The Great Divorce

Reading Lewis is a delight and a challenge all at once. While I understand the broader concepts, there are references to material and ideas I am not familiar with. That being said, I whole heartedly agree with the message of this book that those who want to be in heaven will be there and those who don't won't. Lewis masterfully depicts a number of examples of people who choose not to be in heaven, some more subtle than others.

One concept in the book I don't quite understand and struggle with is the concept of time outside this world. I think the explanation in Mere Christianity was easier for me to understand.

Overall this is an excellent book, but for me takes a back seat to Narnia and Mere Christianity.

Summary: CS Lewis imagines Heaven and Hell.

This is the most recent Renovaré Book Club selection. My biggest problem with book clubs is staying on the schedule. I generally read too fast or too slow to stay with the group. The Great Divorce is a fairly short book and it is being split into five weeks. I stayed with the schedule for the first two weeks, but by the time I got to the end of the reading this past week, I did not want to stop and just finished the rest of the book.

What is helpful in the Renovare book club is that they get an author or a subject area expert to help readers get the most out of the book. This time it is Junius Johnson. The director of education for Renovare always hosts the club and hosts the weekly podcast as the interviewer.

I last read The Great Divorce about six years ago and I have read it enough and recently enough that I know the rough story well. However, the strength of the book is the people that the CS Lewis character meets along the way. Generally these are all people who are rejecting heaven for one reason or another. These are not murderers and thieves; these are cynics, conspiracy theorists, the vain, or those who want to control others.

Part of the lens through which I was reading was discernment. The Lewis character is trying to understand what is going on. And George MacDonald, one of Lewis' heroes, is playing the role of guide. As the Lewis character interacts with various people, he talks to them or overhears their concerns. Having overlapped the Great Divorce with a discussion of Ignatius' Rules of Discernment, you could see the evidence of a number of the rules in action. I am not sure if Lewis wrote about the rules anywhere, but if he didn't know them, the principles of the rules were still shown.

Obviously, this is speculative fiction, but it is helpful to work through ideas.

This was most originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/great-divorce-2/
Previously I wrote about it on my blog here https://bookwi.se/great-divorce/

WARNING: IF YOU LIKE THIS BOOK, DON'T READ MY REVIEW!!


With my background, you'd think I'd have a greater appreciation for the man most modern Christians consider the greatest Christian thinker of the last century. Nope. Meh. I appreciate the progressive nature he displayed in his discussion of Heaven and Hell, even though it was just a dream. A Clinger's snowglobe, as one of my friends calls it. People in Hell choose to be there; if they choose to leave, it becomes merely Purgatory for them. Nice.

That said, I found every character to be unbearable. The people of Hell were all very one-dimensional, and I realize that is necessary for the message of the book. But it grates on one. They have no personalities left whatsoever, and so they are all disagreeable, petty, nasty little creatures. And it's annoying and awkward. It reminds me of the way many people I know when I was a Conservative Christian thought of the secular world. We viewed it as shallow and meaningless, since it didn't have God. That point of view trivializes any other view but its own, and that's most irksome, to say the least. I felt like this trivialization was all over the place in this book. Any good thing a person does or feels is meaningless or even tainted without God.

And let us not even begin to discuss the sexism. Oh, wait. LET US. Every single woman in this book, what few there were, could only be defined by her relationship to other people. They were wives, mothers, caregivers. The men were artists and intellectuals and made of sterner stuff. The most awful women were possessive and bitter shrews. The ideal woman was a wonderful, loving wife and caregiver to all around her. I am NOT saying that's bad. But even the awesome woman is defined by her relationships. She has no substance in and of herself. I realize that's typical of the time period, but it's tiresome.

And the HEAVENLY people. So, going to Heaven means you've apparently lost all brain function (unless your George MacDonald), because all across the board, they failed in their mission to convert the Hell People. They just could NOT figure out how to communicate properly. At all. They laughed awkwardly and failed to elucidate ANYthing relevant to getting to Heaven. Everything they said was vague and unhelpful. So in Heaven, you're a happy idiot; and in Hell, you're a petty shite. That's a great view of human nature. I felt like this was a bit too misanthropic to be of any pertinence in saving souls.

And it was just bloody tedious. It's so short, but it took forever to finish, because I kept getting bored. Or I would space out during discussions of mumbo-jumbo, especially at the very end.

There were two moments of enjoyment in this book: The last page, which was dark and referenced the war. And somewhere, MacDonald says something about human nature that I can't remember anymore because the rest of the book drilled it out of my head.

And the hymn to Sarah Smith was one of the most appalling excuses for a psalm I've ever read.

Sorry, Jack. Stick to talking lions and fauns.

A short novel about a field trip to Heaven from Hell. The premise was interesting, that a busload of people in hell (described as a city where you can build houses with your mind but the houses have no roofs and you're always fighting with your neighbors and moving farther away from them) would take a trip to heaven - presumably with the ability to stay if they so choose - and the excuses they come up with to remain in hell instead (and alternatively, the reasons they feel they should be allowed to stay without understanding what staying really means). It's told from the perspective of a nameless Ghost who visits heaven and overhears many of the conversations of his fellow Ghosts, each of whom has a discussion with a teacher Spirit.

Also contained an interesting bit about earth, heaven, hell and purgatory, and how each of those can be perceived as being located in the place of official Heaven and Hell depending on your perspective.

Interesting to ruminate on. Not sure why I can't rate it higher. I've read other Lewis where I felt he was rather heavy-handed with the allegory (the latter books in the Space Trilogy come to mind), but this is not allegory. It was a good story, but I didn't love it.