Douglas Gresham on Twitter
Today, Douglas Gresham answered questions via the @CSLewis Twitter account. Check out some highlights below:
Q: Did CSLewis believed that other worlds (such as Narnia) may really exist?
DG: Why? Don’t you?Q: What was the most emotionally difficult part of working on the Chronicles of Narnia films?
DG: The hardest part of working on the Narnia films was having to accept stuff that I knew to be less good than what Jack wrote.Q: I’m curious about Lewis’s position on anarchy. Would he have considered Jesus to be an anarchist?
DG: No Jesus was purely a Theocrat not an anarchist. Anarchy is for fools and bullies.Q: Is C.S. Lewis still relevant in the 21st Century? What would he have made of the current financial crisis?
DG: Like me he would have shaken his head and said “Well here we go again-drat it.”Q: Did he ever start works of fiction and then scrap them?
DG: Yes, every writer does. Lots of his attempts ended up in the wastepaper basket.Q: do you have a personal favorite that he wrote?
DG: Yes, I think the best fictional book he ever wrote was ‘Til We Have Faces.
Notable Quotes
“Evangelical is far too broad a term and covers a multitude of sins. Jack was a mere Christian, as am I.”
(About the death of Lewis’ wife, Joy) “We grew very close in that time. I leant on him and he had only me to lean on.”
You can see a “replay” of the chat at http://tweetchat.com/room/cslewis.
It's definitely noticeable that he didn't answer any questions about future Narnia films.
I must say that I am somewhat disapointed that he didn't address that. Somebody must have asked that question, maybe he just didnt have anything else to say about the situation.
Dylan, yes, several people, including GlumPuddle in several different ways, asked about the future of the films, but, like Tirian said, he ignored all the questions about it.
I bet he knows something we don't about the future of the films. Maybe Walden and the Lewis Estate haven't come to an agreement yet, what a shocker that would be.
Hmmm…That is most interesting. Perhaps he is not allowed to answer questions about the future of the films.
Glad to hear he wasn't happy about all the changes. Still, you would think he had more influence with that. :-[ Hmm…
I think he had plenty of influence, I just wish he had a chance to make some adjustments to make the movies more like the books.
I missed it. 🙁 Oh well. I DO like the question about the other worlds!
As to Gresham not answering questions about the future of the Narnia films, I wouldn't be too surprised if he said nothing for a few years. Considering we still have 3-4 years left until production of another can continue at the least, he probably doesn't have too much of an idea himself on "Narnia 4", or whatever else could happen. Let's try to ask again in 3-4 more years. 😉
But great interview. I like learning more about Lewis now that ever now that I am trying to read more of his books, or dying attempting to read them. 😛 (Surprised by Joy is indeed very hard for a fan my age.)
I wonder if he knows anything about C.S Lewis' The Great Divorce, film? I hear it's in the works and it sounds absolutely incredible. Did anyone ask him anything about that?
Yeah, Lewis' other works are pretty hard to read. I mean have any of you tried to read the Space Trilogy? The first book is alright but the second one is like trying to read a Dickens book….
I really liked his reply too "Why. Don't you?". Excellent reply.
…but then the third one brings in the Arthurian Legends, which is pretty awesome! 🙂 Yeah, Lewis's non-Narnian works are a little more difficult, but I enjoy them just as much. Like Mr. Gresham, I think "Till We Have Faces" is one of Jack's best works. And then there's "Mere Christianity" (Warning: attempting to read this book in one sitting may result in brain explosion) and "Surprised by Joy". The thing about his non-fiction is that you have to take it one chapter at a time, and spend a lot of time just thinking about what he said.
A long time thinking…………..
John Dunn I'm pretty sure he might know something about it. Nothing goes by Gresham that has to do with Lewis without him knowing.
Yes, I think he could've truely done SOMETHING if he REALLY wanted to! I wish he had. If it was someone's book in my family, or my book, I would be doing everything I could to make sure they were faithful! I would be like "No, I'm sorry, you CANNOT put this in the movie." Even if it meant they wouldn't make it, I would just find someone else (easier said than done, I know) to do it. I would rather my books not be made, then to be ruined. And I can imagine since I love to write stories myself. (Although I have never finished one =\)
They didn't completely ruin Prince Caspia, yes, there were plenty of issues with the film, but it wasn't destroyed. Voyage of the dawn treader was a disaster, I really wish they could have stuck to the book and not orient the movie towards 5 year old kids.
He probably doesn't have much more news, than what we already know.
I watched the whole Q&A session on twitter. I had sent in a question the day before, and I got an email from them today saying that I was the daily C.S. Lewis book winner.
I'll answer these as if it were directed towards me…
1. Yes, I believe other worlds do exist. How could they not? The galaxy and space is huge, who knows what could be in it besides us!
2. I think the hardest part of not just the Narnia films, but any films is making it come to life, such as the magic and effects.
3. I wouldn't know what to say about this, I'm not a religious person. I just love the fantasy of these films.
4. No idea how to respond…
5. I agree, in order to achieve perfection, its scrap after scrap until BAM, genius finally done.
6. Never knew who he was until the Narnia films, then read the books and those are my only favorites of his.
1. The question was about other worlds, or universes, not other planets or sentient species. There are several parts of the series that suggest that the portals between our world and Narnia take a person into different universes, not different places within the same universe.
I completely disagree, I found the Space Trilogy to be the best thing I'd read since I first started "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" years before! They made me feel like I did when I read the seven Chronicles books for the first time.
I love those books its just the second one wasn't my favorite. But the first and the third were really good.
It shouldn't have been stated as other worlds, more like other dimensions. Which I do believe to be real.
What was Lewis trying to tell us in "Til We Have Faces"??
To "have a face" is to know and accept who and what you are. To be honest about your true motivations. Orual's ugly, physical, face was not her "real" one. She earned her "true" face when she understood, and confessed, her jealousy of Cupid to the gods. We cannot see the divine to approach it, because we need the eyes of our true faces first. Sort of like the dwarfs at the end of 'The Last Battle' who refused to see the great feast in front of them, or smell Lucy's flowers. That's what I got out of it. Others, surely, have different opinions.
Well, I'm still not sure which is worse. This was the case for me: They did well on LWW that I thought PC would be great. We really did not get much info on the movie PC, so I wasn't knowing what to expect. When I saw it I was completely shocked and disappointed. I knew so much that was going to be in the film VODT, so I wasn't really as shocked, so I decided the movie "Was not as bad as PC." Because I was expecting all those changes. Now every time I watch VODT, I realize more and more how…well, what a disaster it is and I don't know which one to think is worse- PC or VODT. 🙂
The only thing that really missed the target for me in Prince Caspian was the brattiness of Peter and Caspian. I guess you really can't blame Caspian, losing everything he knows, but Peter had no excuse to act like that. They badly screwed the script. Voyage of the Dawn Treader was extremely dissapointing for many reasons, the cheesy acting, the predictabilaty (especially during the sea serpent scene, "Edmund, what did you just think of?" that was one of the lowlights of the film) also how many things they left out from the book that I think they could've easily included, even if there was a different goal in getting the swords to the table and defeating the mist i still think in some way they could have incorperated it somehow into the script. Like Gresham already said, the toughest part of making (and watching/waiting for us fans) these films is having to accept something definately not as good as what Lewis wrote, its very, very tough.
Well yeah, portals then. My whole life I have always thought about being transported to another world (like Narnia) and seeing what life would be like. Although they seem to be VERY rare, I do believe in that which is why I am so addicted to this series… where as others are in it for the religion… but oh well, to each is own.
It's worth noting that near the end of Perelandra, the second book of Lewis's Space Trilogy, there is a brief mention of other worlds that are outside our world, but are intertwined with it as part of the "Great Dance" of Creation. Cross-reference that with direct mention in That Hideous Strength (Space Trilogy 3) of J.R.R. Tolkien's Numenor (aka "Atalante" or Atlantis; see The Silmarillion) as the indirect origin of Merlin's power, coupled with the fact that the dust in the magic rings from The Magician's Nephew originated in Atlantis, and you can imagine some pretty intriguing inter-textual theories.
As much as I love Narnia, I consider Space Trilogy to be vastly superior in pretty much every respect. And actually, Perelandra might be my favorite of the three. The last couple of chapters are indescribably magnificent–and painfully beautiful.
The Abolition of Man was also quite thought-provoking.
I think Gresham should brush up on Lewis' politics. Lewis considered theocracy the worst of all possible human governments. A tyrant's evil may sleep, but a pharisee tortures with the approval of his conscience.
If Gresham is saying that Jesus is our ultimate king, then it's true but completely unresponsive to the question… perhaps coyly on purpose. But my understanding is that Gresham's politics are pretty far removed from Lewis'.
Not that Lewis was an anarchist either. But he seems to have had a deep respect for human liberty. There was a great fictionalized scene in Shadowlands where Joy said something like, "Back then everyone was either a fascist trying to conquer the world or a communist trying to save it," and Lewis quips, "I must have been otherwise engaged."
Agree that Till We is Lewis' best, but probably not for the same reasons as Gresham, who seems to think that Lewis stole it from his mother and was too big a cad to give her the credit (apart from a dedication).
The "mere Christian" thing is also wince-inducing. Jack explicitly says in the preface to "Mere Christianity" that one should NOT remain a "mere Christian". I forget the exact wording, but it was along the lines of him expounding on common Christian principles, but that everyone should then find the church that they think fits them best while adhering to those principles. He was "boiling down" the essence of Christianity but explicitly not for one moment suggesting that they were sufficient.
Awesome answer on the other worlds question!
Are you Lewis' step son? How would you know more about Lewis Politics the he does?
Um, I've read his books? Sometimes I wonder if Gresham has. (For instance, he once said that Orual wasn't really ugly but just "thought" she was. This is pushing the technique of the unreliable narrator a little too far, and completely misunderstanding the vision at the end.)
See also the "Mere Christian" thing: "I hope no reader will suppose that "mere" Christianity is here put forward as an alternative to the creeds of the existing communions — as if a man could adopt it in preference to Congregationalism or Greek Orthodoxy or anything else. It is more like a hall out of which doors open into several rooms. If I can bring anyone into that hall, I have done what I attempted. But it is in the rooms, not the hall, that there are fires and chairs and meals. The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in. For that purpose the worst of the rooms (whichever that may be) is, I think preferable."
And, oh yeah, claiming Lewis "wanted" the books reordered because of Lewis' patronizing offhand comment to a particularly dull child. And unilaterally undoing Lewis' improvements to the Chronicles. (I miss you, Fenris Ulf. Please come home.) I have very little doubt that he makes this stuff up.
I'm glad someone's fighting for Lewis' estate, but the man doesn't speak for Lewis from beyond the grave. Lewis' own works do that. I love C.S. Lewis. I applaud Gresham's fighting for his works, but beyond that, the man's never impressed me much, and the few times I've interacted with him, I've found him very rude.
I really do want to think best of the man, but I find his understanding of Lewis' works highly shallow, and his authoritarian tone in all things Lewis doesn't help.
And your one so high in authority to judge the man? He is the closest person to Lewis still alive, and you disrespect that? Just because you have read Lewis' books and claim you understand them better then Mr. Gresham makes your opinion 100% correct? Opinion is opinion, and everyone has one, but one is not greater then another.
I agree.
Sorry, Perelandra was a drawl by the middle of the book I just wanted to fall asleep. It was so stinking repetetive too, the whole "Ransom, Ransom, Ransom" "What?" Nothing, Ransom, Ransom, Ransom……." was so annoying. I still don't get what happened to Weston, was he posessed or something? Anyways weird book.
Oh and Tradition I'll have to agree on how painfuly beautiful it was, very painfully.
He said Orual wasn't ugly?! For reals?
okay……..
Anyway, gn, two things regarding your posts here:
1) I agree. With every single word. Especially about Fenris Ulf. *nods*
2) It doesn't matter that you're right. Be prepared to dodge the pitchfork and torch-bearing gang. I've been down this road before.
Excellent points.
Whats this about Fenris Ulf?
Dylan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maugrim
For all those who are disappointed that Gresham didn't do more to make sure the movies were more like the books: You have no idea how screen adaptations of books work. You CAN'T include everything from a book in the movie version for a few reasons:(1)Not everything that "works" in a book "works" onscreen for the simple reason that words on the page evoke images in the mind of the reader, and those images will vary from reader to reader; (2)If you were to include absolutely everything onscreen, you'd have a ridculously long movie; (3) Although I love the Narnia books, I for one am glad Adamson made the changes he did in Prince Caspian—it was more dramatic and action-packed (Prince Caspian is my fave of the three films—more like LOTR).
I think Till we Have Faces is great, and I didn't have a hard time with it until the end, which I don't understand. Maybe I need to read it again.
Wow, i love this guy. i just dream of sitting down with him one day and having a chat (infortunately i missed this technological opportunity). my favorite was the answer to the belief in other worlds. he sounded so much like C.S. Lewis right there, it made me smile 😀
O, yeah I know! Peter had no call to act that way. In the book he said they had come to help put Caspian in his place. In the movie they acted like they were fighting against eachother! 😛
Yeah, I think the CGI in VODT was pretty lame. Sorry, LWW looked really good, VODT just looked way too……I can't even explain it!
C.S. Lewis' work was pure genius, the movies are just mediocre.
I think Douglas Gresham was happy about LW&W & PC, but VODT less happy about in translating the novel & has decided to put a brake on that – I'm sure it's been a very big load emotionally that goes in to his commitment in seeing the films made & he feels the legacy involved in the chronicles of narnia deeply.
Prince Caspian's the film that makes the narnia fims a trilogy to me and has my enthusiasm & investment in them as a series – but i skip the narnian underground bobbytrap addition/battle chapter after the first Telmarine catapult starts slinging after Peter/Mirz duel, which goes nicely to Lucy in forest finding Aslan and thus doesn't lose narrative beat of film which is important.
Andrew Adamson's film style is abit like the Lady of Green Kirtles spells regarding narnia, kind of an all or nothing experience, very powerful but if broken hard to rekindle. They changed tack on what originally was to be done in the end battle & it does break the spell of the film to me, where as the battle in LW&W was awesome & extended addition even better still! But it might not have made a difference if done how originally envisioned, because it's really the Peter – Miraz dual & then Caspian's resolution to that which is really the culmination of main themes in the story & battle afters point is really just the magic coming back into Narnia after the aformentioned resolutions and not more ratcheting up of main character ups & downs in a big battle. So i skip all that, to the ending of the trees and river god entering the battle and that basically caps off an amazing rendition of Prince Caspian.
I read the book PC last week, & it really is a good match to the film n a read between the lines kind of way from book to film. VODT is as reliant on it's connection to the previous two films as it is to the novel, in being a Narnia film so while not out of place, continuing in it's direction could have seen a film that didn't represent the Silver Chair novel very well. On a whole though, it's still been GREAT to have the Narnia film adaptions/adaptations to date the way they have come through 🙂
My biggest regret about the undone changes was Dark Island. It's gives you the chills to think that Dark Island can still be out their in the Narniaverse, waiting for another unsuspecting victim.
I think Douglas is hiding something…maybe another big movie company put in a bid for the Narnia rights and we'll see more movies in a couple of years. Then again…he could be hiding nothing because there's nothing to say. I still like LWW the best, I mean I like all the movie with different degrees but that's my fav because it went with the book. 🙂
yah, that is a little weird, it just stayed in existence. The green mist is gone, but Dark Island is still there, weird……
I agree with you on that, but in VDT key characters and parts in the book are missing. You don't need to include EVERYTHING in the book, but just the important parts, which some parts were missing from the movie.
Agreed! LWW is still my fav, very close between that one and PC though.
The only thing VDT really had going for it was the special effects. There was no plot to back it up, they marketed the whole movie on special effects alone.
Does anyone think that Voyage of the Dawn Treader was better than the book with the changes that were made in the film? I read all books and I actually thought the changes in the film version of Voyage of the Dawn Treader actually made it a lot better than the book. Do you think if they would have stuck to the book it would have gotten as far as it did today? Do you think the changes made it better or worse or in between? Thoughts?
Steve H.:
1) Mr. Gresham has/had next to no influence over the creative process behind the films. You're better off arguing that point, rather than going on about the adaptation process. But, since you did…
2) As Dylan states, "More like the books" doesn't automatically mean "include everything". It means… I don't know… more like the books. Of that spirit. Recognizable as. Respectful of. Not necessarily "word-for-word".
3) Changes are not *always* necessary for a successful literary adaptation. There is no blueprint for how to adapt a work of art to a different medium. I can cite several examples of well-known novels that were, for all intents and purposes, seamless, direct translations to the screen, with no, or very minor, adjustments. It is true, though, that changes are SOMETIMES necessary. It DEPENDS on the source material, and of the writer to have faith IN the source material.
4) "Changes" are not, necessarily, anything to object to, even for a "book purist" as myself. BAD changes are. 'Prince Caspian' was a fine film, with (mostly) necessary and logical alterations to the story. I didn't like everything about it, but Adamson's overall vision resulted in a very passably entertaining adaptation of a pretty… staid… book.
5) The changes made to 'Dawn Treader', conversely, resulted in an insulting adaptation, and a shockingly poor product of the cinema.
The vast majority of us, I believe, are well aware of the constraints involved in going from the printed page to the big screen. We do not object to changes. We object to stupid, disrespectful, arrogant changes that result in a translation that bears no resemblance, in spirit or deed, to the stories we love.
Good changes = happy/content
Stupid changes = sad/angry
The green mist was never in the books. Dark Island disappearing was in the UK edition, but he changed that in the American revision. I think it's better the second way.
VDT was not in the same spirit of the book, was not aneccessarily respectful adaption of Lewis' work, and it was barely recognizable as an adaption of the book. Its not the "Oh VDT had a ship called the Dawn Treader, that makes it recognizable" excuse for the movie. It had so much added on that it just simply was not the book Voyage of the Dawn Treader.
Really? Did you like the special effects? I though it was sort of lousy. 🙂 The sea serpent….looked pretty…fake?
Anhun: I think in the book it DOES say that the dark Island disappeared. Even in the US version…I'll have to check that out