The More You Ignore Me, The Closer I Get
Everything that I'm learning about The Golden Compass makes me want to see the movie or read the books. What I'm learning is that it looks awesome and that it is feared by some religious types. Perhaps my wanting to see or read it says I have a rebellious spirit or I'm a sucker for polar bears in armor.
Oh... right- There's no spoiler alert needed 'cos I'm not saying anything about the movie that is not already in the ether.
So, I hear it's supposed to somehow be atheist propaganda- or at least it impugns organized religion and a particular conception of God. I don't find that particularly troublesome, not least of all because there are many things about organized religion and particular conceptions of God that need impugning. Still, I see why that might bother some people, just like I can see why ham-fisted cartoons of Mohammed might bother some people too. What can I say? I can really empathize.
It seems like it could easily offend some people's religious sensibilities. If that's the case, then I don't see why someone shouldn't avoid it. I couldn't read the Left Behind series for largely that reason.
But atheist propaganda? From what I know, that seems a stretch. It's not a stretch insofar as religious babies misunderstand atheism- or believe too much in their own boogiemen. That is, it makes sense to see this as a type of atheistic threat if you're into the hype in much the same way it makes sense to believe that Iraqi Islamo-fascists will get into their boats and airplanes to follow us home.
From what I can tell, The Golden Compass does not seem like atheist polemic. It may be anti-theist, or theist of a stripe you're not comfortable with, or anti-religion, but not atheist. It's a lot like the Bible in that sense.
I should confess though, I might be an atheist. If I need to believe in God as some Santaesque bearded old man hanging out somewhere beyond the boundaries of the sky to be a theist, well, then, that's not me. And if I need to believe that there is one thing that is Christianity- that there is possibly some pasteurized thing that is pure Christian beyond any of the myriad forms that have ever been expressed so that I might be... whatever it is that would make me, then I guess that's not me either. So someone somewhere might think I'm an atheist. I guess that's fine. But I think an atheist is something else.
For good or bad, an atheist seems someone who couldn't care less about a god or many gods. It wouldn't make sense to say they don't believe in god as it suggests that there may be some type of alternative to do so or not do so. God just doesn't enter into the picture for them. Just as you likely do not consider the existence of luragrafs a matter of belief or not, an atheist would give no more thought to a deity. There is no thing in which they might believe, so why bother with the position? I suppose there are those who view the concept of god as something others might believe in and regard such belief as a harmless matter of personal superstition or a dangerous delusion and act accordingly. But here, as I speak out my rear on the matter, things in The Golden Compass seem anti-Christian or anti-religion and smart enough to not be anti-god. (I don't mean to say that the author may not be anti-god, but it makes no sense to be so or write an allegory that makes a case for that position- as it makes no sense to be pro-god and allegorically justify that position- maybe he realizes this. I don't know.)
Perhaps I should know better, but I don't find that wholly problematic. There is, after all, a lot in religion generally and the many expressions of Christianity specifically to be "anti." This may not be any fault of religion or Christianity. They are just things made by people, and, as the Blonde Buddha said, there are a lot of Christians who are easy to not like. It makes sense that they would craft a religion appropriate to their unlikeability.
I suppose if that's all there were or if I thought the church were some thing that needed to be kept safe in a garden I would be troubled. But I don't so I'm not.
It may be that Philip Pullman really is describing and advocating some metaphysical position and hoping someone, somewhere will say, "Hey, wait a minute- that group I keep giving my money to every Sunday is a crock." But I don't think that would be the fault of the movie. Though worse, I may be missing the Chick-reality behind it all, and with every copy of the book and every screening of the film there is an imp assigned to destroy the faith of the reader/viewer.
Tell you what, if that turns out to be the case, I'll buy you a soda.
In My Absence I Missed a Watershed Event in The Life of My Blog
Helter Skelter- The Beatles
Search And Destroy- The Stooges
My Iron Lung- Radiohead
La La- The Polyphonic Spree
Necromancer- Gnarls Barkley
Supermassive Black Hole- Muse
Power of Love- Jimi Hendrix
Turn A Square- The Shins
Who Are You- The Who
Coffee Mug- Descendents
Las Abajenas- MMF
Blitzkrieg Bop- The Ramones
She Watch Channel Zero- Public Enemy
6 comments:
If you're going to see it, let me know. Also - want to be the speaker at a youth retreat?
I am going to see it, and I'm going to read the trilogy. I started reading The Subtle Knife yesterday and I liked it, so I stopped to begin at the beginning.
Very exciting.
I do, as a general desire, want to be the speaker at a youth retreat.
Tell me more.
I read the first book but not the second. Not because I thought it was destroying my faith but because it was too scary. Which I mean in a good way. Maybe next year, after I turn 40, I'll be grown up enough to read the second book. My husband and nine year old son really liked it.
I finished the first last Sunday and can't wait for break to begin to read the next two.
There were some tense moments for me in the first- and if the others are similiar or offer more of that type of excitement, I should be very happy.
I did find the ending a bit rushed- as if he were trying to describe other aspects of Coulter and Asriel too quickly, though everything else fit for me- especially with the theme of moving into the unknown and alternatives collapsing.
I also really enjoyed the understanding of freedom he seems to be developing. Strangely- or heretically- I find what he was saying about it more compatible with what we say we say about God than most churchy descriptions of freedom.
He just may be setting me up though.
Oh, and I loved the whole Iorek subplot.
i read the series a few years ago, and basically wound up feeling like he was saying that what i thought of as God is Not God, and that some other weird stuff was God and ridiculous and bad. but it's been awhile. i actually had a whole other reason to be frustrated and not want to read them ever again. *laughs*
In that way I figure it fits in with the broader theme of human history- except he doesn't have a state, or at least people with bigger sticks and rocks, on his side trying to convince us to change.
Post a Comment