Perelandra Reflection
Two aspects of this novel in particular caught my interest while reading it. The first of which is the nature of the supernatural entities portrayed by Lewis in this work. They all felt very real to me, and were in accordance with my preconceived notions of the supernatural that result from growing up inundated with Christian lore and culture. I thought to myself "If angels and devils are real, surely they are like this".
The other thing I took special notice of was the application of phenomenological principles to Christian values and beliefs. Lewis writes "Only Maleldil sees any creature as it really is... you see only an appearance, small one. You have never seen more than an appearance of anything.". Perhaps it is indicative of a lack of practice in philosophical inquiry on my part, but until I read that I had never conceived of phenomenology as a necessary Christian doctrine, but now I cannot see it any other way.
A love for platonic ideals once again seeps through into Lewis' writing as we are shown the purity of Perelandra. I suppose if there is a Heaven, what exists there can only be the purest forms of those things, but I have some reservations. It always seemed to me that there is only a single ideal version of any given thing, in Plato's mind. But I wonder if there might be different but equally good versions of that thing? Say, two different kinds of trees. Who could claim for one to be closer to the ideal tree than another? Perhaps I am too broad in my interpretation, maybe every category of thing in our world has its own, unique platonic ideal.
Anyway, I found myself quite surprised nearing the end of the novel. After an indeterminately long battle of words and ideals, Ransom's solution is to straight-up murder Weston (who is ostensibly possessed by Satan). Somehow I thought that the rhetoric of good would be stronger than evil, and on Perelandra that rhetoric had an active champion, as opposed to in Eden where the words of a snake went unchallenged. Yet Weston was inexhaustable, and Ransom's strength began to fail him, and his solution was combat. Moreover, Lewis praised Ransom's act by claiming the purpose of hatred is to destroy vessels that hold evil. I felt pity for Weston, not knowing if there was any of him really left in that shell, or if any of his personality was merely used by Satan as a ploy.
It is a common saying, that Christians ought to love their enemies. I wonder, then, if Lewis thinks Christians should love and hate their enemies at the same time. Since Satan is by all appearances the ultimate enemy of Christians (unless that enemy is actually the self). The idea of loving what is made out to be the very embodiment of evil seems quite abhorrent to me. How many Christians are out there, praying for that ultimate evil to be redeemed?
The other thing I took special notice of was the application of phenomenological principles to Christian values and beliefs. Lewis writes "Only Maleldil sees any creature as it really is... you see only an appearance, small one. You have never seen more than an appearance of anything.". Perhaps it is indicative of a lack of practice in philosophical inquiry on my part, but until I read that I had never conceived of phenomenology as a necessary Christian doctrine, but now I cannot see it any other way.
A love for platonic ideals once again seeps through into Lewis' writing as we are shown the purity of Perelandra. I suppose if there is a Heaven, what exists there can only be the purest forms of those things, but I have some reservations. It always seemed to me that there is only a single ideal version of any given thing, in Plato's mind. But I wonder if there might be different but equally good versions of that thing? Say, two different kinds of trees. Who could claim for one to be closer to the ideal tree than another? Perhaps I am too broad in my interpretation, maybe every category of thing in our world has its own, unique platonic ideal.
Anyway, I found myself quite surprised nearing the end of the novel. After an indeterminately long battle of words and ideals, Ransom's solution is to straight-up murder Weston (who is ostensibly possessed by Satan). Somehow I thought that the rhetoric of good would be stronger than evil, and on Perelandra that rhetoric had an active champion, as opposed to in Eden where the words of a snake went unchallenged. Yet Weston was inexhaustable, and Ransom's strength began to fail him, and his solution was combat. Moreover, Lewis praised Ransom's act by claiming the purpose of hatred is to destroy vessels that hold evil. I felt pity for Weston, not knowing if there was any of him really left in that shell, or if any of his personality was merely used by Satan as a ploy.
It is a common saying, that Christians ought to love their enemies. I wonder, then, if Lewis thinks Christians should love and hate their enemies at the same time. Since Satan is by all appearances the ultimate enemy of Christians (unless that enemy is actually the self). The idea of loving what is made out to be the very embodiment of evil seems quite abhorrent to me. How many Christians are out there, praying for that ultimate evil to be redeemed?
Comments
Post a Comment