Talk:The Great Divorce

message: I tried to make the article more comprehensive, clear, and flowing; as well as to add more facts.  I also felt a need not to completely trash the efforts of the person(s) who did the earlier versions, and tried hard not to revise or rearrange any more material than absolutely necessary.
I would have been much more comfortable omitting the suggestion of it's being a 'Christian' work at all: because first, because it is not theological, as pointed out in the article; and second, because we do not normally refer to classic works much more openly and specifically Christian, such as Shakespeare's "Measure for Measure" or even more so Malory's "Le Morte d'Arthur", as such; and indeed to  most people the adjective "Christian" automatically implies that it's subject can not possibly be of any interest to them, which is certainly untrue of "The Great Divorce".
Finally the concept of an afterlife, it's circumstances varying with the moral quality of the individual, is common to almost all religions, and even some non-religions:
:"Traditional Spiritualists state that they are not necessarily Christians. While they view Jesus as a great teacher and likely a medium, they do not see belief in his teachings as required in order to enter the afterlife."
:-from the Wikipedia article "Spiritualism".
Cspalletta 19:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I've just changed the second sentence from:
:Although not one of Lewis' better-known works, many perceptive readers consider it to be one of his finest
to:
:Although less renowned than Narnia and the Space Trilogy, it is considered one of his finest works of fiction by many Lewis fans
which is less self-congratulatory (at least in my case), more encyclopedic and has subject-verb agreement. On the other hand, it's a bit weasel-wordy. I'm sure someone can improve on this.
Cheers, CWC(talk) 17:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede 

message: :Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg

message: I thought the 'grey town' Lewis first finds himself in represented more of a purgatory. Don't want to edit the article with this idea, though, because I'm not sure if I'm right about it.
:I'm not sure if your inquiry has been resolved or not yet; "The Grey Town" in this Novel is symbolic of Hell.  And it remains as Hell unless the occupant leaves, should the occupant leave then "The Grey Town" was always Purgatory to that person.  So if it represents Purgatory, it also represents Hell, as it was shown, some of the visitors simply returned home and likely didn't return.Sonalchagi (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Grey town" 

message: :Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg

message: I think that the sentence about primary and secondary sources should be changed to remove that distinction because a "secondary source" is material that is written to discuss the primary sources. For example, if I were to write a biography of C.S. Lewis, I would use his writings and correspondence as "primary sources." "Primary sources" would also be what people who knew him wrote about him as his contemporaries. Biographies and books written about him by scholars would be considered "secondary sources" like my own hypothetical biography. One could say that Dante, Milton, Bunyan, et al. had a direct relationship to Lewis's storyline because he used concepts and themes from them. In his preface he mentions an American sci-fi writer, whose work Lewis had read, who used the idea that the elements a time traveller encountered when he went back to the past would be dangerous to him (hard as Lewis makes the grass and the elements of the "Valley of the Shadow of Life"). Jeremy Taylor, Prudentius, and MacDonald are alluded to in the story, and may have also been direct sources. The point I am making is that the concept of primary and secondary sources here is misapplied.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary and [[Secondary source]]s 

message: Why does the article keep hammering away at this?  Saying "This is an allegory" should be sufficient.
CharlesTheBold (talk) 04:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes, we know fiction isn't literal 

message: Does anyone know an online version or audio version?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.19.227.52 (talk) 15:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online version 

message: The premise of the article is false:
:portrays Christian perceptions of the life after death allegorically, specifically one individual's journey from hell/purgatory  ("the grey town") to heaven and salvation. 
It does not portray Christian perceptions of life after death in any way, but is rather about the choices people make while alive and how that affects their character.
Still more inaccurate is the claim that it's about "one individual's journey from hell/purgatory  ("the grey town") to heaven and salvation." Previous contributors to the article may perhaps have confused the plot of this story with The Screwtape Letters. The protagonist of GD wakes up from his "vision in a dream" to find himself back in his dingy room, very much alive. 
I'd like to delete the first several paragraphs. --Uncle Ed (talk) 02:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: On what basis do you make your claim that this novella is not an allegory? Not that it necessarily is. The author points out that the experiences of the individuals in question become either "heavenly" experiences or "hellish" experiences depending on where they end up. To uncover what exactly Lewis is trying to do one has to see the parallels with William Blake's work and Dante's work. The George MacDonald "spirit guide" does some explaining of what is happening. Hell is portrayed as minuscule while Heaven or the outskirts of Heaven is gigantic and more real. Unless you can come up with reliable sources either from the author himself or from secondary literature, you are engaging in original research.--Drboisclair (talk) 20:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement you deleted: "portrays Christian perceptions of the life after death allegorically, specifically one individual's journey from hell/purgatory ("the grey town") to heaven and salvation" may be somewhat inaccurate. I think that Lewis makes the point that there is either heaven or hell. He appears to portray the differences between individuals in hell and individuals, who are residents of heaven or will be.--Drboisclair (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

text: The narrative is a dream that the individual has before he awakens in London or somewhere in England during the "Blitz on Britain" in 1940 presumably. In that respect Lewis may be following the concept of The Pilgrim's Progress, which is an allegory.--Drboisclair (talk) 20:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs complete rewrite

message: If someone is planning a rewrite, and also in response to the "Dante" comment, it seems to me that Lewis' work is more closely aligned to Plato's Allegory of the Cave http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave .  In both cases, a person, previously in a limited environment, is "carried up to a higher level" of experience.  Plato's Allegory speaks of a "prisoner" being freed and carried up to a place of "reality", is this not similar to Lewis' "dreamer" getting on the bus?  Perhaps at least a link to Plato's Allegory might be appropriate?
GlenBarney (talk) 04:22, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Dante / Re: Allegory 

message: Does anyone think this is a reversion of vandalism? --Uncle Ed (talk) 02:03, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: IP vandalism claim

message: A 2013 release is planned? Has anyone even read this since last year? No film has yet been released. 75.219.181.139 (talk) 21:30, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to "was planned"; it's hard to see what the current reported status at IMDB is without subscribing to IMDBPro, but there are zillions of promising-sounding film-making projects which never end up resulting in a finished movie.  Such lack of updating is quite common on Wikipedia articles... AnonMoos (talk) 04:04, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Motion Picture

message: The idea of "travelling in size" was explored extensively in the pulp-SF novels of Ray Cummings, most notably The Girl in the Golden Atom and its sequels. There are seeming echoes of Cummings not only in The Great Divorce but also in The Dark Tower and elsewhere in the Lewis canon. Is there any hard evidence anyone is aware of that Lewis read and was influnced by Cummings?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.241.199.21 (talk) 09:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's by no means impossible that Lewis read Cummings, but it's speculative at this point, and without reliable sources, it can't be added to the article... AnonMoos (talk) 13:30, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Influence of Ray Cummings

message: I am new to this so please forgive me! I wondered if there should be a 'global' change to the entry for C S Lewis, to recognise his professorship? He was not merely a writer, but an academic also? I noticed on a cover of one of his books, it said 'Prof Lewis' & I thought that was a good remark.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christos-radio (talk • contribs) 21:36, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi.  According to the manual of style, "For people with academic or professional titles, subsequent uses of names should omit them. For example, use 'Asimov', 'Hawking', and 'Westheimer'; not 'Dr. Asimov', 'Professor Hawking', or 'Dr. Ruth'."  You have changed the first mention of Lewis' name to have the honorific "Prof.," and I'm not sure whether that might be okay.  Subsequent mentions should definitely not have the honorific.  --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 15:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:    (That's C S Lewis, an Oxbridge trooper.) But aside from him, there's an ocean of difference between an earned degree and an honorary one. IMO likewise between teaching professors and those who've never taught, but have enuf earned or honorary degrees and make being  called "Professor Dildome" their price for a commencement address. I see there are honorary professorships, so do we kowtow to their holders (thus tarnishing a worthy, elite, and i think potentially resentful, profession)?? Does the MOS make honorary/earned distinction, either as to degree or prof'ship? --Jerzy•t 16:21, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Professor

message: At least one St.-Louisian with access to a printing press uses the term to refer to a legal change crucial to the relationship between St. Louis and St. Louis County, Missouri. It's not unusual for a merger or some kind of partial or functional merger between a city and county (i think the courts in LA call describe themselves as "in and for the City and County of") to exist. Maybe this is one jerk's obsession in the St. L case, and maybe it's already well covered. And maybe not. Verbum sap. Ah! The city is now longer inside the county.--Jerzy•t 15:36 & 16:25, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  St. Louis 

message: If The Great Divorce is an ever-present warning against our ego-driven disputes called 'debates', then our never-ending search for truth is little more than a trick we play on ourselves. Given this, is there any reason to believe that we have any intention of coming to any lasting conclusions, or finding real solutions? For perhaps we are unwilling to admit that we are all trapped in our self-made Grey Towns?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.190 (talk) 10:36, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The purpose of this page is to discuss improving the article.  I'm sure there are many other websites which would welcome general reflections on the book... AnonMoos (talk) 19:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: A Bus Ride To Heaven