding the nature of Christ's salvation. See Spe Salvi, for instance.
What is clear is that Lewis is not making any kind of equivalence between “gods” and that there is a twofold requirement for the soldier's salvation: That he enter the stable (a symbol both of the nativity — the incarnation that reveals the coming redemption — and of the church's narrow gate) and that he receive the breath of Aslan after his confession. (Go back and read the passage! It's amazing, actually.)
To me, this signifies Lewis' acknowledgment of the necessity of a *coming* to Christ for salvation, although the look of that coming may not fit our predisposed ideas of it. It's the church who disposes, and God is not bound by the sacraments (including baptism of course), as Aquinas held. But again, I would not want to be held myself to any precision as I fling about my opinion here! Of all the doctrines of the church, the precise nature of what you might call the mechanism of salvation is the trickiest to explain (if indeed we need to explain it!). But I agree that it must be through Our Lord, and I am convinced that Lewis agreed as well.
Breanna says
I don't *think* he was a universalist, have you read “The Great Divorce” where he asks George MacDonald that question?
_Leila says
By the way to all who are interested in the discussion about The Last Battle, the chapter called How the Dwarfs Refused to be Taken In (Chapter VIII) is the thesis of The Abolition of Man!
Kathy@9peas says
“I realize that I encounter the ideas contained therein as my own, given to me by the author at a moment opportune for the gift — when my mind was searching and I had the time to absorb them.” – I agree with this and think sometimes how blessed I am to have had such books come my way when they did and who would I be had they not. I love your Library Project Leila, thank you for taking the time to put it together!
Joy says
Great post! I agree about The Abolition of Man. It was earthshaking for me back when I first started homeschooling. In fact, reading Lewis has helped me in so much of my educating and raising my children. I can't imagine our family culture without his books.
Thanks for this library project. I am thoroughly enjoying each of your choices and often think that our home libraries must be almost identical.
Mrs. B. says
I am no expert and no philosopher, but I found myself in a CS Lewis mood recently, and read or re-read a few things (The Narnian, the biography written by Alan Jacobs, is good to give you a picture of the man, with all his contradictions – just be ready to roll your eyes when Jacobs insists Lewis' view of sexual morality, which Jacobs surprisingly considers “outdated”, is just a product of his misogynism…) I own the Narnia books, but I have never read them. I must say his fiction does not suit me, in general: I am not a fan of science fiction or fantasy, and really struggled through Out of the Silent Planet: I get what he wants to say, but it was not an enjoyable reading for me. I hope I can safely skip Perelandra, because That Hideous Strength looks a lot more promising to me.
As an aside, one thing that has always baffled me about the movie Shadowlands is that the writers make him emphatically deny the Christian subtext of the Narnia books – he insists it's “just magic”: a movie is just a movie, of course, but that scene was really weird in its patent falsity.
I don't need to agree with everything Lewis thought and wrote to truly appreciate the parts of his work that are objectively and universally true – I will admit that this is not a distinction I am able to make for many writers, but Lewis is too good in too many respects for me to bristle at what he may get wrong. There are pages upon pages in Mere Christianity that make one wonder why he never became Catholic (if he lived today, I am sure he would: no offense meant for our Protestant friends here, but there isn't much in that book that matches the mainstream Protestant theology of today.)
I will just add that I wholeheartedly agree on the necessity of reading certain books when one is younger rather than older – so many mistakes are avoided! For me this is one of the best reasons for classical education: the great books are read since the beginning, even accounting for the fact that a lot will go over a kid's head for some time (that's what re-reading is for!) But, among other things, you acquire a sensitivity to good reasoning and a taste for goodness and beauty that is too fundamental to be put off for when one is older.
Lewis would have never been Lewis without all the books he learned to appreciate when he was really young (and very lonely and very unhappy, during what many would consider an unhealthy childhood – it's amazing the good God can have in store for us even in the midst of misery.) I sense Charlotte Mason's approval when I read Lewis on education: you realize there really is no time and space for twaddle, even the innocent-looking one (thank goodness, no twaddle doesn't mean nothing fun to read.) What is depressing about the Abolition of Men is that Lewis can still think of the consequences of Gaius and Titius' educational efforts as something hypothetical: he shows so clearly what they are up to, and what it may lead to, but for him it's still almost like a thought experiment, or a dangerous seed planted in society. Today, it's just what we witness everyday. The end of Men Without Chest is impressive in its clarity about what we are as a society:
“And all the time – such is the tragi-comedy of our situation – we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. […] In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”
Mrs. B. says
One thing to add quickly – Leila, you make a connection in this post with your community-building advice. I know you have said that at the beginning we shouldn't be too picky in our efforts to just get to know people, but this is exactly the kind of friendship I miss the most: right now, my husband is my only kindred spirit in real life (this is what makes my not coming to the meet-up in Bethesda all the more painful!!), and we miss so much people around us who can share that feeling of “no explanation needed” you mention. I guess your last sentence is the only answer – if you miss something, try to build it… My problem is that, when it comes to being social, I am more of a follower than a leader, so to speak 😉 I should really pray about this. Thank you, Leila!
ps – This reminds me: is there anything Deirdre might need these days from your readers in the DC area??
_Leila says
Aw, Mrs. B — sorry we missed you! I guess my larger point is — get out there without predisposed ideas, and all these things (kindred spirits) will be added unto you. Seek for that alone, and you will be lonely.
I think Deirdre is doing well, but I'm sure she's grateful for your interest! We will keep you in mind if she needs something 😉
Mrs. B. says
I am sure you're right – I should dare more!
Glad to hear Deirdre is doing well – the beginning can be tough!
_Leila says
Anyone who is interested in what's behind the Narnia stories beyond what Lewis' possibly disingenuous disclaimers might lead you to think and even beyond what pious interpreters might reduce them to, may enjoy this book by Michael Ward: Planet Narnia http://www.amazon.com/Planet-Narnia-Seven-Heavens…
Besides being a fascinating study of what might very well be the actual schema of the books (I'm convinced that this is the key), it's a revelation of just how much scholarship Lewis possessed, without actually exhausting the case (for instance, Ward barely touches on Lewis' philosophical grounding — he was a thorough Platonist).
Jenny says
Not really about The Abolition of Man, but about libraries…
My mother works at a public elementary school and, inexplicably, the library has some bizarro policy where they get rid of books that are published before a certain date. My mother says the librarian has no choice and it is a standard policy, but honestly I doubt it. This year after the librarian cleared out the old bad books, my mother went through the pile and picked up at least a dozen classic books. She says they are in pristine condition and look like they have never been read. She intends to create a small lending library for her grandchildren.
So yay for Grandma's library! Disturbed about the school library.
Breanna says
That's so sad! I could see doing that for something like science texts, but why on earth get rid of classics? How is a 2013 edition of Oliver Twist better/different than a 1985 edition? Gracious.
Breanna says
I forgot to mention, I love Aboliton; and as to what Lewis's theology was, I think it's probably better to read his specifically theological works to decide that, rather than Narnia, which was naturally theology mixed with fairy tales. As a fiction writer myself, I can testify that even in allegory not *everything* has a meaning, sometimes it's just there because it was there when you were imagining the scene in your head. (He himself speaks to some of this in an essay on English criticism, whose title escapes me at the moment, in the collection “Of Other Worlds”.)
And FWIW, Last Battle is my least favorite of the books, I think because reading about the end of a world is very sad, and because everyone finds eschatology difficult. (As far as the soldier goes, my impression was that it was mostly Lewis making the point that it's difficult to predict who we will meet in heaven–especially given that in his other books, Hell is very much in evidence.) But to me Narnia is fairy tales–the Space Trilogy is more adult fairy tales {he didn't like the Space Trilogy much himself}, and the theological books are where the rubber hits the road. “That Hideous Strength” is my favorite of his fiction, and “Abolition” is my favorite of his non-fiction (because it sets the foundation for everything, as you say).
To me the point CSL hammered home over and over is that religion and reason are two sides of a coin, not opposites; that God WANTS us to think; that the Enemy does NOT want us to think. Thinking and getting closer to truth mean that we are getting closer to God.
“Mere Christianity” has been very helpful to me, although I'm not of the same communion he was, and “Screwtape” has seen me through a lot of hard times. Part of it might be that I just like CSL's style–he hits me in the right places, like someone I know would get my jokes and encourage me to go ahead and have another plate of cake. He doesn't do that for everyone, which is why we have so many different saints to choose from as mentors. For instance, I personally find it much harder work to get through St. Teresa of Avila's “Interior Castle”, although her wit was just as sharp as CSL's, and she was just as logical. She just doesn't click as easily for me (which is not an excuse for me to stop reading, just a fact of personality).
Bridget Green says
What a wonderful post. I am a huge fan of Lewis, and am constantly trying to get people to read more of him. I even named a son Ransom. Currently I am reading Narnia to my older sons, and the theological discussions it is prompting are astounding me. This is, to me, what separates Lewis' work from that of the many “modern Lewis'” – that his work has a depth the others cannot match.