From: Ari Dy S.J.
[mailto:a...@ateneo.edu]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007
10:17 AM
To: Fr. Bienvenido F. Nebres, S.J.
Subject: The Golden Compass by Pullman
Interview With Pete Vere and Sandra Miesel
INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana, NOV. 14, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The film "The
Golden Compass" isn't simply about using fairy-tale magic to tell a good
story, it corrupts the imagery of Lewis and Tolkien to undermine children's
faith in God and the Church, says Catholic author Pete Vere.
In this interview with ZENIT, Vere and Sandra Miesel discuss the movie
adaptation of the fantasy novels written by Philip Pullman. The film, staring
Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig, will be released in the United States
in early December.
Vere and Miesel are co-authors of the booklet "Pied Piper of Atheism: Philip Pullman and Children's Fantasy," to be published by Ignatius Press next month on the topic of "The Golden Compass."
Q: The
first movie of "The Golden Compass" trilogy is being released at
Christmas. For those unfamiliar with the series, what kind of books are these
and to whom do they appeal?
Vere: To begin, the books are marketed for 9-12 year olds as children's fantasy
literature in the tradition of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, and J.K. Rowling.
"If you're a fan of 'Lord of the Rings,' 'Narnia ' or 'Harry
Potter,'" the critics tell us, "you'll love Pullman."
Personally, I just can't see a child picking up these books and reading them. I
see them more as books that adults give kids to read.
Having said that, "The Golden Compass" (1995) is the first book in Pullman's trilogy. The
second book is titled "The Subtle Knife" (1997) and it is followed by
"The Amber Spyglass" (2000).
Collectively, the trilogy is known as "His Dark Materials," a phrase
taken from John Milton's "Paradise Lost." This is appropriately
titled in my opinion, since each book gets progressively darker -- both in the
intensity with which Pullman attacks the Catholic Church and the Judeo-Christian
concept of God, as well as the stridency with which he promotes atheism.
For example, one of the main supporting characters, Dr. Mary Malone, is a
former Catholic nun who abandoned her vocation to pursue sex and science. The
reader does not meet her until the second book, by which time the young reader
is already engrossed in the story. By the third book, Dr. Malone is engaging in
occult practices to lead the two main characters, a 12-year-old boy and girl,
to sleep in the same bed and engage in -- at the very least -- heavy kissing.
This is the act through which they renew the multiple universes created by Pullman.
Another example is Pullman's
portrayal of the Judeo-Christian God. Pullman
refers to him as "The Authority," although a number of passages make
clear that this is the God of the Bible. The Authority is a liar and a mere
angel, and as we discover in the third book, senile as well. He was locked in
some sort of jewel and held prisoner by the patriarch Enoch, who is now called
Metatron and who rules in the Authority's name. When the children find the
jewel and accidentally release the Authority, he falls apart and dies.
Additionally, Pullman
uses the imagery of C.S. Lewis' "Narnia" chronicles. "His Dark
Materials" opens with the young heroine stuck in a wardrobe belonging to
an old academic, conversing with a talking animal, when she discovers multiple
worlds. So the young reader is lulled early on with the familiar feel of Lewis.
Nevertheless, Pullman's
work isn't simply about using fairy-tale magic to tell a good story. He openly
proselytizes for atheism, corrupting the imagery of Lewis and Tolkien to
undermine children's faith in God and the Church.
Q: Many Catholics, including William Donohue of the Catholic League, are speaking
out against the movie. What should parents know before they let their children
watch this film?
Vere: I don't recommend any parent allow their children to view the film. While
the movie has reportedly been sanitized of its more anti-Christian and anti-religious
elements, it will do nothing but pique children's curiosity about the books.
I'm a parent myself. My children would think it hypocritical if I told them it
was OK to see the movie, but not to read the books. And they would be right.
It's not OK for children -- impressionable as they are -- to read stories in
which the plot revolves around the supreme blasphemy, namely, that God is a
liar and a mortal. It is not appropriate for children to read books in which
the heroine is the product of adultery and murder; priests act as professional
hit men, torturers and authorize occult experimentation on young children; an
ex-nun engages in occult practices and promiscuous behavior, and speaks of it
openly with a 12-year-old couple; and the angels who rebel against God are
good, while those who fight on God's side are evil. This is wrong. And while
it's been softened in the movie -- or at least that's what Hollywood is telling us -- it's still there
in the books.
Miesel:
Furthermore, there's a great deal of cruelty and gore in the books, not just
battles but deliberate murder, sadism, mutilation, suicide, euthanasia and even
cannibalism. There are also passages of disturbing sensuality and homosexual
angels who are "platonic lovers."
I agree with Pete. Avoid both the movie and the books. It would be best if
people didn't picket or make a public fuss because that's just free publicity.
If the movie fails at the box office, the second and third books won't be
filmed.
Q: The author, Philip Pullman, is an outspoken atheist. Does this come across
in the books and the movie as a secularist position or more in the form of
anti-Catholicism?
Vere: It's not an "either/or" situation. What begins as a rebellion
against the Church turns into a rebellion against God. This then leads to the
discovery that God -- and Christianity -- are a fraud.
The 12-year-old protagonists -- Lyra and Bill -- discover there is no immortal
soul, no heaven or hell. All that awaits us in the afterlife is some gloomy
Hades-type afterlife where the soul goes to wait until it completely dissolves.
Thus Pullman
uses anti-Catholicism as the gateway to promoting atheism.
Q: The trilogy is being compared to "Harry Potter" and "The Lord
of the Rings." Is there a comparison to be made with either?
Vere: On the surface, yes. You've got wizards, heroines, strange creatures,
alternate worlds, etc. Although for reasons already stated, the real comparison
-- by way of inverted imagery -- is to C.S. Lewis' "Narnia"
chronicles. Pullman, who has called "The Lord of the Rings"
"infantile," has a particular dislike for Lewis and
"Narnia." This is reflected in Pullman
taking Lewis' literary devices and inverting them to attack Christianity and
promote atheism.
As Pullman said
in a 1998 article in The Guardian: "[Lewis] didn't like women in general,
or sexuality at all, at least at the stage in his life when he wrote the
'Narnia' books. He was frightened and appalled at the notion of wanting to grow
up. Susan, who did want to grow up, and who might have been the most
interesting character in the whole cycle if she'd been allowed to, is a
Cinderella in a story where the ugly sisters win."
Miesel:
That nasty quote is factually wrong on both points. Lewis began corresponding
with his future wife in 1950, the year the first "Narnia" book came
out, and married her in 1956, the year the last one was published. Susan's
problem isn't "growing up," but turning silly and conceited. She
doesn't even appear -- much less get sent to hell -- in "The Last
Battle."
Vere: Thus what we see here is more contrast and corruption than comparison.
Also, the work of Tolkien, Lewis and Rowling is primarily driven by the
audience. It is the average reader who purchases these works, reads them, and
makes them popular.
Pullman's work,
on the other hand, appears to be driven by the critics. The only people I know
recommending Pullman's
work are English majors and university professors. I don't know a single
electrician, hairdresser or accountant who recommends Pullman's work by word of mouth. Thus the
books haven't resonated with the average person to the same degree as
"Lord of the Rings," "Narnia" and "Harry Potter."
Q: Nicole Kidman, a Catholic who stars in the film, has said she wouldn't have
taken the role if she thought the movie was anti-Catholic. What do you make of
this response?
Vere: The film has not yet been released, so I cannot comment on it. However,
Christ asks very pointedly in the Gospels: Can a good tree bear rotten fruit?
The movie is the fruit of the books and Pullman's
imagination. These are anti-Christian and atheistic at their core. How does one
sanitize this from the movie without completely gutting Pullman from his story?
During an interview with Hollywood
screenwriter Barbara Nicolosi a couple of months ago, I asked her whether it
was possible to tone down the anti-Christian elements for the movie. Nicolosi
is the chair of Act One, a training and mentoring organization for Christians
starting out in Hollywood.
She had given the question thought. A few years ago one of her friends -- an
evangelical Christian -- had been asked by her agent to pitch on the project,
that is, propose to write the screenplay adapting "The Golden
Compass" to film.
"We read [the book] and there was just no way we could come in on
this," Nicolosi told me. "Pullman's
fantasy universe is nihilistic and rooted in chaos. You cannot fix that in a
rewrite without changing the story Pullman
is trying to tell -- which is atheistic, angry and at times polemical."
But let's suppose it is possible. Let's suppose Kidman is right and that the
movie has been sanitized of its anti-Catholicism. The books remain saturated
with bitter anti-Christian polemic. So why promote a movie that will only
generate interest in the books among impressionable young children?
For the Christian parent, the movie cannot be anything but spiritual poison to
their children -- for the movie is the fruit of the book.