« Crunchy Cons | Main | New Releases »
December 02, 2005
The Chronicles of Pullman
A good critique of Phil Pullman's critique of Lewis from the Chronicles of Higher Education.
Many children seem to have read The Chronicles as Laura Winner, in Slate, remembers herself and her friends doing, as simply "a riveting tale." Some children — the books have sold more than 95 million copies, after all — presumably have experienced, in Lewis's phrase, the "pre-baptism of the child's imagination" that Lewis hoped and Pullman fears would someday open their ears to the Christian story. But where's the offense in that? For Pullman, it seems, Lewis's offense was merely to love what Pullman hates.
Certainly there is nothing remotely as tendentious in The Chronicles as Pullman's attacks in His Dark Materials against Christianity. "For all its history," a benevolent witch tells Lyra Belacqua and Will Parry, the young protagonists of the series, the Church "has tried to suppress and control every natural impulse. ... That's what the Church does, and every church is the same: control, destroy, obliterate every good feeling." As for God, a rebellious angel later tells the children, "God, the Creator, the Lord, Yahweh, El, Adonai, the King, the Father, the Almighty ... was never the creator. He was an angel like ourselves ... [who] told those who came after him that he had created them, but it was a lie." In one of the last scenes of the trilogy, the children watch God die. "Demented and powerless," Pullman writes, "the aged being could only weep and mumble in fear and pain and misery." Every Christian character in the series is rotten to the core, and none of them bothers to pretend otherwise. "The Christian religion," one of Pullman's main characters blandly explains, "is a very powerful and convincing mistake, that's all." Oh.
What about Pullman's other charges against The Chronicles?
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d83464678c53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Chronicles of Pullman:
Comments
Pullman has long had a bitter and abiding hatred for Lewis and all his works. The success of the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe film will be painful for him. Good.
Posted by: Donald R. McClarey at Dec 2, 2005 4:37:21 PM
Another scandal will hit St. Tims as Dale Fuschek harbored a communist dictator. She still works at the church, & I filed a complaint with the state board, 14 months later & still no meeting.
Posted by: Mike at Dec 2, 2005 4:40:21 PM
I find Pullman a better proselytizer for religion than Lewis, actually, though not necessarily for Christianity...
As Rowan Williams said "which God is it who gets killed? Is this what a believer would recognise as the real God?"
It clearly is not. Not the believers I know, anyway. The God of Pullman's universe is a usurper, not a Creator. The Church is likewise unrecognizable. It takes the worst aspects of several religions, jumbles them in a blender, and this is what comes out.
It's not a good argument against religion or Christianity as they actually exist. It is a powerful argument against Divine Command Theory, but well, who said this?
There were in the eighteenth century terrible theologians who held that "God did not command certain things because they are right, but certain things are right because God commanded them". To make the position perfectly clear, one of them even said that though God has, as it happens, commanded us to love Him and one another, He might equally well have commanded us to hate Him and one another, and hatred would then have been right. It was apparently a mere toss-up which He decided on. Such a view in effect makes God a mere arbitrary tyrant. It would be better and less irreligious to believe in no God and to have no ethics than to have such an ethics and such a theology as this.
Answer: C.S. Lewis. There's stuff about Lewis' theology that I really really dislike, but for goodness' sake, he's not Tim LaHaye. Really now.
As for how Pullman inadvertantly proselytizes for religion: he presents a very thoroughly imagined picture of what it would be like for God to interfere directly in the human mind. This is presented, very effectively, as the worst kind of tyranny. "Free will" is of course a very common answer to the question of "how do you recognize the evils of this world with a just and merciful God"--but when it's kept on a theoretical level, it's not a very satisfying answer.
I like both series a lot. Both feel the need to drop giant anvils on readers sometimes, especially in the last book, in a way that gets in the way of the story. But they are great stories with great characters nonetheless, and I like it when novels try to engage with the Big Questions.
This First Things review makes a similar argument.
Posted by: Katherine at Dec 2, 2005 5:28:22 PM
Amy, did you review Pullman's trilogy for Our Sunday Visitor around this time a couple years ago? I first heard of Pullman in an OSV review back then and posted it to a couple mailing lists I was on. Caused quite a stir, especially as this was during the first flare of Harry Potter Hysteria.
I think Pullman's just jealous of Lewis. If someone does better than you (or is even more popular), pull him down any way you can -- it's a pattern I've seen too often in both high school and fandom. (An old Mad Magazine cartoon put it this way: "Anybody who can do anything better than I can is a FAAG!")
Posted by: Ken at Dec 2, 2005 5:29:43 PM
There were in the eighteenth century terrible theologians who held that "God did not command certain things because they are right, but certain things are right because God commanded them". To make the position perfectly clear, one of them even said that though God has, as it happens, commanded us to love Him and one another, He might equally well have commanded us to hate Him and one another, and hatred would then have been right. It was apparently a mere toss-up which He decided on. Such a view in effect makes God a mere arbitrary tyrant.
Sounds more like Allah of Islam. Or a lot of splinter churches where "God's Soverignity" & "Glory" crush all else -- including you & me. It becomes a matter of following God not because He's good, but because He's bigger than us and can smash us like a bug anytime He wants. So you scream your praise-phrases over and over like one of the involuntary guests at Comrade Stalin's all-night vodka bashes...
Posted by: Ken at Dec 2, 2005 5:37:22 PM
Pullman was actually how I found this blog. My husband, who taught fifth grade at the time, brought home His Dark Materials. I read the first book, and couldn't believe that this was being recommended in an elementary library. I also couldn't believe that I'd never heard of it, so I googled it, found Amy's review, and have enjoyed her blog ever since.
The reading teacher at Eric's school recommended it to him. I'm not even sure that she had read it herself. Then I found it on a recommended list in the children's section of the library. Ironically, I actually think it was alongside Chronicles of Narnia, kind of "if you like Harry Potter, try these". I asked the librarian if she'd ever read them. She hadn't, but had heard good things about them.
I just can't imagine an impressionable kid reading these, especially a thinking kid who hasn't quite gotten all the foundations of his religion down. If I had read these in elementary school, I know that many of the thoughts within would have festered inside me. Good and evil are completely twisted around with wisdom being the only, the ultimate good.
I thank Mr. Pullman for bringing me to this site, but I truly hope that his books don't pull young, impressionable souls away from the faith.
Posted by: Maeana at Dec 2, 2005 8:43:16 PM
My experience is that many atheists are bitter, angry, and unhappy people. Often they spend lot's of time attacking religion in an almost fanatic way. Why do they spend so much time attacking something that they don't believe in anyway? Logically they should just ignore it. Instead they seem fixated and all to often just plain hateful. When they see a happy religious person it just drives them nuts. I wonder what Mr. Pullman's real demons are?
Posted by: Fr. J at Dec 2, 2005 11:11:42 PM
I'm pleasantly surprised that the Chronicle of Higher Education published this reply to Pullman's attacks on Lewis. From the days I subscribed I never got the impression they were friends of any religion, Christianity in particular. The had a lot to say (mostly negative) about Ex corde ecclesiae, John Paul II's document that proposed the novel idea that a Catholic college or university's thelogy program should actually be faithful to the teaching of the church! They published at least one admiring article about Peter Singer, the reprehensible "ethicist" at Princeton who favors infanticide, euthanasia, and animal rights.
Posted by: Niall Mor at Dec 2, 2005 11:11:48 PM
Pullman isn't as important as he's made out to be. Almost every child I know (I have over ten neices & nephews and minor age cousins) has read Harry Potter. None of them have read Dark Materials.
Posted by: dymphna at Dec 3, 2005 9:28:01 AM
dymphna,
You're probably right, but with the popularity of the movie versions of Potter and Narnia, Pullman's characters will probably show up on a movie screen near you before too long.
Posted by: CV at Dec 3, 2005 10:04:52 AM
CV - In fact, they're almost certain to show up at the local theater before long. There's been a movie deal in the works for some time. I will be avoiding any HDM movie for several reasons, most important of which is that Pullman is a subpar writer, and I find his stories absurd.
Posted by: Tope at Dec 3, 2005 10:11:13 AM
New Line Cinema is filming Pullman. The series has already been turned into a successful stage production. Although not a patch on Lewis's figures, he's sold more than a million copies, won the Whitbread prize and the Carnegie Medal (which Lewis also won for Narnia). Pullman is lauded in all sorts of catalogs and guides as superior lit. And the HARRY-haters had not a word to say about him.
A fantasy writer who sells at closer to Rowlings' figures is Terry Prachett. He also hates Lewis and there is a much subtler pro-Pagan, anti-organized Religion message in his books than in Pullman's.
Posted by: Sandra Miesel at Dec 3, 2005 11:32:29 AM
Ah, but Terry Pratchett is strongly pro-morality, pro-marriage, pro-kids, and pro-democracy. He believes that actions, ideas, and words have consequences that cannot be waved away, and that is rare in these days. I have some problems with his positions (to say the least!), but on the whole, he is really trying to be on the side of the angels. Pullman isn't.
Also, Pullman can only be inadvertently funny, whereas Pratchett is one of the great comedic writers of all time. He's gone well beyond Douglas Adams, and become a truly great novelist. I won't say Shakespeare level, but definitely well up there, especially considering the consistent continuous improvement of his body of work and ideas.
Finally, Pterry is a real gentleman, a generous convention guest, an invaluable component to a panel, and a model of patience with fans of all ages, as anyone who's met him will attest.
Maureen, who's only a lukewarm Pratchett fan, compared to many she knows.
Posted by: Maureen at Dec 3, 2005 11:59:07 AM
re: Pratchett as pro-pagan
Not really - more like a typical fannish English gamer.
Not really interested in religion, yet God-haunted and aware of religion's power as a social and motivational force. Scornful of religion and priests, yet always coming up with really nice religious professionals who work hard and do good. Dismissive of the idea that gods would really care about humans and their morality, yet unable to resist making the smallest unnamed character into a real person with thoughts and feelings. Death is one of his justly famous continuing characters.
His latest book features a god who "went away" and "doesn't care what we think, but only that we think", but also features a man fighting possession by an interdimensional creature to make peace between warring races and read to his son.
There are also some famous quotes:
Mightily Oats: "There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment about the nature of sin, for example."
Granny Weatherwax: "And what do they think? Against it, are they?"
Mightily Oats: "It's not as simple as that. It's not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of grey."
Granny Weatherwax: "Nope."
Mightily Oats: "Pardon?"
Granny Weatherwax: "There's no greys, only white that's got grubby. I'm surprised you don't know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
Mightily Oats: "It's a lot more complicated than that--"
Granny Weatherwax: "No. It ain't. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they're getting worried that they won't like the truth. People as things, that's where it starts."
Mightily Oats: "Oh, I'm sure there are worse crimes--"
Granny Weatherwax: "But they starts with thinking about people as things...."
Oh, yeah, I think God has Pterry well in hand. Heh, heh, heh.
Posted by: Maureen at Dec 3, 2005 12:36:30 PM
Please do not dismiss Pullman just because you think his writing style is inferior. I have at least one niece and several of her classmates whose loss of faith and antagonism against Christianity stems from these books.
Pullman doesn't care if his theology is bunk. He is aiming at immature adults. The kind we haven't done a strong job of catechizing.
I hope there will be a huge outcry against these books.
Posted by: Amy Mitchell at Dec 3, 2005 3:23:40 PM
Hey don't diss Terry Pratchett! He's one of the authors that everyone in this family (except the baby - and I'm sure she'll love him as soon as she's old enough to be read "Where's my cow?) enjoys.
I don't really see he's pro-pagan, so much as he writes about an imaginary world that has kind of a Greek/Roman mythology. He's definitely an agnostic type himself, but as Maureen points out, there are interesting tones in his book. I just finished rereading "Carpe Jugulum" which Maureen was quoting from, which I love because besides being a great deal of fun, it's a pretty good treatment of religion. Unlike the rather annoying "Small Gods," which Pratchett also wrote, the believer doesn't have to lose faith at the end to become credible.
I'll quote my other favourite bit from Carpe Jugulum, since Maureen's already quoted the bit about sin.
"She turned to face him, suddenly alive. "it'd be as well for you if I didn't believe," she said, prodding him with a sharp finger. "This Om...anyone seen him?"
"It is said three thousand people witnessed his manifestation at the Great Temple when he made the Covenant with the prophet Brutha and saved him from death by torture on the iron turtle-"
"But I bet that now they're arguing about what they actually saw, eh?"
"Well, indeed, yes, there are many opinions-"
"Right. Right. That's people for you. Now if I'd seen him, really there, really alive, it'd be in me like a fever. If I thought there was some god who really did care two hoots about people, and who watched 'em like a father and cared for 'em like a mother...well, you wouldn't catch me saying things like "There are two sides to every question," and "We must respect other peoples beliefs." You wouldn't find me just being gen'rally nice in the hope that it'd all turn out right in the end, not if that flame was burning in me like an unforgivin' sword. And I did say burnin', Mister Oats, cos that's what it'd be. You say that your people don't burn folk and sacrifice people any more, but that's what true faith would mean, y'see? Sacrificin' your own life, one day at a time, to the flame, declarin' the truth of it, workin' for it, breathin' the soul of it. THAT'S religion. Anything else is just...is just bein' nice. And a way of keepin' in touch with the neighbours.
She relaxed slightly, and went on in a quieter voice. "Anyway, that's what I'd be, if I really believed. And I don't think that's fashionable right now, 'cos it seems that if you sees evil now you have to wring your hands and say, "Oh deary me, we must debate this." That's my two penn'orth, Mister Oats. You be happy to let things lie. Don't chase faith, 'cos you'll never catch it." She added, almost as an aside, "But, perhaps, you can live faithfully."
Posted by: Eileen R at Dec 3, 2005 3:43:00 PM
Yes, Pratchett is hilarious. And I've met him and he's funny in person, too. But I think the cummulative effect of reading a lot of his books in a row would not be so positive on kids. Not at all in the same league with Pullman but not so positive. You didn't notice the pro-Wicca undertone in books where the witches appear?
Posted by: Sandra Miesel at Dec 3, 2005 5:08:45 PM
Pro-wicca undertones? All the most wiccan characters in his books (compared to the three or four I've known) were made out to be foolish and unnecessarily complicated, c.f. early Magrat and "Perdita".
Admittedly, maybe all the wiccans I've known just had Perdita personalities :)
Posted by: Eepsy at Dec 3, 2005 7:50:47 PM
It's interesting that while pterry is not a C.S. Lewis fan, he does seem to like Chesterton.
Posted by: Dave Pawlak at Dec 3, 2005 8:03:39 PM
My experience is that many atheists are bitter, angry, and unhappy people. Often they spend lot's of time attacking religion in an almost fanatic way.
I recently got into an Internet battle with a raving atheist (who said he was raised Catholic, and thought the Church was the most evil institution on the face of the earth). You couldn't argue with him, because all he did spew disjointed venom about the Scandal, the Pope's "Nazi" past, the Inquisition, etc, etc. And he simply ignored any answer or question put to him, so I was giving it up as useless, when I spotted a line buried in the midst of his raving. He mentioned that his 5 year old daughter had died of a brain tumor. Now, I am aware that people on the Internet can make up any old story - but somehow, I believed that. And I thought, "Ah, that's it - the source of all this fierce, unhinged anger. "
Suddenly, I felt pity for him - and a bit of shame, because I had lost my temper and slung some insults back at him. After all, according to his lights, his daughter died for no reason and is now dust and ashes. Is his atheism rage at God - for not existing? I can't imagine a more hopeless state of mind. I gave him my condolences and said that I did not mean to offend him, but I would pray for Emily that night. "After all," I said. "If there is no God, praying for her does no harm; if there is a God, it can only help." His reply was to go on about the "irrationality " of Christians. He saw his own anger and fear and hatred not at all.
Some people find God in suffering, but others get bitter and nasty. Is it because they have not been granted grace, or because they've set their hearts and minds against it? I don't know.
Posted by: Donna at Dec 3, 2005 8:57:25 PM
Pro-wicca? No, not really. He seems to be ridiculing the New Age and Wicca types more than anything else. To take an example off the top of my head, a lot of "At Hat Full of Sky"'s humour came from Mrs. Earwig (pronounced err-vij) with her mystical runes and such. The real witches are much more matter of fact people and their power is in seeing things how they are (first sight) and influencing how people think (headology). Power is in *not* using it, generally. Pratchett's witches seem rather the opposite of the New Age type.
I don't think all his books are appropriate for kids till a certain age. His kids' books: Wee Free Men, A Hat Full of Sky, The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents are fine for the younger folk. I've read some of the adult novels to the family in the van on vacations, but edited to take the slightly risque jokes out.
Other than that, I do think that a steady diet of Pratchett with nothing else and no parental guidance would be a bad thing. He isn't a Christian and his books reflect that. I'd definitely suggest keeping away from "Small Gods," as I said above. But I don't see him as at all anti-Christian or pro-pagan. He's an agnostic with all the problems that go with that. I see much more good in his books than bad, though, and as long as parents are giving their teenagers guidance and balance in their reading, there's room for Pratchett. Whereas there's not any good at all in reading Pullman.
*Does* Pratchett hate Lewis, though? I seem to remember him saying that he had nothing but respect for Tolkien and Lewis. I can see him criticizing Lewis, but I don't think he hates him.
He's written quite a lot about Tolkien, including an essay about reading the Lord of the Rings for the first time which is absolutely fantabulous. It's in "Once More with Footnotes."
Posted by: Eileen R at Dec 3, 2005 9:14:02 PM
Well, my husband and I seem to be sensing something in Pratchett that the rest of you don't so I'll drop it.
GOOD OMENS by Pratchett and Gaiman is hilarious though for adults. Too bad the film deal fell through and the authors had a falling out.
Posted by: Sandra Miesel at Dec 4, 2005 3:16:55 PM
Sadly, Pullman has become a cultural force to be reckoned with in the UK at any rate.
His books are widely read by British children, many of whose parents seem unaware of the radically anti-Christian nature of the works.
Posted by: Gerry O' Neil at Dec 4, 2005 3:20:20 PM
Don't dismiss Pullman's popularity among kids and so-called young adult readers. Alas, too many kids have read the Pullman series. I know a couple of kids who read Pullman while waiting for new Harry Potter books to come out and declared the Pullmam trilogy superior to the Harry Potter books.
From my own observations, although there is plenty of overlap, among young readers the Narnia books appeal to a younger audience (8-11), the Potter books appeal to a wider group but in general they tend to be older kids (especially the last couple of novels)(9-14), and Pullman's trilogy appeal to those who are bit older still (11-15).
Incidentally, I have not read the Pullman trilogy and gave up on Potter after the first three books (but my son and daughter loved them all so far), and the Narnia books are my favorites. Another confession: despite two valiant tries I never finished Tolkien's LOTR (last time I gave up after about 250 pages), but I did enjoy reading aloud The Hobbit to the kids.
Posted by: pHil at Dec 4, 2005 4:40:15 PM
'I wonder what Mr. Pullman's real demons are'
Maybe they're real demons.
Posted by: reluctant penitent at Dec 4, 2005 11:06:18 PM
