Here is a CS Lewis related question that has been on my mind recently that might perhaps be worthy of some discussion: Much is often made of the friendship between CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien, but it seems to me that more often than not it is people in the Lewis camp that bring up the Tolkien connection, rather than the other way round. Is that the case or is it just me?

It's just that everytime mention is made of the life of CS Lewis (say for example regarding the planned upcoming movie based on his life "The Lion Awakes") they almost always make reference to his friendship with JRR Tolkien. Yet when it comes to comparative discussion of the life of JRR Tolkien, the vice-versa Lewis connection never seems to come up as much, or at least is not considered as important.

Part of me thinks that maybe the recent movies have had something to do with this, and that as they were following in the wake of Peter Jackson's commercially successful and critically acclaimed LOTR movies, that the Walden LWW people had more of a vested interest in promoting the Lewis/Tolkien connection more than the other side did, and that it is something which has just stuck.

Or does this apparent mismatch in the relative status of the relationship pre-date the movies? Is it the case that JRR Tolkien's literary achievements are considered to be superior to Lewis', and that thus Tolkien is more likely to be discussed on his own merits, rather than in terms of his connection to any other author as seems to be the case with Lewis?

Or perhaps it is just the case that biographically speaking, Tolkien's influence on Lewis' life was greater than Lewis' influence on Tolkien's life, and so is considered to be more worthy of mentioning?

Huh, those are some very interesting thoughts, icarus. Now that you mention it, I've noticed the same thing too. I'm wondering if, like you said, perhaps Tolkien's works are seen as superior by some people. (I'm not saying that Narnia is inferior at all, but some people may see it that way.) Or, perhaps it's due to the fact that The Chronicles of Narnia are seen as "children's books" by a lot of people and therefore don't appeal to as wide a fanbase as Tolkien. I really have no idea which reason it is, but I'm looking forward to seeing what other theories are presented here.

Edit: FK sent me this fascinating article about the friendship of Tolkien and Lewis. I found it insightful and very entertaining to read. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

I don't profess to be a Lewis or Tolkien expert by any means. Pretty much everything I've learned about them are through people on this site. But I do know one thing for sure... We wouldn't have had Narnia without Tolkien being instrumental in converting Lewis to Christianity, and we wouldn't have had Middle Earth without Lewis constantly encouraging Tolkien to continue writing.
Colin Duriez, the author of the article that Mountie linked above wrote a book called 'Tolkien and C.S. Lewis: The Gift of Friendship' and I believe he talks about the subject quite a bit. I've not read it, but johobbit assures me it's a good book.

I was recently reading The Company They Keep: C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien as Writers in Community by Diana Pavlac Glyer (excellent book) and she mentions that many previous authors and scholars have denied influence between the two writers, preferring the Romantic idea of an original artist to the earlier Medieval concept where artists built and borrowed from one another with a lot less documentation of the process.

I'm going to guess this denial is particularly true when speaking of Tolkien because it's really hard to deny that Lewis used bits and pieces of existing mythos. Glyer spends most of the book bringing up examples of the back and forth between Tolkien, Lewis, and the other Inklings.

I found the parts about Charles Williams and C. S. Lewis particularly interesting; there's an anecdote about Lewis sending Williams a fan letter, and receiving a reply along the lines that Williams had been just about to write something similar to Lewis.

Years ago on this forum I suggested that Lewis was in the shadow of Tolkein and several members of this site (I guess not surprising I suppose) suggested I had it backwards. My fellow NarniaWebbers suggested that due to the numerous books Lewis had written and the overall popularity of those works was proof that Tolkien was in the shadow of Lewis. I think the popularity of the LOTR films has overshadowed the Narnia films (at least so far) so this was part of my thinking. Perhaps it's cyclical. Perhaps there are time periods when Tolkien is a bit more popular than Lewis and times when Lewis is a bit more popular than Tolkien. I'm not sure who would have the edge as of 2012. I wonder who was a bit more popular among the public during their lifetimes.

Hello, Icarus.

My best guess as an answer to that question is that the relationship between Lewis and Tolkien is more meaningful to the majority of the Lewis camp. Narnia readers almost always inevitably become Middle-Earthers, however, there are many Tolkien fans who discovered Middle-Earth first and are uninterested in either Lewis' Christian writings, and or too old for Narnia. The LOTR appeals to some audiences - though not all - that would not necessarily be fans of Lewis - they are less likely to delve into anything outright sympathetic to the Christian faith. Although Tolkien's books also have strong roots in his Catholic faith, they are more nuanced and encompass a lot of ideas that appeal to a more general, social-minded audience. Lewis fans on the other hand often represent the exact opposite mindset within the realm of Christianity. I would venture to say that Lewis fans are more likely to pick up something containing ideas or stories contrary to what many others in their circle might read because Lewis himself was this way. While it was said of Tolkien by many that the only book he liked was his own, C.S. Lewis would read anything. He was not afraid of things because they were different. In fact, it was this sort of attitude that led to his own invitation to Tolkien to join the Inklings. On their meeting, they didn't immediately hit it off in all respects, but their shared love of Norse mythology, and Jack's love for spending time with minds different than his own made the formation of their friendship secure.

It was this same friend that opened Jack's heart to the release of his pride and the acceptance of the possibility that a single myth within the realm of all other myths might, in fact, be true. Ultimately, Tolkien believed that Jack would come into the Catholic faith - when he did not and did eventually publish some very outward comments on what he disagreed with in the Catholic faith, Tolkien's heart was broken. That too may be why fans who love Tolkien first have not been drawn to Jack. No matter their feeling, the Lord of the Rings exists specifically because the Inklings - especially and particularly C.S. Lewis - encouraged Tollers not to give up on his book of elves and dwarves and hobbits. Ironically, Tollers hated Narnia and reamed Jack out after reading about Lucy and Mr. Tumnus, refusing to read anymore. So, although Lewis gave Tolkien every encouragement to finish his beloved tale, Tolkien made every effort to discourage Jack from going further into Narnia.

So, if anything, it would seem that this literary relationship (considered the most influential of the last century), should be of the greater value to Tolkien fans who, without Jack Lewis, would have never destroyed the ring, and that Lewis fans would be those to overlook the relationship that tried its best to cost them the chance of ever meeting Aslan. For whatever reason, it doesn't seem to be that way.

Much is often made of the friendship between CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien, but it seems to me that more often than not it is people in the Lewis camp that bring up the Tolkien connection, rather than the other way round. Is that the case or is it just me?

Interesting observation. Now that you mention it... yeah, I think I have often found that to be the case. I suppose I would tend to blame the popularity of the LotR films. Not sure though.

First off, great opening post, Mountie! And great discussion so far! I can't wait to see this thread get more active!

I have to admit I got a little confused when reading parts of the opening post, though. Keep in mind, it's been ages since I've read biographies on Lewis... but, I think I remember things a little differently. Feel free to correct me if I'm remembering wrong, ok? Anyway, how I remember it is...

- C.S. Lewis detested his birth name, and when he was four he nicknamed himself Jack, or “Jacksie”. It is unknown why he chose his name, except for the fact that he owned a dog, Jack, who was run over by a car. He refused to be called anything else. He also nicknamed his brother Warren “Warnie”, and they both went by those names for the rest of their lives.

I was under the impression that it wasn't his dog... but a neighbors'. (or something) Regardless, he did take his nickname from a dog. And I always found that to be a cute story.

- C.S. Lewis' testimony is incredibly powerful. Before becoming the apologist and Christian that he is famously known as, he was originally an atheist. Jack had previous experiences prompting him to become a Christian, but his believing friends and their influence on him gave him the final ‘push’ he needed.

Again, this confused me. The way I remember reading it, is: He was raised as a Christian at first, but turned away when his mom died. Then he was an atheist for a vast majority of his life, and it was only much later that he came back to faith. Didn't he once say he was dragged back into it "kicking and screaming"?

...........
Ok, I'll be back later. Thanks for listening, and I look forward to talking more with all of you about Jack!

Unfortunately, it's been ages since I read biographies of C.S. Lewis as well, PA. As I stated in the opening post, I wrote the report several years ago (when I was 12), and as such, I apologize for any errors.

I really don't remember whose dog it was. A quick glance at C.S. Lewis' Wikipedia page seems to state that it was his dog, though there is no citation for that particular fact so it may be wrong. I do know that I used quite a few books on C.S. Lewis' life to verify most of the facts, but they were borrowed from the library so I don't have them now. Regardless, I'm pretty sure it was a dog named Jack; whether it was his dog or someone else's is the only thing I don't know. I love that story too.

Yes, the story you stated sounds about right. I just didn't want to bog everyone down with too many details, and my opening post was getting a bit long. That's why I chose to abbreviate it by saying that he was originally an atheist. There's certainly much more to the story than that, though, and I think it would certainly be a good discussion topic to bring up in this thread!

From time to time I've wondered whether C.S. Lewis was in some way "anti-science", or disliked science.

In the Narnia Chronicles, the only character who talks in any kind of scientific language is Uncle Andrew, and he's most definitely a bad 'un. He talks about space and other planets and compares travelling through the space of "our world" with travelling to other worlds, which he identifies as other universes. What's more, the results of his "scientific experiments" are shown to cause disaster - bringing the Witch first into our world and then into Narnia. Professor Kirke, on the other hand, often refers to logic but not science.

Lewis' "space-travel" trilogy doesn't read much like modern science-fiction; it doesn't come across (to me at least) as all that scientific, unlike other science-fiction of the period, even that by other authors who also had faith in God (such as Isaac Asimov). It seems much more like classical mythology.

How much education in science subjects had Lewis had, and how much did he interact with scientists at Oxford?

What do people think?

Years ago on this forum I suggested that Lewis was in the shadow of Tolkein and several members of this site (I guess not surprising I suppose) suggested I had it backwards. My fellow NarniaWebbers suggested that due to the numerous books Lewis had written and the overall popularity of those works was proof that Tolkien was in the shadow of Lewis. I think the popularity of the LOTR films has overshadowed the Narnia films (at least so far) so this was part of my thinking. Perhaps it's cyclical. Perhaps there are time periods when Tolkien is a bit more popular than Lewis and times when Lewis is a bit more popular than Tolkien. I'm not sure who would have the edge as of 2012. I wonder who was a bit more popular among the public during their lifetimes.

I could definitely imagine myself disagreeing with the statement that Lewis was in the shadow of Tolkien.
Prior to the LotR movies coming out, I would still disagree with that statement. I was a great lover of The Hobbit and LotR, but finding someone who had actually read the LotR was like finding a needle in a haystack. That changed when the movies came out.
But it was never hard finding someone who had at least read LWW if not the whole Narnia series.
So if I disagreed with you then, that's probably why.

Fast forward to today and I suspect you're right, at least here in the USA. The LotR movies were made so successfully that pretty much everyone knows the story (though I'd be curious to know how many people have read the books). LWW was made pretty well so I think most people know that story too, but the rest of the movies fell by the wayside and interest in Narnia from the general public was lost.

Moving on to overseas, boy, I don't know. I'm forever surprised by the amount of languages Narnia has been published in and so I find that most countries are familiar with the story. LotR, I have no idea.

Regardless, I'm pretty sure it was a dog named Jack; whether it was his dog or someone else's is the only thing I don't know. I love that story too.

I get a kick out of the story of the big old ginger tom cat that inspired Ginger in LB. Lewis said "Dogs think, 'they pet me and feed me, they must be gods.' While cats think, 'they pet me and feed me, I must be God.'"

I've never seen anything that indicated Lewis was against Science, but rather that Science was the study of God's creation.

He admitted once that he didn't know enough about Science to write anything accurate about it in the Space Trilogy. But that's merely because Science wasn't his main field of study. His main fields of study were, as you said, Classical Mythology, stories, and also amateur theology.

~Riella

Lewis seemed less anti-science than anti-scientism. The main thing he argued against was the modern tendency to treat science as God, especially in The Space Trilogy.
I remember he said in his autobiography that he never got very far in science, because in order to do so you have to be good at math, and he was very bad at it. (In fact, he originally had trouble getting into Oxford because he couldn't pass his math exam.)

Also, Isaac Asimov was not a Christian.

I'm not sure. Lewis wasn't so much anti-science, as incredibly aware of the dangers of particular scientific and technological discoveries in the hands of sinful people. He didn't hate science but both he and Tolkien loved the more simple times and simple life that people had in ages past.