An Experiment in Criticism (Canto) [Paperback]

Lewis' point is that there is not a real "bad" or "good" literature. The value of what we read is in how we interact with it. Lewis defines how people interact with culture in terms of "The Few" and "The Many."

"The Few" are the literary (in other fields they would be musical, have a palette capable of enjoying the best food, or an eye for art). The literary count reading as valuable, read books more than once, are able to be changed by what they read, and remember and share works or pieces of works with others.

"The Many" are the unliterary. Unliterary people generally don't accuse the literary of reading the wrong books-they wonder why literary people make such a big fuss about books at all. They never read a book twice. Their interaction with a work is not deeply felt. Though they may "read a lot" they don't "set much store by it."

Lewis draws some interesting comparisons with other forms of cultural involvement. He compares these two styles of reading with how some people interact with art and music. Just because one is in the literary "Few" does not mean that they are part of the "Few" in other venues.

Chapter five, "On Myth," is incredibly valuable in discussing myth as well as the value of modern genres such as Fantasy and Science Fiction. It is a wonderful area to start exploring what has come to be termed "Mythopoeic literature."

Another notable section is chapter seven which is a discussion of realism. Lewis' definition is broader than the usual. Personally, in changing my perception of what "realistic" fiction is, this chapter probably influenced me more than any other.

This is a book capable of changing the reader's view of culture. It is therefore of great value. I give it my heartfelt recommendation.

Central to his argument is the fact that the same book may be read in different ways. It follows then that there is a certain speculative nature to evaluative criticism, and therefore no amount of reliance upon literary criticism can absolve one from the responsibility of becoming a GOOD READER. And what is a good reader? Well, that is the question isn't it? In my opinion (and it is just that... an opinion) I feel that reading Lewis's "Experiment" can answer that question more effectively than anything I've ever come across. Read it, and see where you fit into Lewis's categories of the "literary" and the "unliterary" person (too lengthy to enumerate here). If at any point, you feel offended and want to hurl the book across the room... you are of the latter category.

Lewis deplored the technical dissection of what he loved so dearly... the simple act of reading. I loved his image in chapter 2 of the "status seeker" type of readers, gathered to discuss the finer (and, of course HIDDEN) points of "approved literature" while the only real literary experience in such a scenario "may be occurring in a back bedroom where a small boy is reading Treasure Island under the bed-clothes by the light of an electric torch."

Lewis sought in books (as he called it here) an "enlargement of his being". He says on page 52, "I am probably one of many who, on a wakeful night, entertain themselves with invented landscapes. I trace great rivers from where the gulls scream at the estuary, through the windings of ever narrower and more precipitous gorges, up to the barely audible tinkling of their source in a fold of the moors. But I am not there myself as explorer or even as tourist. I am looking at that world from outside." This is a terrific/significant book that will be read, re-read, and cherished by anyone who has ever had similar musings. Oh, and by the way... all GOOD readers have !

I'm a Christian, and I believe the single most important priority is to lead people to the knowledge and saving grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. You can do such through art. However, anything that Lewis wrote that lead someone to Jesus is, of course, more important than this book in that respect. Jesus comes first, art comes underneath that in priority, as do all things. That being said:

AN EXPERIMENT IN CRITICISM is the single most important work C. S. Lewis has produced when it comes to literature and the arts. THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA, the SPACE TRILOGY, and TILL WE HAVE FACES are literature, but this overwhelms them all - not because of what it is (a universal principle that can be applied to art), but because of what it is not (a story or work of art that not everyone will have the same taste for). People may or may not like his fiction (although I find it rare to meet a person who doesn't like NARNIA) - but this book anyone can appreciate, especially those interested in literature in specific and art in general (for, although it concerns itself primarily with literature, this book also stands in defense of drama, music, painting, and the artistic endeavours of humankind in general). Because there are differing tastes in terms of fiction, people who will not read Lewis's own literature will (or should) read this. This element comes into play at the last chapter, where Lewis brings out how hard it is to take down a work with this apparatus, because, while you may not enjoy a work, others may. Literature is a very highly subjective experience.

CRITICISM's central argument rests in the fact that books should not be judged by some arbitrary critical analyses, but by what response it elicits in the reader. This book contains one of Lewis's famous quotes, at the end of the Epilogue: "But in reading literature I become a thousand men and yet remain myself." That is the central thesis of this work: not to approach a piece of literature, or movie, or painting, or drama, as something to experience and forget immediately afterward, but to enter into it, surrender to it, and approach it with an open mind. That is one thing that is so great about this book - even people who have prejudices against Lewis can read this work.

It also points out the central flaw in evaluative criticism: it may dominate and wipe away the chance at a reader appreciated the work for what it really is, and to experience it in the reader's own way. Lewis does not argue that all evaluative criticism is bad - there's a very human need, he says, to `compare notes', and that is normal, but to much has been given over to this `note comparison' and not enough to the actual work of art. People, especially students (Lewis was, by profession, a medieval literature professor), had quite a broad range of knowledge concerning Chaucerian and Shakespearian criticism and hardly any of Chaucer or Shakespeare (he cited this example at the end of the last chapter). To much has been given over to criticism.

Although I will continue to write reviews, this book has forever changed my approach. Lewis states that one can have an appreciation of a work without the critics, but one CANNOT have an appreciation of the critics without the author. Now I propose that all reviewers should read this book, and keep this in mind when writing. I certainly will. It is also my personal belief that anyone in universities who are studying literature should be required to read this book at the start of their very first semester, so they may examine their motives of precisely WHY they are in this study.

Indeed, the biggest tragedy of this book is, I fear, it is not highly enough read. Regardless of your views on C. S. Lewis, this is one book everyone should read who professes a love for art, and ESPECIALLY by all who write literary criticism. And while that profession does have a place in our world (where would academia be without it? `Publish or perish!'), it is superseded in importance by the art that it deals with, and we should first immerse ourselves in it, sometimes several times over, before we turn away and reach for that scholarly volume. And if it's a good work, it will only encourage you more to go to the work at hand and discover for yourself what the art can do for you. (Shippey's ROAD TO MIDDLE-EARTH is a good example of a well-written criticism). Lewis said one good element about criticism is, if the critics truly care for the art, the enthusiasm will be apparent, and it may cause you to read literature otherwise unknown to you. Also, a central element is the difficulty in producing condemnation to a work. It's a good case against censorship, because although a great work can be abused, it can also be used properly. One may classical images and use it as pornography - while one may look at it and fall in love with the Renaissance. Of course, PLAYBOY is mainly used for lust.

A side note: Pay close attention to the chapter on MYTH, which is a central element in both Tolkien and Lewis. This alone should make it required reading for anyone who study the lives of these two great Christian writers. This work also shows you the depth of versatility of how well-read C. S. Lewis actually was, and shows his phenomenal memory of such things.