UPEP Reading Group II: Rereading The Past discussion

Right off the bat, readers were confused as to why Cupid didn't really make an appearance in the novel. His name is never mentioned, his presence is referenced, but it's as close as we get. At first, some readers were a little frustrated because they were told this is a rewriting of the myth of Cupid & Psyche. But in our discussion, we were reminded that Orual wrote the novel. She reminds us quite a bit that she wrote it. And in the traditional story of Cupid and Psyche, Orual is a minor character. Well now that she has a pen to write her own story, she has made Cupid a minor character in her story. One reader said it was like writing an entire Star Wars story based on R2D2's bathroom break. Another reader said it's like when you go to see a rockstar in concert--you only see this glorified version of them, not the mundane parts of their life. There is another side to the story.

Everyone agreed that Lewis has a great way with words. One reader said that Lewis makes sure each word "lives" at the right spot in the sentence. Two others mentioned how Lewis carefully builds a world by populating it with small details that subtly build a world for us to live in as we read it. From the politics of the Kingdom of Glome to superstitions to relationships and customs, it's a lived in, grounded world that doesn't detract from the story.

And yes, we did get into the "subtext" or the meta qualities of the novel. Knowing Lewis was a Christian apologist, many readers read into scenes where a Lord of the gods were referenced. A reader remarked that Lewis was at one point an agnostic, and came around to Christianity again later in life. Part 1 ends with Orual being bitter towards the gods, challenging them to answer for themselves. Part II ends with Orual recognizing that she had been shortsighted and proud, not acknowledging the gods presence in her life and realizing the mercy she had received in her life.

The meta quality of the novel is fascinating. Orual is writing part I to set the story straight and how things happened, as she didn't get a lot of air time in previous tellings of the myth. But in part II, she realizes that her memory is faulty, she has been subject to her own passions and emotions. In thinking back over part I, Orual believes that, through her writing, the gods are calling her to remembrance and causing her to reconcile her memory with what may have actually happened.

There's a scene where Orual is before some gods and is asked to read her book (part I) to voice her complaint. In her mind, she has written this big beautiful novel that succinctly sums up how she has been wronged and she is such a good person. But in picking up the book, she sees that it's a small, ugly, tattered book. The readers shared experiences how they saw themselves in this scene: when you're young and proud, your complaints are huge and seemingly valid. It's not only you have some maturity and perspective that you are able to trim that book down and see that it was somewhat petty and didn't amount to much. Is Lewis wrestling with his past in these pages?

There was a lot to wrestle with in this novel, not just in terms of theology (how does Lewis navigate a world of Greek gods), but philosophically. There's a lot of unrequited love in this novel. What does that do to a person? What are we to do when we feel the gods have gone silent? Who is to blame, and how do we move forward? "Till We Have Faces" is a rich and resonating text. We loved it. There is something in here for everyone.