Lewis knew what all lovers of Great Books know--that of all their many qualities, literary, theological, and philosophical masterpieces have the potential to expand the human soul. Lewis's case against derivative works, instead of the primary works, is extremely insightful. He was sensitive to the fact that most readers are intimidated by the classics.
When Lewis says, "The simplest student will be able to understand, if not all, yet a very great deal of what Plato said; but hardly anyone can understand some modern books on Platonism," I would agree completely. My experience of teaching Great Books to college Freshmen and Sophomores bears this out entirely. Many of them have even noted that Plato is considerably easy compared to the modern "experts" offering commentary on Plato. I suspect one could say the same about the Bible.
Of the many intellectual nuggets Lewis has in this brief essay, it is the point about reading older books more often than newer books that people often site. In truth, being the kind of person that does read more old books than new books, I would agree again. There is something fresh, new, distinct, rich, and vibrant with the old books in contrast to most of the new books, especially since most new books are in some way or manner derived from the old books. One point that Lewis makes on why we should read older books more often than new books is that the new books are still being tested. In other words, the jury is still out on the real value of these works. If we only have so many hours in a day, and so many days in a year, and so many years of our life, then the big question is what should we spend time reading?
After reading this essay, we can better recognize that we need books that help us to see the mistakes of our own era, and modern books are too much a part of our own error. Modern books tend to increase our myopia of our own age. Lewis was not ignorant of the past. As a brilliant literary historian, he recognizes that the past had its own set of problems. However, these problems were not always the same as our own, and by virtue of being different problems, it gives us both an insight into that age and into our own age.
On an autobiographical note, it was actually C. S. Lewis's deep admiration for George McDonald that prompted me to write a doctoral dissertation on MacDonald's shorter fairy tales. I was so struck by Lewis's love of an author who preceded him and so keenly affected him, that I needed to read this author. Knowing MacDonald's works has indeed heightened my appreciation of Lewis's works, especially Lewis's The Great Divorce.
In this fine essay on books, Lewis makes a brief and yet persuasive case of the historical reality and the value of what has been associated with Lewis's name--"mere Christianity." "Measured against the ages, 'mere Christianity' turns out to be no insipid interdenominational transparency, but something positive, self-consistent, and inexhaustible."
Further proof of C.S. Lewis's respect for older great books is that this piece is now part of the forward for a great, old writing by Athanasius. Lewis admits that when he first read Athanasius's The Incarnation, it change the way he thought entirely about Jesus and the Church. It would do us all well at this point to track down some old writings of George McDonald and Athanasius, and read some of the older Great Books that can help change the way we see the world we live in and be more diligent in being faithful in that new world.
