“Compass” Update

I had made up my mind to contribute just the one post to the never-ending discussion about this trilogy and the movie based on its first book (other than perhaps a report of what the kids get out of it, once we’ve read the book with our book club & then seen the movie together….) But as I was surfing I happened upon two sites that were offering up the content of the Catholic League’s booklet, and I couldn’t resist the read – which turns out to be 31 pages. You can view the PDF version of Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked here and here (I am assuming these folks have permission to post it, since the folks at the Catholic League & their allied organizations have a vested interest in educating people, and since their hard copies are all sold out….)

Here are some thoughts on the continuing debate, having read the booklet:

1) Exact structure/content of the pamphlet: titles & front matter (5 pages,) note to readers (2 paragraphs on a single page,) about the film (3 pages,) Pullman’s agenda (3 pages,) synopsis & excerpts from the books (8 pages,) book reviews (3 pages,) a section labelled “Pullman bares his soul” (a collection of brief quotes from Pullman, 2 pages.) This is followed by the conclusion (4 paragraphs on a single page) and the back matter, including end notes & blank pages for note-taking (5 pages.) [N.B. I am rounding up here, as long as the section contains a minimum of one full page of text.]

2) Is the representation of the film/books/author in this publication a balanced one? Not really. While one reviewer quoted is said to be a fan of Pullman’s, the writers of the pamphlet seem to have gone out of their way to quote only his negative comments about the books. Here’s more:

• While the remarks from the Australian reviewers quoted in the pamphlet are in no way flattering, if one searches out the original interview the impression gained is that the comments were made in the context of literary critique. They were not intended as a commentary on the morality of the author, the fitness of the work from a spirituo-religious point of view or, certainly, the hidden agenda of which the author is accused.
  • Sophie Masson is quoted in the pamphlet, in reference to the anti-Catholic sentiment of the books. But in the original interview she also had this to say:
    

    “I am still in awe of the magnificent achievement that the series represents. I do not agree with some of the underlying ideas and themes in His Dark Materials, but I think it is truly a work of stunning originality, extraordinary and courageous ambition, gloriously written, passionate and beautiful.”

    She later continues:

    I reckon that in a way in Milton was of the Devil’s party without knowing it, Pullman could be said to be of God’s party without knowing it! – He’s succeeded in putting an interest in God, whether hostile or not, back on the agenda as far as fantasy is concerned, anyway. And in such a stimulating way.

  • Richard Harland is quoted as saying “I think the anti-Catholicism is only half of what Pullman detests — he’s equally opposed to authoritarian churches on the Protestant side.” But he also lauds what Pullman is doing in revisiting the themes of Paradise Lost, saying:
    

    I guess I don’t see Pullman as standing magnificently alone, but as being one of the key movers in a trend that’s gathering pace worldwide. I think fantasy writers are looking to move beyond the Tolkien paradigm – and the Arthurian paradigm – and discover new “countries of the imagination”. I think that’s what Pullman has done, and I think he’s also created a narrative to fit this particular country – a dark story with Miltonic echoes.

  • Sean Williams is the fourth reviewer interviewed in the original article. He is not quoted in the pamphlet, but I found it significant that he said of The Golden Compass that “I remember thinking at the time that this could be one of the greatest YA fantasy novels ever written, tapping cleverly as it did into numerous traditions and creating something wonderfully unique”. He expresses disappointment in the second and third novels, which I felt myself on my first read-through. However he raises an interesting point:
    

    One very persuasive piece published in the SFWA (Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America) handbook took the line that His Dark Materials was a powerful and successful work in the sense that it looked at theology from the point of view of the Scientific Method.

  • Ian Irvine’s words quoted in the pamphlet are perhaps taken in context, but it is worthy to note that there is a sentence that the Catholic League chose to leave out, and which would significantly alter the way in which his words are understood. Here is the full quote (the omitted sentence is highlighted):
    

    I felt that his attack on the Catholic Church went way beyond what was necessary for the story, and in fact damaged the story. By the end of the book I felt as though I’d endured a lecture about his beliefs, and that marred the story for me. I had a similar reaction to the Narnia books in early adulthood.

• Rachael Ebbs is similarly quoted in reference to the anti-church sentiment of the books. However the pamphlet never explains that her review was written for a His Dark Materials fansite, and that her view of the trilogy is a positive one. Indeed, she defends Pullman’s choices:
  

  Many people look to God for love, trust, friendship, happiness and all the qualities that humans should possess to have the greatest human worth. Yet, Phillip Pullman causes God to be killed. This is not an attack on Christianity but a confirmation of human worth…

• Laura Miller’s description of the Magisterium is quoted in the pamphlet as well, and if that was all you bothered to read of her article you might believe she agreed with the folks at the Catholic League. But it is from Laura Miller herself that we hear how preposterous is the idea of a hidden agenda behind Pullman’s books. Her opinion of the email alerts telling parents to beware of the movie is:
  

  The messages had the breathless, marginally literate quality of rumors about spider eggs in bubble gum. Perhaps that’s why the controversy promptly earned itself a page at www.snopes.com, that venerable Internet clearing house for urban legends. Snopes lists this particular rumor as “true,” presumably because the e-mails use a few genuine, if cherry-picked, quotations from Pullman’s writings and press interviews. But that doesn’t keep the whole thing from being fundamentally ridiculous.

I’ll leave you to do the rest of the legwork yourselves. If you manage to ferret out any juicy bits, please let me know! Similarly, I’m sure you can find ample sources of Christians who are in no way threatened by either books or film. Again, Archbishop Rowan Williams believes the books should be taught in religious education courses. One of the lead roles in the movie is played by Catholic actress Nicole Kidman, who states that she couldn’t have made the movie if she felt it was anti-Catholic. We also discover that the Church of Scotland “believes that the film provides a golden opportunity to stimulate discussion on a wide range of moral and spiritual issues” and “looks forward to its release and the opportunities that it presents.” (church press release) They will be producing their own leaflet about the movie – but theirs will be distributed through churches, presumably free of charge. Update: If you would like a copy of the leaflet, says the press release, you can email gmclennan@cofscotland.org.uk

3) Does the pamphlet show convincing evidence of an actual hidden agenda in the books and the film? I’ll leave it to the reader to make that decision independently. It is interesting to note, though, that the accusation about Pullman being involved in an atheist DVD intended for use in religious education classes is true. You can get a copy of the PR material for the film here. Not having seen the DVD myself I won’t comment on it. Again, if anyone has seen it or has any reflections on whether this realistically connects to a hidden agenda in the books & film, they are quite welcome to post comments.

4) Perhaps the most important question about the pamphlet is not whether it achieves its purpose (for obviously those who are skeptics will be difficult to convince and the so-called choir never required any preaching to.) The question that seems most relevant is this: was the pamphlet necessary? If you were able to receive the email alerts, use the internet to order the hard copy of the pamphlet or download the PDF then my answer has to be an emphatic, “No!” Why not do the work for yourself? There are plenty of places online where you can read interviews with Pullman or find quotes in which he discusses his religion & his writings. There are numerous places to read both summaries and critical reviews of the books and movie. Do you need someone else to pre-digest your reading for you?

It is truly frightening that certain religious organizations spend much of their time telling their members what to think and how to act on it. This is exactly what Pullman objects to, and those who follow the commandments blindly prove that we have a need today for more writers like Pullman – not fewer. St Bede’s Traditionalist Community tells its members:

The Catholic League in America has written a booklet, “The Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked”. …. It is important that all Christians, especially those with children or grandchildren, read this booklet. Anyone who does will be armed with all the ammo they need to convince friends and family members that there is nothing innocent about Pullman’s agenda.

So not only do good members of the community have to go buy a book to think for them, but then they must tell their friends and family to think as they do! Another Christian newsletter tells the faithful what they are permitted to view and read, instead of The Golden Compass:

Please do not go to the movie and do not buy the books. Return the books if you have already bought them. Spread the message to family and friends. Embrace the positive movies that have come from Hollywood like the Chronicles of Narnia or read the Lord of the Rings, and refuse to give your money or your approval to “Dark Materials” that try to snuff out the Light.

I think I agree with Pullman himself on this one:

Well, you know, I always mistrust people who tell us how we should understand something. They know better than we do what the book means or what this means and how we should read it and whether we should read it or not.

This work was created by Ruby of Freehold 2, and is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.

Excerpts copyright quoted authors. Please visit their sites to read more, and respect the terms of their copyrights. Thanks!