I came across this somewhat interesting article on The Golden Compass on CNN today, a movie I had no plan on seeing but now am considering reading the books it was based on of course not knowing earlier that it was based on books (the more you know!). Apparently the author of the books, Phillip Pullman, is decidedly “Anti-God” and well, good for him. And not only is he anti-god, but writes subversive fiction aimed at children. Again, good for him.
I don’t praise him specifically because he’s attacking the church or the belief systems it sets up or all sorts of other stuff that I could praise him for because they are in line with my own beliefs (my own beliefs being to put it simply that I don’t have big b Belief), but more because it gives another angle to religion for young people. While the Church (or churches) may argue that Pullman is being subversive in writing this book and allowing it to be made into a movie for children, I could right back and say that the Church is being subversive in preaching the bible and making animated movies about vegetables on religious adventures. It all amounts to the say thing. One group pushing its agenda against another. The bigger problem as I see it is that the more conservative religious icons or groups get to attack Pullman as evil, in essence, while in the end he seems to just be promoting a questioning of absolutes (again, haven’t read books or seen movie, I just enjoy making blanket statements about things I do not understand - Donny, you’re out of you’re element!).
And there I can agree with him. I have no problem with Faith or Belief or any of the various religions out there, but I do have a problem with the absoluteness of it. Perhaps this is why I enjoyed the character of Pi in The Life of Pi. He choses to embrace three different religions because the most essential part of them all is that you have faith (which he has in abundance) and that you love life (which he does in abundance) and that you love god (which again he does in abundance). This is against a large portion of the principles of each religion as each, of course, preaches that it is the one sole religion with the one true god(s). The point of this literary aside (other than to prove how smart I am) is that religions shouldn’t exist in these absolutes. That they are the one true with the one true is bullshit to me The one true to you with the one true to you is fine with me. Keep it individualistic or community oriented. There is no need to talk in absolutes. And that, I think is what Pullman is trying to undermine more than anything (more unsubstantiated blanket statements - yay!) - that this indoctrination (admittedly strong word) of religion should be questioned. Good can be evil. Roles can be reversed.
Just ask the transgender community.