All Comments for: Shedding Light on <i>The Dark Tower</i> | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > February

Christianity Today, February, 2007 |

Shedding Light on The Dark Tower

A C.S. Lewis mystery is solved.

Harry Lee Poe | posted 2/02/2007 09:17AM

...

In 1988, Kathryn Lindskoog accused Walter Hooper, who was briefly C. S. Lewis's secretary and later a trustee of his literary estate, of forging a number of manuscripts that he attributed to Lewis, ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

Jason Pratt

Posted: February 12, 2007 3:02 PM

I wouldn't call it "settled" exactly. What Professor Poe dosen't mention (perhaps because he isn't aware of it), is that Kathryn didn't consider a mere argument from silence to be her strongest evidence (or even particularly strong evidence at all.) She believed Walter Hooper's own provenance trail, as described by himself in various public accounts, to be highly problematic. It was this which originally set her on the hunt, after a mere initial curiosity about the material; and it is this she primarily focuses on in her books.

Michael Covington

Posted: February 10, 2007 9:15 PM

As a computational linguist, I don't trust Morton's cusum analysis. It's one thing to show that the style varies from text to text; it's quite another to conclude that the variation is due to a different author. Besides, why shouldn't Lewis's style be different when he's having trouble than when he's writing successfully? If nothing else, the aborted fragments would never be reworked by the author to perfect the style. Having said that, until I read about Fowler's evidence, I sat on the fence regarding the controversy about The Dark Tower. Something is badly wrong with it. But if nothing else, it pokes some well-deserved fun at the architecture of the Cambridge University Library, whose shadow I (literally) lived in for a year as a graduate student.

Kelly

Posted: February 07, 2007 9:02 PM

I do believe, after reading several books by the same author from more than one author, that you can have a great writer write something really bad once in awhile. More power to the ones who recognize it before it gets published! As for Ms. Lindskoog's time spent trying to prove Mr Lewis didn't write it, think what could have been there for us to read had she spent the same amount of time writing something worth reading!

Lachlan

Posted: February 06, 2007 3:36 PM


the ceilings were yellow but Jack is still my hero

Jason Pratt

Posted: February 06, 2007 9:16 AM

grammata

Posted: February 05, 2007 5:42 PM

Having lived through the rise of cumulative statistical analysis of Paul's writings (the Pastorals in particular) as well as reading Morton and others on the subject, I found the article significant from the perspective: I find that qumsum is valuable, but not definitive. I have saved this article to my Pauline Studies Folder, because it offers a very real parallel to Paul and the question of a pseudepigrapha. It does not settle the question of Pauline authorship. It does raise a "real case" illustration and corresponding reservations about the certainty of qumsum determination that Paul didn't write the Pastorals.

Gina	Posted: February 05, 2007 4:45 PM


"Questioning a work" is one thing, but Ms. Lindskoog's accusations went far beyond "questioning." At one time I thought she might be right, but the more I read, the more I became convinced she wasn't. She was undeniably smart and talented; it's tragic that she devoted so much time and effort to what turned out to be little more than slander.

Chip	Posted: February 04, 2007 1:52 PM


It only takes cursory reading of The Dark Tower to realize that it wasn't written by Lewis. The scholars can argue all they want, if it hisses, and writhes, it isn't a duck.

jon	Posted: February 04, 2007 1:30 PM


Michelle, What have you found particularly interesting from MacDonald? I've read Lilith and Phantastes Thanks, Jon

Elizabeth

Posted: February 04, 2007 8:09 AM

"Lewis certainly talked about TDT [The Dark Tower]," Fowler wrote to me. "He said he had been unable to carry it further. He didn't say when he had written the fragment. The fragment? Certainly Lewis spoke about it, as it resonated in his mind, but how much had he actually written, this fragment might be only a few hundred words.... Kathryn was correct to question this work and she was not the only one.

Gary D. Robinson

Posted: February 03, 2007 1:22 PM


As a wise man once said, "Don't believe anything you see and only half of what you hear!"

Dru	Posted: February 03, 2007 9:09 AM

As an aspiring writer at times, I enjoyed The Dark Tower and other Stories very much.It was refreshing to consider that great authors and thinkers all have to start somewhere--the threads of story and sense throughout the rough pieces showed me how fiction develops. "The Man Born Blind" was, I felt, a story worthy of Lewis and worthy of reading and re-reading. I have often thought to use it in my own preaching or writing, and have indeed used the storyline in conversation. Thankyou for preserving the cherished notion I have of Lewis as a human being, not just a perfect wordsmith who never wrestled, and never wrote drivel.

John	Posted: February 02, 2007 9:57 PM


I too find it encouraging to know that Lewis at times had problems doing what so many of us think he did with ease - always. From the article we now know that not only was Lewis brilliant, but he knew he was human and was willing to share the fact to help someone else through a hard time. He truely was a man humbled by Grace to serve us all.

Mike	Posted: February 02, 2007 6:19 PM


Daryl makes a good point about the arrogance and imprecision of forms of literary analysis that are pseudo-scientific. I too, while reading this article, was thinking about the damage some lines of historical- biblical criticsm have done to people's faith. This is an interesting analogy and cautions us against being suckers for the pronouncments of the latest "expert" to come along.

craftsman

Posted: February 02, 2007 6:01 PM


It seems that if you think the best of someone and you turn out mistaken, you don't really have to apologize for your mistake; but if you think the worst and even publish defamatory articles to that effect, and turn out mistaken you have the shame of a malignant spirit exposed. (I meant to click 4 stars for the article, but it won't let me change it after clicking the first star.)

Tom	Posted: February 02, 2007 4:40 PM

To answer Elizabeth's questions I would have to point to Fowler's area's of interest; "Renaissance scholar, devoting his life to Milton and Renaissance literature rather than to C. S. Lewis studies" It is quite possible that he was not even aware of he controversies, or if he was, was too involved in his own studies to take the time to comment on what to him was trivial. Maybe it was not until professor Poe sleuthed him and his work out that the light now shines on the truth. What stinks is that too many people make a career, and a fortune, in finding a conspiracy behind every story.

jsharp

Posted: February 02, 2007 4:40 PM

I don't quite follow the "Case solved" conclusion this article assumes. Someone comes out of the woodwork after 51 years to say, "Oh, yeah. I saw that." and the whole problem evaporates? Where was Fowler at the height of the Lindskoog/Hooper debate? What was his reason for waiting? I have no reason to think he's lying but that doesn't mean he couldn't misremember. I don't want to hold onto Lindskoog's theory. I just want to know (if such a thing is possible) if Lewis really wrote TDT. I just don't think one man's recollection of a sheaf of notes he saw half a century ago is ironclad proof.

Timothy Roy, UT Austin Law

Posted: February 02, 2007 4:25 PM

Speaking as a law student, Fowler's testimony is not, in fact, "legally hearsay". Had Fowler testified that someone else heard Lewis talk of TDT, that would be hearsay. But Fowler says he himself heard Lewis. Fowler is offering direct evidence, eyewitness testimony, that Lewis talked of the book as his own. The fact that no tape recording devices were present is irrelevant; the testimony is as strong or as weak as Fowler's own credentials. I submit to this audience that Alistair Fowler, a distinguished scholar in his own right, is unlikely to lie about his former colleague to settle a dispute in the comparatively small but burgeoning field of Lewis studies. Why didn't Fowler step up earlier? Fowler may have been unaware of the dispute - a small ripple indeed to the wider scholarly world. Something does stink in these Shadowlands: a willingness to accuse Lewis' friends and colleagues of wrongdoing for no good reason. Whatever else Lindskoog may have been, she was wrong here.

Elizabeth

Posted: February 02, 2007 2:54 PM


Where was Fowler when the arguments were flying? Why didn't he step up to the plate when Kay was still alive....hmmm, no one can substantiate what he said he heard, which is legally hearsay.... so know it's all okay and Kay was wrong? Something still stinks in the Shadowlands.... I miss her.

Daryl

Posted: February 02, 2007 1:53 PM

It was such analysis as Lindskoog's and Morton's that was used by historical critical school regarding the Greek New Testament and Hebrew Old Testament that shook the Christian faith of so many in the 19th and 20th century. Theytoo were proved wrong in their method and scholarship -- but not before incredible spiritual damage was done. It's too bad that Lindskoog died before the mystery was solved and she would have to account for her accusations against Walter Hooper and Lewis's step-children who had to wait more than 40 years to be cleared. It's a good reminder for people in the church to be careful what they say and who they accuse, particularly if you are in a position of leadership.

Michele

Posted: February 02, 2007 1:47 PM


Nearly to the end of reading all of George MacDonald's original writings, I next intend to read everything Lews wrote. I'm delighted to know the full body of his preserved works will be greater rather than lesser in volume. Good article, thank you.

Robert

Posted: February 02, 2007 1:15 PM


I'd like to see Mr. Morton perform his statistical analysis on Ms. Lindskoog's reissued "Sleuthing C. S. Lewis: More Light in the Shadowlands" with the two additional chapters just to see how consistent her writing was.

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment