Here’s a prime example of why I wanted to separate the family postings (that, by the way, is a plug for http://shaneandrea.blogspot.com/) from my rantings: Some brief thoughts about Pullman’s The Golden Compass…
There are some of you who are involved, on one side or the other, in the (largely media-created) “debate” about the books and movie. As I keep saying, I don’t really have a horse in that particular race, especially when I don’t really see any real Christian/Heretic /Humanist/Dogmatist conversation as being very well represented by either the books or the current national conversation.
So, here’s the deal from my perspective: I’ve read the books. I liked them, although it took two tries to get up the momentum to push through the first one. They are not classics of any genre, and they certainly wouldn’t sit on my idealized shelf next to Tolkein, but they’re not bad. That’s just one man’s opinion. I hear from Mom that the audio books are really good, and I can readily imagine that the style of the narrative would work really well in that format (similarly, Harry Potter, to me, is most engaging as an experiential synthesis between the books and the movies… Each of the two media are, alone, pretty good, but they become great when Reese’s-Peanut-Butter-Cupped together into a movie supported by the texts. In other words, not every book is best as a book).
Wow, I was close to getting distracted, there…
So, the Pullman books are pretty good. The movie was mediocre and it certainly doesn’t deserve a sequel, especially one which will undoubtedly veer widely away from the source material. That’s part one of my take.
Part two is this: I, myself, am something of a pseudo-humanist who has deep sympathies for organized religion. Hmmm. Maybe I'm a motive or two-level utilitarianist, actually, which doesn't really preclude humanism, but catches a slightly different flavor. Sigh. I need to re-expose myself to a lot of this stuff before I start casting too many stones. Which reminds me, how this for stones:
This all segues into my disdain for the whole Dawkins, anti-religion, crowd. Considering the spiel, there, is supposed to be that rationalism and practice of scientific method are some of the best tools that we have for moving through the universe – which I happen to agree with – there’s some pretty specious argumentation that gets thrown around. Dawkins needs some serious remedial logic, starting with a review of what modus tollens means.
Of course, biologists are not philosophers are not scholars of religious studies are not theologians are not opinionated yokels from North Carolina, and it’s always dangerous when one tries to splash in others’ wading pools.
The take-away from my point of view is that it is ridiculous to non-rationally demonize (Ha! A joke there!) organized religion, at least in rational discourse. In literature, in fantasy, it makes a world of sense to use beautiful and heavy metaphors to move your ideas around. When you’re trying to convince your neighbor that you have deeply-held beliefs about things (whether we’re talking about the divinity of Jesus, the innate value of human beings, or whatever else floats your boat), it makes more sense to use sympathy, compassion, understanding, and thoughtful, honest, communication.
It’s possible that you can, maybe, glimpse a bit of my deeply held beliefs mixed up in that sentence.
So, it’s tricky when I’m asked about my opinion, here. I don’t love the books, I disliked the movie, and I think that Pullman is a pretty problematic spokesman for any kind of “alternative to organized religion.” If I’m feeling generous, I can say that he’s a good young adult author and that’s it. I also loathe the whiney victim bit that one hears constantly repeated by both “Christians” in this country (who, are, like, totally being oppressed by the left-wing media and the ivory tower academics and the Zionists) and the “Secular Humanists” (or whatever they’re called today; these are the poor souls who are waging the lonely, passionate battle of free will against the tyranny of Rich White Men and Zionists. Groan). There’s a slim chance that there might be one or two people who don’t fit in these two camps, but if there are, they must be illegal immigrants or Duke fans, so I’m not sure if I care to know them.
Well, I’m now officially rambling. I guess I just hope that people are arguing about the importance or danger of The Golden Compass, which is really called Northern Lights, anyway, are finding the experience to be useful. I am all for conversation between people in diverse camps, especially about issues that excite and interest them. My preference would be for everyone to keep open ears and hearts, but that’s just me. My advice is this: Do no harm.
After all, that is the reason for the season. Right? Oh dear, I’d better shut up before I pry open that kettle of monkeys with a fish. (Ha! Two jokes in one, there!)
