|
Post by Antioch on Jan 28, 2008 8:20:03 GMT -5
Finally saw this movie this weekend. I agree with Pigdish. I thought it was a good movie. I'm interested in picking up the books and reading them before the next movie comes out.
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Jan 28, 2008 10:12:19 GMT -5
I'm going to finish The Golden Compass today and let me tell you it was really good. I don't know where people got the anti-christian or anti-God themes from the book because so far (I'm two chapters from the end) there is hardly any mention of such things.
So far the book has themes promoting family, friendship, love, and independent thought. All good things as far as I'm concerned wrapped up in a beautiful story of adventure in a fantasy world.
I hope you enjoy the books as much as I am and can't wait to start the second book.
|
|
|
Post by Antioch on Jan 28, 2008 12:27:19 GMT -5
Good to hear. I'm looking forward to starting them. I might pick them up in the next month or so.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Jan 28, 2008 13:08:56 GMT -5
Not to rekindle the argument, but here is much of the basis of the assertion that his works are anti-Christian:
'We're used to the Kingdom of Heaven; but you can tell from the general thrust of the book that I'm of the devil's party, like Milton. And I think it's time we thought about a republic of Heaven instead of the Kingdom of Heaven. The King is dead. That's to say I believe the King is dead. I'm an atheist. But we need Heaven nonetheless, we need all the things that Heaven meant, we need joy, we need a sense of meaning and purpose in our lives, we need a connection with the universe, we need all the things the Kingdom of Heaven used to promise us but failed to deliver.' - Philip Pullman, August 2000
"I've been surprised by how little criticism I've got. Harry Potter's been taking all the flak. I'm a great fan of J.K. Rowling, but the people - mainly from America's Bible Belt - who complain that Harry Potter promotes Satanism or witchcraft obviously haven't got enough in their lives. Meanwhile, I've been flying under the radar, saying things that are far more subversive than anything poor old Harry has said. My books are about killing God." - Philip Pullman, December 2003
I won't spoil the plot for you, but if you have read Milton it is very derivative. I am just starting the books, so I will be able to have a more intelligent discussion of it later.
My attack on Pullman is mostly centered on his sloppy philosophy - the drivel about needing what Heaven represents without needing Heaven itself. Sorry - can't have your cake and eat it too, Phil...
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Jan 28, 2008 14:19:13 GMT -5
Your quotes still do not show any evidence that what is in the books is anti-christian or anti-God. The quotes seem more like shocking publicity statements to needle the religious extremists. It's like J K Rowling saying that Dumbledore is a homosexual but it has no relevance in the books. Sure there are terms in the book that can be associated with our world's religious organizations but it doesn't mean they are those organizations as written in the context of the book. Words like "Church", "priest" have evolved to mean more than just relating to the Christian religion.
I have to agree with what he says and I can see how to Christians it would be anti-Christian. But it doesn't mean that he is wrong. King = Jesus + crucification = dead In Christianity God is diluted by idolatry: A human (Jesus) is believed to be God, worshiping other humans (saints), some humans (which happen to be all males) in the Church are thought of having the power of angels or God-like (as the Pope), praying to symbols (cross), rituals (drinking blood, eating human flesh, etc). These are the things that have detracted from the message of Heaven. It seems to me that Pullman isn't even an Athiest but maybe an Agnostic or some other term that fits. Because you can't believe in Heaven and not believe in God. lol Makes me laugh due to its absurdity.
I want it to be clear that I'm not starting a debate on religious practices but putting to words my interpretation of what Pullman said in that quote.
So there is no need to get heated over what I say because in the end the author is laughing all the way to the bank.
In the first book there are people that use the word God as a comforting term, in a positive way.
There are many fantasy books that have God killing themes. The David Eddings series Belgariad I think have that story, I think there are some J V Jones books that have those themes also. I don't remember a big halabaloo about those books and that is probably because those authors keep their yap shut.
|
|
|
Post by Antioch on Jan 28, 2008 16:41:23 GMT -5
Whether I agree or disagree with both of your findings is irrelavent. I do strongly agree with Pigdish about post works author commentary. What the author really thought or thinks now is irrelavent if he/she did not include it in their story. It is probably just a publicity stunt.
I personally don't care about an authors thoughts outside of their works. If it was so important, they should have included it.
|
|
Dmitri
Land Owner
D&D Geeks of the World Unite!
Posts: 1,466
|
Post by Dmitri on Jan 28, 2008 17:24:35 GMT -5
I have to agree with what he says and I can see how to Christians it would be anti-Christian. But it doesn't mean that he is wrong. King = Jesus + crucification = dead In Christianity God is diluted by idolatry: A human (Jesus) is believed to be God, worshiping other humans (saints), some humans (which happen to be all males) in the Church are thought of having the power of angels or God-like (as the Pope), praying to symbols (cross), rituals (drinking blood, eating human flesh, etc). These are the things that have detracted from the message of Heaven. It seems to me that Pullman isn't even an Atheist but maybe an Agnostic or some other term that fits. Because you can't believe in Heaven and not believe in God. lol Makes me laugh due to its absurdity. - Pigdish
I understand your issue with Christianity, though I think that your interpretation of Christian symbolism is a bit inaccurate. Actual doctrine of Protestant faith goes quite differently than that. But that really isn't my point.
King = God, not Jesus. It plays to the Nietzsche quote,
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? – Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr. Walter Kaufmann
The idea is that we no longer need a God - that we have become strong enough to do away with such "falsehoods" and "myths". This is what Nietzsche and Milton before him were getting at - Lucifer jumps from the edge of Heaven, he is not cast out. This is the camp that Pullman places himself in by his own words.
I think that reading Pullman's quotes establish that he is the anti-Lewis. Lewis sought to indoctrinate Christian values in children, Pullman seeks to indoctrinate Atheistic values in children.
I don't care that he wrote the books. He is entitled to write what he wills. From what I have heard, and read so far, he is actually a quite talented writer. But it is obvious to me that his works attack the roots of Christianity, and indeed religion in general. I won't include any plot spoilers, but while I have only read a little ways into the 1st book, I have seen places in the later books were this is most evident. He attacks the idea that sin is bad, he attacks the idea that man requires salvation, he attacks the eternal nature of God and His omnipotence. Granted, most of this I have read in excerpt, and mostly from The Amber Spyglass if I recall correctly.
As to the last part about not having Heaven without Heaven, I am not sure if the "lol" is meant to abrogate what was just written - it is not possible to have something without having it. I thought this was self-evident.
As for JV Jones, I don't even know what he or she wrote - sorry. The Belgariad did not use characters from this world, it used a generic pantheistic cosmology, did not have a character that is sympathetic and respected saying something like "Christianity is a huge mistake" (not exact, but close - I don't have the reference handy), and did not directly reference Christian, Judaic, and Muslim traditions, as Pullman does - I won't give the spoiler here, just keep reading.
As for getting heated, I haven't, though I would recommend getting a better grasp on Christian theology if you plan to cite it - what you had in you post was grossly inaccurate. Many people I know would consider what was written as wildly offensive, or worse, just laughable.
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Jan 28, 2008 17:33:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm with you on this one. You can't say there is no God but still want Heaven. It just doesn't make sense to me. God and Heaven seem to be inextricably linked.
I'd be interested to know which parts and how I was inaccurate on. If you like you can PM so we don't offend anybody that may happen upon our discussion.
|
|
|
Post by grond on Jan 28, 2008 17:48:32 GMT -5
Well, actually, I think it is quite possible to believe an a paradise like existence after death (Heaven) without believing in figure ruling over or creating it (God). I hold neither and almost no belief, but I agree with Dmitri that the tone of the books (His Dark Materials) is strongly set against organized and hierarchical religions. It promotes free thought and demotes dogmatic practice. Most of religion is in a sense dogma, good or bad. All of the source material was written in (arguably) non literal form and none of the creators of this material are alive to defend or explain it. It relies on corruptable (not necessarily corrupted) tradition, while the living proof is either long gone or less than measurably apparent. Whoops, that last little bit was the unbeliever's side of this debate, take no offense from my unconvinced ramblings, there is little conviction behind them.
|
|
|
Post by Rincewind on Jan 28, 2008 19:45:45 GMT -5
I think about 90% of what Pigdish mentioned is actually Catholicism-specific. That might be what Dmitri means by inaccurate. Protestants split with them on many issues, one being the whole transsubstantiation versus consubstantiation thing (I think I spelled that right). A lot of that stuff is also what gave Christianity such a bad rap with people to begin with- go telling somebody that your religion goes around drinking blood and you're going to get some odd looks.
|
|
|
Post by pigdish on Jan 28, 2008 20:56:26 GMT -5
The reason for my Catholic specific examples was because I've heard that what might be construed as anti-Christian are terms like Magisterium, and other words (which I can't think of right now) that are used in Catholicism.
|
|
|
Post by Antioch on Mar 3, 2008 12:29:41 GMT -5
I just picked up the book over the weekend. I'm through the first chapter now. Interesting that the book started at a way different point than the movie did. I like the writting so far, we'll see how it goes.
|
|
|
Post by MjolnirH on Apr 4, 2008 6:34:02 GMT -5
ok granted I've only seen the movie and the book is laying on my bedside table as of yet untouched. however does this story not take place in an alternate dimension? a world similar to ours, yet different
|
|
|
Post by Lady Winter Wolf on Apr 5, 2008 0:14:54 GMT -5
Methinks that some people tend to over analyze, or nitpick books and movies, because they just don't know any better. The idea of sitting and enjoying, just for the pure enjoyment of the experience, is a foreign concept. Anti-this...Anti-that....oh for goodness sake. I liked "The Golden Compass", it was exciting, it was fun, and I can't wait for the sequel.
|
|
|
Post by MjolnirH on Apr 7, 2008 5:04:32 GMT -5
I 2nd that
|
|