I really wanted to like C.
S. Lewis: A Biography of Friendship
by Colin Duriez. The author is a kind person and a fine scholar/teacher. The is a pleasant retelling of Lewis' life-story, but it
is sadly flawed.
First, its writing style is quite poor, and the book
is badly edited. There are odd, pervasive grammatical errors and
frequent instances of strange syntax. Take this example: “The
Inklings were a group of literary friends that coalesced around
Lewis, and existed for around thirty years” (135) and then on the
next page: “Of the more committed writers, Charles Williams's books
were nearly all published before he joined the Inklings and breathed
its atmosphere” (136). Is “Inklings” singular or plural? Why
does that comma appear before “and existed,” when what follows is
a dependent clause? Haven't we gotten away from misplaced modifiers
yet? (CW's books were more committed writers? What?)
Furthermore,
this claim about Williams' books is debatable: yes, he wrote some 36
of around 54 books before joining the Inklings (it is difficult to
decide how to count some of his works, such as plays in collections),
but the number of books per year went up significantly during that
time: he wrote 18 books in those last 6 years of his life. Arguably,
the quality and depth of his works also increased during those years.
So that claim that Williams was pretty much done writing before
meeting the Inklings is extremely misleading.
Yet
there is much valuable information in this volume. The discussions of
each phase of Lewis' beliefs are clear. I learned that George Orwell
reviewed That
Hideous Strength
(176-7) and that Joy Davidman Lewis gave a lecture on Charles
Williams to a group of Oxford students (215). There is a fascinating
discussion of the theme of the Devil in the Inklings' works from the
1930s (172-77). The emphasis on friendship (though neither as
consistent nor as well-developed as in Carpenter's or Glyer's books)
is interesting. Overall, Duriez' biography is a sweet, simple,
engaging look at Lewis and his friends, but it would have benefited
from better editing and more rigorous scholarship.
No comments:
Post a Comment