|
C. S. Lewis on Myth
from a letter of September 5, 1931
About his recent viewing of Shakespeare's The Winter's Tale: "[the
play] is merely the scaffolding whereby Shakespeare (probably unconsciously)
is able to give us an image of the whole idea of resurrection, [and] I was
simply overwhelmed. You will say that I am here doing to Shakespeare just
what I did to Macdonald . . . Perhaps I am. I must confess that more and
more the value of plays and novels becomes for me dependent on the moments
when, by whatever artifice, they succeed in expressing the great myths."
from a letter of October 18, 1931
Now what Dyson and Tolkien showed me was this: that if I met the idea of
sacrifice in a Pagan story I didn't mind it at all: again, that if I met the
idea of a god sacrificing himself to himself . . . I like it very much and
was mysteriously moved by it: again, that the idea of the dying and reviving
god (Balder, Adonis, Bacchus) similarly moved me provided I met it anywhere
except in the Gospels. The reason was that in Pagan stories I was prepared
to feel the myth as profound and suggestive of meanings beyond my grasp even
tho' I could not say in cold prose 'what it meant'.
Now the story of Christ is simply a true myth: a myth working on us in
the same way as the others, but with this tremendous difference that it
really happened: and one must be content to accept it in the same way,
remembering that it is God's myth where the others are men's myth: i.e. the
Pagan stories are God expressing Himself through the minds of poets, using
such images as He found there, while Christianity is God expressing Himself
through what we call 'real things'. Therefore it is true, not in the
sense of being a 'description' of God (that no finite mind could take in)
but in the sense of being the way in which God chooses to (or can) appear to
our faculties. The 'doctrines' we get out of the true myths are of
course less true: they are translations into our concepts and
ideas of the wh. God has already expressed in a language more
adequate, namely the actual incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection. Does
this amount to a belief in Christianity? At any rate I am now certain (a)
That this Christian story is to be approached, in a sense, as I approach the
other myths. (b) That it is the most important and full of meaning. I am
also nearly certain that it really happened.
from The Pilgrim's Regress (1933)
See Book 8, Chapter 8
from the essay "Myth Became Fact" (1944)
The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of
the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven
of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens--at a
particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical
consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying nobody knows when or
where, to a historical Person crucified (it is all in order) under
Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is
the miracle. I suspect that men have sometimes derived more spiritual
sustenance from myths they did not believe than from the religion they
professed. To be truly Christian we must both assent to the historical fact
and also receive the myth (fact though it has become) with the same
imaginative embrace which we accord to all myth. The one is hardly more
necessary than the other.
from the "Preface" to George Macdonald: An Anthology (1946)
[Myth] may even be one of the greatest arts; for it produces works which
give . . . as much delight . . . as much wisdom and strength as the works of
the greatest poets. . . . It goes beyond the expression of things we have
already felt. It arouses in us sensations we have never had before, never
anticipated having, as though we had broken out of our normal mode of
consciousness and 'possessed joys not promised to our birth!' It gets under
our skin, hits us at a level deeper than our thoughts or even our passions,
troubles oldest certainties till all questions are reopened, and in general
shocks us more fully awake than we are for most of our lives.
from Miracles (1947)
From a footnote to Chapter 15: "My present view--which is tentative and
liable to any amount of correction--would be that just as, on the factual
side, a long preparation culminates in God's becoming incarnate as Man so,
on the documentary side, the truth first appears in mythical form and
then by a long process of condensing or focusing finally becomes incarnate
as History. This involves the belief that Myth in general is not merely
misunderstood history . . . nor diabolical illusion . . . nor priestly lying
. . . but, at its best, a real though unfocused gleam of divine truth
falling on human imagination. The Hebrews, like other people, had mythology:
but as they were the chosen people so their mythology was the chosen
mythology--the mythology chosen by God to be the vehicle of the earliest
sacred truths, the first step in that process which ends in the New
Testament where truth has become completely historical. . . . It should be
noted that on this view (a) Just as God, in becoming Man, is 'emptied' of
His glory, so the truth, when it comes down from the 'heaven' of myth to the
'earth' of history, undergoes a certain humiliation. Hence the New Testament
is, and ought to be, more prosaic, in some ways less splendid, than
the Old; just as the Old Testament is and ought to be less rich in many
kinds of imaginative beauty than the Pagan mythologies. (b) Just as God is
none the less God by being Man, so the Myth remains Myth even when it
becomes Fact. The story of Christ demands from us, and repays, not only a
religious and historical but also an imaginative response. It is directed to
the child, the poet, and the savage in us as well as to the conscience and
to the intellect. One of its functions is break down dividing walls.
from "On Three Ways of Writing for Children" (1952)
[When a little boy reads of an enchanted
wood] it stirs and troubles him. . . with the dim sense of something beyond
his reach and, far from dulling or emptying the actual world, gives it a new
dimension of depth. He does not despise real woods because he has read of
enchanted woods: the reading makes all real woods a little enchanted.
from a letter of September 22, 1956
. . . a good myth (i.e. a story out of which ever varying meanings will
grow for different readers and in different ages) is a higher thing than an
allegory (into which one meaning has been put). Into an allegory a
man can put only what he already knows; in a myth he puts what he does not
yet know and cd. not come by in any other way.
from An Experiment in Criticism (1961)
1. Myths "always have a very simple narrative shape."
2. Myths are "extra-literary."
3. "The pleasure of myth depends hardly at all on . . . suspense or
surprise. Even at a first reading it is felt to be inevitable."
4. We do not project ourselves into the characters of a myth.
5. Myth is always "fantastic."
6. The experience of myth may be "sad or joyful but it is always grave. .
. . [and] awe-inspiring. . . numinous. It is as if something of great moment
had been communicated to us."
|