Tyler van Opstal "No Accounting for Taste"

     In Lewis' "On Juvenile Tastes" he writes about the other side of the assumption that fairy tales are meant for children, the idea that all children enjoy fairy stories as a distinct literary species. Lewis finds this idea preposterous, that there might be some universal taste shared by children. He points out that there are certainly different tastes amongst children and denies that there are any classics which might be enjoyed by all children- Lewis himself admits to having disliked The Arabian Nights both as a child and an adult. Tolkien's "On Fairy Stories" is cited by Lewis, as it is be nearly any author who wishes to discuss the idea of a children's literature and whether one exists. In addition to denying that there is any Childish taste, in another piece ("Unreal Estates") Lewis denies that children can be in any way categorized into clear taste groups, saying "You'll find the same boy who reads [comics] also reads Shakespeare or Spencer."

    My own juvenile taste is not very far removed from my current taste in that I still read most of what is offered to me. I still enjoy science fiction, and fantasy to a slightly lesser extent, and to another lesser extent I enjoy mysteries and slice-of-life books (seeing the term slice-of-life in Lewis' 1958 essay was strange, I thought the term a more recent one). I prefer fiction to non-fiction, and prefer reading allegories or scriptures (for scripture of any religion is as fantastical and astonishing as any story) to reading scholarly commentaries. Were I in possession of greater financial means I would happily spend my life reading and working with books, but alas I am not quite Scrooge McDuck and will be working with books of another kind to eat well. 

    Lewis may be right that there is no unifying taste, but perhaps literature would be better served if there was- the world could then be saved from sparkling vampires and werewolves. Jests aside, that is likely the only negative aspect of such a diverse range of tastes in literature, that in our competitive nature we feel the need to assert our tastes as superior and others are lesser. Should the person making the complaint be of a certain respected stature, their taste is considered genuine literary criticism, but the rest of us are left to leave low reviews on Goodreads and be told we don't understand the lovely romance at hand in Twilight and 50 Shades of Gray. The diversity in taste is certainly a good thing overall as it is the direct cause of the diversity available in literature, but a few tastes lost would be no harm done to the world.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

McDermott The Social Ethic

  My final paper for my honors seminar was about how Americans form their moral compasses and one of the things I researched for it was called the “Social Ethic.” It describes the tendency to submit yourself, as an individual, to the whims of the group, such as religious organizations or political parties. I think that myth can be a tool of the social ethic – in this sense, reason can function as an organization or group. Reason relies on imagination (we perceive the senses through it), and while too much pure logic can be bad, so can too much imagination. For example, back when the pandemic hit there were a bunch of people who said that they were immune to covid because they didn’t have the right “waves” for it to transmit to them because their political party and the people within it told them so (a view relying almost entirely on imagination with very little science to back it up, if any at all). It was almost like mob mentality. We saw this happen in Big Fish . The son was affe...
Read more

Tyler van Opstal "Inklings Apart"

    In the 1968 Understanding Tolkien and the Lord of the Rings (alternatively titled The Tolkien Relation ) by William Ready, C.S. Lewis is mentioned more regularly than anyone but Tolkien himself. This itself is entirely rational, Lewis having been another member of the Inklings club to which Tolkien also belonged, but the treatment of Lewis by Ready is often strange or otherwise notable.     Lewis is first mentioned in Understanding Tolkien in the first chapter, after Ready discusses the Andrew Lang lecture by Tolkien that we read at the beginning of class to lay a framework for how myth and story can be understood. Ready takes umbrage with what he sees as an unfair treatment of Tolkien by scholars, blaming the fame of Lewis for coloring their opinions of him (Dr. Thompson states it is his recollection that Lewis was indeed more famous than Tolkien prior to the LotR movies). Ready complains that "Tolkien has been tarred by [Lewis'] brush" and that the resulting mi...
Read more

Tyler van Opstal "Here There Be Dragons"

     In Lewis' Out of the Silent Planet , when the protagonist has his revelation about the nature of Space and its true identity as the Heavens, he is realizing that the maps of the storytellers are more accurate than any map that science can produce. And if the storytellers can chart the stars better than the physicists, then perhaps the storytellers also charted the seas better than the satellites have.      Many older maps feature creatures and gods. Even when the explorers had discovered the world was a sphere and that there was not a giant cliff at the end of a flat world guarded by dragons, storytellers continued to etch their maps with "Here there be dragons." The winds remained portrayed by the four wind gods perched in the map corners, and the sketches of great serpents in the oceans were kept. The storytellers understood that it did not matter whether there were literal dragons and wyverns lurking in and above the ocean, the danger they represent...
Read more