Scan barcode
bshyng's review against another edition
challenging
funny
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
kellynicole9's review against another edition
3.0
I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this book— 3.5 stars seems fair but I think I would have enjoyed reading this in high school English class
ribetzi's review against another edition
funny
hopeful
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
chrissych's review against another edition
3.0
Reading this book as a sceptic, humanist, and atheist was an interesting experience. It is a veiled series of sermons, reshaped as instructive letters from a senior to a junior devil on how a good tempter should prevent Christians from living their lives according to 'true' doctrines of faith and good, pushing them instead toward the pale (and sinful) facsimiles to which most humans subscribe.
Where the book criticized quietly shameful facets of modern Christianity, evoking caricatures we've all encountered in real life-- the snobbish cliques of fierce denominational division, the man who behaves charitably only to brag about it-- it is brilliant. CS Lewis was a terribly sharp man, and his capacity to call out societal foolishness and intellectually seek the heart of his belief system should be admirable to even non-believers.
Where the book strikes instead at the more general nature of humanity, from the attitude that we harbour vices and flaws which devils seek to draw out, it is unfortunately more hit-and-miss. His views on sexuality, for instance, are dreadfully naive and plainly endemic to an era in which shame and guilt were commonplace accompaniments to sex without marriage, fetish, lust, and so on. I like to imagine we now live in a world where judgments on these counts are considered quaint, and that, given the option of a socially-pressured guilt or a peaceful acceptance of universal natural urges, the enlightened among our own contemporaries would have no trouble seeing the latter as more conducive to societal happiness. On the other hand, in talking about the folly of young lovers believing that love is all a long-term commitment needs to sustain itself, for example, he again hits the nail on the head.
Yet other parts of the book lay out plainly some of the more horrifying assumptions required of a belief in a benevolent god. Young death, the senior devil for instance suggests, is the Christian god's way of protecting his favourite animals from decades of pressure under devils and temptation. Disasters and war are his way of uniting survivors in charity. Acts of benevolence, all. These arguments are some of the more repugnant elements of Christianity, and it was distasteful to read about them and imagine a young child being given this book (from a popular children's fantasy writer!) and drinking every word as non-fiction.
In one of the more interesting parts of the book, Lewis co-opts logic and rationality as routes not to scepticism or unbelief, but to a deeper acceptance of the Christian god. It's fascinating insofar as this clearly intelligent man was able to convince himself that rational thought about the nature of mankind, followed through to its conclusions, could only deepen one's (irrational) faith. The two were not inconsistent to his worldview, or at least it seemed they weren't until at a later point the topic of science was broached-- at which point the senior devil's joy in promoting science and psychology as tools to push souls off-course underscored the caveat in Lewis's view: rationality leads to faith when applied introspectively, sinful skepticism when applied observationally.
The lesson taken from this helped me to better appreciate the root of very intelligent walking contradictions, and intensified my recently growing resolve that debating over skepticism and religion (in the vein of Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, or Grayling) is destined to be fruitless so long as internal and external consistency can be confused-- in short, always. My own time is better spent promoting the external consistency of observation and scientific method, than in appealing to the internally consistent rationality of irrational people.
Where the book criticized quietly shameful facets of modern Christianity, evoking caricatures we've all encountered in real life-- the snobbish cliques of fierce denominational division, the man who behaves charitably only to brag about it-- it is brilliant. CS Lewis was a terribly sharp man, and his capacity to call out societal foolishness and intellectually seek the heart of his belief system should be admirable to even non-believers.
Where the book strikes instead at the more general nature of humanity, from the attitude that we harbour vices and flaws which devils seek to draw out, it is unfortunately more hit-and-miss. His views on sexuality, for instance, are dreadfully naive and plainly endemic to an era in which shame and guilt were commonplace accompaniments to sex without marriage, fetish, lust, and so on. I like to imagine we now live in a world where judgments on these counts are considered quaint, and that, given the option of a socially-pressured guilt or a peaceful acceptance of universal natural urges, the enlightened among our own contemporaries would have no trouble seeing the latter as more conducive to societal happiness. On the other hand, in talking about the folly of young lovers believing that love is all a long-term commitment needs to sustain itself, for example, he again hits the nail on the head.
Yet other parts of the book lay out plainly some of the more horrifying assumptions required of a belief in a benevolent god. Young death, the senior devil for instance suggests, is the Christian god's way of protecting his favourite animals from decades of pressure under devils and temptation. Disasters and war are his way of uniting survivors in charity. Acts of benevolence, all. These arguments are some of the more repugnant elements of Christianity, and it was distasteful to read about them and imagine a young child being given this book (from a popular children's fantasy writer!) and drinking every word as non-fiction.
In one of the more interesting parts of the book, Lewis co-opts logic and rationality as routes not to scepticism or unbelief, but to a deeper acceptance of the Christian god. It's fascinating insofar as this clearly intelligent man was able to convince himself that rational thought about the nature of mankind, followed through to its conclusions, could only deepen one's (irrational) faith. The two were not inconsistent to his worldview, or at least it seemed they weren't until at a later point the topic of science was broached-- at which point the senior devil's joy in promoting science and psychology as tools to push souls off-course underscored the caveat in Lewis's view: rationality leads to faith when applied introspectively, sinful skepticism when applied observationally.
The lesson taken from this helped me to better appreciate the root of very intelligent walking contradictions, and intensified my recently growing resolve that debating over skepticism and religion (in the vein of Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, or Grayling) is destined to be fruitless so long as internal and external consistency can be confused-- in short, always. My own time is better spent promoting the external consistency of observation and scientific method, than in appealing to the internally consistent rationality of irrational people.
alexangelas's review against another edition
4.0
First read in 2017. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Second read in 2019. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
I am the first to admit, I don’t understand satire. Not one bit. So I don’t know what people mean when they say this is satire, I just know it’s an entertaining book that really makes you think about your actions.
It’s a classic for sure.
Second read in 2019. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
I am the first to admit, I don’t understand satire. Not one bit. So I don’t know what people mean when they say this is satire, I just know it’s an entertaining book that really makes you think about your actions.
It’s a classic for sure.
andyhendricks's review against another edition
4.0
You die and you die and then you are beyond death.
juushika's review against another edition
3.0
An experienced demon writes letters to his nephew, advising his work as the personal corrupter of a Christian convert. This is fantastic in audio (I listened to Joss Ackland's reading); the narrator so well inhabits that deceptively charming, incisively cruel personality. The epistolary format is expressive; there's engaging narrative tricks in the interplay between mentor, pupil, and victim, subverting the reader's investment in the speaker and playing with expectations of "good" and "bad" endings. I appreciate the work when read that way: the playfully critical view of humanity's benign and common evils, haunted by the ghost of a horror story. I don't know that the text holds up well to more rigorous criticism, or that the social commentary in particular has aged well. Luckily, I don't care. I'm not Lewis's intended audience and find no benefit in closer reading.
oracleofdusk's review against another edition
5.0
I loved this book. I'd dabbled with C.S. Lewis' books in the past but never that seriously. In a theology class, we had read an excerpt of this book, and I decided to look more into it.
This book is amazing. It's not the typical piece of Christian literature. It makes you see things about yourself you need to see but rather not. The most common mistakes we make as Christiands are held up for us to see as well as the most basic traits of our religion we overlook.
I'll say it again. I love this book. I really do.
This book is amazing. It's not the typical piece of Christian literature. It makes you see things about yourself you need to see but rather not. The most common mistakes we make as Christiands are held up for us to see as well as the most basic traits of our religion we overlook.
I'll say it again. I love this book. I really do.
coffeedog14's review against another edition
dark
funny
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
slow-paced
3.0
I read this once as a young and struggling christian kid, and found it very enlightening - it felt like somebody thinking about all this stuff as much as I was! Someone who maybe had a few more of the answers about things.
Looking back now as someone who doesn't believe, I can see alot more of the... red flags. Opinions and beliefs that I didn't understand or shrugged off as a youth, but not stand out to me as problematic, harmful, and in some cases the foundational beliefs of modern alt-right murder cults. Woops!
Looking past that however, the book is pretty fun for a series of mini-sermons. Putting it in the mouth of a Demon gives it just enough distance and amusement that they don't really *feel* like sermons, which makes it funny that C.S. Lewis said that he didn't really like writing the book because he had to put himself in the demon's mindset. My man, you finally found an interesting way to teach people some of these things, and you're too boring to handle it! Amazing.
I would say, go into this one with open eyes (it was written by a mid-century conservative christian - he's not like the *worst* but some weird stuff comes out) - but if you can look past that it's a quick read with a fun gimmick that it uses well.
Looking back now as someone who doesn't believe, I can see alot more of the... red flags. Opinions and beliefs that I didn't understand or shrugged off as a youth, but not stand out to me as problematic, harmful, and in some cases the foundational beliefs of modern alt-right murder cults. Woops!
Looking past that however, the book is pretty fun for a series of mini-sermons. Putting it in the mouth of a Demon gives it just enough distance and amusement that they don't really *feel* like sermons, which makes it funny that C.S. Lewis said that he didn't really like writing the book because he had to put himself in the demon's mindset. My man, you finally found an interesting way to teach people some of these things, and you're too boring to handle it! Amazing.
I would say, go into this one with open eyes (it was written by a mid-century conservative christian - he's not like the *worst* but some weird stuff comes out) - but if you can look past that it's a quick read with a fun gimmick that it uses well.