The Space Trilogy

Silent Planet and Perelandra are indeed more like classic science fiction, but with an interesting perspective, especially Perelandra. Strength is in a class by itself - there are parts of it that are horror, and parts that are like a comedy of manners. It is, in my opinion, an unparalleled masterpiece, and the most prophetic work of imagination to come out of the 20th century - even moreso than 1984 and Brave New World.
 
I am about a third way thru Jane Austen's Mansfield Park. I still don't see how this book relates to THS. It is just about a group of ladies and gentlemen in England that ride horses, do family Plays, and gossip about each other. I know that Lewis idealizes how 19th century ladies and gentlemen treat each other in THS, but the way Ladies and gentlemen are portrayed in Mansfield Park is not that great. I do find Fanny to be a sweet lady in the book and marrying your first cousin is ok in those days. I do see that maybe Jane identifies with Fanny resisting marriage with Henry and that Jane feels she should have not married Mark.
 
Last edited:
I don't think there are any close parallels. I think CSL just thought that was a book any young married woman might be reading. I've read it many times myself, although it's certainly not my favorite of Austen's.
 
Come on Inkspot, get with the game and help me figure out this Mansfields Park angle.

First all thru THS, Lewis stress that love needs to be based on the character of the lovers and not on warm feelings. In Mansfields Park everyone loves Henry Crawford, even Edmund Bertram, who is supposed to be the level headed one. But it is all because Henry is so charismatic and not because he has high character. Only Fanny sees Henry's faults.

The problem is I don't see a clear parallel with Mark and Jane of THS. Mark's character is very weak until the very end and he is not very charismatic. In Mansfields Park, Henry is a manipulator and shouldn't be sympathized with. But Mark is such a weak person and easy to be manipulated that he is also hard to be sympathized with until the very end of the book. My point is that both Henry and Mark have such low characters, and Mark isn't even charasmatic. The question beggs to be asked why should Jane love Mark, except for the high character of Jane to make Mark rise to the occasion. I guess that is the point. For what was great about Edmund Bertram after he fails to stand with Fanny about Henry, only Fanny's high character causes Edmund to rise the the occasion.

Will thanks for letting me talk this out. You got to have an opinion Inkspot, since you are a big reader of Austen, while this is my first reading of her.:D
 
You have put way more thought into this than I have! I always took away from jane's love for Mark that she was allowing Christ to love him through her -- nothing he could do would change that love, but you are right, her courage to love will be part of making him a better man.
 
Well I do see a connection between Jane of THS, and Fanny of Mansfield Park. And just as Mark was shown that he had married his better by the end of THS, Edmund saw he was being allowed to marry his better in Mansfields Park.

But I didn't find Mansfield Park to be that great of a book. Which of Auten's book is good Inkspot?
 
I like them all, but of course Pride & Prejudice is everyone's favorite. Sense & Sensibility is probably my next favorite after that, then Emma, which is loads of fun, and Persuasion are about equal to my mind. Mansfield Park and Northanger Abbey are OK, but probably my least favorites. Lady Susan, I didn't even know there was a Lady Susan until years after I had read all the others; it's not that great, but an OK read, too.

Jane in THS is not much like Fanny in MP to my mind, because Jane starts out sort of rebellious and demanding her independence -- while Fanny is always shy and retiring and nearly always willing to rely on the judgment of Edmund or her uncle or aunt; she never demands her independence except in the one really important thing to her, which is her refusal of her unworthy suitor -- and then her stubborness, although condemned by her family, is presented in the book as a great virtue; she suffers for it. But Jane in THS, her demanding her indpendence is presented as childish and something she must overcome in order to discover her truth worth as a servant of God. And to my mind, Fanny's acceptance of Ed is a marriage of equals (Ed went gaga for the wrong girl but throughout he is presented as the virtuous one whose compassion and good sense helped educate and form Fanny's mind). But Janes acceptance of Mark in THS is more or less a woman's forbearance; there is no virtue on Mark's part at all that she should receive him back; it's all on Jane, and she does it with humility, understanding that there was no virtue on her part which made her acceptable to God, so she will accept Mark despite his mistakes and mis-steps, just as God has accepted her.

This is my thought; I do not see much of a parallel here.
 
You are right that Jane isn't much like Fanny to start with, and Mark is not much like Edward to start with. But Mark does fail Jane, and Edmund does fail Fanny. And if you read THS closely you see that Jane fails in being independent. She deeps down wants children but can't stand up to Mark, she can't focus on her work, but just sits at home, she wants to be independent of St. Anne's but can't.

But I am glad I got you to think about the subject, and I still think I am on the right track on why Lewis referenced Mansfields Park in his book.
 
I think Jane in THS doesn't want children -- I think if she did, she and Mark would have had them; she really seems to be the stronger one of the pair. She can see how easily led he is, and I don't doubt that she herself has led him at times. I think that her desire for her own independence is wrong-headed -- she thinks she doesn't want to be "drawn in," she has to be her own woman; but that very reluctance to be drawn in keeps her from the relationships that could be most fulfilling to her. Fanny in MP has much different failings (if she has a failing, which it isn't really clear that she does). She is more than willing to be drawn in, to be used up really. She wants to be wanted and needed. Jane wants to be left to herself. Even with the Dentons (is it?), people that she likes and wants to be friends with, she draws back when it feels like to her they are asking too much. Perhaps she even keeps part of herself aloof from Mark because she doesn't want to be misplaced and forgotten as just Studdock's wife -- and we see from his POV that was exactly what he had planned for her!
 
I just recently read the Space Trilogy, and while I thought Out of the Silent Planet and That Hideous Strength were worth reading but not amazing, Perelandra reminded me why I love C.S. Lewis all over again. The conversations between the Lady, Ransom, and Weston (or rather, the creature using Weston) were some of the most scintillating stuff I've ever read, and the whole book made me consider the creation of our own world in a way I never had before.
 
Catherine said:
I just recently read the Space Trilogy, and while I thought Out of the Silent Planet and That Hideous Strength were worth reading but not amazing, Perelandra reminded me why I love C.S. Lewis all over again. The conversations between the Lady, Ransom, and Weston (or rather, the creature using Weston) were some of the most scintillating stuff I've ever read, and the whole book made me consider the creation of our own world in a way I never had before.
Click to expand...
I agree with you about Perelandra, it was an amazing look at the Fall of Man, as seen on another planet, and how the Tempter worked at the one "weakness" the Lady had; the desire to protect/nurture her planet and children to come -- how insidious his half-truths were to get into her mind through that sort of back door ... very riveting. I found THS and OotSP very good reads, too, though -- THS is one of my great favorite books.
 
Do you think these stories would translate well onscreen? I would love to see them made into movies. Would they be successful in our empirical-driven soceity? I can just picture what a trailer of "Out of the Silent Planet" would look like and it makes my blood rush!
 
That's a tough one. I think a lot of the subtlety of the work might be hard to translate to the screen - or, at least, hard for modern filmmakers who view all stories through their perceptual filters to translate. I think Perelandra in particular would be tough, because so much of the action happens within Ransom's mind. And what I think about the Chronicles goes double for the Space Trilogy: if they can't do it right, they shouldn't even attempt it.
 
It would be interesting to see if you could pull it off. Early on in the story, it splits into two parallel stories: the Belbury track, which ends up as a horror story better than anything Steven King ever wrote, and the St. Anne's track, which is a modern fantasy. Pulling that out would be a feat.
 
I don't usually like movies based on books because they seem such a disappointment after the books. Sometimes the movies even ruin the books for me. This is not always true (my favorite movie is a book adaptation that I like more than the book it was based on, which was already a good book), but it usually ends up that way. I would not want to see a movie of the Space Trilogy or any of its books--even though, if done well, it could be amazing--because it seems far more likely that it would NOT be done well.
 
Of course would be an adaptation. It would mean dropping references to the earlier stories as much as possible. But the background story is of little importance to the plot of THS. I would drop the ending with the coming of the eldila. Just keep it to the what happens to man when he trys to reach out to higher forces. It would have to be a made for TV short series, because I can't see it being less than 5 hours. But in the end it is too politically incorrect.
 
Last edited:
Please understand, I love the original book and an adaptation would lose much of what make THS special. I am just trying to figure out how it would be made into a stand alone movie. Because like Arvan said I don't feel the first 2 books would ever fly except for us Narnia fans.
 
Back
Top