http://nhw.livejournal.com/1069727.ht...

This book is overtly attempting to recast its great model in terms suitable for an intellectual Anglican of the 1920s or 1930s. Lewis's metaphors are even less subtle than Bunyan's (at one point he supplies footnotes so that we can be sure which philosophers he is parodying). He has more of a sense of humour than Bunyan, which is something. But I rather felt the whole book was a series of mots d'escalier after losing the argument over dinner at High Table; poor Bunyan was in prison for years, which is a rather different matter. It is fortunate that the first chapter is a rather effective skewering of smug Anglicans, otherwise it would have been difficult to take at all. ( )

This is an echo of Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, an early 20th Century allegory of a soul's journey through the spiritual dangers of the world to the eternal paradise of Heaven. It was a bit more readable than Bunyan's tale, but still a bit over my head. Mr. Lewis was and is quite more literate than I. Another stumbling block is that the story reflects the intellectual and philosophical world of the 1920s and 1930s. Would the tale be written today, I'm sure the characters would have to be changed. Or maybe not. Either way, it made for an interesting read.
--J. ( )

I find this both stimulating for its ideas and
interesting for its imagery. I often ask myself
whether I am more Mr. Broad or Mr. Angular. ( )

great review of CS Lewis' experiences and thoughts with the things that lead us away from Christianity. With each one there is found lacking substance. for me my favorite piece in the book is the discussion with the Hermit and the afterword by Lewis. ( )

An autobiographical, alligorical tale of one man's philosophical journy through life. Told with a painful honesty about his frailty.