That's...interesting. Aren't those books really misogynistic? The third one anyway? I'm surprised they could find enough actors who weren't offended by it to do a full cast dramatization. (And I am not someone who is super sensitive about misogyny. After all, people accuse the Narnia books of misogyny, and I love those. I also love classic fairy tales which get accused of misogyny. In fact, considering how much people on the internet either complain about misogyny or misandry, probably most of what I love has had that charge leveled against it. But That Hideous Strength is too much even for me. )  

The BBC frequently releases radio dramatizations of classic literature with a disclaimer that the content may be offensive to some listeners. They have mostly been recorded at least 20 years ago so there may have been more actors willing to be involved with a project that would be difficult to cast now.

I am also pretty thick skinned about books that have been accused of being misogynistic but I have heard such mixed opinions about the Space Trilogy that even though I have owned an omnibus edition for years I've never read it. 

@col-klink works written in the 1930s and 1940s are likely to show a different attitude to women.  

The Space Trilogy does definitely have some rough bits, especially in book three, but to me at least it's interesting enough to be worth my time if I'm not expecting perfection out of it. And I'm honestly thrilled they're looking at doing an adaptation. It's deeply weird but full of wonder, and I have repeatedly attempted fanart for it. (I am on team "justice for Jane Studdock," but I'm glad her story *exists* even if I hate how it was handled. And neither of the other books bothered me as badly.)

A friend once theorised that Jane's story began where Susan Pevensie's ended. Two different characters but one showing how the other came to the point where the book introduces her.

Huh, very interesting to hear about this new audio drama coming out! I have yet to make it through the Space Trilogy either but I'll have to mention this to some family and friends so they can keep an eye out for it.

I come a bit late to this thread, but regarding The Space Trilogy and misogyny and the "rough bits" as @silverlily put it.  When I originally read the books in the late 1990s early 2000s, my original copy of That Hideous Strength was an abridged copy which edited out which edited out and had removed some of the more controversial and "rough bits" of the book.  I bought a more recent box set edition of the books probably around 10 years ago but finally got round to reading it again last year or the year before and was surprised at how many "rough bits" the story had.  I even found myself squirming a bit as I read it.  I'd probably recommend the abridged version more than the full version to people who haven't read it before.  

@pete Huh! I hadn't realized there was an abridged take -- that's kind of cool although I am curious how many parts they cut. For instance there's that bit where Merlin is being a jerk about Jane not having had a kid yet, but like... I almost feel like that was important, both because it showed he was a man of a very different time and because I find the hints about potential for a child of prophecy to be interesting? That may just be me, though. 

@silverlily - The main part that I do not recall reading much of in the abridged version is the scene where Fairy Hardcastle interrogates Jane Studdock.  I barely even recall that scene from the abridged version, however, but it was certainly there in my newer edition.  Unfortunately I don't recall too much else of what was taken out of the abridged version as I sadly have parted with it somewhere along the line, but I can tell you, it must have been significantly abridged, because that copy (which I think dated to the 1980s) was about the same size as the other two books, whereas in the newer edition That Hideous Strength is probably about the size of the other two books put together.

Just did a bit of looking and found something of note on Wikipedia (yes, I know it's not 100% reliable) but apparently there was an abridged version released in 1945 under the title "The Tortured Planet".  Perhaps the edition I had a copy of was a re-release of that one but with the regular title?

Here is a picture of the cover of the book I had:

I found a site with an article talking about these differences. https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/6584/what-was-the-difference-between-that-hideous-strength-and-the-tortured-planet

In Walter Hooper's C.S. Lewis: A Complete Guide to His Life & Works, there is a section "A note on the Variant Texts of That Hideous Strength". There were three editions of the work:

Bodley Head, 1945
Macmillan, 1946
Avon, 1946 (titled "The Tortured Planet")

Number 1 is considered the most complete and correct edition. Number 2 was set directly from Lewis' manuscript and contains some errors not found in number 1.

[Number 3]

was abridged from number 1. Lewis himself performed the abridgment and also made a number of corrections.

The article tells that WizardOz quoted Lewis on Jan 2, 2012 from the preface:

"In reducing the original story to a length suitable for this edition, I believe I have altered nothing but the tempo and the manner. I myself prefer the more leisurely pace--I would not wish even War and Peace or The Faerie Queene any shorter -- but some critics may well think this abridgment is also an improvement."

There was later a Pan abridged edition, first published 1955, and there have been various covers. (I have both versions, but not where I'm sitting right now.)

Decide for yourself which edition you prefer:

Here is an example of the differences from the first page:

Pan: "Through the open door she could see the tiny kitchen of the flat and knew how tidy it was. The beds were made and the rooms "done"."

Macmillan: "Through the open door she could see the tiny kitchen of the flat and hear the loud, ungentle tick tick of the clock. She had just left the kitchen and knew how tidy it was. The breakfast things were washed up, the tea towels were hanging above the stove, and the floor was mopped. The beds were made and the rooms "done"."

The third paragraph in the Pan edition is 4 lines long, the Macmillan edition is 16!

I seem to remember that the publishers demanded the abridged version, and I knew that Lewis performed the abridgement himself. But that the abrigded version first had its own title, was new to me. In later years the separate title soon disappeared, and even this shorter version has been published as THS, so when you buy one of them, you need to check which is which. My different copies have the same title.

Edit:

I just noticed someting that hasn't struck me before. Wikipedia has a list of the THS characters - and there is an Ivy and a Margaret. There is no Betty, though.