Primary Texts: Owen Barfield, selections from Poetic Diction (PDF on Connect)
Secondary Texts:
- Michel Piret, “W. H. Auden and the Inklings,” C. S. Lewis and His Circle: Essays and Memoirs from the Oxford C.S. Lewis Society, edited by Roger White, Judith Wolfe, Brendan Wolfe (UBC Library online)
- Owen Barfield, “Lewis and/or Barfield,” in C. S. Lewis and His Circle: Essays and Memoirs from the Oxford C.S. Lewis Society,edited by Roger White, Judith Wolfe, Brendan Wolfe (UBC Library online)
Discussion Questions:
- Think about the Inklings’ historic and literary moment, particularly as it is characterized by Nemerov in his introduction to Barfield’s work; you can also think back to our previous guest lectures, or to your own research when considering this question. Who were the Inklings, and why were they significant, particularly in their early twentieth-century contexts? How could they be defined as “Modernist” or “Late Romantic,” and what was their reason for preserving “antiquarian” ideas, or “archaisms” as Barfield would put it, in their work?
- In his essay “Lewis and/or Barfield,” Barfield describes the “big difference” between himself and his friend was that “[Lewis] grew and I failed to grow – but, at any rate, he changed his views, whereas I didn’t.” Although we’ve read Lewis’s works non-chronologically, think about how his ideas “evolved.” Is there a difference between his “theological” versus “literary” utterances? How might his ideas compare to those of Barfield, particularly regarding historicism, different ways of reading or evaluating literature, as well as the formation of “meaning”?
- In Piret’s article on “Auden and the Inklings,” he talks about Auden’s faith and his fascination with Tolkien’s works; for him, The Lord of the Rings revived the “Quest genre,” here defined as a multivalent “quest for meaning amidst chaos, a quest to ground moral instinct and judgement in metaphysical reality, a quest for authentic love and faith, a quest to transcend self-regard, and imprisonment within the limits of present apprehension as it can shut down around us” (9). How would you apply this definition of “quest” to the works we’ve studied, and do you agree with this definition? Going back to our first seminar, what is the difference (or relationship) between a quest and a journey? Connect your reflections back to the readings we’ve discussed.
- Like Tolkien, Barfield felt that the innate historicity of “old” or “dead” languages rendered them archaic and arcane, yet are also vessels through which original word-meanings, timeless myths, and indeed human history can be felt, experienced, and conveyed; old words are effectively a palimpsest, in the sense that they have unstable, evolving definitions but are also telling artefacts, with value for both past and present. What is the value (or not) of “tradition,” historicism, or archaisms for Barfield, and for the other Inklings? How do these aspects of language and poetry/ prose shape meaning, or value-making when it comes to art?
- Barfield offers several criteria for the assignment of “meaning” or “value” to poetry, contingent on both the creator and the recipient of poetic works; what are some of these criteria, and do you agree with Barfield? How might his arguments be influenced by his current historic moment, or his connection to the other Inklings? Consider his position on “civilization,” modernity, and technology, particularly its effects on language and tastes among consumers.
- Barfield writes that “there is little doubt that nearly every poetic fashion (to use a word more in keeping with the trivial nature of the thing) begins in this way as a return to Nature, or in other words a return to the attempted expression of genuine knowledge.” In the context to Williams’s portrayal of art in All Hallow’s Eve, or some of the Marxist theory we’ve discussed, do you agree with this argument? What is the relationship between “archaism” and literary “fashions” for Barfield?
