Checking with Russian on CSL - wiki

Hans-Georg Lundahl

status, sharing link

Could it be, some cultivate misconceptions about our dear author, on purpose?

Check this:

New blog on the kid : How Russians Might be Seeing C. S. Lewis ...
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2019/02/how-russians-might-be-seeing-c-s-lewis.html

Aa Aa

I’m really sorry, but it’s fairly strange to draw conclusions from a poorly translated Wiki page. CS Lewis is very much admired among Russians, he’s one of the not so many non-Orthodox writers whose books you will always find in an Orthodox book shop.

I

Hans-Georg Lundahl Fine, but it seems some of the wikipedians are trying to draw down on that admiration.

I used google translate phrase per phrase since I don't know Russian.

[II]

[Hans-Georg Lundahl]

[Also, are Orthodox all that much into intellectual defense of Christianity?]

[Answers below given in FB under I, not II, so II is put here, since written before these answers, but III and IV were added after the reply by Aa Aa, they go down as real new subthreads.]

Aa Aa

Hans-Georg Lundahl google translate can be very misleading. I’m not a theologian, so I don’t want to take part in a discussion on a subject that is not in my field of competence. If you are really interested in what the Orthodox think of CS Lewis I would advise to read Kallistos Ware’s “C.S. Lewis: an anonymous Orthodox?”.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Your answer is wrong on so many points.

Sorry, I overreacted, three is not "so many".

"google translate can be very misleading."

Much less so if you take it sentence by sentence and even smaller clause by smaller clause, as in phrase by phrase. If someone knows CSL's biography, one can see which bits are covered and which bits are not covered.

In paragraphs leading up to those translated, I found this, you are very free to correct the google translate if it is misleading:

В 1924 он начал преподавать философию в колледже университета.

In 1924 he began teaching philosophy at a university college.

В 1925 был избран членом научного сообщества и начал преподавать английскую литературу в колледже Магдалины, где оставался на протяжении 29 лет, вплоть до 1954 года.

In 1925 he was elected a member of the scientific community and began teaching English literature at Magdalen College, where he remained for 29 years, until 1954.

In other words, his being teacher of philosophy for one year is NOT brought in as anything other than a piece of biography. That is had enormous importance for his eventual (involuntary) conversion to Theism (one year before that to Christianity) is not covered.

"I’m not a theologian, so I don’t want to take part in a discussion on a subject that is not in my field of competence."

Where was theology as such even brought in?

C. S. Lewis, you might be interested to know, was also not a theologian, and he did not share your "competentialist" prejudice on the matter.

The fact is : C. S. Lewis was highly intellectual.

The other fact is : this is not shown at all for C. S. Lewis' Christianity in the article.

"If you are really interested in what the Orthodox think of CS Lewis I would advise to read Kallistos Ware’s “C.S. Lewis: an anonymous Orthodox?”"

How many Russians read Kallistos Ware?

He is episcopating in Great Britain, and he is also not in the Russian but in the Byzantine jurisdiction.

My post is concerned with what Russians, in a country that came out of Communism in 1990 (or one supposed so) are perceiving C. S. Lewis.

III

Hans-Georg Lundahl

William O'Flaherty, these tidbits from that Russian wiki are for you to analyse whether goof or bad in biography, supposing the translation is correct or tolerable, and Aa Aa, you are very welcome to comment on the quality of translation, just three phrases:

Именно в это время он утратил свою детскую веру и стал атеистом, начал интересоваться мифологией и оккультизмом[8].

It was at this time that he lost his childhood faith and became an atheist, became interested in mythology and the occult [8].

Пережитые ужасы войны утвердили его в атеизме.

Experienced horrors of war established him in atheism.

После обращения в христианство, он начал интересоваться христианской теологией и отошёл от языческого мистицизма кельтов[16].

After converting to Christianity, he became interested in Christian theology and withdrew from the Celtic pagan mysticism [16].

• 1) was mythology and the occult really contemporary?
• 2) was CSL really ditching Celtic mythology along with Yeats' interest in Magic?
• 3) Was C. S. Lewis genuinely horrified by war, and did it affect his atheism one way or the other?

It IS after all some time since I read Surprised by Joy.

Alexander J. Wei

Hans-Georg Lundahl I would say that he always LIKED mythology, but he didn't believe in it. He was bemused when he made the acquaintance of Yeats and realized that the great man actually believed in the existence of fairies, much as Arthur Conan Doyle did.

Hans-Georg Lundahl As for the War, there was no discernible influence on his atheism. He was to all appearances, a complete atheist before and the War neither increased or decreased that.

As for whether he might have subconsciously have remained a believer, so thought not, but interestingly, his brother believes that he never completely lost his faith. Warren Lewis was a good man, but I would tend to believe CS Lewis over his brother.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Alexander J. Wei as to the first, I totally agree, but the question was more, was the interest in mythology contemporary with that in the occult?

The Ukrainean wiki lumps both together as "Pagan mysticism" and I have some difficulty in seeing C. S. Lewis renouncing the enjoyment of mythology as literature.

Wonder how bemused he would be by meeting me, I don't know whether fairies, as distinct from men (bewitched or not), angels and demons exist, but I am fairly (!) sure fairy appearances occur. So was Chesterton btw.

As to mythology, I think Theogony is a fairly worthless substitute for Genesis 1, but Iliad and Odyssey (sometimes also labelled mythology) are fairly accurate histories. Like, if we have some latitude with anachronism in arms and with omission (a very glaring one) of Hittites.

I exactly thought so, the war did not influence his atheism, and he pretty much enjoyed it (not barracks, but action in field, like a whistling bullet and thinking "This is war. This is what Homer wrote about").

I think some Russians were eager to shoehorn him into the mold of politically correct Erich Maria Remarque, when the war part of Surprised by Joy is even more "war is not the worst there is" than In Stahlgewittern by Jünger.

Alexander J. Wei "As for whether he might have subconsciously have remained a believer, so thought not, but interestingly, his brother believes that he never completely lost his faith."

So, there was at least a source for it, even if not the very best?

I agree on preferring CSL's own account.

Alexander J. Wei

Hans-Georg Lundahl There is a source, but I don't know where exactly I saw it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

No problem.

Alexander J. Wei

Hans-Georg Lundahl As to fairy appearances, I have never seen anything like them, and tend to discount them. That, of course, is only anecdotal, proves nothing, and only speaks of my mindset.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I haven't seen them either, nor miracles, nor wars breaking out.

Alexander J. Wei

Ah! Well there I have a distinction. I believe in miracles, or perhaps don't disbelieve in them, because they are attested in the Bible. The Bible says nothing about fairies. I don't believe in stories about fairies as I do about the Bible.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Before believing Holy Bible, I believe history. Not above, but before.

This means, I need to give some credit for reliability to those recording it, primary witnesses.

Some of these have sighted fairies.

Note, I said I believe fairy sightings occur, I did not say fairies were sth distinct from the beings we see in the Bible, angels, men, devils.

Also, there is a passage saying "the hairy ones shall dance" and it is disputed whether it means:

• satyrs / fauns shall dance
• anatomically normal, but hairy people shall dance
• devils disguised as satyrs / fauns shall dance
• pagan idols depicting satyrs / fauns shall "dance" as they are dashed to pieces.

Also, one saint saw a Centaur, and did not decide on whether it was a creature of God or a diabolic apparition.

"I did not say fairies were sth distinct from the beings we see in the Bible, angels, men, devils." - Note, I did also not say the reverse. As, they weren't.

Alexander J. Wei

Hans-Georg Lundahl I see. I do know that people have reported seeing fairies, but i dont count that as history, while i do believe that wars started. I could, of course, be very wrong about that

Hans-Georg Lundahl

" I do know that people have reported seeing fairies, but i dont count that as history,"

History = what has been reported by men.

Note, history is not always truth. There is false history.

Alexander J. Wei

Hans-Georg Lundahl It is and it isn't. History does consist of reports, as mediated through historians. There are many reports, some of which are assigned very low credence. In addition to fairies, there are stories of aliens, dragons, various cryptozoia, etc.

Yes, just like science or theology, history is a human pursuit that is subject to human frailty.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"History does consist of reports, as mediated through historians."

No, historians are assessing history, not making it.

Sometimes our access to reports is mediated by historiographers, since original individual reports are lost, even so, the historiographers are not producing, just mediating, history. If there are reports they systematically leave out (like a 70's historiographer leaving out UFO sightings) they are suppressing history. Not making a purer one.

" there are stories of aliens,"

As credible as fairies, and both could in many cases (not saying all) be demonic.

CMI : Aliens in your bedroom?
by Mike Matthews | This article is from
Creation 27(2):36–41, March 2005
https://creation.com/aliens-in-your-bedroom

"dragons, various cryptozoia"

Cd in many cases be "surviving fossils".

Viking dragons probably Dimetrodon grandis, Amerindian thunderbirds probably pterosaurs, Nessie could be a plesiosaur, or a series of surviving such, and two African cryptozoa seem to be sauropods. Mokele mbembe and Jobar. The latter talked of in vicinity of a sauropod fossil classed as Jobaria.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Anyway, thank you for helping to show how Russian wikipedians have indeed given a false history of C S Lewis on more than one point!

IV

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I checked Bielorussian and Ukrainean wikis.

Bielorussian one was clean but very jejune. Both avoided speculations about Jane Moore.

Here are some pearls from Ukrainean one:

1) Ukraine had a praiseworthy actual argument from Lewis:

In 1961, having heard the statement of Yuri Gagarin that "he had not seen God in the cosmos," Lewis replied briefly: "With the same success, Hamlet could search for Shakespeare in the attic of his own castle."

2) Translation issues for AI ...

"When Clive was 4 years old, his dog Jacksy shot down a car."

Journalistic principle, car runs over dog, no news, dog runs over car, news. As long as everyone in the car was safe, this would perhaps have been preferrable to what actually happened.

"Soon, the school was closed due to lack of students, and the director of the school Robert Kapron 'Oldies' was dropped into the madhouse."

Sounds like the madhouse is a kind of oubliette.

"After college, Lewis took private lessons from William Kirkpatrick, a former director of the college, Lurgan, who was still taught by his father."

Kirkpatrick still taught by Albert James, not the other way round ...? Translator seems to have some issues distinguishing subject from object.

"After graduating from school in 1917, she entered Oxford University College, but soon dropped out of studies and volunteered to the front."

I like the "dropped out of studies" part.

"In 1918, after the injury, he was demobilized and returned to the university where he graduated from the studio."

Where is the studio he graduated from? Decca? Hollywood?

"On November 22, the same year, the writer died without surviving a week before his anniversary."

Wonder how many survive dying ...

3) Real issues of content, perhaps:

"Батько, людина похмура і нелагідна, у 1908 році, відразу після смерті матері, віддав його у закриту школу Віньярд подалі від дому."

"Father, a man gloomy and weak, in 1908, immediately after the death of his mother, he gave him to the closed school of Vignard away from home."

Wait, obviously refers to his being heartbroken after death of wife.

"Його новими інтересами стали міфологія та містика."

"His new interests were mythology and mysticism."

Again, as on Russian, were his first interests in mythology contemporary to the desire to dabble in magic?

"У 1923 році отримав ступінь бакалавра, а згодом — магістра. Став викладачем філології."

"In 1923 received a bachelor's degree, and later - a master's degree. Became a teacher of philology."

I checked, Ukrainean says філології and not філоcофії!

"У 1931 році в житті Льюїса відбулася світоглядна зміна: він усвідомлено став християнином."

"In 1931, in the life of Lewis, a world-wide change took place: he consciously became a Christian."

As, he had been a Christian unconsciously before?

[See above, under III]

V

S LaV

I haven't had time to respond to this until today. I read the Wikipedia article in Russian and to me, the unbalanced or biased part, if you will, has more to do with them leaving out most of the information about how Lewis contributed and his influence, rather than what is said in these parts that are questionable, like the relationship with Mrs. Moore. However, it must be remembered about the Russian church: there was never really a reformation or counter-reformation there and the oppression of believers also had an effect on whether people think as intellectually-critically or value things like apologetics, the way we do, especially we who like Lewis. The basic religious worldview of the Orthodox church and the parts of the gospel that are more particularly valued there are not necessarily what is valued highly in the west, so these differences probably contribute to part of why Lewis is not thought of as more than just another Western Christian/religious writer.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"has more to do with them leaving out most of the information about how Lewis contributed and his influence, rather than what is said in these parts that are questionable"

My impression too.

My impression on Orthos is about the same, and my problem with this is : are they trying to force Westerners to ignore what they ignore. I am for one an Apologist (RC, traddy trad)

S LaV

I haven't time to look into what goes on in the RU Wikipedia, but since it is still Wikipedia, I would assume it functions in the same way as it does here.

Whoever registers and wishes to contribute to the group collaboration--the crowdsourcing-- known as a Wikipedia article will do so and sometimes the push and pushback on various views shown in articles edited and deleted will cause great changes in the text on any given Wikipedia article. Over time, groups of editors have come forth to serve as moderators for articles to bring balance to and to improve Wikipedia's accuracy and validity and especially this is true about those articles which get public attention, like those about major figures or controversy, great public interest, scandal, political or rhetorical impact, etc.

As you could see, some articles will not have as much interest as others. Those topics with multiple people writing articles will have more of the push back of edits and deletes, and those with less interest, much less or no push-pull to sort out the balance in the points of information. For example, if you want to write in English about an American politician, many people will want to write and take a position on Wikipedia, causing a great deal of back and forth to the point that the article will need upper-level editorial attention and even become locked for further public edits. However, you could see how an article with less interest (or about a topic less interesting to people in language-speaking areas outside of the original topic) might have only one author or very few edits. For the most part, attention to any one topic or individual will be most active within the articles for that person in the language of the country in which the topic or person is important.

Go to the section on editorial changes for any article on Wikipedia and see how many and which changes have taken place to it. This is how the English one works and I would presume it is how the articles work in other languages. The various articles are not computer generated translations of the English pages (Thank God!), although you sometimes can get an option to use translation software to read them (sort of), so as with anything on Wikipedia, you get what you got.

I don't have time to dig into the Russian editorial pages and changes, but that is very likely what is going on here and there could possibly have been a more balanced version in the article on Lewis in the past.

All of that leaves out the fact that in the case of the Russian Wikipedia, Mr Putin is in the long line of Russian leaders going back through the communists and the Czars, to want to control all information. He wants and works to reset Iron Curtain control of information, so he probably has set in motion a team of Wikipedia authors working away in their cubicles, "clerks in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth," (from the Wikipedia article, "Winston Smith") to rewrite everything according to his purposes. In that case, there are bigger worries than what does the Wikipedia article on CS Lewis say.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"Whoever registers and wishes to contribute to the group collaboration--the crowdsourcing-- known as a Wikipedia article will do so and sometimes the push and pushback on various views shown in articles edited and deleted will cause great changes in the text on any given Wikipedia article."

Actually, if you do not register, your contribution will be credited as per your computer's id (whatever that is, forgot the term).

Would you, as speaking Russian, try to edit some sense into the article?

As I don't speak Russian, I can't!

"in the case of the Russian Wikipedia, Mr Putin is in the long line of Russian leaders going back through the communists and the Czars, to want to control all information."

Can a Russian wikipedia entry be edited internationally?

I think so.

S LaV

I should think so because Wikipedia is hosted online, not owned by particular countries. As far as if I wanted to write any edits to the entry. I would have to have the time to do it, which I do not have right now.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Ok, whenever you have time, or any other Russian speaker you can contact.

For me, what Russians and Ukraineans think of CSL is a problem:

• 1) I am known to be a CSL fan;
• 2) I have more than a quarter of my readers (all blogs together) in Russia and Ukraine.

Since all blogs together are less than 2 million, more than half a million is more than a quarter.

Russia 329226
682 + 27417 + 5616 + 1182 + 364 + 8929 + 28445 + 32276 + 2290 + 2902 + 10631 + 325 + 2674 + 7495 + 669 + 26439 + 146 + 144 + 1192 + 931 + 579 + 550 + 740 + 639 + 53 + 1988 + 3368 + 3372 + 10992 + 48858 + 9765 + 9928 + 7090 + 4544 + 10477 + 336 + 19731 + 765 + 23 + 1028 + 33651

Ukraine 185964
15962 + 672 + 12 + 697 + 9032 + 129 + 3480 + 2088 + 2252 + 5723 + 3606 + 43565 + 4041 + 1706 + 3222 + 645 + 11 + 182 + 294 + 315 + 348 + 385 + 1046 + 13 + 17882 + 270 + 3280 + 1254 + 100 + 5264 + 1570 + 24548 + 172 + 2433 + 325 + 3739 + 13313 + 10897 + 1491

185964 + 329226 = 515190 (more then half a million, more than a quarter)

Some funny things about arranging readerships:

France : 77763 for one blog. (777 with decimal multiples is 21*37 with decimal multiples, and 63 is 21*3, have seen a lot of multiples of 21).
France : 666 for another.

Speaking of "club 21" - this post had 42 readers prior to this last edit: [link here]