So y’all kind of missed an important point with CS Lewis. He’s primarily writing for children. The chronicles of Narnia are perfect for my seven-year-old. He loves those stories so much and it’s a great way to introduce our faith and relationship with Christ.
I prefer the Space Trilogy novels to the Narnia, though both have a bit of a hodgepodge of a mythos. Tolkien worked everything out meticulously, Lewis sort of threw in various things that caught his fancy, and made them work more or less harmoniously. Very different approach to fiction.
It is very difficult to make things simple so the reader can understand deep truths. Lewis does this so well. I think he is very underrated, I would go so far as to say that he is a modern mystic.
@@markiangooley Lewis would agree though, he talks about this in some of his essays. But Lewis does elicit virtues from children and helps them to have that in reality
Great video Matt! I do have a little bit different opinion, I think Lewis and Tolkien's work get compared with the same standard. Its a little bit of an apples and oranges comparison to me. Yes Lewis is not as subtle as Tolkien. But his goal is also a little bit different. Lewis is trying to introduce his reader to Christ in the figure of Aslan. Essentially the idea is what would Christ be like in another world, which in this case is Narnia. I understand the idea of maybe it coming off as "preachy" but I also think there's genius to doing it that way as well. Basically, Lewis introduces his readers to Christ without the church, tradition and stuff that people tend to think of when they think of religion and they fall in love with the character of Aslan. Not to ramble on, but I just think the two stories were written with different approaches. That's like asking if I like Pints of Aquinas or the Council of Trent better. I love both shows, but they each do different variations of a similar thing.
Certainly, none of Tolkien's heroes "are" the Christ figure, tempting as it is to assign Frodo to that role as ring-bearer // cross-bearer. JRRT avoids the symbolic realm that CS Lewis works in, as Fradd and Pearce both point out. Rather, Tolkien's heroes are _followers_ or _imitators_ of Christ, in different ways and to different degrees, and the closer they are, the _better_ they are, the more _saint-like._ What's fascinating is that JRRT sustains an orthodox Christology of membership and participation in the body of Christ even in this imaginary world that lacks both a historical Christ and a historical Church. It's as if to prove that Christ is always Truth, and always the sole path to salvation, even in a world that does not know his name. Heavy stuff.
Frodo is the victim of substitutionary (vicarious) sacrifice, the root of atonement in both Jewish and Christian theology,. ('I have saved the shire, but not for me').
Tolkien was very definitely *not writing an allegory* - he could hardly have said that more clearly than he did - so there are no “Christ-figures” (whatever *that* is supposed to mean) in the legendarium.
C.S.Lewis actually has a ton more subtle themes and depth in The Chronicles of Narnia than you are giving him credit for. Yes, they are fantasy books primarily aimed at children, and they have a not-so-subtle 2nd layer of Christian symbolism. However, there is actually an extremely subtle and mind-blowing 3rd layer that was so subtle it took decades for anyone to notice. I highly recommend having Michael Ward on your show to discuss his book Planet Narnia.
Loved the chronicles of Narnia growing up. I’ve tried reading LOTR multiple times throughout my life; in middle school, Highschool, even into college. I just could never get into LOTR as a book. I did enjoy the children of Hurin more than LOTR though. Overall I’d say I prefer C.S Lewis. I think he gets overlooked because he wrote books for kids.
I wouldnt say "better", but definitely more thorough. Lewis' work is much lighter but I still rank them together. You should definitely read both mens works, they're great
You shouldn’t compare Tolkein and Lewis. They are writing for different audiences and pdurposes. Lewis started writing the Narnia series for his god-daughter, so they were aimed for children. Tolkein never intended any of his work for children. They are both tremendous authors. And remember they encouraged each other, through their Inklings meetings, with their respective writing - this comparison, pitting one against the other, is regrettable and frustrating. We are blessed to have both.
Agreed! The only problem I have is sharing it with friends. The dream-like sequence when Orual participates in Psyche's tasks is VERY confusing to anyone who doesn't know Greek mythology.
I agree - when you read about their meetings as the Inklings, at Oxford, they were hugely encouraging to each other regarding their writing. They had different purposes for writing, and different intended audiences. I get frustrated with comparing them, as they are both brilliant, and we are blessed to have them both.
Im a huge Tolkien fan. His writing has a depth and beauty that is in my opinion unmatched. But I’m currently reading Lewis to my youngest daughter - first time I’ve gone back since my own childhood - and my view towards his writing has softened somewhat as he’s clearly writing for children. As such his style has a gentleness that stands alone, it’s just that the landscape isn’t as vast or as well thought out.
I think Lewis left the landscape less detailed so we could fill it in ourselves. Children have powerful imaginations. I remember as a child constructing my own images based on what Lewis did describe, and the world that I saw in my imagination was vast and beautiful.
It never ceases to amaze me the depth people insist on projecting on LotR and resisting in Narnia. Lewis' Discarded Image and more recently, Michael Ward's Planet Narnia, should've shut down this silliness about Lewis being preachy, sloppy, or writing at a child's level. Just read Ward's chapter on The Horse and His Boy. The dualities will start to pop out immediately. And Till We Have Faces is the most subtle book I've ever read. Tolkien fans seems to me far too willing to regurgitate his critiques - maybe he was just wrong.
Is he the same Joseph Pearce who has written "Tolkien - Man and Myth"? I have read 3 of his books on Tolkien and Middle-earth, but this is the first time I see or listen to him. I love his books.
I really dislike that whenever people discuss CS lewis and Tolkien they seem to only compare the lion the witch and the wardrobe and lord of the rings. CS lewis wrote great fiction that isn’t allegory like till we have faces and even within Narnia you have interesting books like the horse and his boy.
Around 3:30 got me thinking. Frodo is Christlike in that one aspect of his character, that he is a cross-bearer. Now that you mention it, many lotr characters I am thinking of resemble Christ in a unique way: (This dimensional relationship to getting to know Christ (Jeremiah 9:24) is awesome. It’s reminiscent of Christ’s manifestations in the Old Testament) .Aragorn is the rightful and just ruler; the captain, brother to man, and king 👑 of a mighty lineage; Jesus was the “Shoot of Jesse,” the Old Testament prophecies of David’s lineage .Gandalf is the ever-wise, ever-kindly, upmost critical counselor / teacher / rabbi / embodiment of wisdom. Gandalf the White reprimanding Pippin for looking at the Palantir in Two Towers book! .Sam is the true loving best friend whose got your back all the way, has a loving desire to serve you (Jesus washing the disciples’ feet) .Pippin and Merry, jovial friends, Jesus turned water into wine 😎 God takes delight and joy in His people who love Him and are close to Him. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is abounding in mutual love, that overflows in His love for us ❤ it has to do with the mercy: why Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam all showed pity to Gollum
You may be right about Lewis’s fiction, but I still love it and reread it over and over again (I am 70 years old). I just don’t find any other modern authors, other than Lewis and Tolkien, who create morally deep fiction.
I had to do an essay once on an influential theologian, I picked Tolkien and focused themes in lotr such as the ring and the general themes such as the doom of man. I really took a lot of joy in discovering even more. I like CS Lewis, his book a grief observed helped me to work through some personal things, but I love the theological themes in Tolkiens fiction rather than Lewis’s.
I think an important point that you kind of danced around is that good doesn’t destroy evil. Evil destroys evil. That is why Tolkien didn’t have Frodo destroy the ring. In fact, it corrupted Frodo in the end. In the end, as in real life, good rarely outright destroys evil. Instead evil eats itself and gets destroyed from the inside. The good are those that are left standing there after evil has destroyed itself. The good are those that pick up the pieces and help in the healing after evil has beaten itself back. This is also why we don’t go around militantly forcing conversion to Christ. We show up when we are needed and people have hit their lowest point. We help them pick up the pieces of a broken life by directing them towards the source of all healing.
Tolkien's work is greater than Lewis's, and Lewis too easily absorbs flavours from his surroundings - That Hideous Strength would have been vastly better without the influence of Charles Williams, IMO - but it is a bit unfair to blame the Space Trilogy for including angels when it is set in our universe, which in the Christian cosmology necessarily includes angels.
Super disagree. Apples and oranges. Both men are genius in their respective styles. One can do what the other can’t. Tolkien writes brilliant historical fantasy. Lewis writes genius science fiction that most mistake for childrens stories. In addition, Lewis has a unique ability to catapult the reader into a psychedelic/psychological/spiritual encounter akin to reading The Book of Revelation.
This is very average. My guy os better than the others giy stuff. Lewis is instantly captivating writing. And as for people don't want to be preached at, well Lewis sold millions so i guess many dont mind. And of course Lewis writes for young children. I mean, come on guys s no mention of that. But yeh LOTR is so amazing, deep, Rich.
Standard ignorant tropes. Lewis' children's fiction has clear allegory. His adult fiction is much different, and possesses the same variability that Pearce attributes to Tolkien. And what is Fradd talking about? There are angels in Lewis' Space Trilogy. _There are also angels in Tolkien's works._ This has nothing to do with the Tolkien-Lewis debate. It has to do with Matt's secular mind, which apparently sees angels as somehow unfit for fiction (and also nonfiction?). Tolkien and Lewis both believed in angels and incorporated them into their literature. In neither case are the angels functioning via allegory.
I don't care much for Tolkien as it pertains to Christianity. The god of Tolkien's works isn't the biblical God at all. The world is thoroughly pagan, like any old pagan religion, that had a twisted version of the creator.
So y’all kind of missed an important point with CS Lewis. He’s primarily writing for children. The chronicles of Narnia are perfect for my seven-year-old. He loves those stories so much and it’s a great way to introduce our faith and relationship with Christ.
I prefer the Space Trilogy novels to the Narnia, though both have a bit of a hodgepodge of a mythos. Tolkien worked everything out meticulously, Lewis sort of threw in various things that caught his fancy, and made them work more or less harmoniously. Very different approach to fiction.
It is very difficult to make things simple so the reader can understand deep truths. Lewis does this so well. I think he is very underrated, I would go so far as to say that he is a modern mystic.
Lewis did a lot that most people don’t realize. They are both equally deep in my opinion
@@markiangooley Lewis would agree though, he talks about this in some of his essays. But Lewis does elicit virtues from children and helps them to have that in reality
I just love the simplicity and clarity of Aslan, a story recognizable at any age for what it is.
"I was so enthralled I could do nothing until I had finished it". JRR Tolkien's review of CS Lewis's Out Of The Silent Planet
Great video Matt! I do have a little bit different opinion, I think Lewis and Tolkien's work get compared with the same standard. Its a little bit of an apples and oranges comparison to me. Yes Lewis is not as subtle as Tolkien. But his goal is also a little bit different. Lewis is trying to introduce his reader to Christ in the figure of Aslan. Essentially the idea is what would Christ be like in another world, which in this case is Narnia. I understand the idea of maybe it coming off as "preachy" but I also think there's genius to doing it that way as well. Basically, Lewis introduces his readers to Christ without the church, tradition and stuff that people tend to think of when they think of religion and they fall in love with the character of Aslan. Not to ramble on, but I just think the two stories were written with different approaches. That's like asking if I like Pints of Aquinas or the Council of Trent better. I love both shows, but they each do different variations of a similar thing.
Well said. Tremendous.
@kentadamson6992 spot on. Narnia is also a wonderful story for my younger children, Tolkien not so much.
I said the same thing in my comment, then saw yours.
“That Hideous Strength” is prophetic.
INDEED!
I've been saying this for 12 years, since I first read it in high school!
Certainly, none of Tolkien's heroes "are" the Christ figure, tempting as it is to assign Frodo to that role as ring-bearer // cross-bearer. JRRT avoids the symbolic realm that CS Lewis works in, as Fradd and Pearce both point out. Rather, Tolkien's heroes are _followers_ or _imitators_ of Christ, in different ways and to different degrees, and the closer they are, the _better_ they are, the more _saint-like._ What's fascinating is that JRRT sustains an orthodox Christology of membership and participation in the body of Christ even in this imaginary world that lacks both a historical Christ and a historical Church. It's as if to prove that Christ is always Truth, and always the sole path to salvation, even in a world that does not know his name. Heavy stuff.
Frodo is the victim of substitutionary (vicarious) sacrifice, the root of atonement in both Jewish and Christian theology,. ('I have saved the shire, but not for me').
Tolkien was very definitely *not writing an allegory* - he could hardly have said that more clearly than he did - so there are no “Christ-figures” (whatever *that* is supposed to mean) in the legendarium.
@@JamesMC04 Right, but the story is nonetheless very Christian in character, in its morality and anthropology..
C.S.Lewis actually has a ton more subtle themes and depth in The Chronicles of Narnia than you are giving him credit for. Yes, they are fantasy books primarily aimed at children, and they have a not-so-subtle 2nd layer of Christian symbolism. However, there is actually an extremely subtle and mind-blowing 3rd layer that was so subtle it took decades for anyone to notice. I highly recommend having Michael Ward on your show to discuss his book Planet Narnia.
Lewis' fiction is underrated. Like Tolkien, he is endlessly rereadable.
Loved the chronicles of Narnia growing up. I’ve tried reading LOTR multiple times throughout my life; in middle school, Highschool, even into college. I just could never get into LOTR as a book. I did enjoy the children of Hurin more than LOTR though. Overall I’d say I prefer C.S Lewis. I think he gets overlooked because he wrote books for kids.
This has been my experience as well.
I wouldnt say "better", but definitely more thorough. Lewis' work is much lighter but I still rank them together. You should definitely read both mens works, they're great
Joseph Pearce is brilliant and super friendly. I got to share a pint (or two) with him this summer.
I love Joseph Pearce. He has amazing insights.
You shouldn’t compare Tolkein and Lewis. They are writing for different audiences and pdurposes. Lewis started writing the Narnia series for his god-daughter, so they were aimed for children. Tolkein never intended any of his work for children. They are both tremendous authors. And remember they encouraged each other, through their Inklings meetings, with their respective writing - this comparison, pitting one against the other, is regrettable and frustrating. We are blessed to have both.
@@SMD2308 I totally agree.
That is the correct approach.
Lewis’s “Till We Have Faces” is far from two-dimensional. IMO it’s his most beautiful work of fiction.
Agreed! The only problem I have is sharing it with friends. The dream-like sequence when Orual participates in Psyche's tasks is VERY confusing to anyone who doesn't know Greek mythology.
I hadn't heard of that one, thanks!
I think Tolkien and Lewis would have been honoring each others works. Not tearing one down and building the other up.
I agree - when you read about their meetings as the Inklings, at Oxford, they were hugely encouraging to each other regarding their writing. They had different purposes for writing, and different intended audiences. I get frustrated with comparing them, as they are both brilliant, and we are blessed to have them both.
Tolkien was quite critical of the Chronicles of Narnia.
God bless you Matt Fradd.
Im a huge Tolkien fan. His writing has a depth and beauty that is in my opinion unmatched. But I’m currently reading Lewis to my youngest daughter - first time I’ve gone back since my own childhood - and my view towards his writing has softened somewhat as he’s clearly writing for children. As such his style has a gentleness that stands alone, it’s just that the landscape isn’t as vast or as well thought out.
@@danscreativecreatures wait, you're telling me the Chronicles are children's books? 😂
I think Lewis left the landscape less detailed so we could fill it in ourselves. Children have powerful imaginations. I remember as a child constructing my own images based on what Lewis did describe, and the world that I saw in my imagination was vast and beautiful.
Finally I have an explanation as to why Frodo didn't throw the ring into the Fire himself. Thanks
Just to clarify something, the eldila of Lewis’ space trilogy are not angels
It never ceases to amaze me the depth people insist on projecting on LotR and resisting in Narnia. Lewis' Discarded Image and more recently, Michael Ward's Planet Narnia, should've shut down this silliness about Lewis being preachy, sloppy, or writing at a child's level. Just read Ward's chapter on The Horse and His Boy. The dualities will start to pop out immediately. And Till We Have Faces is the most subtle book I've ever read. Tolkien fans seems to me far too willing to regurgitate his critiques - maybe he was just wrong.
@@bodenschatz10 💯 %
Is he the same Joseph Pearce who has written "Tolkien - Man and Myth"? I have read 3 of his books on Tolkien and Middle-earth, but this is the first time I see or listen to him. I love his books.
This is a great break down of lotr
I really dislike that whenever people discuss CS lewis and Tolkien they seem to only compare the lion the witch and the wardrobe and lord of the rings. CS lewis wrote great fiction that isn’t allegory like till we have faces and even within Narnia you have interesting books like the horse and his boy.
Around 3:30 got me thinking. Frodo is Christlike in that one aspect of his character, that he is a cross-bearer. Now that you mention it, many lotr characters I am thinking of resemble Christ in a unique way: (This dimensional relationship to getting to know Christ (Jeremiah 9:24) is awesome. It’s reminiscent of Christ’s manifestations in the Old Testament)
.Aragorn is the rightful and just ruler; the captain, brother to man, and king 👑 of a mighty lineage; Jesus was the “Shoot of Jesse,” the Old Testament prophecies of David’s lineage
.Gandalf is the ever-wise, ever-kindly, upmost critical counselor / teacher / rabbi / embodiment of wisdom. Gandalf the White reprimanding Pippin for looking at the Palantir in Two Towers book!
.Sam is the true loving best friend whose got your back all the way, has a loving desire to serve you (Jesus washing the disciples’ feet)
.Pippin and Merry, jovial friends, Jesus turned water into wine 😎 God takes delight and joy in His people who love Him and are close to Him. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is abounding in mutual love, that overflows in His love for us ❤ it has to do with the mercy: why Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam all showed pity to Gollum
Listening to this I can’t help but see Frodo, Aragorn, and Gandalf as representative of aspects of the Trinity.
Can we please not do the clicky click thing?
Helps sync audio and video
@@1970bosshemi never had that problem before. It's annoying
You may be right about Lewis’s fiction, but I still love it and reread it over and over again (I am 70 years old). I just don’t find any other modern authors, other than Lewis and Tolkien, who create morally deep fiction.
I have always preferred Narnia to Middle Earth, and I am nearly 63. I find CS Lewis endlessly readable, but LotR is turgid and poorly pace d IMHO.
@@etiennedevignolles7538 They're too different for me to compare, but I agree on Narnia's rereadability. It's a powerful work of genius.
I had to do an essay once on an influential theologian, I picked Tolkien and focused themes in lotr such as the ring and the general themes such as the doom of man. I really took a lot of joy in discovering even more. I like CS Lewis, his book a grief observed helped me to work through some personal things, but I love the theological themes in Tolkiens fiction rather than Lewis’s.
Very good, quite interesting.
I think an important point that you kind of danced around is that good doesn’t destroy evil. Evil destroys evil. That is why Tolkien didn’t have Frodo destroy the ring. In fact, it corrupted Frodo in the end. In the end, as in real life, good rarely outright destroys evil. Instead evil eats itself and gets destroyed from the inside. The good are those that are left standing there after evil has destroyed itself. The good are those that pick up the pieces and help in the healing after evil has beaten itself back. This is also why we don’t go around militantly forcing conversion to Christ. We show up when we are needed and people have hit their lowest point. We help them pick up the pieces of a broken life by directing them towards the source of all healing.
I would rather have children get into solid, well told, lives of the Saints. A way to teach the Faith direct, and realy heroes children can look up to
Wow very cool insight
I think tolken said that gandalf represents jesus as a teacher, aragorn is jesus as a king, and frodo is jesus as the humble servant.
Tolkien's work is greater than Lewis's, and Lewis too easily absorbs flavours from his surroundings - That Hideous Strength would have been vastly better without the influence of Charles Williams, IMO - but it is a bit unfair to blame the Space Trilogy for including angels when it is set in our universe, which in the Christian cosmology necessarily includes angels.
Please put the other name back
The ring is symbolic of *political power.* Such should not be a surprise given that Tolkien was a Christian Anarchist like Tolstoy.
Lewis was big on Math. Some of his works are based on symbolic logic.
By that, not Y implying not X is the same as X implying Y.....
A minor point, but the word "Gollumize" should be added to dictionairies, IMHO!
Super disagree. Apples and oranges. Both men are genius in their respective styles. One can do what the other can’t. Tolkien writes brilliant historical fantasy. Lewis writes genius science fiction that most mistake for childrens stories. In addition, Lewis has a unique ability to catapult the reader into a psychedelic/psychological/spiritual encounter akin to reading The Book of Revelation.
Tolkien was not wring for a young audience. Obviously
This is very average. My guy os better than the others giy stuff. Lewis is instantly captivating writing. And as for people don't want to be preached at, well Lewis sold millions so i guess many dont mind. And of course Lewis writes for young children. I mean, come on guys s no mention of that. But yeh LOTR is so amazing, deep, Rich.
Standard ignorant tropes. Lewis' children's fiction has clear allegory. His adult fiction is much different, and possesses the same variability that Pearce attributes to Tolkien. And what is Fradd talking about? There are angels in Lewis' Space Trilogy. _There are also angels in Tolkien's works._ This has nothing to do with the Tolkien-Lewis debate. It has to do with Matt's secular mind, which apparently sees angels as somehow unfit for fiction (and also nonfiction?). Tolkien and Lewis both believed in angels and incorporated them into their literature. In neither case are the angels functioning via allegory.
I don't care much for Tolkien as it pertains to Christianity. The god of Tolkien's works isn't the biblical God at all. The world is thoroughly pagan, like any old pagan religion, that had a twisted version of the creator.
What are you smoking? Illuvatar and Melkor is as christian as it gets with God and The Devil...
I can't get through Lord of the Rings. It's far too tedious.
Best vid posted on UA-cam today
Nope. Swing and a miss.
How so?
Agree with Emily’s comment. Two very different approaches. Lewis is not lesser.
Brilliant. I always knew Tolkien was better, but couldn't articulate why
Still can’t.