Pullman takes on Lewis/Tolkien
- Thread starter Nikia
- Start date
The Land of NoD
Banned
Ah, here we go again.
1) I just saw the Golden Compass, maybe I grew too much of an adult, but I didn't see what was the big deal. It was a classic kids story, a little girl with a goal was amusing. It was 100% better than Eragon, but not really LWW caliber. But my friend Lucy enjoyed it, so I consider the day well spent. I give it a 7/10, since the plot didn't make me cry, unlike Eragon. I also gave 8.5/10 for Narnia (FYI), and 9/10 for LoTR.
Like Eragon, I found out the movie was hacked from the book with many, many missing scenes, but unlike Eragon, I might actually read it someday (about the same chance I would read Last Battle again, haha)
2) The Prince Caspin Trailer was amusing to watch. I recognized a few scenes that my memory can grasp, but I am pretty sure Lewis made an effort to not to paint an LoTR type of battle. But I can understand then the Hollywood wouldn't be able to make nearly as much if that happened.
Now, on ward.
When you use loaded language about Israelis "exterminating/exiling the Palestinians," I wonder which method of extermination you have in mind?
I wondered about that too, to be honest, my first and only Christian church I went to was one in Brooklyn, one of the themes (among several) was the pastor's open suggestion that Palestinians should be removed from all known terrortories of the ancient kingdom of Judea. He said something along the line "because the bible does not mention them" and frankly, the "removal" sounded like Hitler (Godwin)'s old speech of removing the Jews from German.
He also said a lot of other politically loaded things that made me eventually storm out the church one day in disgust.
But let's dig deeper, into the concept of "Palestine." The very name "Palestine" was coined by the Roman Empire (derived from "Philistia," as in the Philistines) as a cynical means of denying the Jewish people's right to possess the land of Israel. It never was a distinct Arabic entity with any set-apart cultural traits that could be traced across history.
I am not going to argue if Isreal belong to the Jews or Arabs, nor do I really care since the two sides resemble more of a pair of squabbling children than nation states. The only argument I would put up for the Arabs is this.
The Jews left for hundreds of years, Arabed settled there. If the Jews can claim right to the land due to ancestorship, then what is it to stop say...the Indians to claim most of New England, the Mexicans take back Texas and such because they were once land belong to people other than Americans?
During the 19th century, the land of Israel was under the control of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and was almost entirely uninhabited. Mark Twain wrote about this in his book "Innocents Abroad." There was no talk at all of a "sovereign nation of Palestine." Before World War One began, a number of Jews received Turkish permission to resettle in their ancestral homeland. Once there, they began developing the land, building homes, planting crops and so on. _Then_ itinerant Arabs began drifting in from nearby countries to find employment. The so-called Arab nation of Palestine simply amounts to the descendants of these migrant workers.
That is interesting, I would like to see a source material from the matter. Since someone dissed my source on a different topic as "an atheist website", I would politely ask you to send me a non-religious source.
1) I just saw the Golden Compass, maybe I grew too much of an adult, but I didn't see what was the big deal. It was a classic kids story, a little girl with a goal was amusing. It was 100% better than Eragon, but not really LWW caliber. But my friend Lucy enjoyed it, so I consider the day well spent. I give it a 7/10, since the plot didn't make me cry, unlike Eragon. I also gave 8.5/10 for Narnia (FYI), and 9/10 for LoTR.
Like Eragon, I found out the movie was hacked from the book with many, many missing scenes, but unlike Eragon, I might actually read it someday (about the same chance I would read Last Battle again, haha)
2) The Prince Caspin Trailer was amusing to watch. I recognized a few scenes that my memory can grasp, but I am pretty sure Lewis made an effort to not to paint an LoTR type of battle. But I can understand then the Hollywood wouldn't be able to make nearly as much if that happened.
Now, on ward.
When you use loaded language about Israelis "exterminating/exiling the Palestinians," I wonder which method of extermination you have in mind?
I wondered about that too, to be honest, my first and only Christian church I went to was one in Brooklyn, one of the themes (among several) was the pastor's open suggestion that Palestinians should be removed from all known terrortories of the ancient kingdom of Judea. He said something along the line "because the bible does not mention them" and frankly, the "removal" sounded like Hitler (Godwin)'s old speech of removing the Jews from German.
He also said a lot of other politically loaded things that made me eventually storm out the church one day in disgust.
But let's dig deeper, into the concept of "Palestine." The very name "Palestine" was coined by the Roman Empire (derived from "Philistia," as in the Philistines) as a cynical means of denying the Jewish people's right to possess the land of Israel. It never was a distinct Arabic entity with any set-apart cultural traits that could be traced across history.
I am not going to argue if Isreal belong to the Jews or Arabs, nor do I really care since the two sides resemble more of a pair of squabbling children than nation states. The only argument I would put up for the Arabs is this.
The Jews left for hundreds of years, Arabed settled there. If the Jews can claim right to the land due to ancestorship, then what is it to stop say...the Indians to claim most of New England, the Mexicans take back Texas and such because they were once land belong to people other than Americans?
During the 19th century, the land of Israel was under the control of the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and was almost entirely uninhabited. Mark Twain wrote about this in his book "Innocents Abroad." There was no talk at all of a "sovereign nation of Palestine." Before World War One began, a number of Jews received Turkish permission to resettle in their ancestral homeland. Once there, they began developing the land, building homes, planting crops and so on. _Then_ itinerant Arabs began drifting in from nearby countries to find employment. The so-called Arab nation of Palestine simply amounts to the descendants of these migrant workers.
That is interesting, I would like to see a source material from the matter. Since someone dissed my source on a different topic as "an atheist website", I would politely ask you to send me a non-religious source.
Copperfox
Well-known member
Okay, read "Innocents Abroad" by Mark Twain, who was far from being a Bible-thumper. Then, try to find any history of Palestinian Arab (not Ottoman Turkish) governments before the 20th century. Try to find anyplace where an Arab nation of Palestine signed a treaty with someone, or went to war with someone, or opened trade negotiations with someone.
By the way, your dismissive remark about "squabbling children" places you right in the center of one of the politically-correct trends of modern times: the delusion known as "moral equivalence." Israel's struggle for survival is not, and has never been for one second in all history, a matter of "both sides equally guilty." No Jewish leader is seriously proposing killing every Muslim everywhere on the planet; but there ARE Muslim fanatics who want to do exactly that to Jews. Moral equivalence thinking would make Aragorn and Gandalf share the blame equally with Sauron, or make Aslan share the blame equally with Jadis.
Now, no doubt, someone will say "Get back on topic!" But even there, the falsehood of the both-sides-guilty view can be seen. If I am doing wrong by talking here about something other than Pullman specifically, then it would be foolish to say that someone trying to restore the topic was "equally guilty" with me for the "conflict."
By the way, your dismissive remark about "squabbling children" places you right in the center of one of the politically-correct trends of modern times: the delusion known as "moral equivalence." Israel's struggle for survival is not, and has never been for one second in all history, a matter of "both sides equally guilty." No Jewish leader is seriously proposing killing every Muslim everywhere on the planet; but there ARE Muslim fanatics who want to do exactly that to Jews. Moral equivalence thinking would make Aragorn and Gandalf share the blame equally with Sauron, or make Aslan share the blame equally with Jadis.
Now, no doubt, someone will say "Get back on topic!" But even there, the falsehood of the both-sides-guilty view can be seen. If I am doing wrong by talking here about something other than Pullman specifically, then it would be foolish to say that someone trying to restore the topic was "equally guilty" with me for the "conflict."
Last edited:
LOL, it's nearly impossible to find a source to prove something doesn't exist -- try to document the face that pink elephants don't exist ... why would anyone bother to document that something isn't there? But CF has done a good job here just the same: try to find any record that a nation, or people, of Palestine did exist before 1949.
But, we are getting off topic here. Let us try to confine this discussion to Pullman vs. Lewis. Thanks!
The Land of NoD
Banned
Okay, read "Innocents Abroad" by Mark Twain, who was far from being a Bible-thumper. Then, try to find any history of Palestinian Arab (not Ottoman Turkish) governments before the 20th century. Try to find anyplace where an Arab nation of Palestine signed a treaty with someone, or went to war with someone, or opened trade negotiations with someone.
Palestinian Arabs is a concept that formulated before WWI described by Arabs living in then Palestinian area. It is a group of people with self-identity, same as any other group. They were under the domination of Turks, and after the Turks the British. Of course there wouldn't a treaty or historical document. It is very well known Empires tend not to encourage ethic population under its control to sign treaties. In fact, any attempt by Palestinians to were oppressed by its rulers.
But saying no one lived in present day Isreal and it was a empty block of land until the Isreali showed up and built it up is kinda pushing it, in fact it could be consider as outright slander.
By the way, your dismissive remark about "squabbling children" places you right in the center of one of the politically-correct trends of modern times: the delusion known as "moral equivalence." Israel's struggle for survival is not, and has never been for one second in all history, a matter of "both sides equally guilty." No Jewish leader is seriously proposing killing every Muslim everywhere on the planet; but there ARE Muslim fanatics who want to do exactly that to Jews. Moral equivalence thinking would make Aragorn and Gandalf share the blame equally with Sauron, or make Aslan share the blame equally with Jadis.
Pfft. There are two kind of stories, LOTR are the kind of black and white, evil mobs of demons vs warriors of good. Then there is ones with reason (Dune: See the exile of Harkonnoens because they refused to open fire on civilians) of evil. By choosing to believe every Isreali are good and every Arabs are bad, you are inviting the same disaster same as Nazi Germany and their "Jews are a dangerous menace to society" issues.
I can dig up documented Isreali atrocities too, but you will, in your "moral clearance" dismiss them as accidents or liberal propaganda.
<back on topic>
Palestinian Arabs is a concept that formulated before WWI described by Arabs living in then Palestinian area. It is a group of people with self-identity, same as any other group. They were under the domination of Turks, and after the Turks the British. Of course there wouldn't a treaty or historical document. It is very well known Empires tend not to encourage ethic population under its control to sign treaties. In fact, any attempt by Palestinians to were oppressed by its rulers.
But saying no one lived in present day Isreal and it was a empty block of land until the Isreali showed up and built it up is kinda pushing it, in fact it could be consider as outright slander.
By the way, your dismissive remark about "squabbling children" places you right in the center of one of the politically-correct trends of modern times: the delusion known as "moral equivalence." Israel's struggle for survival is not, and has never been for one second in all history, a matter of "both sides equally guilty." No Jewish leader is seriously proposing killing every Muslim everywhere on the planet; but there ARE Muslim fanatics who want to do exactly that to Jews. Moral equivalence thinking would make Aragorn and Gandalf share the blame equally with Sauron, or make Aslan share the blame equally with Jadis.
Pfft. There are two kind of stories, LOTR are the kind of black and white, evil mobs of demons vs warriors of good. Then there is ones with reason (Dune: See the exile of Harkonnoens because they refused to open fire on civilians) of evil. By choosing to believe every Isreali are good and every Arabs are bad, you are inviting the same disaster same as Nazi Germany and their "Jews are a dangerous menace to society" issues.
I can dig up documented Isreali atrocities too, but you will, in your "moral clearance" dismiss them as accidents or liberal propaganda.
<back on topic>
glum_of_the_marsh
New member
Well said, sir, well said!
I have read the Pullman books and find them to be very bitter, very twisted. And his comments on Narnia have confirmed my view.
A good story-teller, yes; but this makes him all the more dangerous in encouraging children onto a path of nihilism.
Just my own opinion -- although many disagree.
GM
Last edited:
Copperfox
Well-known member
Glum, you may be aware how Mr. Lewis used to say that evil needed to "borrow" things from goodness in order even to be able to function. Thus, to the extent that Pullman is a skillful storyteller, he is using talents that God gave him to play out his ingratitude to the Giver.
lady liln
New member
it also reminds me of this quote from macbeth:
The instruments of darkness tell us truths,
Win us with honest trifles, to betray's
In deepest consequence.
Copperfox
Well-known member
Well, you can still be cool with Milton PROVIDED you do NOT let yourself be fooled by the FALSE statement made by many teachers. They say that Milton regarded Satan as "the real hero" of "Paradise Lost;" but a complete reading of the epic, instead of only reading Satan's own boastful speeches in the early chapters, will show that Milton REALLY was only setting Satan up to be deflated in a well-deserved series of crushing humiliations.
lady liln
New member
haha! now that's just absurd.