Lewis's Favorite: "Till We Have Faces"

image: 
faces.jpg

Till We Have Faces is by no means C. S. Lewis’s most popular work. The recent movies based on two of the Narnia books have probably given them a secure place as Lewis’s best known. Yet beyond the widely read Chronicles of Narnia, it’s still a better wager that any given person has read Mere Christianity, or The Screwtape Letters, or The Great Divorce, and probably even Lewis’s space trilogy, rather than Till We Have Faces. It is not the C. S. Lewis book that people know about. It is, however, the one Lewis called his favorite.

Lewis said he considered Till We Have Faces his best-written book. For me, that bodes good things. I compare it to the way I’ve been excited every time when, on the first day of a college class, a professor lets slip that this class — the one that I’m in right now — is his or her favorite of the quarter. If the professor is enthusiastic about teaching the class, there’s a very good chance it will be particularly enjoyable and worthwhile for the students. An author’s lasting enthusiasm about a work can, I think, indicate similar quality.

Till We Have Faces may be more obscure than some of Lewis’s other works, but its complexity and depth make it a challenging read for all the right reasons. The subtitle of the book is A Myth Retold, referring to the myth of Cupid and Psyche. Lewis provides a synopsis of the myth in an appended note.

Referring to the earliest extant version of the myth in Lucius Apuleius’s Metamorphoses, Lewis tells that Psyche is the youngest of three princesses and so captivatingly beautiful that people neglect to worship Venus and worship her instead. Because no men feel worthy to marry her, her father the king consults an oracle who tells him to leave Psyche on a mountain since she is not meant for any mortal man. Venus, jealous of Psyche’s beauty, sends her son Cupid to the mountaintop to make Psyche fall in love with the worst of all men. Instead, Cupid falls in love with her himself and has her whisked away to his golden palace as his wife. He comes to her every night in the darkness, but he forbids her from ever seeing his face.

Psyche convinces Cupid to reluctantly bring her sisters to his palace to visit, and they become fiercely jealous of their sister’s golden palace, supernaturally delicious food, and divine husband. They convince the gullible Psyche that her husband is a terrible beast and tell her to light a lamp in the night as he sleeps so that she can see him. When she does, Cupid awakens, rebukes her, and flies away. Mournful Psyche is left with the tasks of overcoming jealous Venus, avenging herself on her sisters, and regaining Cupid’s love.

Lewis sets his retelling of this myth in the fictional kingdom of Glome, contemporary with Hellenistic Greece, and he tells his version from the perspective of one of Psyche’s sisters, whom he names Orual. Till We Have Faces begins as Orual’s accusation against the gods, who she says have stolen Psyche from her and wronged her with their deviousness. The older sisters in the original myth are unequivocal villains, but Lewis makes a fundamental change to the story that makes Orual’s claim admissible, one which he says “forced itself upon me, almost at my first reading of the story, as the way the thing must have been.” To Orual, the palace Psyche shares with Cupid is invisible.

By adding this complexity to the story, Lewis makes his wonderfully unreliable narrator into a round, thoroughly engaging character. Orual, rationalizing that she is acting out of love and in Psyche’s best interests, manipulates Psyche’s true and self-sacrificing love for her, coercing Psyche (who is, in Lewis’s version, not gullible at all) to knowingly betray her husband. Instead of focusing on Psyche’s tasks following her betrayal, Lewis leads readers along Orual’s journey as she denies and then slowly comes to realize the true nature of what she’s done. As she becomes queen of Glome and rebuilds her land following her father’s ineffectual reign, she has other cares in which to hide from her reflections. But these and the veil she begins to wear cannot fully protect her from increasingly painful revelations about herself.

As she struggles with her own motives and self-deceit, at the same time she struggles to understand the gods she is accusing. “Why must holy places be dark places?” she asks, contending that if the gods revealed themselves openly and did not rule from invisible palaces, she would have believed Psyche.

These gods of Glome, like the gods of Greece, are jealous, capricious, and sometimes bloodthirsty, but a Greek slave who is advisor to Psyche’s father dissents from this view. Called The Fox by Psyche’s father because of his cleverness, he is the voice of materialistic rationalism in the book, urging Psyche that personal gods are “the lies of poets.” Orual must reconcile this view of the gods as a dispassionate “divine nature” with her experiences with the cruel, fickle gods against whom she rails.

Till We Have Faces explores love and its subtle counterfeits and presents the tension between mystery and reason in conceptions of God. Lewis engages these themes directly in essays and longer theological writings, and he explores them in the garb of overtly Christian fiction in works like The Great Divorce and The Screwtape Letters. His penetrating insight and powerful style are a joy to read in both sorts of writing. Till We Have Faces is equally good, but it represents, more than any of Lewis's other works, a third sort of approach.

Lewis’s approach here calls to mind his statement that while he was still an atheist, Christianity wafted about him again and again in his reading, permeating his English studies and breathing from the most unexpected pages like an “all too familiar smell.” It is this familiar smell of Christianity with which Lewis scents the pages of Till We Have Faces. It is more subtle than in many of Lewis’s works, but the smell is there.

Till We Have Faces leads me to consider the complex motives that underlie my actions — even the ones that seem most altruistic; it raises the possibility that there are precious few who yet have faces. I ask myself whether my holy places are dark like Orual’s or whether I am quick, like The Fox, to explain with glib reason just what the “divine nature” is or is not like.

Till We Have Faces is a thought-provoking book that is read too little. C. S. Lewis and I recommend it.

Caleb Rasmussen is a graduate student at Pacific Union College who plans to teach high school English. He lives in Angwin with his wife, Launa, and enjoys juggling and photography.

You can Till We Have Facesthrough our Amazon affiliate account and support Spectrum with your purchase.

Comments

Caleb - You're right, I haven't read this one! But after your review, it's high on my list. So I can look for that "subtle smell"!

Would that there were more Calebs to teach High School English in our SDA schools. If teenage students can be reached by literature and taught to think amazing things could happen.

Thanks, Caleb, for this insightful review.
Donna

Reading some of the world's greatest literature opens up our imaginative side and we are compelled, forever after, to see life in a new and different perspective. Such writers confront us with our universal human condition.

I read this book few years ago and didn't realize it was addressing all these issues! Thanks for an insighful review.

I thought it was simply a story about religious belief/non-belief and perception. The part in the book I still remember vividly is where Psyche offers Orual a glass of wine in her palace--all Orual can see are the mountains and water from the stream. What is "reality"?

Speaking of tension, I love the contrast of the shapeless stone god of Glome with the beautiful human-shaped marble statue. The common person preferred the mysterious stone and felt blessed by her but ignored the more civilized god because she was too transcendent. That tension seems to still be in the Adventist church in our arguments about worship in the sanctuary, and in other issues. We break our religion down into a war between earthy feelings and airy thoughts. But maybe Lewis’ solution to this tension is in Orual’s complaint to the gods, which I think is the most powerful section in the book, when she realizes the depths of her own depravity. I won’t spoil it for anyone who hasn’t read it, but I can say that one of the main lessons of the book is that acts of service are more important than winning theological arguments. True religion is feeding the widows.

Lem, the part of the book you refer to is the highpoint for me too. When I began to read through the book again for this review, that was the part I remembered most vividly. Lewis makes the turn that happens there very moving.

I agree that the tension between earthy feelings and airy thoughts, as you put it, can become too much of a focus. I know that the power of both feelings and thoughts--the mysterious and the rational--are essential parts of my walk with God. One without the other is incomplete.

So great to see a review of this book -- it's a favourite of mine too, and has been for many years. I once loaned it to a friend (actually he was my student at the time) who gave the book a lot of credit for bringing him to God. The moment in it that stood out for him, and that has come to be more important to me too over the years, is the scene from which the title is drawn -- "How can we meet the gods face to face till we have faces?" To me it's that theme of authenticity and honesty in identity -- we can't really encounter God except from a place of absolute, utter, humiliating honesty -- that still resonates after all these years.

Caleb -- thank you for a perceptive and inviting review. Lewis himself saw the story as one about love "gone wrong" in a number of ways, including the jealousy that natural loves feel in the face of the consuming love of God. The paragraph below is the original dust jacket blurb, written by Lewis:

"This re-interpretation of an old story has lived in the author's mind, thickening and hardening with the years, ever since he was an undergraduate. That way, he could be said to have worked at it most of his life. Last spring what seemed to be the right form presented itself and themes suddenly interlocked: the straight tale of barbarism, the mind of an ugly woman, dark idolatry and thin enlightenment at war with each other and with vision, and the havoc which a vocation, or even a faith, works on human life."

Readers in Sacramento may want to join with a small group -- mainly SDAs, but other Christians as well -- who are currently discussing Till We Have Faces. Our next meeting will be on March 2 at 7 p.m. at the home of Vic and Jana Aagaard, 5321 Antique Court, Carmichael, CA. Call 916-203-6312 if you're interested.

Mr.Rasmussen -

Thank you for the thoughtful review. My guess is that it was no labor, however; to muse on a work this rich can be nothing but a pleasure.

One possible correction: report has it that Lewis did consider TWHF his best work, but that it was "Perelandra" that was his favorite. I confess to being unable to place the source of that information, however.

Thank you again, and best wishes.

My favorite Lewis book. It makes you just ache!

Larry,

I do recall reading statements by Lewis expressing particular fondness for both Perelandra and Till We Have Faces. You may be right about the favorite/best-written distinction. I'll see if I can find the source that we're both thinking about.

Post new comment

Because conversation is our mission, we publish all comments immediately. We simply request that you focus on the posted topic, and not attack anyone or use profanity. Please sign your post. Consistently used pseudonyms are acceptable, but "anonymous" is not. Adding links to commercial web pages for promotional purposes is not allowed. A link to your personal blog is welcome. This site is a place for thoughtful conversation and a healthy exchange of ideas and perspective; rants and tirades don't further this mission and are not appropriate. We reserve the right to delete comments which do not follow these guidelines. Thank You!
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comments are limited to a maximum of 5000 characters.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

User login