C.S. Lewis' space trilogy

[bkpan]

Would you recommend them to a 13yo who LOVES fantasy lit? Or should I wait? Thanks!

 

Kim

[Sumiller]

I read them and really enjoyed Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra but I didn't like That Hideous Strength. It was very dark. I don't know how else to describe it except to say that there were parts of it that I wished I could have skipped over. However, my ds read them and liked them but he was 15 at the time.

[Julie of KY]

I read them in college and loved them then. I just loaned them to a 13 year old boy who also loved them.

[Murphy101]

Yes!

[Sumiller]

Gosh, am I the only one who didn't like That Hideous Strength? :glare:

[Harriet Vane]

Gosh, am I the only one who didn't like That Hideous Strength? :glare:

 

I didn't find it as disturbing--and I am one who really, really shies away from reading dark literature. I love the entire series, including that book.

 

I willingly recommend the series to a mature reader. 13yo might be a bit young as the books deal with some weighty ideas. YMMV

[MamaT]

Gosh, am I the only one who didn't like That Hideous Strength? :glare:

 

I love the series, and think the books would be great for the OP's 13yo, but That Hideous Strength was my least favorite.

[Matryoshka]

I read them and really enjoyed Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra but I didn't like That Hideous Strength. It was very dark. I don't know how else to describe it except to say that there were parts of it that I wished I could have skipped over. However, my ds read them and liked them but he was 15 at the time.

 

:iagree: Loved Out of the Silent Planet, really liked Perelandra, kinda hated That Hideous Strength. (It was probably made worse by the fact that I liked the first two so much; I felt let down). I was probably 15 or 16 when I read them?

[canadianmum]

Kim,

Our daughter - now 14 yrs - just finished the last one a few weeks ago. She was 13 when she began them, and some time had elapsed after Out of the Silent Planet, but, aside from her comment of the Perlandria being "dark", as most have said, she really enjoyed them and got a lot out of them. I suppose your own awareness of your boy's sensitivity would come into play here, and have him stop if he's not comfortable with the material...

 

Nancy in Alberta.

[laughing lioness]

Of course!! Some of the best reading in the world! (Space Trilogy and Till We Have Faces are my 2 #1 favorite "books" - even though technically the trilogy isn't just one book).

[Carol in Cal.]

I first ran across it in college, and could not put it down. Sadly, this was during finals week, LOL.

 

I then discovered the other two, which I thought were pretty boring. I'm glad I read "That Hideous Strength" first, so that I didn't miss it. I have a feeling that if I had just started with the first one, I would never have gotten to the third.

 

What I liked about THS...

1. I liked the tie in with the Arthurian legends. It was intriguing and I didn't know much about them but I was enthralled.

2. I liked the way it juxtaposed two worldviews, one matter of factly 'normal' but also Christian by British standards, and the other sort of sanitizedly academic. The little turns of phrase were very well done. Remember when he described the MC as having written in graduate school about gradually getting rid of a certain class of people but never having pictured the slow starving of an elderly woman, the last cup of hot chocolate having been drunk 2 weeks before (or something like that.) And remember how all of life was perceived as sort of squicky?

3. I liked the quiet dawning of heroics in the MC, who had been very weak. ("There was much of the spaniel in him.) I loved it when he discovered that he hated to stand on a step ladder and touch that circle. I loved it when he refused to stamp on the cross. I loved his moral awakening, from sanctimony and phoniness to truth (so interesting that it was not from evil to good). The writing in those sections was so tight. Remember when he says that he realized that even if you don't win, that's not in and of itself sufficient justification for not taking a stand.

4. I liked the fact that God intervened and evil perished. Flat out. An unexpected result, related to ancient prophecy that was not well-understood, like the Incarnation.

5. I liked the description of evil and how it works in modern times--bland bureaucracy, secrets, 'the system', 'taking care of things behind the scenes', applied rudeness at times, utter ruthlessness, the clique, a coldness toward life that manifests itself in torture without passion.

6. I liked the desciption of the struggles of the Christian life. No hearts and flowers here; realistic descriptions that include flaws. The MC's wife becoming attracted to the Christ-figure and being turned away from that, the man who prays for charity toward the MC, the older woman who kneels by her bed and prays out loud before retiring.

 

It was just so well-written. The descriptive prose was so impressive.

 

Having said that, it has been years since I read it, and I am much more well-read now. It might be that it won't strike me as so extraordinary in the company of the books that I have read since then. It's very interesting to go back and look at books and movies that I used to like--some of them I am appalled at now.

 

I am sure, though, that I would still prefer THS to the other two, and I remain very glad that I read it first.

[Harriet Vane]

I first ran across it in college, and could not put it down. Sadly, this was during finals week, LOL.

 

I then discovered the other two, which I thought were pretty boring. I'm glad I read "That Hideous Strength" first, so that I didn't miss it. I have a feeling that if I had just started with the first one, I would never have gotten to the third.

 

What I liked about THS...

1. I liked the tie in with the Arthurian legends. It was intriguing and I didn't know much about them but I was enthralled.

2. I liked the way it juxtaposed two worldviews, one matter of factly 'normal' but also Christian by British standards, and the other sort of sanitizedly academic. The little turns of phrase were very well done. Remember when he described the MC as having written in graduate school about gradually getting rid of a certain class of people but never having pictured the slow starving of an elderly woman, the last cup of hot chocolate having been drunk 2 weeks before (or something like that.) And remember how all of life was perceived as sort of squicky?

3. I liked the quiet dawning of heroics in the MC, who had been very weak. ("There was much of the spaniel in him.) I loved it when he discovered that he hated to stand on a step ladder and touch that circle. I loved it when he refused to stamp on the cross. I loved his moral awakening, from sanctimony and phoniness to truth (so interesting that it was not from evil to good). The writing in those sections was so tight. Remember when he says that he realized that even if you don't win, that's not in and of itself sufficient justification for not taking a stand.

4. I liked the fact that God intervened and evil perished. Flat out. An unexpected result, related to ancient prophecy that was not well-understood, like the Incarnation.

5. I liked the description of evil and how it works in modern times--bland bureaucracy, secrets, 'the system', 'taking care of things behind the scenes', applied rudeness at times, utter ruthlessness, the clique, a coldness toward life that manifests itself in torture without passion.

6. I liked the desciption of the struggles of the Christian life. No hearts and flowers here; realistic descriptions that include flaws. The MC's wife becoming attracted to the Christ-figure and being turned away from that, the man who prays for charity toward the MC, the older woman who kneels by her bed and prays out loud before retiring.

 

It was just so well-written. The descriptive prose was so impressive.

 

Having said that, it has been years since I read it, and I am much more well-read now. It might be that it won't strike me as so extraordinary in the company of the books that I have read since then. It's very interesting to go back and look at books and movies that I used to like--some of them I am appalled at now.

 

I am sure, though, that I would still prefer THS to the other two, and I remain very glad that I read it first.

 

Well said. :iagree:

[KnitWit]

Of course!! Some of the best reading in the world! (Space Trilogy and Till We Have Faces are my 2 #1 favorite "books" - even though technically the trilogy isn't just one book).

 

Same here...and I wholeheartedly agree with Carol's take on THS :)

 

Hmm...maybe I need to pull those out again. :) I just reread Til We Have Faces this spring. :)

[Jugglin'5]

My favorite was also THS, though I read it last. Perelandra was the only one that didn't really give me the creeps. I enjoyed it, but not as much as the other two. I don't usually enjoy "scary" lit, but Out of the Silent Planet and That Hideous Strength are two of my favorite books ever. I think I was 14 or 15 the first time I read them. I was pretty sensitive, though. Things creeped me out rather easily. :D

[LoriM]

I read Perelandra aloud to my 7/8th grade class last year, and they all LOVED it. I might suggest you do that with the first book. The chapters are short, and the vocabulary is a bit strong for many modern teens, particularly young teens, and it might "read" better if you can pause and discuss the big words. :)

 

Honestly, my kids couldn't wait for me to read what happened next. The looks on their faces when they realized where Perelandra was...it was terrific.