But that's cowardice, isn't it? We Christians aren't ashamed of speaking our faith or declaring our viewpoints in any clear way. We don't dumb our beliefs down. We aren't so in love with the Almighty Dollar that we hide what we consider the truth. Heck, we go down with our ship. Are non-religious filmmakers so afraid of declaring their truth, or of showing us the true compass? Why are they behaving like the Magisterium and hiding the "truth" from us? Or are they attempting to slowly feed us the truth, like the Magisterium's vaccine, slow dose by slow dose, until we are sufficiently inoculated against religion?
Pullman's books, I hear, are more honest and direct. A good thing. If someone is fighting against something, he should be bold enough to say what he is fighting about and should leave himself open to battle. And Christians more learned than I can easily challenge and battle anti-Christian books. I'll only say that from what I've seen in the film it appears that the Magisterium represents the Church in Pullman's books. If so, Pullman has succumbed to an old cliché, and how powerful can an old cliché about authoritarianism be in creating a powerful allegory against Christianity?
Whether atheist, Christian, New Ager, or Muslim, a pushy person indoctrinated in a particular world view will often bully those who don't believe the same thing he does. Only atheist governments such as the old USSR and flaky dictatorships such as that in North Korea have the kind of power the Magisterium has. No evangelical or Roman Catholic equivalent of such a power exists in the United States and North America. And the larger portion of the world's Christians are not rich, white, powerful, men. Hey, I'll be the first to admit that religious people can be overbearing and bullying. But should an allegory against a specific church be built up around a human trait that is common to all of humanity? And should a film which purports to show this allegory be so lacking in specificity for mass consumption?
A true allegory should come from the author’s own sense of truth, but there is something about The Golden Compass that feels passed down, unexperienced, untrue, and, well, old. The film also feels vaguely untrue because evil though some authoritarian organizations may be, many of them also do good. If the Magisterium truly represents the evil authoritarian nature of the church, shouldn’t the filmmakers (and perhaps the book's author) show how the Magisterium is loved by at least a few of the common people? This is one of the main problems with the child-stealing sub-plot. In the past the Church has been guilty of trying to steal the culture of certain children – Native American Jesuit schools for instance. But for the most part, the Church has taken care of orphans and poor children. And if children’s minds and spirits were being “stolen” and the children indoctrinated with religion, the parents of those children were often quite happy to work with the church to teach their children about the facts of life.
Article comments
1 - ostrova
I haven't seen the movie yet but I just loved the books. Hey, I've got an idea--read the books!
2 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I also suggest reading the books. Movies based on books are generally failures. Exodus, based on Leon Uris' novel of the same name, was a failure as a film in spite of the stirring theme. The Ten Commandments is practically a Cold War comedy. I'll take the Book of Exodus any day of the week to the bad news mugging of the actors in the movie, in spite of all the boring parts of the text.
3 - carole
True. Go to the source, i say. And read all books. And those who dislike the Church and have an idea of what the Bible purports to say should also try to read the Bibles. All this second-hand stuff does no one any good. -C
4 - duane
Parents trying to lead good Christian lives should be aghast at Pullman and the film producers for their attempt to indoctrinate the impressionable minds of innocent children with baseless nonsense. Parents need to protect their children from the world of alternative viewpoints and fight for their right to indoctrinate their children with baseless nonsense of their own choosing.
5 - carole
Duane: did you read my review or are you so busy working off a grudge against an old evangelical aunt that you can't see what I've already written? Although I do believe individual parents should be able to teach their children anything they wish, that's not what I spoke of in this article. What I wrote about: the failure of a film to adequately portray a book. That's all. Your opinion about religion and whether religion is nonsense should be saved for another article. I hope you can hold onto your witty comebacks until the appropriate article comes along. Incidentally, most Christian parents DO show their kids alternative viewpoints. Obviously, you don't know what it's like to be a Christian parent in the US with so much media, worldviews, and propaganda around. What Christians object to is the fact that this is a book geared to young children who might not know how to correctly answer some very nonsensical atheistic assertions. -C
6 - duane
Good smackdown, Carol. Old evangelical aunt. Hehe. Nice.
I did read your review, and thought it was an interesting spin on the issue, and overall, quite balanced.
I read about the first 2/3 of the book with my son, have not seen the movie, have heard a lot on Christian radio about drumming up support for boycotts against the movie and Pullman in general, which I think is quite silly, like most of the rest of what is broadcast on those stations (need some examples?).
As for sticking to the specific topic, hehe, that almost never happens at BC.
Obviously, you don't know what it's like to be a Christian parent in the US with so much media, worldviews, and propaganda around.
No, but I do know what it's like to be a parent in the US with so much media, worldviews, and propaganda around.
What Christians object to is the fact that this is a book geared to young children who might not know how to correctly answer some very nonsensical atheistic assertions.
Yeah, I know. That's precisely echoes the meaning of my comment #3. If I were feeling combative, I could say, "What I object to is the fact that this is a book geared, in part, to young children who might not know how to correctly answer some very nonsensical religious assertions," and I think, if I were to say such a thing, that you know which book I'm referring to.
But I'm feeling rather conciliatory today, so I will refrain.
Carry on.
7 - Headless Unicorn Guy
Carole: Either "Old Evangelical Aunt" or "Mean Nun with Black Belt in Ruler".
Duane: Golden Compass apparently did not open well; not too much box office. Christian Activist Groups (TM) are already congratulating themselves on Our Boycott Is Why It Tanked; they're going to be insufferable for a long time.
I look at it as the flick was probably so bad not even the "Angry Christians Denounce Your Movie" self-sustaining free publicity machine could make much difference.