Latest Articles by Sarah Canice Funke
In light of the upcoming film based on Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials series, there is new concern over Philip Pullman's devout atheism and antagonism towards C.S. Lewis. Will children be blindsided into ditching Aslan for Dust? I'm actually a decent fan of Pullman's literary style and books, whatever can be said for the man himself, and so here are a few of my thoughts on the series:
Organized religion bears a good deal of power. Pullman's books illustrate rather profoundly what happens when such power grows corrupt.
As much as Pullman dislikes Lewis, interestingly enough, he structures his book as an answer to Paradise Lost rather than as a response to the Chronicles of Narnia. (There is still some connection, as Lewis loved Paradise Lost, but he obviously didn't write it.) Pullman's books are also meant to counter the gnosticism (inferiority of the body, physical world) that inflects Lewis' work to some degree and Milton's work rather blatantly. And yet apparently really compelling fantasy involves conflict between the seen and unseen, because a certain measure of gnosticism remains even in Pullman's books. [On a related note, if we want to keep our kids from having their imaginations corrupted, I think we need to ban Paradise Lost ( the theology in it is hardly orthodox--so have at bashing it, is my conclusion).]
The most offensive part of the book is the figure of God that Pullman paints. And yet to me, that figure is really just the picture of anyone who usurps what is not rightfully theirs, burdened down by a power that does not belong to them. (Pullman calls "god" the first angel--anyone else remember an angel trying to set themselves up as "god"?--in Pullman's world, this angel really did succeed.) So the real Power of the universe remains mysteriously unknowable. This lack of personal interaction with God puts Pullman in the same camp as Tolkien, and I don't think kids will suffer if there is no Aslan figure explicitly laid out in their novels.
I have a second note of caution about the books, which would make me hesitant to give them to kids until they were probably freshman in high school: there is one episode of very vaguely described sexuality. However, I believe this moment is rather crucial to the whole (intended) project of the book, Pullman's final assault on Milton: in Paradise Lost, sex comes after the fall, sealing its "dirtiness" and subsequently the inferiority and uncleanness of the body and the physical world. In Pullman's universe, sex "saves" the world, signifying the act's sanctified goodness. In a culture of oversaturation and desensitization regarding sex, it was refreshing to find an author who treated it as holy and "set apart" (not set apart in the context of marriage, since Pullman is decidedly not a Christian, but set apart in the sense of having profoundly universal significance).
All that said, I would not throw the books at kids without discussion, but I believe that there are some good issues that Pullman raises. Maybe a family could read the Narnia chronicles and His Dark Materials in tandem, because I believe that they have different, albeit complementary, things to say.
*********************
Update: Hm. Over on another thread, someone argued that Milton includes some descriptions of sexuality *pre* Fall...my statements here may have to wait while I go digging up some Milton.
Update #2: Please read some updated remarks here.
Posted by funke at 31.10.07 9:34 | TrackBack | Posted to Film & Television | LiterazziThis is a really good summary of possibly problems people might have along with answers. I love the His Dark Materials series mainly because it's so beautifully written and the world is so all-engrossing and mysterious. Pullman is also championing truth and beauty, even though he doesn't like organized religion. I think these books are a good look at the other side of the story, the picture that we in the midst of organized religion have a hard time seeing. The Paradise Lost thing is amazing too, I didn't see that was where it was going until the second or third book, the third one I think, and I practically got up and danced around because I was so excited that someone had made a children's series out of Paradise Lost. I like that he doesn't make grown-ups bad, too, like Lewis does. Why should growing up be bad? Why should Susan be left out just because she like lipstick and nylons and boys?
Plus, I love the alternate history "when John Calvin set himself up as Pope . . ."
Posted by: linnea at 31.10.07 19:05Looks like a good summary of the books.
Just to clarify, I wouldn't recommend kids would read Paradise Lost, anyway. They wouldn't understand or enjoy it, apart from the appalling theology that it contains.
Also, I don't think that there's anything wrong with not having an explicit God figure in fiction. In fact, I think that's one of the things that makes Tolkien's fantasy superior to Lewis'.
I believe further discussion could be had about the power of literature to form the imagination, now that some misunderstandings have been cleared out of the way. I was never an advocate of censorship; I was simply tired of seeing the Christian community rush to appropriate whatever redeeming value they could find in mainstream literature, as if we were forced to gather the crumbs from under mass culture's table. But my criticism should have been more cultural, than of Pullman's books specifically.
When I read the interview with him, "Heat and Dust," he made it personal, so I responded in kind. It's a family loyalty thing. However, on later reflection, many of his criticisms of Lewis made sense, though his tone made me react to him much as I do to Richard Dawkins. But there is a difference between the two of them, I now realize. Dawkins is merely a boor, whereas Pullman has some insight. While in the end I believe hierarchy is what we need, when it is just, in this fallen world, there is much to be said for the "Republic of Heaven."
Posted by: Evan Donovan at 31.10.07 19:41i've only read the first book, and am scouring the local used bookstores for #'s 2 and 3. thanks for the thoughts. i'm glad to have skipped the reactionary invective and stumbled first upon somebody who read and responded thoughtfully.
didn't this author also write the Sally Lockhart trilogy? everytime i go looking for His Dark Materials 2 and 3, i only find Tiger in the Well.
...and i ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more. (sorry. that just popped out. it's on the radio.)
Posted by: bob at 31.10.07 22:54I agree that Pullman's literature is much more...level-headed, I guess than he is himself. Similar to the gap between Susan Cooper's views and how most people read her Dark is Rising series. Long, long ago when I was writing a paper on Pullman and Milton, I found a very interesting review of His Dark Materials in First Things, a British journal of culture and religion. This was way back when nobody had ever heard of Pullman and everyone was focused on banning little Harry...have a look http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2181&var_recherche=philip+pullman
Posted by: Jennifer Wharton at 1.11.07 18:22Susan Cooper - what are her views? I read her books when I was a kid, and liked them. I guess that makes me hypocritical for initially speaking out against Pullman. Ah well, live and learn :)
Posted by: Evan Donovan at 1.11.07 23:15Thanks for that article, Jennifer. It was helpful and thought-provoking, and I think even the spoilers it contained only prompt me more strongly to find and read the rest of the series. :)
Posted by: bob at 2.11.07 14:09re. Susan Cooper. I think it's generally accepted that her Dark is Rising quartet speaks strongly about the battle between good and evil. I was quite surprised on reading a collection of essays by her (Dreams and Wishes) to find that she strongly disagrees with this view of her books. She herself has a much more relativistic view of the world and said that the books are supposed to illustrate the destruction and evil that comes through believing in a black and white, good vs. evil worldview. I'm summarizing this very badly, it was quite a long time ago, but that's what I recall.
Posted by: Jennifer Wharton at 3.11.07 12:51Thanks, Jennifer. That makes sense. I read her books as pretty conventional fantasy like you describe - there is a good side and an evil side, and you need to make sure you're on the right one.
And I still remember being in Christian Mind with you. Good to hear from you again, even if only in blog-land.
Posted by: Evan Donovan at 3.11.07 13:04