Hi Everyone -

*SMALL SPOILERS BELOW*

I’m webs’ co-worker and in the children’s lit department at our school (my wife was a major) the prevelant attitude was that these were woefully neglected books and I really agree.

On the books themselves and their ‘anti-christian’ message:

True, they’re dark and have a large critique of the church and, primairly, the legalistic nature of the church they really are well written. I tend to pick and choose my fiction and these books just suck you into their world. They’re just that good and you would be remiss if you didn’t read them.

I knew Pullman was an atheist going into it and so there was really no shock value to them because I knew his message. But, what surprised me was that there were no real overt moments where he played the atheist card. Instead, there were some really rich descriptions of sin, absolute truth, love, people asking big questions. The points where he became a bit more overt in his agenda, it was obvious and mentally I made a note and disagreed and went on with the book.

My wife and I read them together and laughed and said ‘Yup, that’s pretty obvious that he would write it that way considering his viewpoint’ and then he’d move on with the story. I didn’t really feel as though it was an agenda piece as much as an intelligent, well crafted story that was influenced by his religious background.

Obviously, as a Christian, I’m going to spin events and look at sin (in the books he refers to it as dust and dust is a crucial character in moving the story along) and absolute truth a bit differently than him, but I didn’t ever really feel threatened reading the books. Instead there’s alot there. Dust plays a role in shaping people’s lives and it affects people’s daemons; small creatures that are bound to the person and take on different shapes. Our take was they are the person’s personality and/or ‘soul’.

Like I said, there’s alot to critique about Christianity in the books. For example, in The Golden Compass, Lyra rescues some kids from the Magisterium (sic...it’s late) who were figuring out how to sever the link between the children and their daemons - effectively killing the the daemon and rendering the child a zombie. I took it as legalism taken a bit too far - you kill a person when you don’t allow them to be who they are.

Anyway, on the movie:

I think the characters are spot on in casting. Pullman, himself, plays the president of Jordan College; somewhat poetic considering he gives Lyra the altheiometer (a tool to divine what is truth and can answer those that bear it truthfully any question they ask).  Nicole Kidman plays Ms. Coultier - a cold hearted snake would be an understatement. She’s both pretty and cruel at the same time. Heck, even Sam Elliot as Lee Scoresby was great casting, in my opinion.

I hope they don’t tone down the religious aspect of it. The core of the book revolves around the idea of dust and, although ‘controversial’, would emasculate the story if they left it out.

I wonder If they’ll keep the two gay angels in.

I would hope so, but probably not.

PeteJ - if you have not been here before, welcome to SEB! 

The points where he became a bit more overt in his agenda, it was obvious and mentally I made a note and disagreed and went on with the book.

That’s exactly how I read stories written from a Christian perspective.  I don’t get hung up on whether it fits my world view - within the world of the story, that is the reality.

As usual it will be the “adults” who will have the most trouble distinguishing fiction from reality.

I didn’t really feel as though it was an agenda piece as much as an intelligent, well crafted story that was influenced by his religious background.

Religious nutballs ALWAYS confuse the two.

I remember watching the movie “Stigmata” and thinking “Wow, the writer really thinks the Catholic Church is full of evil people and political agendas” but I don’t remember anyone condemning the movie as being a propaganda tool… at least nothing that made the news.  It seems the church picks and chooses what they get upset about.

As far as I’m concerned, every movie ever made and every story ever written has a terrible bias, and that’s okay.  If I want a political debate, I’m sure not going to ask for it from Hollywood.  It’s like watching a movie based on historical accounts and getting pissed because it isn’t factual.  Come on.  It’s entertainment.  Deal with it.

That’s not good enough for some people.  In matters of religion, we should not only protect our children from un-Christian ideas, but also ourselves.  And we do that not by understanding what it is that we’re watching or reading, but by simply isolating ourselves from it.

Yeah.  THAT sure makes sense.

They’re great books for both adults and children, and even if the themes are watered down the movie looks to be terrific as well.

Wow, I got an email response from somebody about my smartass comment on this thread:

Bog Brother Wrote: Poor Christians, always so persecuted.  Especially those Roman Catholics.  I mean really, just look at how poorly such Christian films as the Passion of the Christ and the Chronicles of Narnia did at the Box Office and on DVD.  They practically fell out of the theaters because so few people were viewing them.  Surely we can’t allow a viewpoint that opposes those hallowed principles to be voiced can we? Why if we let such a descent occur, we’ll be a virtual minority.  We certainly don’t wield the power we once did in the Good Old Days of the Middle Ages when the peasantry was poor, illiterate and completely ignorant, do we?  It’s obvious we need to return to those days in order to save the world from all the evil and sin that The Golden Compass represents.  We certainly don’t live in a country where freedom of speech is supposed to rule the day, and we certainly don’t have a majority of the population under our control.  Why, from th e way we act, you would never believe we were the most powerful and influential voting block in the US and one of the most powerful organizations in the entire world, would you?

Jerry wrote: Beside being a smart ass you try to be a know it all as well, are you an atheist? or just like being someone who hates Christians in general? Why should parents allow children to watch trash? I take it you you think children should be able to decide for themselves what to watch? Do you have a line at all drawn in the sand that they should not be allowed to see? Porn? Im sure violence is OK and any gaming CD for xbox and those like it? Children should have restrictions on what they watch, hear, until they are old enough to be told the dangers of what they are watching. Evil is very incidious in it’s ability to mask inself as something to delite, Im sure Eve thought that such a beautiful apple could cause no harm. Im sure you will have a politicians answer for whatever anyones says against your view...Evil is like that...mask the answer with another question until it is all gray and the apple has been bitten. Raven on macbeth.

My response was as follows:

Hello Jerry -

I am glad you read my comment, and believe that I am the epitome of evil as a result. You are quite correct in asking if I am an atheist, I most certainly am, but I am also a former Born Again Christian. To answer your concerns, I also share you belief in the need to restrict the content that children are shown, and I am against pornography in the hands of children.  I also believe that violent materials are damaging to developing minds, more so in my opinion than even pornographic materials; however I am well aware that you and I most likely will fail to see eye to eye on this.

I very much appreciate your attempt to guess what I do and do not believe is appropriate concerning children.  Your base assumptions about my beliefs and character are what makes living in this nation so terrific.  However, I will refrain from sharing any assumptions about your person based on your response to my comment.  The fact that you felt the need to send your response to me directly rather than the normally accepted manner of responding to it on the forum on which it was posted shows to me a level of dedication that I can only admire.  Your efforts are indeed commendable, though I am a bit mystified about your motives, other than simple venting of frustration and anger in a fairly ineffectual manner.  This is not a slight on you good sir, simply against the internet itself, since the anonymous nature of internet forums and even email makes it quite difficult to have a really meaningful discourse between two or more rational adults.

Now to address the actual issue discussed: The Golden Compass and Bill Donahue’s attempts to boycott said film.  I fully believe that it is within anyone’s right to speak out against a film that they disagree with.  I also believe it is the prerogative, nay, the responsibility of any and all parents to filter what their children see, read and hear.  I personally believe that the first is protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, the second is the responsibility of any adult who chooses to raise children.  I personally have chosen not to raise children, no doubt to the delight of you and those who share your views.

That said, I would like to point out that the reaction to this film appears to be a bit of an over-reaction.  It does not seem likely that a nation that is populated by a majority of Christians is in any real danger of collectively losing its faith if it were to view a movie, even one in which the main plot revolves around the death of a being that calls itself God.  You would no doubt find the fact that the novels leave the true identity (if any) of the creator of the universe up in the air, as it is in the real world.  However, I cannot properly elaborate further until I have finished reading the books (I am currently working through the first book, but my reading time is limited by things such as work, which I must get back to.)

In any event, we will clearly not agree on this, but I would very much appreciate any further discourse on this or any other subject you would like to send my way.  Feel free to email me whenever you wish, on any subject. I would be more than happy to take time out of my busy day to discuss things with you.

Respectfully,
Terry

*Sniff* You do me proud! Brings a tear to my eye it does.

BB: and I am against pornography in the hands of children

*Snort* (sorry, had to do that to build on Les’s *sniff* in a way appropriate to me)
Why though? It’s not a big deal unless it’s made into one by society, and it’s only the natural body anyway, and tells them that it’s OK to explore. Perhaps children would have a better understanding of themselves +others from earlier so as not to make mistakes

I like your style of email + patience it shows + gives them a chance, I wonder what gave you cause for comitment, maybe your objectives are not too different than mine, as we both bother with people who will probably never affect us again, probably only for the benefit of them+ those they know. I justify it to myself as practise, because it’s illogical on some levels to help another without some sort of personal gain (ie to feel better about self)

I’m going to file Jerry under ‘no hope’. Someone who equates a kids book that opposes religeon with violence and porn. What exactly is his objection to letting kids see this film?

Kids will whack off to it, go outside and mutilate some squirrels, score some smack, and then go shoot their maths professor that they had big gay sex with while smoking cigarettes the night before.

The writing is on the wall. Why can’t everyone simply understand their legitimate fears?

Christians make me laugh. They believe they’ve got superman watching their asses, and yet they are the biggest bunch of pussies imaginable most of the time.

I just watched the trailer, and it looks pretty good.  That, and the fact that New Line did a damned decent job of the impossible with filming the Lord of the Rings, are enough recommendation for me.  Don’t know when it’s due out in Vienna, but I’m going with the whole family.

Why though? It’s not a big deal unless it’s made into one by society, and it’s only the natural body anyway, and tells them that it’s OK to explore. Perhaps children would have a better understanding of themselves +others from earlier so as not to make mistakes

I can discuss this more in depth later (I’m at work as I type this), but I can sum it up as follows.  Some parents believe porn is an appropriate substitute for giving the “talk” to their children.  However, it is not, and said children can come away from such experiences with incorrect and/or dangerous view about human sexuality.  Sexually explicit materials are intended for adults, and should not be distributed to children, or even young teens.  That said, we can hardly stop curious children from becoming exposed to such things in this day and age, though we should work to limit their exposure, I believe.

I agree that the talk is necessary, it’s not something I really had as my parents didn’t want to bring it up (they said we could talk about ‘anything’ but there was a definite feeling of taboo) and they assumed i’d just know instincively how to deal with +obtain women, that casued me problems

However I can’t see what dangerous views there are to be obtained from a picture - and if it is just part of reality, the child is going to have to deal with it at some point anyway - I don’t think people can be immune from a mindstate they havn’t already had, and sooner or later they’re going to be exposed to it anyway - same goes for religion; they’re going to be exposed to it, and they’re going to think about it eventually, no matter how much you ‘protect’ them from it earlier.

Indeed, (by teenage stage) they’ll only be more motivated to investigate what you will not allow them to know when they realise you’re hiding something, partly to find out why, and they’ll resent not knowing if they feel somehow disadvantaged by it.

OK, so your own parents had trouble talking to you frankly about sex.  So did mine.  However, do you really think that viewing pornography instead of this at the age that you probably started asking questions would have given you a healthy view of sex?  Some nudity would probably not have caused problems, but hardcore pornography does objectify women, and presents a highly skewed view of reality in my opinion, and this can lead to some problems for a person as they progress into adulthood, carrying these skewed views of sexuality with them. 

I know the religious right screams about porn leading to violence and worse, but their hysterics may very well have some basis in reality in relation to children being exposed to porn.  I have my doubts that a healthy man viewing it is going to be swayed to start treating a woman like a piece of meat, but a child who has no experience might very well get it ingrained that the way women are treated in the porn movie he watched is the way to do it. 

I’m well aware that children whose parents are open and willing to discuss these things are more likely to grow up healthy and well adjusted.  Too, I think a child whose parents are that way could probably handle viewing porn, but I still do not think that the skewed view that most porn presents is a healthy one, even for a child whose parents are open and educated about sex themselves and are not afraid to have “the talk”. 

I’m of the same mind about excessive violence, be it cartoons, video games or movies, but as I said, I feel that exposure to violence is worse than exposure to porn. I’m giving neither a pass, and the irony that American society feels exposure to violence is acceptable, while sex is taboo (and the other fact that the porn industry is so gargantuan) is not lost on me at all.

but hardcore pornography does objectify women, and presents a highly skewed view of reality in my opinion

This is what I need to understand - I don’t see what views it’s supposed to get across. For me I think “hmm, that looks like my friend who I semi-fancy, I can fantasise about it”, or “I wish I was there”. It doesn’t make me think women are easy, life seems to indicate otherwise, it just says some women will pose nude for money or emotional trickery, which is true. If they were going to disrespect women, it’s for other reasons that would’ve existed anyway (personality)

The religous right fears anyone enjoying themselves. Anyway, I also think it’s strange how things like tax fraud and theft are viewed far worse than violence, at least legally.

I thought I was being clear when I said that it’s potentially harmful to children.  This does not mean adults.

As for the “views” it is supposed to get across, well, it’s not “supposed” to, it’s supposed to stimulate and excite.  However it does present an unrealistic view of sexuality.  You and I, who are adults, realize it to be fantasy.  Porn is absurd and fairly unrealistic in many instances. Children though are not always well known for their ability to tell reality from fantasy (so too many adults as well unfortunately).

Aside from any psychological/social harm it might do to a child, there is also the other issue of it being illegal and inappropriate. At least here in the US, it is considered endangering a child to expose them to sexual activity, and a felony.  Exposing children to sexual activity is looked down upon almost universally, as it should be.  I fail to see how exposing a child to sexually explicit material is any different, other than the obvious of them not being sexually active in the matter. 

Do you think it would be OK to take a child into a bar/nightclub?  What about sending a child to an rated-R movie? How about putting them on a battlefield with a rifle? I would not myself if I had children.  These are settings that are not intended for children, and there is no good reason to expose a child to them.  So too pornography.  Besides, children grow up too fast as it is, why rush them even more?

In year six my eldest had sex education at school, though we had already told them both all the facts.  Cue 10/11 year olds coming out of school, telling their younger siblings followed by lots of giggling.

The problem was we were going to a big family dinner with some rarely seen 3rd/4th cousins for my dads cousins 80th birthday. “Whatever you do don’t DARE say vagina in front of Auntie Joyce”

Aaargh! I’m done commenting here.  I got ANOTHER email from someone about my comment on this thread:

I just thought it was interesting how you said that the passion of christ and chronicles of narnia did not do good in theaters… Maybe you should read this...http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=1289&p=s.htm

and try searching narnia also....

—
Cooper Miller

I responded with the following:

Um, you are aware of the concept of sarcasm right?  Perhaps you should re-read my comment in light of the fact that I was being very, very sarcastic.

I had no idea that Christians could be so defensive and dense.  (Oh shit, that’s more sarcasm, probably get more emails about that.)

What’s really weird is that I’ve not gotten a single email and I’m the bastard that wrote this entry.

Maybe I just hit some Christian sweet spot with my smart-ass remarks.  Oh dear, this could be the start of something terrible. I wonder how they found the comment, assuming they aren’t lurkers or drive-by trolls though.  I Googled the Golden Compass, and this thread was about 95th on the search results.  If I was doing a search for stuff about the film, I’d have given up way before then.

Bog Brother- I’m sure the fundies found you easily enough.  In their spare time, fundies scour the web to augment their knowledge.  If you google “stupid sex evil”, which I’m sure is a fundy favorite, guess what comes up Number One.

If I could be so fortunate I’d count myself Christian (hey, I love Jesus Christ), yet I don’t see the problem inherent in these books. Is it propaganda? Maybe. It looks like it, but I really don’t know, and I definitely don’t care. I don’t think it’s all that important. I’m certainly not e-mailing my neighbors about it.

All I know is there are nearly billions of people, right now, not in some fantasy world, but here, right now, struggling to see tomorrow. I don’t have time for fantasy, and I’m pretty sure they don’t either.

We in the West should ‘thank our lucky stars’ if we’re so inclined to even be debating such non-issues as “The Golden Compass” and its impact on interfaith dialogue while people are starving and dying.

It’s one thing to die from famine, plague, or some other malady, but it’s high time we all agree it’s unacceptable for a human to kill another, whatever the cause, whatever the cost.

To me this incident looks like what E.M. Forster called the “last, sloshy stirrings.” I hate to see it all, I wish I was just a fly on the wall, only I’m not.

The fact that “The Golden Compass” is polarizing people into holding their heads high or hanging them in shame is a luxury on both sides that I believe we ought to acknowledge, and ought to feel some uneasiness collectively for even debating in the first place.

Not to be mean there Tommy, but do you spend all your time and money helping these poor souls that you care so deeply about?  I don’t think the not so subtle attempt at castigating us who are holding this discussion is really going to work.

Note:  Just in case -

cas·ti·gate (kst-gt)
tr.v. cas·ti·gat·ed, cas·ti·gat·ing, cas·ti·gates
1. To inflict severe punishment on. See Synonyms at punish.
2. To criticize severely.
[Latin castgre, castgt-, from castus, pure; see kes- in Indo-European roots.]
casti·gation n.
casti·gator n.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Anyway, is it really so horrible for us to not be thinking about the bad things in the world and get upset/incensed (be we Atheist, Catholic or otherwise) about what you categorize as fluff?  Perhaps we should be focusing all our time to help the poor and downtrodden.  Perhaps we are all terrible people for not doing so.

What I would really like to know though is this.  Does your help and efforts for the poor come with or without a side of Jesus?

Tommy, you may recall that Jesus encountered the old “We shouldn’t be on trivial things; what about the poor and downtrodden!??” Do you remember who brought it up and what His answer was?  It gets tiresome to focus on ultimately weighty matters all the time.

Also, if you think that matters of religion are trivial, remember religion is constantly trying to get roots into politics and affect policy.  And when something goes “boom” somewhere and kills people who were otherwise just minding their own business, there’s an even chance religion was involved.