Scan barcode
bluereen's review against another edition
4.0
“What began the change was the very writing itself. Let no one lightly set about such a work. Memory, once waked, will play the tyrant.”
“Dont you think the things people are most ashamed of are the things they can’t help?”
“The change which the writing wrought in me .. was only a beginning— only to prepare me for the gods’ surgery. They used my pen to probe my wound.”
“Did I hate him, then? Indeed, I believe so. A love like that can grow to be nine-tenths hatred and still call itself love.”
“There must, whether the gods see it or not, be something great in the mortal soul. For suffering, it seems, is infinite, and our capacity without limit.”
“I saw well why the gods do not speak to us openly, nor let us answer. Till that word can be dug out of us, why should they hear the babble that we think we mean? How can they meet us face to face till we have faces?”
***
Oh the wisdom of C.S. Lewis! I was such a fan of the Chronicles of Narnia growing up, but Till We Have Faces marks my first reading of his. It’s a retelling of Psyche and Cupid’s story, but from the lens of the former’s embittered older sister, Orual.
Two kinds of love are juxtaposed in this novel—obsessive and unconditional. We follow Orual’s account of her accusation against the gods. She argues they have been unjust to humans, and most especially, to her. But as the story unfolds, we see her own folly. Her mistreatment of Psyche, believing all she had done was motivated by pure love for her sister.
Rich in metaphor, allusion, and imagery, this is widely regarded as Lewis’ best work. Yet it’s seemingly obscured by his other works.
I thought the ending was fitting, especially with how he decided on Orual’s fate. More than an exploration of love, family, and sacrifice, this is one of humility and what it means to truly peer deep into one’s own soul—only to find that we are not as blameless as we thought ourselves to be.
**
Being a Christian myself, Orual’s character reminded of Matthew 7:3-5, which says, “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?”
Overall, an enlightening read.
“Dont you think the things people are most ashamed of are the things they can’t help?”
“The change which the writing wrought in me .. was only a beginning— only to prepare me for the gods’ surgery. They used my pen to probe my wound.”
“Did I hate him, then? Indeed, I believe so. A love like that can grow to be nine-tenths hatred and still call itself love.”
“There must, whether the gods see it or not, be something great in the mortal soul. For suffering, it seems, is infinite, and our capacity without limit.”
“I saw well why the gods do not speak to us openly, nor let us answer. Till that word can be dug out of us, why should they hear the babble that we think we mean? How can they meet us face to face till we have faces?”
***
Oh the wisdom of C.S. Lewis! I was such a fan of the Chronicles of Narnia growing up, but Till We Have Faces marks my first reading of his. It’s a retelling of Psyche and Cupid’s story, but from the lens of the former’s embittered older sister, Orual.
Two kinds of love are juxtaposed in this novel—obsessive and unconditional. We follow Orual’s account of her accusation against the gods. She argues they have been unjust to humans, and most especially, to her. But as the story unfolds, we see her own folly. Her mistreatment of Psyche, believing all she had done was motivated by pure love for her sister.
Rich in metaphor, allusion, and imagery, this is widely regarded as Lewis’ best work. Yet it’s seemingly obscured by his other works.
I thought the ending was fitting, especially with how he decided on Orual’s fate. More than an exploration of love, family, and sacrifice, this is one of humility and what it means to truly peer deep into one’s own soul—only to find that we are not as blameless as we thought ourselves to be.
**
Being a Christian myself, Orual’s character reminded of Matthew 7:3-5, which says, “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?”
Overall, an enlightening read.
maurits's review against another edition
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
penguin_emperor_of_the_north's review against another edition
5.0
I knew this would be dark and far different from Lewis's stuff that I'm more familiar with but I was surprised by how much.
The first part explored Orual's side of the Psyche story, exploring Orual's life before Psyche and her life after Psyche and did a solid job of ginning up sympathy for Orual. But then the second part really shifts the context of the first part. Not enough to make Orual unsympathetic but enough to make Orual and the reader rethink her actions and motivations and cast a more skeptical eye on her suffering martyr persona.
I did find the attitude that the main characters take to the gods throughout the story to be funny in a dark and cynical way. It varies from bemused contempt from the Fox to the King's frustration with their demands to Bardia's reverent fear but nobody likes the gods (the priests of Ungit and the common people might, or at least revere them). In general the main cast just don't like the gods and view them similarly to how I view paying taxes.
For example, on being told the myth of Agamemnon sacrificing his daughter, the King remarks, "That's just like the gods. Drive you to do a thing and then punish you for doing it." And I'm nodding along thinking, "well, he ain't wrong."
Finally, there was one line toward the beginning of the novel that really stuck with me, "The room was full of spirits, and the horror of holiness. (p54)" I like that line, "the horror of holiness". I think it points at a feeling I've had at Mass or Adoration, maybe "awe" would be the more pious term. But Lewis always amazes me with his ability to coin a poignant phrase.
The first part explored Orual's side of the Psyche story, exploring Orual's life before Psyche and her life after Psyche and did a solid job of ginning up sympathy for Orual. But then the second part really shifts the context of the first part. Not enough to make Orual unsympathetic but enough to make Orual and the reader rethink her actions and motivations and cast a more skeptical eye on her suffering martyr persona.
I did find the attitude that the main characters take to the gods throughout the story to be funny in a dark and cynical way. It varies from bemused contempt from the Fox to the King's frustration with their demands to Bardia's reverent fear but nobody likes the gods (the priests of Ungit and the common people might, or at least revere them). In general the main cast just don't like the gods and view them similarly to how I view paying taxes.
For example, on being told the myth of Agamemnon sacrificing his daughter, the King remarks, "That's just like the gods. Drive you to do a thing and then punish you for doing it." And I'm nodding along thinking, "well, he ain't wrong."
Finally, there was one line toward the beginning of the novel that really stuck with me, "The room was full of spirits, and the horror of holiness. (p54)" I like that line, "the horror of holiness". I think it points at a feeling I've had at Mass or Adoration, maybe "awe" would be the more pious term. But Lewis always amazes me with his ability to coin a poignant phrase.
anarose1's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
a favorite forever. i'm in awe every time i read it of Lewis's imagery and stunning prose. his retelling of the classic myth paired with the threads of biblical imagery weaved throughout make for a read that changed so much about how i see myself.
dragonflymorning's review against another edition
4.0
An interesting retelling of the classic Cupid and Psyche story as told by one of her sisters has left me wondering about several angles in the book. It's definitely a story I'd like to revisit and delve deeper into.
mybooksarenovel's review against another edition
5.0
One of the greatest work of Lewis that no one knows about. A retelling of Cupid and Psyche.
sburchart's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Self harm, Toxic relationship, Suicide attempt, and Injury/Injury detail
Minor: Sexism, Death of parent, and War
spenkevich's review against another edition
4.0
‘You are yourself the answer.’
C.S. Lewis, author of the beloved Narnia series, is a firm believer in the power of myth. By adorning ideas into a story, Lewis argued ‘we do not retreat from reality: we rediscover it.’ This is doubly evident in his construction of Till We Have Faces, Lewis’ final novel and the one he considered his best, as Lewis examines many of his theological ideas through a myth narrative, but also allows us to rediscover the joy of older myths such as the story of Cupid and Psyche which provides the bones upon which Lewis builds his story. It makes for an engrossing read that is palatable even for those who don’t subscribe to the Christian mythology that is embedded in Lewis’ retelling. Told from the perspective of the oldest sister, Orual, Till We Have Faces is a moral examination on justice, faith and love, particularly interrogating the dichotomy between selfish versus selfless love as well as divine love. Highly approachable and soothingly written, Lewis’ retelling becomes something far more expansive than the original myth and is a novel that is infectiously enjoyable.
‘I have said that she had no face; but that meant she had a thousand faces.’
In his essay On Three Ways of Writing for Children, C.S. Lewis wrote ‘I now enjoy the fairy tales better than I did in childhood: being now able to put more in, of course, I get more out.’ I feel similarly, having enjoyed them in childhood but have found my interest and enjoyment reinvigorated with a greater intensity as an adult. There are extensive literary theories and techniques and many have written about the moral and psychological aspects in them such as [a:Carl Jung|46159836|Franz M. L. von (Editor) by Carl Gustav Jung|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] who believed fairy tales were a way to study the ‘anatomy of the psyche’ and Jungian psychologist [a:Marie-Louise von Franz|27903|Marie-Louise von Franz|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1633002077p2/27903.jpg] wrote that ‘fairy tales are the purest and simplest expression of collective unconscious psychic processes.’ Alternatively there is [a:Philip Pullman|3618|Philip Pullman|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1614625372p2/3618.jpg] who believes ‘there is no psychology in a fairy tale,’ and instead it is simple repetition on good and bad. For Lewis, as well as [a:J.R.R. Tolkien|656983|J.R.R. Tolkien|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1648968349p2/656983.jpg], they believed fairy tales point us towards faith, with Tolkien once encouraging Lewis to believe in Christianity because it was ‘the fairytale that is really true.’ While I’m not personally religious, for me I see fairy tale stylings as a great way to fold in social criticisms and other messaging in a way that feels epic and imaginative. I’m included to agree with what [a:Jeanette Winterson|9399|Jeanette Winterson|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1561070665p2/9399.jpg] once wrote on that matter:
Lewis has always worked in myth and fairy tales—[a:George MacDonald|2413|George MacDonald|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1201019294p2/2413.jpg] being one of his idols—and even in his mythical world of Narnia we see figures from the Greek myths inhabiting his lands. Till We Have Faces is his most direct immersion in the genre. Drawing from the story of Cupid and Psyche as it is found in [b:The Golden Ass|80081|The Golden Ass|Apuleius|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327654203l/80081._SY75_.jpg|1741202] by [a:Apuleius|7929831|Apuleius|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1396743441p2/7929831.jpg], Lewis sets his tale in the fictional kingdom of Glome in the country Greekland (if you guessed it’s modeled on Hellenistic Greece, you’d be correct). Where in the original myth the older sisters hope to send Pyche to ruin due to jealousy of her, here the tragedy is sparked due to jealousy for Pysche’s love. Told in a first-person narration, Urual’s tale reads as rather confessional, representative of the sacrament of Reconciliation in Christian practices.
Written over a span of 35 years, the story also reflects Lewis’ conversion into Christianity, mirrored through the narrator Urual who’s complaints against the gods were Lewis’ own when he began the tale. The second part, written alongside his wife [a:Joy Davidman|467360|Joy Davidman|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1424056735p2/467360.jpg], affirms his conversion and creates an interesting contrast to his beliefs from his pre-Christian days. Characters such as the Fox, a slave named for his red hair that becomes the three princesses’ teacher, operate within realms of logic and reasoning based in Stoicism, which is juxtaposed with later revelations by Urul which demonstrate Lewis’ belief that ‘Christianity is both a myth and a fact,’ and operates not without logic but beyond it. Lewis is widely beloved in Christian circles (it became evident to me once I was an adult why the Narnia books had been pushed on me so hard as a child), though his theology often draws criticism from these same circles for beliefs such as this (Aslan allowing folks into his kingdom like Emeth who believed in a different god is another Lewis belief I have heard him harshly criticized over). While I’m not really all that into religious messages, I think this novel is still just as enjoyable reading it as a message of self-discovery and positive morality.
But on to the story. Lewis reworks the original myth in fun ways, with Aphrodite represented here as the goddess Ungit and Cupid being the Shadowbrute, a god of the Grey Mountain who is purportedly the son of Ungit. It begins similarly, with Psyche being worshiped by the kingdom for her beauty and a belief that she can heal the sick, which leads to her being sacrificed to the Shadowbrute. The tragedy begins when Urual, unable to see and therefore unable to believe in the Shadowbrute’s invisible palace where Psyche has become his bride, convinces Psyche to betray him and is thereby banished from his kingdom. The notion of faith and the importance of believing without evidence is blatant, with the palace serving as a symbol of divine mystery.
This is central to the novel and one of Urual’s dominant complaints against the gods (which she refers to as ‘divine Surgeons’) is that they do not speak clearly to mortals. She does not yet see how the ambiguity is key to faith, instead frustrated that it leads to mistakes for which the gods punish them. Her brief vision of the palace—and choosing to disbelieve it—is highly symbolic of how she opts for a selfish, earthly love to have Psyche to herself like a possession. There is a clear juxtaposition in the novel of selfish and selfless love, with earthly concerns making love more of a devouring of one another than anything else. ‘Some say the loving and the devouring are all the same thing, ’ Urual is told. When she is Queen, she sees this as devotion to her is something of a sacrifice, even leading to the death of her military counselor, Bardia, who more or less was overworked right into the grave. Urual is rebuked by his widow who tells her ‘I do not believe, I know, that your queenship drank up his blood year by year and ate out his life.’ Urual eventually realizes that it is she who is the devourer:
Urual is not an unsympathetic character however, and we see how she was shaped by the cruelty of her father and her belief in her own ugliness. The veil she wears to hide her face—symbolic of her cutting herself off from humanity as well as hiding her ‘true face’—is donned to hide her ugliness which can be read as more an unconscious belief in her tormented soul than just physical beauty. You wouldn’t be wrong to raise an eyebrow here, as physical beauty (or lack thereof) being a reflection of the soul can be a bit problematic. There is also the awkward element of Urual being treated more ‘like a man’ by her court because she is not sexually desirable (this is coming from the same author who kind of denied Narnia to Susan for being into boys and make-up). But it does lead to the idea that Urual must embrace her own face because the gods cannot ‘meet us face to face till we have faces’
Faces are highly symbolic in general here, with Psyche’s betrayal is that she (through Urual’s direction) attempts to see the gods faces. Mirrors, as well, function symbolically in the story, being used to convince Urual she is not qualified for the god’s love due to her ugliness and she later removes the same mirror as it has become representative to her of her father’s cruelty.
‘I know now, Lord, why you utter no answer. ’
Urual believes ‘the case against [the gods] should be written,’ but when the time comes to confront them she hears her own voice in a new way.
This becomes Lewis’ way of examining divine mystery as part of the whole point in faith. Divine love is intended as all-encompassing, a giving of oneself bare of the veil of self-deceit, and only then can the gods look upon us ‘face to face.’ Possessive love must be denied, and it is only by accepting and, well, confessing, one’s sins can one be cleansed. It gets pretty religious here, but the message is powerful to embrace ourselves even in our flaws and cultivate a self-understanding to do better and do no harm.
This was a wonderful novel, one that it is easy to get lost in as Lewis constructs a world that feels just as magical and engrossing as his Narnia. The title, taken from the line ‘how can they meet us face to face till we have faces?’ was originally intended to be Bareface but Lewis’ editor thought it would sound like a Western. While the editor is probably right, someone should jump on this as a band name. Till We Have Faces has been another fascinating myth retelling in my current obsession with retellings, and one that I have heard all my life cited by others as one of their favorite books. Myths and fairy tales are powerful and can be a lovely way to deliver a message. As [a:Jeanette Winterson|9399|Jeanette Winterson|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1561070665p2/9399.jpg] wrote, ‘they explain the universe while allowing the universe to go on being unexplained,’ and that notion of retaining the mystery is highly representative of Till We Have Faces and Lewis’ belief in ‘the true myth.’ A book well worth reading.
4/5
C.S. Lewis, author of the beloved Narnia series, is a firm believer in the power of myth. By adorning ideas into a story, Lewis argued ‘we do not retreat from reality: we rediscover it.’ This is doubly evident in his construction of Till We Have Faces, Lewis’ final novel and the one he considered his best, as Lewis examines many of his theological ideas through a myth narrative, but also allows us to rediscover the joy of older myths such as the story of Cupid and Psyche which provides the bones upon which Lewis builds his story. It makes for an engrossing read that is palatable even for those who don’t subscribe to the Christian mythology that is embedded in Lewis’ retelling. Told from the perspective of the oldest sister, Orual, Till We Have Faces is a moral examination on justice, faith and love, particularly interrogating the dichotomy between selfish versus selfless love as well as divine love. Highly approachable and soothingly written, Lewis’ retelling becomes something far more expansive than the original myth and is a novel that is infectiously enjoyable.
‘I have said that she had no face; but that meant she had a thousand faces.’
In his essay On Three Ways of Writing for Children, C.S. Lewis wrote ‘I now enjoy the fairy tales better than I did in childhood: being now able to put more in, of course, I get more out.’ I feel similarly, having enjoyed them in childhood but have found my interest and enjoyment reinvigorated with a greater intensity as an adult. There are extensive literary theories and techniques and many have written about the moral and psychological aspects in them such as [a:Carl Jung|46159836|Franz M. L. von (Editor) by Carl Gustav Jung|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] who believed fairy tales were a way to study the ‘anatomy of the psyche’ and Jungian psychologist [a:Marie-Louise von Franz|27903|Marie-Louise von Franz|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1633002077p2/27903.jpg] wrote that ‘fairy tales are the purest and simplest expression of collective unconscious psychic processes.’ Alternatively there is [a:Philip Pullman|3618|Philip Pullman|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1614625372p2/3618.jpg] who believes ‘there is no psychology in a fairy tale,’ and instead it is simple repetition on good and bad. For Lewis, as well as [a:J.R.R. Tolkien|656983|J.R.R. Tolkien|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1648968349p2/656983.jpg], they believed fairy tales point us towards faith, with Tolkien once encouraging Lewis to believe in Christianity because it was ‘the fairytale that is really true.’ While I’m not personally religious, for me I see fairy tale stylings as a great way to fold in social criticisms and other messaging in a way that feels epic and imaginative. I’m included to agree with what [a:Jeanette Winterson|9399|Jeanette Winterson|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1561070665p2/9399.jpg] once wrote on that matter:
’Reason and logic are tools for understanding the world. We need a means of understanding ourselves, too. That is what imagination allows…As explanations of the world, fairy stories tell us what science and philosophy cannot and need not. There are different ways of knowing.’
Lewis has always worked in myth and fairy tales—[a:George MacDonald|2413|George MacDonald|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1201019294p2/2413.jpg] being one of his idols—and even in his mythical world of Narnia we see figures from the Greek myths inhabiting his lands. Till We Have Faces is his most direct immersion in the genre. Drawing from the story of Cupid and Psyche as it is found in [b:The Golden Ass|80081|The Golden Ass|Apuleius|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1327654203l/80081._SY75_.jpg|1741202] by [a:Apuleius|7929831|Apuleius|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1396743441p2/7929831.jpg], Lewis sets his tale in the fictional kingdom of Glome in the country Greekland (if you guessed it’s modeled on Hellenistic Greece, you’d be correct). Where in the original myth the older sisters hope to send Pyche to ruin due to jealousy of her, here the tragedy is sparked due to jealousy for Pysche’s love. Told in a first-person narration, Urual’s tale reads as rather confessional, representative of the sacrament of Reconciliation in Christian practices.
Written over a span of 35 years, the story also reflects Lewis’ conversion into Christianity, mirrored through the narrator Urual who’s complaints against the gods were Lewis’ own when he began the tale. The second part, written alongside his wife [a:Joy Davidman|467360|Joy Davidman|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1424056735p2/467360.jpg], affirms his conversion and creates an interesting contrast to his beliefs from his pre-Christian days. Characters such as the Fox, a slave named for his red hair that becomes the three princesses’ teacher, operate within realms of logic and reasoning based in Stoicism, which is juxtaposed with later revelations by Urul which demonstrate Lewis’ belief that ‘Christianity is both a myth and a fact,’ and operates not without logic but beyond it. Lewis is widely beloved in Christian circles (it became evident to me once I was an adult why the Narnia books had been pushed on me so hard as a child), though his theology often draws criticism from these same circles for beliefs such as this (Aslan allowing folks into his kingdom like Emeth who believed in a different god is another Lewis belief I have heard him harshly criticized over). While I’m not really all that into religious messages, I think this novel is still just as enjoyable reading it as a message of self-discovery and positive morality.
But on to the story. Lewis reworks the original myth in fun ways, with Aphrodite represented here as the goddess Ungit and Cupid being the Shadowbrute, a god of the Grey Mountain who is purportedly the son of Ungit. It begins similarly, with Psyche being worshiped by the kingdom for her beauty and a belief that she can heal the sick, which leads to her being sacrificed to the Shadowbrute. The tragedy begins when Urual, unable to see and therefore unable to believe in the Shadowbrute’s invisible palace where Psyche has become his bride, convinces Psyche to betray him and is thereby banished from his kingdom. The notion of faith and the importance of believing without evidence is blatant, with the palace serving as a symbol of divine mystery.
This is central to the novel and one of Urual’s dominant complaints against the gods (which she refers to as ‘divine Surgeons’) is that they do not speak clearly to mortals. She does not yet see how the ambiguity is key to faith, instead frustrated that it leads to mistakes for which the gods punish them. Her brief vision of the palace—and choosing to disbelieve it—is highly symbolic of how she opts for a selfish, earthly love to have Psyche to herself like a possession. There is a clear juxtaposition in the novel of selfish and selfless love, with earthly concerns making love more of a devouring of one another than anything else. ‘Some say the loving and the devouring are all the same thing, ’ Urual is told. When she is Queen, she sees this as devotion to her is something of a sacrifice, even leading to the death of her military counselor, Bardia, who more or less was overworked right into the grave. Urual is rebuked by his widow who tells her ‘I do not believe, I know, that your queenship drank up his blood year by year and ate out his life.’ Urual eventually realizes that it is she who is the devourer:
‘I was that . . . all-devouring womblike, yet barren, thing. Glome was a web—I the swollen spider, squat at its center, gorged with men’s stolen lives.’
Urual is not an unsympathetic character however, and we see how she was shaped by the cruelty of her father and her belief in her own ugliness. The veil she wears to hide her face—symbolic of her cutting herself off from humanity as well as hiding her ‘true face’—is donned to hide her ugliness which can be read as more an unconscious belief in her tormented soul than just physical beauty. You wouldn’t be wrong to raise an eyebrow here, as physical beauty (or lack thereof) being a reflection of the soul can be a bit problematic. There is also the awkward element of Urual being treated more ‘like a man’ by her court because she is not sexually desirable (this is coming from the same author who kind of denied Narnia to Susan for being into boys and make-up). But it does lead to the idea that Urual must embrace her own face because the gods cannot ‘meet us face to face till we have faces’
Faces are highly symbolic in general here, with Psyche’s betrayal is that she (through Urual’s direction) attempts to see the gods faces. Mirrors, as well, function symbolically in the story, being used to convince Urual she is not qualified for the god’s love due to her ugliness and she later removes the same mirror as it has become representative to her of her father’s cruelty.
‘I know now, Lord, why you utter no answer. ’
Urual believes ‘the case against [the gods] should be written,’ but when the time comes to confront them she hears her own voice in a new way.
‘the complaint was the answer. To have heard myself making it was to be answered. . . . I saw well why the gods do not speak to us openly, nor let us answer. Till that word can be dug out of us, why should they hear the babble that we think we mean?’
This becomes Lewis’ way of examining divine mystery as part of the whole point in faith. Divine love is intended as all-encompassing, a giving of oneself bare of the veil of self-deceit, and only then can the gods look upon us ‘face to face.’ Possessive love must be denied, and it is only by accepting and, well, confessing, one’s sins can one be cleansed. It gets pretty religious here, but the message is powerful to embrace ourselves even in our flaws and cultivate a self-understanding to do better and do no harm.
This was a wonderful novel, one that it is easy to get lost in as Lewis constructs a world that feels just as magical and engrossing as his Narnia. The title, taken from the line ‘how can they meet us face to face till we have faces?’ was originally intended to be Bareface but Lewis’ editor thought it would sound like a Western. While the editor is probably right, someone should jump on this as a band name. Till We Have Faces has been another fascinating myth retelling in my current obsession with retellings, and one that I have heard all my life cited by others as one of their favorite books. Myths and fairy tales are powerful and can be a lovely way to deliver a message. As [a:Jeanette Winterson|9399|Jeanette Winterson|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1561070665p2/9399.jpg] wrote, ‘they explain the universe while allowing the universe to go on being unexplained,’ and that notion of retaining the mystery is highly representative of Till We Have Faces and Lewis’ belief in ‘the true myth.’ A book well worth reading.
4/5
betseywj's review against another edition
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
kk1311's review against another edition
5.0
Going to have to take some time to process this one. Possibly the most profound book I’ve read in some time. Definitely one of the best renditions of a Greek mythological tale I’ve found. I’m kind of blown away by it, but realized that I shouldn’t be, since The Magician’s Nephew is similar and was one I read a thousand times growing up because I loved it so much. I’m just sorry it took me so long to find this one - very underrated. Was waiting for some subversive Christian angle to kick in, knowing Lewis, but it didn’t really, or at least I wasn’t smart enough to notice. I also have to say that this is maybe the best book I’ve read written by a man with a woman narrator. I was sort of stunned by how much he understood about the internal life of women.