November 15, 2007
What Every Parent Should Know
About "The Golden Compass"
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.
