The C.S. Lewis Hoax

Ms. Lindskood's book is quite insightful. It causes one to revaluate statements attributed to C.S. Lewis by those, like Walter Hooper, who have capitalized handsomely off Lewisania. For example, "The Dark Tower" allegedly written by Lewis is most likely not Lewis' work and is, at worse, another fraud perpetrated by Walter Hooper (pp. 34-37). Lindskood points out that Walter Hooper was a devout Christian (p. 117). However, I disagree. Even Ms. Lindskood notes the liberty Hooper took by defaming C. S. Lewis and his brother Warren Lewis in the book "They Stand Together" (Chapter 8). Hooper depicts Warren Lewis as a hopeless alcoholic and implies a homosexual relationship between C. S. Lewis and Arthur Greeves. What one easily infers from the evidence is that Walter Hooper was an opportunist. He claims to have been Secretary to C. S. Lewis even though no one knew about it. Warren Lewis, Lewis' brother, was quite irritated by Walter Hooper coming over from the United States and making all sorts of claims such as this. Hooper claims to quote letters and such from Lewis but has never produced the originals. It seems he makes stuff up in any biographical reference he makes about Lewis. Most noteworthy is the self serving nature of all of Hooper's quotes, such as the one relating to Lewis' alleged reference to Hooper as the son he never had. Hooper is definitely a C. S. Lewis enthusiast; however, it is tainted with jealousy and mischief. For example, profiting from Lewis, making stuff up about him and defaming Lewis and his brother all causes one to hearken to this. Hooper was very persistent in pushing himself into Lewis affairs which Warren Lewis himself points out. It reminds me of Howard K Stern imposing himself, to the point of being a nuisance, into Anna Nicole Smith's life. It also reminds me of Hank Hanegraaff suddenly appearing as director of the late Walter R Martin's Christian Research Institute and attributing statements to Walter Martin after Walter Martin's death. It reminds me of the false accusations of Pietro Aretino against Michelangelo, accusing him of being a homosexual when Michelangelo would not let Aretino take his artwork. Beware of your admirers. If you have any talent, your worse enemies will be those most flattered by you. Any defamation of your sexual morality or sobriety will most likely reflect the character of the jealous weirdo who wants to be part of your world. It is noteworthy that none of the attention talented people have given to their most zealous admirers has benefited them, but has in fact hurt them and has even damaged or tarnished any legacy they have left. I suppose the talented party pays less critical attention to their admirers, not realizing that they have a devil in their midst because they are less moved to view critically the appreciator of their talent. Chances are, some fans are nothing more than stalkers: I fail to see the difference between a Robert Bardo and a Walter Hooper.

. . .this remarkable bit of literary detection by Mrs. Lindskoog.Informed hobbits have known for quite some time that there have been serious issues of legitimacy and integrity surrounding the writings and literary legacy of CS Lewis, close friend and fellow Inkling of our own great Professor. In this volume, Mrs. Lindskoog traces the history and lineage of Lewis' literary legacy and demonstrates that there has, in all likelyhood, been a great deal of fraud and deceit practiced upon lovers of Lewis by a number of individuals who should have known better.This hobbit can only hope that Mrs. Lindskoog's book quickly returns to print and is widely read and disseminated among those of our fellows who truly loved Mr. Lewis and respected his legitimate work.