This is just an idea--I think it was, in a way, a kind of test to show him the untruth of his philosophy. And, as was shown, Wimpey didn't really believe in violence as the ultimate thing, or he would have participated in it himself.Does that make any sense?
Definitely! He worshiped violence but wouldn't worship it in his own action. He was a lukewarm violence-ist, so both Ian and Turnbull were disgusted. =)
I haven't read The Ball and the Cross, but I certainly will now!
I think I agree with Lewis and Don Pedro for the most part. Here's another thought: perhaps this is also an illustration of the difference between a love for violence and a love for a fight. All Christian men should willingly rise to battle (literally or figuratively) in defense of what is good; someone who worships violence will rise to fight for the sake of violence alone. If you'd like to, we could compare Wimpey with the Dane Ogier in "The Ballad of the White Horse." Ogier worships violence, too. However, there is a stark difference between the characters of Ogier and Wimpey; it would be interesting to look at the differences between them and the reasons for those differences. God Bless,RoseinFaith
Post a Comment
© 2006-2009 Alicia Van Hecke (moderator)