From Narnia to a Space Odyssey : The War of Ideas Between Arthur C. Clarke and C.S. Lewis

by Ryder W. Miller (Editor), Arthur C. Clarke, C.S. Lewis

From Narnia to Space Odyssey is the dialogue of letters between Arthur C. Clarke and C.S. Lewis in which they debate, discuss, and ponder the potential and potential dangers of the rise of technology. Their encounter sets the stage for much of what we face is technology the "beauty" that will lead to a more utopian society, or is it the "beast" that endangers our humanity and spirit? Clarke and Lewis began their correspondence in December 1943 when Clarke took Lewis to task for his remark about "little rocket societies bent on exporting the crimes of mankind to other planets." While they met only once (at a well-known pub in Oxford, with Lewis bringing along a good friend-the Oxford don, one J.R.R. Tolkein), their "encounters" lasted until 1954 when Clarke became involved in underwater exploration and left for the Great Barrier Reef. Their concern about the future of society, even from differing perspectives, is both provocative and illuminating, and bears close reading today when we are all confronted with the question whether mankind can control the explosion of technology or will become its slave.

Genres: Science Fiction, Philosophy

176 pages, Hardcover

First published October 1, 2003

Reviews

[Raja99 · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really should give this book a lower rating. I can't in conscience recommend it to anyone. But I'm almost certainly going to buy a copy as soon as possible.

The book concerns itself (at least nominally) with the differences in worldview between C. S. Lewis and Arthur C. Clarke. Lewis saw the human race in general, and scientists in particular, as terribly flawed, and warlike; he saw the exploration of space as a way to repeat the mistakes of the past, and to expand imperialism throughout the universe. Clarke took a more optimistic view, feeling that humanity would learn from its past mistakes, and would move into space in the spirit of fellowship, and with a strong desire to explore and discover.

This book opens with a lengthy introduction by editor Ryder W. Miller (whose name, annoyingly, appears nowhere on the cover), and the editor's profiles of Lewis and Clarke.

The first main reason I can't recommend this book is that it's very poorly edited; not only are there many, many typos, but multi-paragraph passages from the intro are repeated, verbatim, in the profiles.

Pages 33-34 carry a newly-written preface by Arthur C. Clarke in which he admits that his memories of the correspondence with Lewis are rather vague, but he does clearly remember Joy Gresham, whose "ultimate marriage to C.S. Lewis was a great surprise to everyone. Its tragic outcome has been dramatized in the play, Shadowlands, and was described by Lewis himself in A Grief Observed, which I have never had the heart to read."

The correspondence between Clarke and Lewis itself takes up pages 36-52. This brings up the second main reason I can't recommend this book: While Clarke's side is clear and understandable, Lewis's is hard to read, and almost incoherent in places. The sample images of some of the letters we are shown suggest that Clarke's letters were typed, while Lewis's were handwritten ... and the handwriting is quite hard to decipher. I suspect that the editor's transcripts of Lewis's letters have more than a few mistakes. Perhaps the editor should have included clear images of all Lewis's letters so the reader could try to double-check them?

After the correspondence there is a 28-page section with three works by Lewis: "Ministering Angels", "Forms of Things Unknown", and "On Science Fiction". The first comes across as rather dated, misogynistic, and ugly; I suspect it was intended as light-hearted humor. The second is an entertaining short-short; not up to the standards of Fredric Brown's best, but as good as average Brown. The third is the real gem, in my opinion. It's an essay in which Lewis argues that critics who hate a genre can't write effective criticism of it because they will miss (or dismiss) the differences between superior and inferior examples. I found Lewis's arguments fairly convincing.

Next comes a 93-page selection of pieces by Clarke. Miller includes three, "A Meeting with Medusa", "The Nine Billion Names of God", and "The Star", that I would surely count among Clarke's best short fiction. He also includes "Jupiter V", which I count as very good, and "The Light of Darkness", which I count as slight, though well written. There are then two short non-fiction pieces; in the first, he decries a particular example of the sort of ugly attitude Lewis fears; in the second, he talks about superseding rocketry.

This brings up the third reason I can't recommend this book: Why were these particular pieces by Lewis and Clarke included? For some, it's clear, but for others, I don't see the connection to the Clarke and Lewis correspondence.

Nonetheless, I plan on buying a copy, especially since Amazon Marketplace vendors have inexpensive copies available, in order to get the correspondence and Lewis's "On Science Fiction".

(Finished 14:57EST 2007-11-11.)

[Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

First of all, reader, understand that the title of this book is overstated. It is not a series of letters, a debate held in your hands. The first quarter of the book follows the exchange between Lewis and Clarke -- one pensive, one optimistic -- about mankind's seemingly imminent conquest of space, but this is then followed by essays and SF short stories by both Lewis and Clarke. Both men were interested in science fiction as a genre, having witnessed it erupt from obscurity within their own lifetimes. Although Lewis is remembered more as a medieval literature scholar and a Christian apologist. his letters to Clarke evidence a deep familiarity with the SF of the day, from serious novels to pulp trash.

The spirit of the letters is intended to serve as a theme for the stories and essays that follow, though frankly I found it a collection of miscellany. The correspondence begins when Clarke reads Perelandra and takes offense that the scientists are portrayed as grasping imperialists, wanting to subject the whole of the poor solar system to mankind's vices and ambition. He protests to Lewis that the proponents of rocket societies, both laymen and scientists, are among the most pacifistic and philanthropic people in society. Lewis' response is that while there may be no "Westons" (his technocratic imperialist character) in the rocket clubs as of yet, they will quickly follow once idealistic explorers have broken the 'quarantine of space'. The two then chatter about science fiction.

The bulk of the book consists of odd stories and essays by Lewis and Clarke, ostensibly related to the argument. The only real trace I saw of that was in Clarke's stories, though: in one, "Meeting with Medusa", an airship probing Jupiter's oceans of cloud discovers a new kind of life. While not sure it is intelligent, the characters immediately put into effect the "prime directive", protocols regarding the circumspect treatment of intelligent life -- specifically, do no harm. The term prime directive brings Star Trek to mind immediately, and so does Clarke's optimism that man will learn from his mistakes. In one of the last pieces of the book, Clarke rebuts an enthusiastic essay from an American military personality that the United States should lay claim to the Moon in its entirety, and Clarke appears so disturbed at the naked avarice and nationalistic aggression that he muses that perhaps it would be better for the galaxy if man were kept inside Lewis' quarantine of space for a while longer.

I'm the odd bird who enjoys both Lewis and Clarke, whose own mind is divided between the hope of Star Trek and the sad wisdom of history, and so I found this collection odd but fun. If nothing else it is an example of two men who -- to borrow from Lewis -- can argue without quarreling.

[Annette]

got this from the brother in law. Skimming here and there between other books. I would guess it is best for the hard core sci fi and C.S. Lewis fans.

[John Gossman · Rating 3 out of 5]

This short book consists of background and discussion of a series of letters between Lewis and Clarke, followed by a selection of short stories and essays the two wrote. The editor worked closely with Clarke (having the advantage that Clarke was still alive) and thus the background on Clarke is more substantial. In addition, more than half of the book is Clarke stories (notably Meeting with Medusa, Nine Billion Names of God, and The Star). I am left with the impression that this is a book about Clarke and CS Lewis is secondary.
I was drawn to the book after reading Stapledon’s “The Star Maker” and then learning that Lewis told Clarke he liked reading the book but that the ending was “pure satanism.” This book contains that letter and the others (known) from their correspondence. Unfortunately, there aren’t very many of these letters and they are short. All of them combined are only 18 pages (including reproductions of the hand-written letters alongside transcriptions).

The correspondence is friendly, starting with Clarke admonishing Lewis that the engineers working on rocketry are nothing like the imperialist characters from the Space Trilogy. Lewis cedes the point and they quickly become quite chummy, eventually arranging a pub meeting, where Lewis brought along a friend (more later).
It may have helped that Lewis’s wife (see Shadowlands) was very good friends with Clarke.

More insightful is Lewis’s essay “On Science Fiction” where we discover Lewis was quite a fan and read widely, though (like Lem and others) he thought most of it was terrible, more space fantasy than anything to do with science. Lewis thought it was at its best when it explored a theme that could not be elucidated in a more realistic setting (he mentions both 1984 and Brave New World). He then talks about the “engineering subgenre” and here it becomes apparent that Clarke won him over. He gives a Clarke book as a paragon before saying he is too technologically illiterate to appreciate these stories. He also expressed a great appreciation for escapism and defended science fiction from charges of being fascistic by quoting his friend JRR Tolkien who pointed out those most opposed to “escape” are jailers aka the dictators.
Finally, Lewis mentions some of his favorites, a list that stands up well, including Clarke, HG Wells, Stapledon, Bradbury, and a longer list of fantasies starting with Homer and including his friend Tolkien.
The book ends with a letter from Clarke to the editor where he says the friend Lewis brought to their pub meeting was Tolkien, though this was before LoTR and it was only much later that Clarke realized just who he had met!

Unfortunately, the introduction and background are not well written, and include a surprising number of typos and grammatical errors. I’m not a grammar snob, but it was distracting. The letters are short and I learned little more than I already knew. The Clarke stories were already familiar to me, and the one CS Lewis story was bad…far below the level of other Lewis books. The essay on science fiction was the best part of the book, and I’m not sure that alone justifies a whole book. Nowadays, it would probably just be a blog post. 2.5 stars. Less if you don’t care what Lewis thought about sci-fi, more if the Clarke stories are new to you.

[J-Bird · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really loved this book. There was not enough content with just the letters between the two, so they also included short biographies (of sorts) and science fiction short stories from both authors. I particularly enjoyed Clarke's stories because you can feel the excitement and optimism he has about the human race and space travel. He also has a way of tying scientific things that we already know into the stories. I do find (as does Lewis) that science fiction stories that could have just happened on Earth should not be science fiction and should just be dramas or novels. It was interesting to read his essay about science fiction as it sort of read like literary criticism, (which I am a huge fan of). It is not my favorite to read science fiction stories that have "expired" because they are kind of humorous (or sad, in a way). One story, for example, portrayed what it was like to land on the moon before humans had actually done so, and it was not my cup of tea. Though I suppose it gives an interesting perspective as to what people were wondering and thinking about before human space travel. I would recommend this to anyone dabbling in science fiction, and especially to those who love it!
That said, there are a ton of grammatical errors and misspellings, and I understand why some of the other reviewers have said what they have, but I still really looked forward to reading this when I was reading it.

[Guy McArthur · Rating 1 out of 5]

It would be incredible if there were an actual war of ideas, or even just a real debate, between Clarke and Lewis. And it would be highly relevant in our own time of billionaire techno-optimists working on carrying out Clarke's vision while many are pessimistic, like Lewis (evidently) that this expansionistic drive should be curbed. Instead he just have a short segment from a Lewis novel where he creates space colonizer villains, and a couple of letters from Clarke where he pushes back a little bit, separating scientific exploration of the solar system from wild sci-fi fantasies and, incidentally, defending sci-fi fandom, explaining that they actually tended to be more pacifistic (as would later be the case with Trekkies). Lewis, presciently, had also ascribed to his villains, a drive for immortality, which is now emergent in some tech-bro would-be transhumanists. But there was never any real debate, nor any substantive back-and-forth; Lewis felt that he had said what he wanted to say, and the few other letters aren't even worthy of inclusion in the book. We will continue to grapple with these questions: is our expansionism innate and good or make us a cancer, doomed to overrun our resources? should we terraform other planets or leave them as they are? Etc. It's a shame that there isn't a book presenting a real dialogue or debate on this topic.

[Nicholas Whyte · Rating 4 out of 5]

https://fromtheheartofeurope.eu/from-narnia-to-a-space-odyssey-stories-letters-and-commentary-by-and-about-c-s-lewis-and-arthur-c-clarke-ed-ryder-w-miller/

It has three parts: 1) an analytical introduction, including short profiles of Lewis and Clarke and a preface by Clarke himself; 2) the actual correspondence between Lewis and Clarke, which consists of fifteen letters over the years between 1936 and 1954, some of them very short; and 3) stories and essays by the two writers, three by Lewis and eight by Clarke. The publication history is rather droll, but Miller isn’t a terribly deep analyst and he makes a number of obvious mistakes in reading Lewis’s handwriting; also the first of the stories included, “Ministering Angels” by Lewis, is just repulsive (a sex worker and a feminist go to Mars). The primary non-fiction material is welcome, but the rest a bit superfluous.

[Evan Þ. · Rating 3 out of 5]

I bought this and read it because I was promised an epistolary exchange between C. S. Lewis and Arthur C. Clarke on the craft and social impact of science-fiction stories. Their letters were very interesting to read! But unfortunately, they take up no more than a quarter of the book. Most of the rest of it reprints short stories by both of them (mostly by Clarke). The stories are fun, but not what I was hoping for.

[Alexander Oster · Rating 3 out of 5]

The correspondance between the two writers was mildy interesting, but also pretty limited.
Poorly edited collection of (enjoyable) short stories at the end.
Title aas misleading.

[Flash Sheridan · Rating 1 out of 5]

According to Sir Arthur’s biography (p. 393) these letters are better read in Lewis’ Collected Letters v.3, with “accurate and readable transcriptions, unlike the earlier ill -fated effort.”

[Erika RS · Rating 3 out of 5]

The premise of this book is interesting but too thin to carry it: Arthur C. Clarke and C.S. Lewis once exchanged a series of letters where they discussed their contrasting views regarding space exploration. Clarke thought it would open a new frontier of possibility for humanity. Lewis thought it would open the door to humans spreading their corrupted and conquering ways throughout the universe. The letters are supplemented by two short essays about the authors and some stories and essays by each.

Sadly, the letters did not contain much substance. What substance there was is little more than the summary I gave above. The biographical essays about the authors are interesting, but nothing novel. The stories and essays by Clarke and Lewis vaguely connect to the theme, but there is no commentary to show how it all fits together. All in all, it doesn't feel like you are entering into a debate between the authors.

That doesn't sound like a 3 star review. However, I give the work three stars because it's an interesting collection of materials if you drop the premise that they represent some grand debate between Clarke and Lewis. Thus, overall, this was a somewhat disappointing but ultimately worthwhile read.

[Jay · Rating 3 out of 5]

I thought this book was interesting because it it showed some of the correspondence between C.S. Lewis and Arthur C. Clarke. It's always interesting to read letters between literary greats. Especially since they had very different beliefs and ideas regarding science fiction. And what was nice is that the book also had some really well written short stories by each writer. There was also a chapter in which Lewis gave his opinion on writing and critics which if you are an aspiring writer could be very helpful. Quick read and an odd one for me. Glad I came across it.

[Joseph · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed reading the correspondence between Clarke and Lewis (though they were too few) and some Clarke short stories I hadn't read before. My main problems with the book were that it was the worst edited book I've ever read with typos everywhere and the writings of Lewis were nearly incomprehensible babbling. There was very little cohesion to the book: a few letters between the two, some short stories by Lewis, some by Clarke. The End. I felt no connecting thread between any of it.

[Dave Maddock · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is a nice idea that simply doesn't have reality on its side. The letters herein show little engagement between the two beyond a cordial mutual respect. The editorial content by Miller is trite and amateurish (sorry dude, truth hurts). The copy editing is terrible as well.