COMPASS & LOTR comparison

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Thenamir

Darn it, now I'm going to have to actually read HDM so I can see what you guys are talking about and write a thorough refutation.

-- Thenamir The Gadfly

You might find you like it

And some more on Dust...It falls, in Lyra's world, on those who have got a fixed Daemon, as opposed to children who have shifting Daemons - so it must be linked to what the Daemon 'is'. Which cannot be firmly defined, but we can guess that the Daemon is part of the human which feels, which thinks, which learns, judging by what has happened to the nurses at Bolvangar who have undergone intercission as adults:

she would be able to stitch a wound or change a bandage, but never tell a story

Adults also make even more Dust:

by thinking and feeling and reflecting, by gaining wisdom and passing it on

So aside from the notion that teachers must be Dust-y old things that tells us that in many ways Dust is indeed divine, is just like Tolkien's own notions of the importance of Imagination and Art. Love is also a part of what Dust is about as when children grow old enough to have a crush on someone (or something) they tend also to become adults and the Dust settles on them - so Love too is linked with Art; this has to be something Pullman gleaned from Blake.

[Thenamir]

As I noted to someone in PM, my delay in approaching HDM is not from protest of any sort (I have read and thoroughly enjoyed most of the Harry Potter books), but rather of time and the fact that I'd never heard of it until a couple of years ago. I have to admit it's not high on my to-read list even now, but if this row keeps up for much longer, I'll have to up the priority on it.

[davem]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/entert...071219?sp=true

[Lalwendë]

There's some irony for you By being so critical of the books and advising people not to read them, they're in effect doing Pullman's work for him.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Wish I had seen the film or read the books so I could contribute to this thread. For what it's worth, I will say, as a Christian whom most would describe as a "right-wing fundamentalist", that I have zero problem with these films being made. Doesn't affect me one iota. I'm not gonna take my kids to them (assuming I have kids, which I don't, yet), but censorship is idiotic and immoral.

I don't see my God (the God of the New Testament and Old alike) as petty, vengeful, spiteful, or distant. Tolkien didn't either, and I doubt he would appreciate his Eru being characterized as such. But that goes way beyond this thread's topic.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Elladan and Elrohir

Wish I had seen the film or read the books so I could contribute to this thread. For what it's worth, I will say, as a Christian whom most would describe as a "right-wing fundamentalist", that I have zero problem with these films being made. Doesn't affect me one iota. I'm not gonna take my kids to them (assuming I have kids, which I don't, yet), but censorship is idiotic and immoral.

I don't think censorship played any part in the movie's failure at the box office - this is a book which, in comparison to LotR, hardly anyone had read, so the fan base was fairly small. The trailer was too confusing & by removing the 'dangerous' message the movie was reduced to a bland adventure movie about a little girl & her best friend, a polar bear in a suit of armour. It wasn't going to attract the kind of audience New Line needed. Let's face it, the same people calling for a boycott of TGC called for a boycott of the Harry Potter movies - & look how far that got them.

Of course, I'm sure they'll claim it was all down to their boycott - though what effect that claim will have - whether it will be believed by the studios & lead to a situation where only movies (& possibly in the longer term TV series & books) that don't challenge religion get green-lighted - is something we'll have to wait & see about.

I don't see my God (the God of the New Testament and Old alike) as petty, vengeful, spiteful, or distant. Tolkien didn't either, and I doubt he would appreciate his Eru being characterized as such. But that goes way beyond this thread's topic.

The problem is, taking the books on their own, & seperating them from primary world elements/concepts//beings like God, one has to say that Eru is a very minor character who is not developed at all. The only thing Tolkien gives us is a few lines from him in Ainulindale & then the odd reference to him in some of the minor, posthumous, works - his two big moments are, one, the propounding of the Themes, in which he comes across as a kind of ultra petulant Beethoven, & the creation of Arda, in which he basically calls Arda into being, snaps 'Now see what you've done! Don't you think you should go sort that mess out?' & stomps off &, two, his totalling of Numenor, in which he comes across as more than a little trigger-happy, & less than a little creative, in his response.

The point is, if we avoid importing aspects of the Christian/Muslim/Jewish/(fill in the blank) Deity into Eru, we have a character who actually is 'vengeful, spiteful & distant', not to mention a major league egotist, & probably the least interesting character Tolkien invented - & one, as I've argued before, who seems only to exist in order to make the Legendarium a monotheistic mythology. When he does crop up its to be thoroughly irritating & the worst kind of deus ex machina.

[Lalaith]

the movie's failure at the box office

Hey, hold your horses, guys. Success and failure doesn't begin and end in the United States, there is a world out there....the film seems to have done really very well outside the US, and made $135m as of December 19th, and it hasn't even opened in Australia, Japan or Latin America yet.

I've got no axe to grind here, I haven't seen it yet, and I prefer Tolkien to Pullman, myself. But movie success shouldn't just be measured on US box office takings alone. The Passion of the Christ, for example was a huge hit in the US but it was more or less a flop everywhere else.