C.S. Lewis sci-fi trilogy

[Kristin]

I am going to start reading his only sci-fi trilogy. It has been sitting in my kindle untouched for two years. Is anyone else interested in reading along?

[Eben]

Kristin wrote: "I am going to start reading his only sci-fi trilogy. It has been sitting in my kindle untouched for two years. Is anyone else interested in reading along?"

I always intended to read them, just for being classics, and never even got around to buying them. How long you thinking of before reading might be due for discussion?

[Kristin]

I thought it would be good to discuss each book individually, when is a good time for you? I just started Brave New World, so I could be convinced to wait if you need time to get them :)

[Eben]

I liked Brave New World :) Hope you enjoy it. I'm going to have what I think is a particularly good time to catch up on reading the 19th to the 27th, so I could have it read by the 28th. But will that be too late for you?

[Kristin]

No, not at all, that sounds good :)

[Eben]

Excellent :) 28th it is :)

[Kristin]

I need to finish up the books I'm reading so I'll be ready by the 28th. How is your reading going Eben?

[Kristin]

Hi Carrie :) it is a trilogy. Here are the names
The Space Trilogy -
Out of the Silent Planet
Perelandra
That Hideous Strength

I had no idea about them either until a friend mentioned them to me a few years ago. We would love for you to join us!

[Eben]

Hi Kristin ^_^ And hi Carrie Beth if you're joining us ^_^ I hope you are. As ashamed as I am of how little I read over vacation, I did finish Out of the Silent Planet. But should we delay? Especially if Carrie Beth just got it 2 days ago, maybe. Otherwise I'm good to go :)

[Kristin]

If Eben is ok waiting a few days, I am. I'm fine either way. :)

[Eben]

I'm fine to wait ^_^ more people are more fun ^_^

[Kristin]

I agree, let us know Carrie when you start reading, and we can start discussing the beginning of the book :)

[Brian]

I read all three of C.S. Lewis outer space books a long time ago. Let me know when you have finished them so we can discuss them.

[Eben]

Brian wrote: "I read all three of C.S. Lewis outer space books a long time ago. Let me know when you have finished them so we can discuss them."

We're reading them one at a time but we'll post when we start the first one.

[Kristin]

Make sure to read the Postscript :)

[Kristin]

Ok, so I think we are ready to start the discussion. Why don't we discuss up until the first plot point so we can give Carrie some time, and we don't ruin the book for her. What did you all think of the characters and the space ship? What were your impressions regarding the situation with Ransom saving the young man?

[Eben]

To be honest I was mostly bored of Ransom. I appreciated him saving the mentally handicapped young man, Harry, which tells me he's decent enough, but pretty dull at the beginning to be honest. The thing that really weirded me out though was that Ransom goes in and has a drink with them. How that seems like a good idea is beyond me. I was just shaking my head. Not to mention he says that he hated Devine to begin with. So, I have to say that Ransom didn't strike me as the brightest bulb in the box.

Harry having to go back to Devine and Weston makes sense, he's got economic compulsion. Which is probably the only reason he does end up at the mansion most days. He does it or he and his mother starve. Ransom is just being polite, it seemed to me. When I'm not sure he had a reason to be. With some dude he hated at school and Weston who seems like he should provoke the town meeting scene from Young Frankenstein.

I liked the ship, though. I was a bit annoyed that how the solar propulsion worked wasn't explained but the gravity and the angles of everything in a sphere was neat. And the idea of space as beneficent instead of void was very interesting. Not knowing where the story goes later, it makes me wonder if there's an element of panspermia being hinted at with that.

[Kristin]

The premise for Ransom staying with Weston and Devine was that he didn't have a place to stay, and if he slept outside, he would freeze to death. I will admit that wasn't the most obvious of points by the author.

Yes, Weston seems like jerk in the beginning, but by the end of the book I think we see his true character, which was intriguing to me.

I also like the ship, I felt like it was it's own tiny planet in a way. I think it is interesting how they are all naked for most of the trip. This theme of nakedness without shame is something that continues on in the next book as well.

How would you react if you were Ransom? I don't think he ever thought the end result of their caper would result with him in space.

[Eben]

I think, if I were Ransom, I would turn around and go back to Harry and his mother's house and ask to stay there. Maybe I'm just more suspicious than Ransom is. I can't see him as having a reasonable suspicion that he would end up abducted on a space voyage but it seems very reasonable to me that he would end up being used for some kind of experiment given the circumstances he encounters on arrival.

I agree with you about the ship. There was this odd perfection about it. Maybe because of all the description of how the light revitalized him. And the nakedness adds an almost edenic feeling to it. That they are the first people of this little world, learning its rules, and absorbing its life. And the work they do in it doesn't feel like much of a burden. It's just beautiful and exactly accommodates their needs.

Which actually kind of ties in with my major comment on the book. I remember reading somewhere (but not where unfortunately) a critique of the Narnia books as soft paganism. The idea being that the paganism would be an easy entry for the "sophistication" of monotheism and Christianity. Though the critique was that it worked just as well as an easy exit away from Christianity. And a good portion of the time I was reading Out of the Silent Planet, I had that feeling of soft pagan metaphor for a return to grace.

Ransom is forced into a state of ignorance, beauty, nudity, and simple work by Devine and Weston (Who I think I really want to talk about at his big speech at the end). And then thrust out into the terror of a world beyond that is utterly beyond his understanding. And I think I probably shouldn't go farther than that since we don't know how far anyone else is.

But did anyone else get that feeling? Like the story is a soft pagan metaphor for Christian thought? Or is that just my preconceived notions as a non-christian?

[Kristin]

I am a Christian, and I can tell you that there is definitely a lot of metaphor for Christian thought, but also a lot of moralism which isn't necessarily Christian, but was a very popular topic in Lewis' time (Moral Relativism to be more specific). The Christian theme in Out of the Silent Planet is very soft compared to the other books in the series from the overall impressions of the trilogy I have read, and even from what I have read so far in Perelandra.

I also cannot wait to talk about Weston's speech! But yes, we must wait :)

I have not read the Narnia series personally (I did have some of them read to me as a child) and I think there are very overt Christian themes from what I can remember. C.S. Lewis was a Christian, but not a theologian (as some people mistakenly say), so it makes sense that these themes would come out in his work. I am very interested in how he approaches these things from a science fiction standpoint. So far, I am also really enjoying the discussion! I can't wait to talk about the hrossa.

[Eben]

I'm enjoying it too ^_^ and thanks for the clarification on the Christianity and Moral Relativism. I might have a bit more to say about Narnia later just because one of the characters that appears later in the book reminds me a lot of a character in Narnia and there's some other equivalencies. But I figure we should let others chime in before we get farther and get into the Hrossa and past. And I'll make sure to explain the references. Thanks so much for starting this discussion and an excuse to read the books ^_^

[Kristin]

I am so happy others wanted to join me in my quest. How is the reading going Carrie Beth?

[Kristin]

I went on vacation but am back... I noticed there wasn't any activity while I was gone. Should we continue the discussion?

[Eben]

I'm guessing so. I was hoping from comments by others (I, too, was on vacation funnily enough) but maybe they'll break in at some point? Onto the Hrossa?

[Kristin]

Yes! What did you think of Ransom and his encounter with these lovable creatures?

[Eben]

I may have responded extra well to the Hrossa because I've got a thing for otters XD. Poet not quite otter people, how can you beat it? What really got me though was how Ransom recognized it as Hnau. He, as a philologist, heard it talking to itself and made the connection of speech to human-like-ness.

What it got me thinking about is the idea that maybe the Hnau state isn't confined to just humans on Earth. Like how we're starting to think about Dolphins now and I know there's a country that recognizes apes as non-human persons. And I've had discussions with my wife about elephants because of them making art and doodles, which gets us, of course, because we're artists. Which seemed to me the same as Ransom recognizing himself-ness in something very much different - because it participated in his interest and expertise.

I wonder, with what happens later, if it is meant to be a partial indictment on colonial thought? That we only recognize others according to our own values and how well they conform to them. Ransom is more forgiving since his interest is language and companionship/allies. Even so, he falls almost immediately into the dichotomy of us versus the Hrossa in terms of cultural advancement. Though I suppose I would too, given how close the Hrossa conform to the stereotype of the noble savage. The sort of people in touch with their world and their spirituality in a very comforting way.

How about yourself?

[Kristin]

I also love otters, which made me love the Hrossa even more. I know in some ways Ransom was looking at them and noticing deficiencies in their ability to create technology, but at the same time I think he was comparing them to the Seroni (which we should also definitely talk about).

I have already read Perelandra, and they talk a lot more about animals having the status of hnau in that book... so I already know where it is headed. But I won't spoil it for you, I think it definitely brings up interesting ideas and questions.

I thought that the Hrossa as a people were very interesting and they taught Ransom (and myself) a lot about being satisfied in your position in life. They weren't angry about the Seroni living above them, or the Pfifltriggi living below them. As a side note, I have still not figured out how I should even attempt to pronounce pfifltriggi...

I love the way that the Hrossa took Ransom in, how they taught him about their lives and culture, and spent time teaching him the language.

What did you think about the great hunt for the hnarka?

Hyoi was one of my favorite characters in the book, so I felt really sad about the outcome :/

[Eben]

Hyoi was great. Tears.

And I loved all the Hrossa's nowness. Felt very Zen. I was fascinated with their approach to the Hnarka hunt, that it wasn't the winning that was important or the losing, it was the struggle between them that meant it all. That they weren't great without each other. Seems like a welcomely symbiotic relationship. They were more competitors than enemies. I thought it was beautiful. I did just enjoy the Hrossa's outlook on life, too.

I too have zero idea how to say Pfifltriggi. I think, unless they come up again, I've just decided it isn't important. The frog people. It's interesting with them though, that they are the least important to the narrative but what little we know of them, they seem the most culturally similar to Ransom and us.

It seemed almost like european, western (native), and eastern stereotypes. The frog people are the europeans, the Hrossa are the western people, and the Seroni are the easterners, with an old society, and a lot of tech of their own. I might be reading too much into that though. It's just that Augray felt like such an ascetic monk stereotype to me.

What did you think of the Sorn? And their interaction? I totally felt a little mad at him for knocking the Hrossa way of life XD. Their refusal to be different from their hardships and joys is totally what made them beautiful. Did that bug you, too?

[Kristin]

I thought the Sorn was more like what Ransom was used to in humans, and that is why he knocked the Hrossa way of life ;) I also liked how they found joy in every part of life. I like that approach.

What did you think of the appearance of Weston and Devine from out of the forest? I guess we can also talk about Ransom fleeing and going through to meet the Oyarsa with Augray. I didn't really think of him as a monk type, but more like a hermit :) which I can relate to as a introvert (although my extreme extrovert of a husband does force me out of my solitude quite often).

[Eben]

That's smart. I'm an introvert married to an introvert XD We don't get out to see people much XD. I think I saw him as more of a monk than a hermit since it seemed like he lay in wait for travelers to assist them. I got the impression that that was his purpose and he was very interested in what Ransom had to say about Thulcandra. But I suppose that could just as easily be curiosity.

Weston and Devine coming out of the forest was so imperialistic. The "animals" had boats and spears and houses. I don't buy for a second that it was a failure to understand the Hrossa's human-ness as we would define it. I think it even ends up belying Weston's speech a little. I don't think he really believes in all humans as superior to the inhabitants of Malacandra, except perhaps as an extension of British superiority to lesser societies. It's all what Weston and Devine want at the expense of... everything else.

And I think it's interesting to have that in comparison to the Hnarka hunt. Where The Hrossa value the Hnarka, their prey, to the point that they say that they are nothing without the Hnarka and the Hnarka is nothing without them. It's the ultimate comparison. Hyoi lives in complete balance and, as you say, joy in all parts of his life, even death, where Weston and Devine care nothing for Ransom or anything that happens to be around him. They weren't even hunting Hyoi. Oops. But it wouldn't have happened if Ransom hadn't run away. It's that utter assurance that only the self matters.

So, I feel like it was written that way to make me feel offended by Weston and Devine. To push the Hrossa as better than we are. Even to the point that I kind of begrudged Augray's critique of the Hrossa. Because it was a little more like us than the Hrossa, and we just had displayed how bad we are in comparison to them.

I don't think I have many thoughts on Ransom's flight to the meeting. Maybe your thoughts might trigger some of mine? But in general, I have to admit my interest waned from the end of the Hnarka hunt to the meeting with Oyarsa. I think the only thing that occurs to me is that I'm sympathetic with the flight at that point because the Hrossa trust in Oyarsa and Augray, and I'm inclined to trust their judgement.

How about yourself? What caught your attention with the flight and Weson and Devine in comparison to the Hnarka hunt? And did you have any more thoughts on the Seroni in general, since we're actually exposed to them through Augray, now?

[Kristin]

Yeah, I was not convinced by Weston's argument, and also attribute his idiotic actions to getting what he wanted. You are right, they were in boats with oars for goodness sakes. I loved the Hnarka hunt, and I counted them being the ones chosen to kill the Hnarka by the Oyarsa as a consolation for Hyoi dying, although it was still terrible. And at the hands of Weston! Ugh!

I thought the seroni were interesting, but not as interesting as the srossa.

I thought the trek to meet the Oyarsa was interesting because of the way Augray carried Ransom. It was such a natural thing for him to put Ransom on his shoulder. It reminded me of how we carry our children on our shoulders when they are too tired to walk.

What were your impressions of the meeting with the Oyarsa (prior to Weston and Devine's arrival)? I was so glad to see some hrossa again, to be honest. What did you think of the way they recorded their history on the stone tablets?

I am getting ready to start reading "That Hideous Strength," but I think we ought to discuss Perelandra first so I don't get all confused. What did you think of the eldila? They are definitely a prominent race in the next book.

[Eben]

Huh, that (How Augray carried Ransom) is interesting now that you point it out. Especially with the idea of planets getting younger as you move inward. We really are the Martian Hnau's little siblings. Children compared to their old ways. Also might put in perspective the idea of the wider "world" beyond our own. We need help to get through it.

I did find it interesting that Oyarsa presented fear of death as the bent one's influence. I think that was right away. That fear and distrust, as opposed to respect and mutual need, was something instilled in us by our 'botched' creation.

I'm also interested at that point at the name given to God. Maledil, which for us would be suggestive of a bad thing - Mal - as opposed to the bent one. And it makes me wonder if that is a sort of linguistic pun. Are we supposed to think that what we think of as bad on a daily basis is in fact good? Not sure. I think it might also play into the same sort of thing as the naming scheme for the people. That Weston and Devine might be meant to evoke the West and literally Divine - but playing into that reversal - that the divine is the bent one and God is Mal.

I'm not sure what to make of the carving of the history onto stone. I suppose it's good enough. And I guess it does avoid linguistic difficulties. Though there doesn't seem to be any linguistic difficulties. It seems, I guess, oddly primitive compared to what is at the Malacandran's disposal. Though relatively non-pollutive which would be an issue given their world's limited livable space.

I am actually into the next book now. In a non-spoiler way that I think you'll recognize without spoiling it for anyone else, just in case. I've just gotten to the point of where Ransom thinks he may have finally figured out why he was brought to Venus and doesn't like it, and is protesting that Maledil couldn't mean for him to do that. I have no idea how far in I am, because my kindle copy is all three books bundled together.

I do enjoy the idea of the elilda as living with us but at a sort of different frequency. It appeals a lot to my sci-fi and fantasy sensibilities. That voice in your head and the image out the corner of your eye. Real but gone as soon as you pay attention.

But let's get to the really good stuff. What do you think of Weston and Devine's arrival? What about that speech?

[Kristin]

Ok, I had to go back and re-read Weston's speech, and I thought I would quote one part.
"Life is greater than any systems of morality; her claims are absolute. It is not by tribal taboos and copy-book maxims that she has pursued her relentless march from the amoeba to man and from man to civilization."

This is towards the beginning of his speech, and I think this says it all. He says that Life is greater than any system of morality, but what is life without morality? I thought that was a good kicker for this speech. I also want to talk about Divine and what the Oyarsa says about him, but I thought this was a good starting point.

[Eben]

I think I can see, even if I disagree, with his point. Weston is essentially arguing that darwinian fitness is itself the ultimate moral good. The goal of life itself is its own perpetuation.

I vaguely remember a professor of mine positing that, in the end, our entire existence, from birth, to all our civilized activities, is just to ensure that the largest safe amount of our DNA code possible replicates and continues to replicate. That professor would (and I think did) argue that that activity was amoral. It doesn't care if it is right or wrong and couldn't really consider it even if it did care. It's simply the natural laws governing the movement of DNA. That which replicates better, replicates better. It's got no meaning to it. It just is.

I would agree with what Weston is saying that far. That life, at the bottom, doesn't care about our morality because it can't. And that life proceeds like that more or less regardless of what we philosophize about it.

However, I stop agreeing with him at the use of greater. I think life is capable of functioning without morality. It's simply life in favor of your own goals. Pretty much the way Weston acts, actually. other "tribes" don't matter except in conflict because it doesn't advance your DNA's continuance. Life becomes miserable, brutish, and short. It isn't good or bad, it just is. But Weston is saying, essentially that that is the ultimate good. The ultimate morality is the amoral pursuit of benefit to the bottom of the self. And that just seems awful to me.

Funnily enough though, I don't think Oyarsa makes a very good counterargument to that. His argument is essentially, you wouldn't recognize the passed DNA if you saw it in a few thousand generations. But that's the argument of tribe to me. That the tribe would be different. And that's exactly what Weston doesn't care about. It's meaningless to him. It's the DNA - the code of life - that he's interested in. His code must pass at the expense of all others - as much as he can safely pass. It doesn't matter if it is a little clone of him. One hundred percent identical is too much DNA to pass on safely. What he's looking for is that 50% of 50% 0f 50% 0f 50% etc. And yes, of his own tribe. But he understands that equation of diminishing likeness. And he'll favor himself over his extended tribe anyway, because the closer it is to his own DNA passing, the slightly higher percentage will pass.

I think Oyarsa has a point that there is a certain point where you aren't protecting yourself any longer. At a point the arrangement of life is so different, even if it is related, that it might as well not be you any more. But it's funny to me that he makes that argument when he's got four or five (I'm still not clear if Oyarsa is a subspecies of elilda or something else) Hnau living in harmony on one world. It is entirely possible in his own experience to treat something significantly different from yourself as mutually valuable. That Weston would favor his own, even if it became another Hnau in the end, seems like it shouldn't throw Oyarsa off.

Myself, I'm all for civilization. I'd rather have morality and the favor of Hnau than DNA. But in some ways, I would argue that's just the Meme over the Gene argument. It's just because I'm a better meme spreader than I am a gene spreader. But still, it seems like morality makes life greater to me, rather than life being more important than morality.

And I think that's enough out of me. What about you? What did you make of the phrase and the counterarguments? What do you think life without morality would look like? Would Weston actually tolerate it? Does Weston live up to the ideals of his speech at all?

[Kristin]

I personally do not believe that living without morality is possible on this earth. As someone that studies other cultures for career (and for fun!), I have never found a record of any culture or society without morality. I am going to borrow a few quotes from Lewis' Mere Christianity, which I think will solidify his (and also my) position.

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?”

“If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.”

And I think this quote sums up they Oyarsa's comments (and the attitudes of the inhabitants of Malacandra) perfectly:
“I think all Christians would agree with me if I said that though Christianity seems at first to be all about morality, all about duties and rules and guilt and virtue, yet it leads you on, out of all that, into something beyond. One has a glimpse of a country where they do not talk of those things, except perhaps as a joke. Everyone there is filled full with what we should call goodness as a mirror is filled with light. But they do not call it goodness. They do not call it anything. They are not thinking of it. They are too busy looking at the source from which it comes. But this is near the stage where the road passes over the rim of our world. No one's eyes can see very far beyond that: lots of people's eyes can see further than mine.”

I think that the Oyarsa is supposed to be like an arch angel, such as Michael or Gabriel, and the rest of the elida are normal angels. This is my belief because there are bent elida and a bent Oyarsa of Thulcandra which remind me of Satan and his demons (also known as fallen angels).

I believe that DNA is a complicated plan, and there are no complicated plans without a complicated planner. DNA itself cannot strive or create a path to further it's own existence. If you take the components of DNA and lay them out somewhere, will they create a living being on their own? As an author, my job would be so much simpler if I could just throw a bunch of letters onto a piece of paper and they would arrange themselves cleverly into a story with plots, subplots, and complex character arcs, but that doesn't happen. I have to plan each of those aspects and arrange the letters myself.

One of my favorite lines from the Oyarsa was this,
"I will tell you. He has left you this one because a bent hnau can do more evil than a broken one. He has only bent you; but this Thin One who sits on the ground he has broken, for he has left him nothing but greed. He is now only a talking animal and in my world he could do no more evil than an animal. If he were mind I would unmake his body, for the hnau in it is already dead. But if you were mine I would try to cure you."

Divine has only one goal left in his life, to accumulate wealth at any means. He has lost all sense of morality. He is like an animal to the Oyarsa.

As I said before, I believe in Jesus, so this obviously affects my experience as a reader of this trilogy.

I think we can start discussing Perelandra, if you are ready. The end of the book is pretty horrible as they sit in the space ship breathing in poisonous gas. The thing that I thought was interesting is that the elida had to prevent Weston or Devine from killing Ransom.

I just looked up "elida" and in Italian it is a verb used that means, "to omit a sound" which is a pretty fun name for something that you can't quite hear :)

[Eben]

Oooh, love the tidbit about Elilda's meaning. I too got that Oyarsa was to represent an archangel but, within the fiction itself without access to Christianity, I was unclear if Oyarsa was physcially something different, another Hnau created apart from the Elilda but more like them than they are like the rest of the Hnau, or if Oyarsa is just an elevated Elilda, the same physcially, just granted more power. That's where my unsurety lies. I suppose it isn't radically important though.

It's interesting, in terms of what I've studied, where the division between plan and execution might be. Because there are certainly elements of the universe that do not, at least as yet, have anything requiring them to be as they are, and yet they are that way anyway. But such things are actually radically lower down the scale of cause and effect than DNA. DNA and similar components do actually self assemble in the right environments. The letters are short code. If God is the planner, it isn't that he plans the structure of DNA, it's that he plans that Adenine ALWAYS sticks to Thymine. So if you have an A and a T close enough together to touch, they stick together. So if you have a stripped down chain, say TAT, as long as it runs into two A's and a T, it is able to bond into that ladder we would recognize as DNA. Cut the chain in half and both sides of the chain will stick to other free T's and A's. If TAT lasts twice as long as a TTA structure, in the end you end up with more TAT's than TTA's simply because there is a better chance of it taking up more free matter.

DNA itself does not require a plan. It requires a set of conditions. So long as the conditions are met, DNA will simply take care of itself. DNA that is better at taking care of itself will spread farther than DNA that is not as good at taking care of itself. That's what's scary about Genes, Memes, and Temes, once the environment is right, you don't need a planner or a controller, things will simply proceed.

Equally scary on the other side, in terms of Divine intervention, is stuff like thermodynamic equilibrium. DNA can't take care of itself except under conditions that match the way heat differential does always move toward equilibrium without work. However the tendency for all heat to balance is actually just a tendency. There is nothing, so far as we've yet been able to figure out, that forces all heat to balance out. It's a statistical law. We don't see it being broken. But there isn't anything at all to prevent it being broken, except that our universe doesn't appear to work that way. There are a lot of very basic things like that. Things that just seem to happen the way they happen. It's why you'll get scientists coming up with ideas like, well we're in this universe because this is the universe that can produce us. Another universe with different laws would have produced something else. Change those simple but vast rules which don't seem to have anything under them besides that's the way things seem to work, and we can't exist the way we exist.

Having said that. I would agree with you to the point that I don't think we can conceive of events without placing moral value on them. We, and I would argue most things that we would acknowledge as fellow life forms, function morally. It's actually one of the reasons I liked this book's description of space so much. How he drew the distinction between the horror of space and the experience of the heavens. Space and the physics that govern it do seem to be valueless yet they have produced creatures that are obsessed with value. And it's hard to see anything without attaching some kind of valuation to it.

Of course, to a degree that is my own religious beliefs. Not being Christian and being mildly close to atheism in outlook. And being the sort of person who entertains himself listening to academic lectures.

Though it's also interesting you comparing DNA to letters on a book. In some ways I think there are also natural forces to story. Given the right environment, story thrives. In the wrong environment it shrivels. But I also have seen no evidence of divine inspiration or plan in my own work. I make my stories. I do the work. So, in some sense, couldn't it be said that we as authors are replicators. There are rules we follow to create the output but we're the ones who make the output.

Which could also tie into the bent arguments - me as the bent irreligious Hnau. In that I'm not broken and willing to concede points but have a radically different outlook and goals. I remember having lots of debates in highschool - actually given that my two best friends are a priest and a religious historian I guess I still have debates XD - with my friends and I got listened to because I was willing to engage as compared to others who held generally similar stances but were simply insulting. Reason and discourse produce better results than simply your way or the highway.

But I'm also not sure that Weston is better than Devine. Devine doesn't bother to dress it up but Weston seems to act with pure greed and fear even if he has "nobler" motivations he claims drive him to it. I suppose it is the claims that are dangerous? But also give him reasons for which he could act differently?

And I think I'm good to go with starting Perelandra. Which seems like a better place to discuss the bent one and his Elilda. I'll try and finish it up in the next few days. I've been distracted trying to do marketing for my own book. Since it looks like you've got your own first book out this year same as me are you hating marketing as much as I am?

And should we try and make some kind of announcement or something do you think? So others can jump in for book 2 maybe? Or you think it is just a lost cause for others joining us at this point?

[Kristin]

I have many good friends that are Atheist :) We have friendly discussions, but I don't think it is valuable to argue about things. We all must come to our own conclusions about the origins of life and the universe.

I do think we replicate as authors, but the difference in our ideas is that I believe we are replicating a Creator, and you think we are replicating "natural forces," is how I think you put it. I don't personally buy into Stephen King's idea that a story can just be created as you go. He's a genius at writing, of course he can do that, lol. I am a planner. I go more for the story engineering theory. And yes, I throughly dislike marketing. It is my least favorite part of this whole indie writer gig. My first work is a non-fiction, so that also makes things tricky. People seem to be much more willing to read and review fiction.

I do not think that the Oyarsa was saying that Weston was any better than Devine. It didn't seem to me to be a matter of good versus bad, but one that can be saved and one that is already gone. I definitely don't think there is any level of difference between the two when it comes to better. They are both written as pretty deplorable.

Perelandra is a great place to discuss the bent one, since we get to meet him up close (he creeps me out!).

Yeah, I added Perelandra to the book list for the group and said that we were having a discussion, but I think making another announcement would be good. Do you want to make an announcement, or should I try again?

[Eben]

I think it is your baby ^_^ I'd say you should try and announce again.

And I'm totally in the story engineering vein, too :) And yeah, I can see people being less willing to take a chance on non-fiction. I can barely get anyone to read my fiction, so I can imagine that must be very difficult. I just got a few reviews by entering the contest for the Reader Views New Apple awards, each book gets judged by three readers, and they share the reviews, so it's a way to get some for relatively cheap :/

It's an interesting proposition though, why Weston is savable and Devine is not. And that I'm very unclear about. Especially given what happens in the next book. No argument is cool :) But I think you're going to have to explain a lot to me in the next book. I think there are a lot of religious stuff I'm missing.

And yeah, the Bent one is really creepy. I don't think I've seen him described like that anywhere else at all. It's a really interesting take. But I suppose that'll have to wait until we get there. Since it's probably best to start with the bent Eldil.

I love about them that they operate through fear. I find it suggestive that fear is one of the first things that Malacandra Oyarsa criticizes in humans and then Perelandra starts with bent Eldil trying to influence Lewis toward their goals by making him afraid. As if fear is their ultimate weapon, to make people afraid that they won't have enough, or won't be good enough, or won't be safe enough, and that's what they really need to be twisted toward evil action. Just the fear of things going wrong.

[Kristin]

Ok I will make another announcement.

I will definitely attempt to explain everything I can from a theological standpoint, but C.S. Lewis was an academic, and a lot of what is in Perelandra is his personal estimation of what is happening in the background - what the Bible doesn't talk about. So as far as his philosophy, I understand some of it, but some of it is too complicated for me. I will try my best, though.

If you think the description of the Bent one is interesting, you would probably love The Screwtape Letters. It is a fictional book that C.S. Lewis wrote in order to show what he thought was going on behind the scenes as far as demonic activity (fallen angels and Satan). That books goes into great detail to explain things like why Devine was past saving and Weston wasn't. It is one of my favorite books (and my husband's, which is saying something because reading is not his favorite past time). In it, one demon is writing to another (his "coach," if you will) about keeping a guy from accepting Jesus Christ as his savior. Although this book is fictional, it creeps most Christians out! It also discusses why fear is such a successful weapon against us human folk ;)

I think that Lewis had a unique ability to think about the spiritual dimension we never see here on earth. He also writes about it on his book about heaven and hell called The Great Divorce, which happens third on my list of top three books. I have read it many times though, because it is rather complicated, and I wanted to understand it.

I will make the announcement. Let me know when you finish and we can start then.

[Eben]

Finally finished just now, actually. I may hate that ending. XD. I think I'll definitely check out The Screwtape Letters. May have to wait until I've recovered from this series though. I'm going to need some LIGHT reading after That Hideous Strength, I suspect. Unless it is a lot lighter read than Perelandra.

[Kristin]

My cousin told me That Hideous Strength is super intense and creepy, lol. So yeah, some light reading might be in order afterwards.

[Kristin]

Ok, so I don't think anyone else is interested in our Perelandra discussion so we can probably start. Also I wanted to add that if you send me a copy of your book I would love to do a review for you. I have a degree in Comp Lit and I like reading. Those are the only qualifications I can offer you.
---------
Onto Perelandra:
What did you think about the introduction? I didn't expect his story to start at the end with him arriving back so quickly, but I guess it makes sense since he had to tell them everything that happened.

Were you as shocked as I was that Venus was covered in water? For some reason I never thought about what that would be like, so it was an interesting read for me as far as that aspect.

[Eben]

Oh, well, can't please everybody I suppose :( maybe we're just not in the right group to attract attention for it. Not sure how much the Mother/Queen counts as the focus of the book.

I'm always happy to send a book for a review ^_^ Thank you for the offer. Is an ebook alright, or would you rather have a real book? If you use smashwords at all, I'm at https://www.smashwords.com/books/view... and I've just got a code for the download to be free - EY23M. Otherwise I need your e-mail address for Amazon to send you an e-book. Or a real address for a real book.

Would you like me to review yours? Or would my outlook on life, not matching your intended audience at all, do you more harm than good?

Speaking of which, did you see that there is a review swap thread over in the 'How to promote your book on Amazon' group? https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... It looks like it is all types of books. So might be worth skimming through.

--------
Onto Perelandra:

What the intro really reminded me of, in terms of its abruptness, was The Time Machine. How it's one scene before the adventure and then another directly following that's after, so it can be conveyed. Probably one of the major disadvantages of having a different chronicler taking down the story. It's an interesting technique. I wonder if it is to make Ransom sound less egotistical? It's probably much more sympathetic to say, "HE did God's will," than, "I did God's will."

I think what really got me with the introduction though was the influence of the malign Eldil. And that the chariot for Ransom looked like a coffin. It reminded me of Malacandra talking about how true Hnau were not ruled by fear, especially not fear of death. Death is merely a transition toward Maledil. And it is quite literal for Ransom in this case. Did any of that strike you?

The other thing that caught my attention at the beginning - looking at the few notes I scattered in - was Lewis's reaction to Malacandra's Oyarsa. I loved his description of Malacandra being good but that good might not be as desirable a thing as supposed. That good might also be dreadful. And it reminded me a lot of depression and dysphoria (food is what you can't eat being a kind of anorexia). It made me wonder if there is a sort of comment resting in there about that, too, being a kind of bentness, a way to keep people from being "Good" by making "Goodness" repulsive and so driving them away from Maledil's summons. Did anything in that grab you? Or provoke any more thinking on how we might be bent by natural occurrences?


I was shocked at the water's extent on Venus. I know the old view was that Venus was a very "soft" and gentle world. So lots of water wasn't a surprise. To be essentially entirely water was a definite change from anything else I've read or heard about. And the whole islands bending with the waves was unique and cool.

Though I have to admit the islands seemed a bit impractical for the human body shape. Just seems like Ransom and the Mother/Queen would be falling over all the time. Which really provoked the question for me: why is the Mother/Queen human except in color? On Malacandra the closest Hnau to human in shape were the Sorn and even they were pretty well adapted to their environment. You think the idea is the human shape's perfection? As in being in the shape of Maledil and the in focus Eldil? Is there meant to be something essentially superior in the human form? Which alters as you move away from the focus of vital creation toward senescence in the case of Malacandra and I guess pre-history in Perelandra.

It just seems like a different shaped Hnau would have been better at living on those islands. Or do you think that's just an argument for her belonging on solid land?

What did you think of the Mother/Queen's representation of innocence?

[Kristin]

I was able to download your book through Smashwords. I am planning on using them as well as soon as my KDP Select subscription runs out (you know, the 90 exclusivity contract).

If you are interested in reading my book, I would love to hear your opinion. If you do write a review, you could just mention that you aren’t of the same worldview so obviously that affects how you feel about the topics discussed. I can private message you the link.

Thanks for the link to that thread, I will definitely check into it.
——————
I have not read The Time Machine yet, but it is on my list to read this year. It is already waiting for me on my Kindle.

As far as the change in narration, I liked it better coming from Lewis, perhaps for the reasons you mentioned. Also, I thought it was interesting at the end of Out of the Silent Planet how the author made it seem like this was all a true story. He could have chosen any name for the character of the narrator, but chose his own last name. Even if it was just for a few seconds of fun, I loved that. It made the whole thing seem whimsical.

The malign eldil scene was one of my favorites in the entire book and reminded me starkly of The Screwtape Letters. The malign eldila are supposed to represent demons. And the way that Lewis writes about their influence seems very true to life for me (as person that believes in the influence of a supernatural world).

The concept of good is used in The Screwtape Letters as a distraction for people so that they don’t embrace Jesus Christ. I’m sure you have heard people say, “I deserve to go to heaven because I’m a good person.” But according to what the Bible teaches, there are not any good people, because good is equated with holiness. I think I get the same sense of the goodness that you mention, but I view it as holiness. God is so holy that He cannot even be in the presence of sin, and if you don’t have the cover of Jesus Christ, that holiness can be extremely terrifying. That is how I have always thought of it, and the Bible seems to imply the same idea.

The concept of dying as traveling closer towards Maledil reminds me of Philippians 1.
“For I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayer and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, according to my earnest expectation and hope that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but with boldness, as always, so now also with Christ be magnified in my body, whether by life or by death. For me to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain.” (verses 19-21)

I loved the idea of islands that could conform to the shape of the sea. It is very creative that the land should always be changing shape and appearance. It seemed to me that the Mother/Queen had no problem existing on them, and moved about easily. It could be, like you said, that this way of life magnified the fact that she was created to live on fixed land eventually. The Bible says that we are made in God’s image, and that we are the only creatures that are made that way, so maybe that is why C.S. Lewis chose to embrace that shape for the King and Queen. It does make sense if you look at how he has essentially created a new Adam and Eve scenario.

I loved the Mother/Queen’s representation of innocence. It brought me back to many questions I have thought of regarding existence before the fall of man (when Adam and Eve sinned and were cast out of the Garden of Eden). I always wondered what life would have been like without sin, and I think C.S. Lewis did as good of a job as he possibly could have at imagining what that might have been like, but of course it is an impossible thing to know for sure, since we cannot reproduce such innocence and holiness in our own sinful minds (this is my opinion based on my personal beliefs).

From a literary standpoint I found Venus as a setting extremely intriguing and imaginative. I really liked the bubbles in the trees that had an invigorating effect. I never imagined that to be a foreshadowing of how Maledil would help Ransom towards the end in his quest.

What did you think of the dragon? I had hoped that he would be a more prevalent character because I am really fond of dragons, but obviously all of the Hnau on the planet are still in their pet like form at this point.

What did you think about Weston’s appearance? Were you counting on it after the foreshadowing at the end of Silent Planet?

[Eben]

Ah, yeah, good ol’ KDP Select, in retrospect I probably should have used that for the first 90 days myself. I just really don’t like their contract for Select, so I skipped it. The proceeds and reach of Smashwords is really nice. But honestly, I’ve only made about 4 sales through Smashwords :/ so it’s one of those things that’s nice to have but not really sure how much of a competition it is.

And thanks for the link to your book. I picked up the epub which I’m pretty sure I can read on my laptop. So I’ll get to that soon too :) Though I’ve got to hurry up on That Hideous Strength, I’m only five pages in so far XD
————

The Time Machine is an old favorite of mine. I think I first read it in middle school. The really fun factoid behind it is that it is partly inspired by Wells’s non-fiction work. So it’s kind of scary to think he thought it was a legitimate portrayal of possibilities.

That’s really interesting about holiness as opposed to goodness. And that does seem like a very good explanation of what is going on. Though it’s interesting, that I think I’ve run into the concept that even with the cover of Christ, Holiness can be terrifying to us mere mortals, that it is just more than our meat brains can comfortably handle. Which is why the holy always have to tell us not to fear. But yeah, you’re really making me want to read the Screw Tape letters. It is definitely on my list at this point.

Funnily enough, even as a non-religious person, I pretty much agree with you about it being impossible to know innocence and holiness. I may not believe in the fall but I agree that imperfection seems natural to our state. So I would agree that the representation of innocence and purity was pretty impressive.

I was really hopeful for the dragon to play a bigger part in the story, too :( I’m also a dragon nut. That was actually something that really bothered me toward the end of the book. The whole play of mythic things in the surrounds that never payed off or went anywhere. It was just there, like trees are just there. But the trees and the fruit all actually paid off in impressive ways that the mythological entities did not. Which both made me sad and aggravated me. I kept wondering why he spent so much time on them when they weren’t doing anything. I may have missed their point.

Although if they are all pet-like Hnau to be, I suppose that is a promise of many wonders to come. Which would be nice if we ever got that story to come :/

I have to admit I wasn’t counting on Weston. I was thinking maybe Devine. But I wasn’t sure. I think it was that Weston seemed intellectually strong enough to understand that trying again was a bad idea. And fairly quickly it seems almost like Weston isn’t even the right identity to give Weston. That bit with him falling down and going catatonic after essentially begging for help seemed to me to say that that was it for Weston. That was the moment he was digested but he was probably pretty well on his way already. His fundamental flaw of Pride was still there but it seemed like his motivation had so wholly changed between books that it almost wasn’t him anyway.

Though I was really interested in Weston’s new outlook. And in Ransom’s take on it. What really caught me was the bit where Weston is trying to equate everything and he says, “Your own religion, after all, says that the devils are fallen angels.” Ransom retorts, “And you are saying precisely the opposite, as far as I can make out - that angels are devils who’ve risen in the world.” But Weston dismisses that as, “It comes to the same thing.”

What gets me is that they ARE both ‘right’ in the Perelandra universe. As dangerous an idea as that is. Because the Bent one and all his Eldil are fallen. So religion is right. But Thulcandra is off limits and has been since before our creation. So every ‘angel’ we have run into is a bad Eldil that has set itself up to bend us in some unfathomable way to the Bent one’s desires. It’s really only Maledil’s direct interference as becoming Jesus that has interfered with that. And what I would suspect is the background idea that even the Bent one can’t escape Maledil’s will/plan, even as he tries to work against it. But it seems like a wonderful use of the idea of the Bent one. That he doesn’t break, he bends, he taints. He tells you the truth but he does it in a way that makes you take away the wrong idea.

Like Weston’s whole idea of true commitment. That one overriding goal could be so good that other considerations have to fall by the wayside. I think you probably could make that argument. That nobler endeavors might have to take precedence for the greater good. That our own good might have to be sacrificed to a greater good. But as soon as Ransom tries to connect that idea to morality, Weston flips his lid because Ransom won’t bend to the idea of the ends justify the means.

I think, to be honest, the debates with Weston (The Bent One) were my favorite part of the book. Just because you can see some sense in them even as they feel wrong. So it makes it feel very real to me that temptation is possible. Even in innocence.

But what did you think of Weston calling his ‘reality’ into himself? And then pretty much being struck down on the spot. While I feel like that was the Bent One digesting Weston and taking over it seems to me an equally valid argument could be made for Maledil or the Oyarsa of Perelandra striking Weston down for true blasphemy on holy ground. But I fell like you’ll have a much better grasp of that than I will. And what did you think of Weston begging, “Ransom, Ransom! For Christ’s sake don’t let them-“ as his last words?

[Kristin]

I was also really disappointed by the lack of development for the animals, but I do think you are right when they are the promise of wonders to come. I guess Lewis thought we could imagine for ourselves what sort of societies they would become. I really thought the dragon was going to have something to do with the final battle with the Unman because of the scene leading up to the fight, where Ransom wakes up and the dragon has been sleeping on his foot. But I guess it makes sense that he doesn’t help when the Queen talks about how the animals will become hnau through her and the King’s teachings.

I was fairly sure Weston would be back because Devine was” past saving,” if you remember from the scene with the Oyarsa in Malacandra. I knew when something fell out of the sky, it was him. I thought it was interesting that he had been so throughly influenced by the “fallen eldila” on earth, but in the end the tricks that the bent one uses seem to be as effective with the intellectual and the layman alike. I think you are correct in your assertion that the Bent one cannot escape Maledil’s plan. I think the Bent one is in it for the short term while Maledil is playing for the long term. Once again, the idea of bending and using the truth to get you to have the wrong idea is a very strong theme in Screwtape… which you are going to love! I can’t wait for you to read it, although I know we are supposed to read That Hideous Strength first. I think I am going to start reading Screwtape again as I read it. I know I will find parallels.

I am not surprised that you asked about Weston suddenly begging Ransom for help, I reread it myself quite a few times because I was sure I had gotten the implication wrong. But my instincts were correct, I just didn’t want them to be true because I knew how horrible the book was going to get from that point on. I believe that Lewis is using the Bent beings to represent demons (fallen angels) and this is a case of Weston’s body and consciousness being taken over by the Bent One. Here is the deal with demonic possession from a biblical standpoint… A demon can’t just enter into your body without somehow being invited. Whether that is through a direct invitation or occult activity. However, someone that believes in Jesus Christ as their personal Savior cannot be demon possessed (Jesus Himself explained this phenomena). In Weston’s case he had been visited by the bent eldila, and the Bent One as well. However, any kind of worship of anything other than God (aka Jesus), is considered to be Satanic worship in the general sense because Satan is behind all of these other ideas of religion. I think Weston’s arguments about religion are very indicative of this. I do believe this is the last time that we actually hear from Weston, everything after that seems to be the Bent One.

What did you think of the Unman and his behavior when the Queen was not present?

[Eben]

I think it was eeriest at the end with the Bent One pretending to be Weston again. But yeah, I agree with you, I think the don't let them is the last time it is Weston. It's interesting that his last words are rebellion though. At least I took it as rebellion, that in his last moments he didn't want the Bent to cause the fall on Perelandra. Though I suppose it would be equally valid to guess that he was begging Ransom not to let the Bent eat Weston himself. Which did you take it as? Or do you have another interpretation.

The Unman was a very different take on the devil than I've seen before. Mostly I tend to see the devil depicted as urbane. The farthest toward the other end is a mustache twirler. He wants to cause suffering and mayhem but is always working toward a specific goal. But here he's almost an idiot savant. Cruel without purpose other than cruelty in general.

One of the things it reminded me of is that I used to do live action role playing games, and one of the games I played was Wraith: The Oblivion. And I wasn't a player character, I was a shadow guide. Essentially think playing the Bent part of every body else's psyche. And one of the things I remember saying was that it was very difficult to talk people into things. And the guy who was the head of the game said to me that the problem was that it was mostly just me and occasionally him doing the shadow guiding. You have to think of the reality of it as me attached to one player and just talking at them non-stop 24-7 until they'll give in just to shut you up. And reading the "Ransom," repeated over and over and over again until Ransom gives in annoyance felt like that in action. Less temptation and more, God, just anything to make it stop for a second. Just one second.

The maiming of the animals was really hard for me to read. Especially Ransom's attempted mercy killing. Just to be maimed forever, in pain forever, 'dying' more or less forever. It was almost like the Bent one giving them a taste of Hell. When they didn't do anything to deserve it and can't really understand it. Just ugh. I think that's what really disturbed me about him more than anything. I'm used to the devil as seduction and punishment not simply pain for pain's sake.

Though you mentioning him thinking only in the short term also makes me wonder at the maiming. What would the Queen make of running into them. It seems short sighted of the Unman to risk that, which might undo all the work he's done to convince her he's reasonable. And it seemed like an unused opportunity in their deliberations.

What did you think of the final conflict turning on a physical instead of a spiritual or mental battle?

[Kristin]

Yes, the end with him pretending to be Weston again (my opinion of what was happening) was really creepy. I think the last words were about Weston himself. If the Bent One was trying to convince Ransom to show some kind of compassion that would be the only convincing argument because Ransom would know that Weston wouldn’t care about Perelandra.

I feel like the Unman is a more accurate representation of what Satan might really be like. The pointy tail and unmatched bravado has never been a convincing depiction as far as I’m concerned. He is very goal oriented, and he has a shrewd plan to bring about his ultimate goal. In the meantime he is full of hatred and malice and the only way to satisfy this is to destroy anything Maledil has created. They are opposing forces after all. I think this has something to do with the maiming of the animals, which was difficult for me to read also. The scene with the mercy killing made me feel ill.

Yes the “Ransom, Ransom, Ransom…” was horrible. Definitely mental warfare.

I really felt for Ransom when he realized that it would be a physical fight. I had already supposed that it would end that way because that was the entire purpose of bringing Weston to Perelandra, for the use of his body. Until they body was destroyed, the Bent One could keep using it like a sock on a hand. The body was already dead (Ransom kept mentioning how corpse like it looked). But I just knew that the Bent One was still there after the battle in the water which lead to them being in the caves below ground. At this point the Bent One had to know he wouldn’t be able to get to the Queen any longer, and at this point he is just trying to kill Ransom. The Queen would never accept something in the state he is in towards the end as something she could trust or take advice from. The Bentness is apparent. The Bent One is revenge oriented, and his goal is always to destroy, whether that happens long term or short term. His ultimate revenge is aimed at Maledil, so killing Ransom, Maledil’s agent, would make him exceedingly glad.

Going backwards for a minute, I was relieved that they gave up chase on the water before both giant fish were killed. The reminded me of dolphins, and I didn’t want the Bent One to destroy them as well. I did feel though that the fish would be willing to die for Ransom.

What did you think about the Queen with the feathered robe and the mirror?

That whole part of the book where they were underground was very disorienting for me. What did you think about it?

[Eben]

I had just zero idea what to make of the underground. It felt like an undeveloped plot that was just left in for the cool factor. I really didn't like it. Because it was hard to picture for me and I couldn't see the point of it. When it never paid off, I was mostly bitter about having had my time wasted.

I have to admit I kind of scratched my head at appealing to the Queen's vanity, which is how I saw it. It just seems to me that Vanity is a better later appeal. And then of course it isn't vanity she feels looking in the mirror, it's fear. Which I think was also odd to me. Because her experience of the world is all friendly. I'm not sure what it is about a face that would frighten her. So... I really don't know what to think. It didn't resonate much with me.

What did get to me though was the Unman sort of using it as a segue into the idea of the nobility of self sacrifice. That the real way to bend her was that he might convince her that she could suffer all the harms for other people. And that did resonate with me and seem believable. That just struck me as a very good way to convince a naturally good person to do bad things, convincing them it was for the greater good for others and would only really do bad to themselves. I think that was the first time I felt like the Unman had a plausible path to victory. Everything else just sort of felt like it was aimed at an already bent person and so would be useless in the end.

I did freak a little at the idea of what the Unman must have done to make the feather coat but it was dropped quickly enough in favor of the mirror that the mirror caught much more of my attention.

I think what bothered me about the final physical confrontation is that while I get that it is the foothold alone is the presence of the bent one on Perelandra, it took away the choice from the Queen to a degree. It makes it less that she chose to be good and more that the Bent one never finished his argument. Not that I wanted him to finish. But I felt like it was all on her and then, with the switch to the fight, it wasn't. Because with the quiet of Maledil and the Oyarsa of Perelandra, Ransom could have just as easily have been brought to Perelandra to be the voice as much as the body. And, I don't know, maybe it just seemed a little like the good side sinking to the Bent one's level a bit. But that's probably an irreligious stance, since I'm leery of the idea of the good fight.

Though to go along with it all, what also caught my attention was that his name, Ransom, was meant to have meaning in the grand scheme. But the note at the end of the first book I'm pretty sure indicated that Ransom was a fake name. Did that strike you?

And I too was glad the not-quite-dolphins survived. I was really kind of expecting the Unman to run his to death and have Ransom catch him by being gentler. I was happy to be wrong.

But once he's in the water and there's the taste of the sea weed that makes him feel alien. And going back to the underground which was confusing, in part because it seemed to have nothing to do with the humans. Did you start to feel like maybe the King and Queen weren't the only inheritors of Perelandra? It made me wonder if there was some slight argument that the idea of human dominion and ascendency is a bit Bent. That we are meant to hold dominion in our place and others were meant to hold dominion elsewhere. Does that sound plausible to you? Or you think I'm messing that one up. And if so, why would Maledil make independent Hnau that are not meant to be subject to the King and Queen, do you think?

[Kristin]

Yeah I think the underground world was trying to appeal to the science fiction world. I don’t see any theological parallels to be honest. It also annoyed me because it was so much description that didn’t seem to go anywhere, as you mentioned. I have read a lot of complaints about that particular part of the book in other reviews.

In the first book it says that Ransom is not his actual name. If I remember correctly it is Elwin.

In my opinion, I think at that point the Queen had already made her decision, so the Bent One was just an annoying evil influence at that point. Plus the Queen and the King were about to be reunited. It wouldn’t have been appropriate to leave the Bent One to go around killing and maiming things, and it wouldn’t have been appropriate for the King or Queen to kill him since they didn’t know death. Weston was already dead, and they didn’t kill the Bent One, I look at it as disabling the vessel that was being used by the Bent One.