Random CS Lewis question

[tree_and_leaf]

I was thinking - mid washing-up - about Voyage to Venus, specifically about the way in which the plot requires Ransom to kill Weston, or at least to kill his body if we assume that Weston's soul really is gone and not capable of being restored.

Why isn't some kind of exorcism a possible solution, and why doesn't it even occur to Ransom that it might be?

I mean, yes, the series is full of plot holes, even if you prefer to pretend that That Hideous Strength didn't happen, or alternatively that the Director isn't actually Ransom at all given that he isn't actually all that much like him, Symbolic Wounds aside*, and could have benefited from a rigorous beta reader. But that one seems particularly odd.


* In the immortal words of Dorothy L Sayers, "I liked Ransom better before he took to lying on sofas like the Heir of Redclyffe", though I think she was actually being a little unfair to Yonge there.

Comments

[caulkhead]

Can you exorcise something if the exorcisee actually invited it in (I seem to remember Weston did, though I might be wrong)?

On a Watsonian level, that's all I can think of. Even so, you'd think Ransom would at least consider it, though.

[white_hart]

Maybe he doesn't have the requisite paraphernalia with him? (It's a very long time since I read the book, so I really can't remember much about it!)

[legionseagle]

I think it's explained in the book that the Un-Man is NOT precisely Weston possessed; it's more like Weston's a zombie. After all, his transformation included his biting the neck off a brandy bottle and swallowing the broken glass. So I think (which is very convenient for Ransom, of course) that Weston has already been "engulfed" by the forces of Evil beyond hope of recall before the whole attempt to tempt The Lady begins.

[philosophymom]

It's called Voyage to Venus on your side of the pond? I'm disappointed in me for not knowing that, since Perelandra is my favorite of the Ransom books.

Is CSL on the record regarding exorcism?

[serriadh]

I wondered if CSL just didn't consider exorcism part of a modern, robust Christianity, but if Ransom is (at least partly) inspired/patterned on Tolkien, surely an exorcism would have been something he'd consider.

[tree_and_leaf]

I'd forgotten that bit; on reflection I think you're right, though it is a bit too convenient.

Mind you, I'm not sure how Ransom knows he's dealing with a zombie/ed corpse - the swallowing broken glass bit might merely prove that the Forces of Evil don't care what state Weston's body winds up in as it's not their long term problem.

I also, from a theological standpoint, see no reason why you can't exorcise a possessed corpse, and have been worth at least giving it a go. Though I suppose since Ransom is convinced God wants him to deal with the problem on a purely physical plane, it's plausible that he wouldn't.

I do think that aspect of the plot's a mess, though.

[legionseagle]

Every time I attempt to read Milton I get hopelessly bogged down, but I keep suspecting that Perelandra makes more sense if one is familiar with Paradise Lost and Comus.

But the whole setup sounds hinky from the start. Why Ransom?

[legionseagle]

I'm now envisaging Captain Jack producing bell, book and candle from wherever he kept his blaster in the Trinny and Susanna robot sequence.

[tree_and_leaf]

Yes, you're right, he did. I'm not sure about the (para!) theological consequences of that, but I still think it's odd that Ransom doesn't consider it, even if only to reject it.

[tree_and_leaf]

Now that's a mental image to treasure!

Actually, you don't need any of the paraphanalia - as far as I know, that applies even in the case of the full Roman Rite major exorcism. (I can't find a reliable text of the rite online; it is restricted to those authorised by the bishop, which is probably sensible). The bigger obstacle is that Ransom isn't a priest.

"Minor" exorcisms are actually just fairly emphatically worded prayer for healing, blessing, protection and deliverance, and don't need any special kit at all, or indeed require the officiant to be ordained, though for obvious reasons, DIY exorcisms are generally discouraged.

Oddly enough, there's actually an exorcism prayer in the baptismal liturgy, though it's quite tactfully phrased, and for obvious reasons I don't call it that when talking parents through the service. But it is, nonetheless, an exorcism.

[tree_and_leaf]

Other than the fact he speaks Old High Solar, I'm not sure.

I did read Paradise Lost as an undergraduate, but I've forgotten most of it, except the bits that irritated me. I couldn't face Comus.

[tree_and_leaf]

Yes, it is.

On the second point: not as far as I know, but I'm not a Lewis expert.

[tree_and_leaf]

You might be right, in Doylist terms, but it seems unsatisfactory on a Watsonian level.

I don't think you need to be that Catholic to start wondering about whether an exorcism is the way forward once you have seriously accepted the idea that someone you're dealing with is possessed by the devil (or, for that matter, that the devil is animating his corpse), but perhaps this is a sad result of being Insufficiently Manly (but battles are ugly when women fight. That's me in trouble coming and going).

[tree_and_leaf]

Actually, thinking further about it, I wonder if the real problem is Lewis' (the author's) coyness about using names for God. It's obvious that Maleldil is Christ (or, let's say, the Son), but this is only ever said obliquely ("My name is also Ransome", or narrator-Lewis' reflection that "he knew who Ransom supposed Maleldil to be", etc). The one thing that is always part of an exorcism is an abjuration to the devil to depart in the name of Jesus Christ. But Lewis was clearly very reluctant to spell the identification out.

Still. It would have taken Ransome ten seconds to say "In the name of Maledli the Young, depart, foul fiend", and given that Ransome really isn't keen on unarmed signle combat to the death, you'd have thought he'd have given it a go...

[white_hart]

My copy (1983 Pan edition) is called Perelandra (Voyage to Venus), so I think they may have restored the original title at some point.

[nineveh_uk]

I rather liked Comus, though I can't remember any of it beyond that fact.

[tree_and_leaf]

I think I was just Miltoned out at that point. Maybe I should give it a go.

[nineveh_uk]

That may be the crucial difference - it was my first (with Areopagitica).

[kivrin]

Tangent to say I've just started reading Yonge in the past year and a half or so - hooray, Project Gutenberg - and though I have yet to read the great classic Heir of Redclyff I enjoyed Pillars of the House so very much. I've also read The Daisy Chain, The Trial (I wasn't expecting a legal trial to feature in it along with spiritual trials!), and The Young Stepmother. I couldn't really get in to Dyvenor Terrace but I'm still toting it about on the e-reader. Do you have any favorites?

[tree_and_leaf]

I think "The Pillars of the House", though I like the Daisy Chain a lot too. I'm also fond of "The Three Brides", but that does require me to overlook some rather too blatant anti-feminist polemic. On the other hand, it's got a very well drawn portrait of a young curate getting himself into bother, and a dramatic account of a cholera epidemic.

[kivrin]

[breaks speed record downloading Three Brides] Thank you!

[tree_and_leaf]

Calling it "Voyage to Venus" seems to have been Pan's idea, presumably at the same time they chopped down "That Hideous Strength" (a decision I sympathise with, although I'm not sure how much it actually helped; the novel's problems are too deep to solve that way).

ETA: no, I'm talking rubbish: Lewis abridged it himself, for the American market.

[cheyinka]

What obvious reasons? When my sons were baptized, the mandatory baptism class came right out and called it an exorcism, and I seem to recall the deacon calling it that during the services too, but I could be wrong there. :D

[cheyinka]

From a theological standpoint you'd think exorcising a possessed corpse would be easier than exorcising a possessed person, much like exorcising, I don't know, a possessed cupboard.

[tree_and_leaf]

Because it suggests a horror movie. (I actually might use the term in preparation, but I wouldn't in the service, given the likelihood that many of the family's guests never go to church and would immediately start thinking of the movie).

[tree_and_leaf]

Well, yes, that's my feeling.

[molniya]

*delurks* May I ask what you mean when you say 'Watsonian' in this context?

In any case, now I want to reread Out of the Silent Planet!

[tree_and_leaf]

Hi!

It's a term from Sherlock Holmes fandom. A 'Watsonian' explanation is one that tries to make sense of something in in-universe terms. The opposite is a 'Doylist' explanation, which tries to explain it in terms of what the author was doing, deliberately or not. A Doylist explanation for the change in tone between 'Perelandra' and 'That Hideous Strength' would be that Lewis became friends with Charles Williams and wanted to pay tribute to him.

[molniya]

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!

[ethelmay.livejournal.com]

Weighing in very late to say that I think Sayers was probably thinking of Charlie Edmonstone as the sofa-lyer, not the actual Heir.