Hey guys: Just an entry from my other blog that I thought was very applicable to this one.
I'm working on a class I'm teaching for the winter, about Lewis and Tolkien. I've been rereading essays on both men's works, and one issue that occasionally comes up is the Phillip Pullman\C.S. Lewis debate. Now, I like both Pullman and Lewis, though I think Lewis is a slightly better writer (that may just be childish preference talking, however). But I am disturbed that both Lewis and Pullman saw fiction as a vehicle for proselytizing to kids. I contrast this with Tolkien and J.K. Rowling, who did not seem to have the same goal. Both Tolkien and Rowling believed in certain values and morals and fought for those, but they did not believe in using children as religious pawns, so the issue of belief vs. nonbelief was largely kept to the side. It is no coincidence, in my opinion, that Tolkien and Rowling are better sellers and favorites. They express universal truths that we can all believe in, while not forcing people to subscribe solely to the author's point of view (this is particularly true of Rowling). I think the continued popularity of Pullman and Lewis speaks to the continued marginalization of children in our culture, where they are used as little more than political weapons by one religious\non-religious group against another.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have noticed that most books that are anti religion seem to be anti catholic. Pullman is a great example of this. Mists of Avalon goes this route as well.
ReplyDelete