But I’ve read the books and found them captivating, if not inspiring.

I’m not sure how much the real story comes through in the Graphic Novels, since I didn’t really get through them. I put them down after they magnificently failed to meet up the standards that my imagination had set to the characters and settings since reading the books.

I would disagree that the story hits on heresy – though “Other Earth” is set in the future, it really should be thought of and dealt with as another dimension. Other Earth is more of a new incarnation of history rather than a continuation. It’s a re-creation.

Remember, though it is an allegory, it’s not meant to be a literal play-by-play. If you’re gonna call The Circle Trilogy heresy, you might as well call The Lord of the Rings heresy as well. Tolkien filled his story with Biblical allegory, but there are TWO Christ figures in his story. It’s meant to be a picture, and example, a parable even, rather than a direct allegory.

And I would say that the character of Elyon, the portrayal of God, is highly consistent in Dekker’s books.

I can’t say much for the Graphic Novels, but the books are spectacular, and I highly recommend picking them up.

*trilogy is great read and also has CHRISTIAN morals. That’s rare these days

Nothing Heretical about ANY OTHE “THREE”(SIC) BOOKS

Thanks for your thoughts. Sorry to hear you don’t like Lewis. I consider him one of the greastest wordsmiths of the English language. The Space Triology isn’t his best writing, but it’s still written well.

I don’t see myself reading Dekker’s orginial novels. I’ll have to read a few reviews when Green is published to see if he solves the time paradox and other issues.

Tom Bombadil=the man!

Tom Bombadil is cool in a goofy way, but even if I could live without him, I’d hate to give up Old Man Willow and the Barrow Downs.

And Beorn in The Hobbit. I hope Jackson includes him, but I’m not counting on it.

Or maybe I’m just lazy and watching the films is faster. That’s entirely possible too. :)

I was thinking the same thing. Lewis makes it all look so effortless. It’s easy to forget how meticulously he worked out his books. My impression is that he worked out most things in his head and so we see little of the revision process he went through. Tolkien, on the other hand, seems to work out everything on paper and keep all his old drafts. Thus, we can literally see his thought processes as he writing his books.

I’m reading the Narnia stuff for the first time right now and reading about this example of allegory done poorly makes me appreciate Lewis even more.