Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Bush: Media Darling (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Bush: Media Darling
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bush Would Be Perfect Kids' Villain - Author Pullman

LONDON (Reuters) - For children's fantasy writer Philip Pullman, George W. Bush would make a perfect villain in his epic sagas of good and evil.


"He would fit right in," said the British author of the trilogy "His Dark Materials" which now looks set to follow in the cinematic footsteps of Harry Potter and The Lord of The Rings as the next blockbuster franchise.

"Bush has this baying certainty and has imposed this fervent zealotry," said Pullman whose books have been condemned by church groups for attacking organized religion.

"The Christian right in America is the mirror image of the Islamic fundamentalists," he added.


for the full article:
And now...the conclusion

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How original. Finding that Harry Potter's coat-tails are inadequate to shore up the popularity of his shoddy writing, this hack now seeks to cash in on Euro-peon animosity towards George Bush.

According to Shirer, half the houses in Germany had a copy of Mein Kamf on the shelf, but hardly anyone actually read it. It was just politically correct to own it. Or a compulsion, like Catcher in the Rye in Conspiracy theory. [Wink]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How repulsive that they compare him to Tolkien, just because of where he works. Tolkien would have been nauseated by Pullman's that crass announcement that he might incorporate a cheap political parable into a work of fantasy.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
baubin2
Member
Member # 2032

 - posted      Profile for baubin2   Email baubin2   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I like Phillip Pullman's books, especially his Dark Materials trilogy. And if you read the books, you'd understand what Pullman was talking about when he said Bush would fit right in as a villian. Not that Bush is evil or anything, but in the book, the enemy is essentially the Catholic Church, and Bush does sometimes take his religious ideals too far (abortion, constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, etc.). Not that Pullman didn't take it too far in turn, but don't insult a good literary work 'cause you don't like what the author said, and don't disregard a good point because the person making it overdid it.
Posts: 74 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Also, if you've ever read any of Pullman's other interviews, he's an equal opportunity excoriator.

He also has very dry sense of humour.

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Finding that Harry Potter's coat-tails are inadequate to shore up the popularity of his shoddy writing, this hack now seeks to cash in on Euro-peon animosity towards George Bush."

You know, Pete, had you read His Dark Materials, I find it unlikely that you'd call Pullman a "hack," nor accuse him of riding on Rowling's coattails. It's an excellent trilogy, even if the last volume is heavy-handed allegory in the Lewis vein.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree...The books are top-notch. The third one tried too hard to put it all together (what's this slavish devotion to "trilogies"?) but overall, a very excellent string of words.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Van Aaron
Member
Member # 98

 - posted      Profile for Van Aaron   Email Van Aaron   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll chime in on this as well: Philip Pullman is an outstanding writer, better than Rowling IMHO. There is also much more for a religious person to find offensive in his books than in Harry Potter. It will be interesting to see how much of that gets deleted or watered down in the film versions.
Posts: 997 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jim beam
Member
Member # 2135

 - posted      Profile for jim beam   Email jim beam       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
"The Christian right in America is the mirror image of the Islamic fundamentalists," he added.

If he isn't a hack then irresponsible statements like this should not be coming from him.

There is absolutely no correlation the jihadists can have with christians.
I have yet to hear of a christian vowing the annihilation of the the non christian world.

[ November 07, 2004, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: jim beam ]

Posts: 71 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jim beam
Member
Member # 2135

 - posted      Profile for jim beam   Email jim beam       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh and painting GWB as a dark evil villain, give a us all a break.
Again the lame work of a political hack.
Perhaps he is a good writer of fiction.
Perhaps that is what he should stick to!

Posts: 71 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Van Aaron
Member
Member # 98

 - posted      Profile for Van Aaron   Email Van Aaron   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I also completely disagree with what he said, but that doesn't make him a "shoddy writer," at least as to his fiction.
Posts: 997 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jouissance
Member
Member # 784

 - posted      Profile for jouissance   Email jouissance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
maybe this kind of political commentary is just what today's sci-fi/fantasy writers do...

if we listened only to card and pullman we would think america was nothing but neo nazi's and islamic terrorists.

what is the 'middle' of that?

Posts: 359 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They set the rules when they compared him to Tolkien. By Tolkien's standards, ANYONE who feels the need to resort to cheap alegories, in the wake of an election, in order to sell his writing, is a hack. Maybe he isn't a shoddy writer, but clearly he thinks of himself as a shoddy writer, or he would not have shat on his work like that.

Lewis alegorized to ideas and themes, not to specific people, except for Christ. And if he had allegorized to people, he would have let the writing tell the story, rather than spoon-feeding it to a reporter who seems to think that saying the author is riding Rowling's coat-tails serves as a compliment.

You see how weak and derivative the left is? Nothing that they make can stand on their own two feet. The gay rights movement can never make its own moral appears without cannibalizing the authority of the black civil rights movement. And this twerp is "like Tolkien" and "like Rowling," who in turn is like --- oh hell I forget who they said she was like. Nothing new to see here, folks; move along.

Jouissance -- when Card writes political commentary, he writes political commentary. Sometimes he inserts political commentary into the mouthes of some characters. You don't see him announcing to the press that he's going to make a super-villain based on John Kerry or George Sore-ass or Hillary Clinton. Furthermore, I don't know anyone saying Card is great because he's "like" someone else. If you don't grok the distinction, then you have neither taste nor sense of style.

[ November 07, 2004, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gaoics79
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for Gaoics79   Email Gaoics79   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I know nothing about this man's writing, but his statement that "The Christian right in America is the mirror image of the Islamic fundamentalists" is patently absurd. When was the last time a Christian fundamentalist blew himself up in a market, or held a bus full of school children hostage, or flew an airplane into a building? other than the very rare abortion clinic bombing (you can probably count the number of fatalities in the past five years on one hand) the Christian right has been entirely peaceful. In short, it was a blatantly stupid comment.
Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ummm...did I miss something? Since when did 'mirror image' start being defined as 'perfect clone'?

There is a sentiment going around (in case you missed it) that fundamentalist anything is maybe not so great. The opinion is debatable, certainly, but I've heard it many times now from foreign press that most of the free world feels that America has less in common with themselves than it does with Islamic Fundamentalism. Fair or not, that's the general mood of the majority of the population of the Western World.

Anyway, popular opinion in Europe paints Bush as the biggest threat to world peace, and a recent poll named him the scariest movie villain of the year. I personally think that's a little crazy, but I can appreciate the humour in it.

Just because I don't agree with it doesn't make it wickedly pernicious.

Pete, I would recommend reading the Pullman tales, starting with "The Golden Compass". I would also recommend that perhaps you not take something some author said about some rich dude personally.

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gaoics79
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for Gaoics79   Email Gaoics79   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Ummm...did I miss something? Since when did 'mirror image' start being defined as 'perfect clone'?"

Look in the mirror. I'd say your "mirror image" IS indeed a perfect clone, even if it looks slightly different, from your subjective point of view. Either way, saying the Christian right is the "mirror image" of Islamic fundamentalists is inaccurate.

Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jouissance
Member
Member # 784

 - posted      Profile for jouissance   Email jouissance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hi Pete-

quote:
Jouissance -- when Card writes political commentary, he writes political commentary. Sometimes he inserts political commentary into the mouthes of some characters. You don't see him announcing to the press that he's going to make a super-villain based on John Kerry or George Sore-ass or Hillary Clinton. Furthermore, I don't know anyone saying Card is great because he's "like" someone else. If you don't grok the distinction, then you have neither taste nor sense of style.
i haven't a clue what you are saying to me. i was struck by how pullman comparing the christian right to islamic fundamentalists was very much "like" card comparing the liberal left to nazis with his "hate filled lies of hitler" remark.

if YOU do not see a similarity between these 2 remarks by these 2 fantasy authors then you are missing something more than a sense of style...

those of you who have seen me saddened by card's hitler crap can rest assured i am also saddened by pullman's statement.

Posts: 359 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
manji
Member
Member # 1912

 - posted      Profile for manji     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What I got from that comment was that OSC doesn't compare a politician to, say, Peter Wiggins.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by canadian:

There is a sentiment going around (in case you missed it) that fundamentalist anything is maybe not so great. The opinion is debatable, certainly, but I've heard it many times now from foreign press that most of the free world feels that America has less in common with themselves than it does with Islamic Fundamentalism. Fair or not, that's the general mood of the majority of the population of the Western World.

I guess I get all weirded out when people use the word "fundamentalist" versus "extremist". After all, a "fundamentalist" is just someone who prefers to focus on something's "fundamental parts", not someone who twists the parts into an excuse to go murder people. That's why "extremists" tend to fit my understanding of these people better.
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I guess I get all weirded out when people use the word "fundamentalist" versus "extremist". After all, a "fundamentalist" is just someone who prefers to focus on something's "fundamental parts", not someone who twists the parts into an excuse to go murder people. That's why "extremists" tend to fit my understanding of these people better.
I agree with this. I have amongst my friends people who consider themselves to be "fundamentalists". It means that we disagree in many areas, but I'm not worried that they're going to blow up my house.

It's the "extremist" folks who should worry people, whether or not they are also fundamentalists.

Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jouissance
Member
Member # 784

 - posted      Profile for jouissance   Email jouissance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think the distinction is key. I would raise the question, does fundamentalism point to extremism? but I doubt a serious discussion about this could happen on this forum these days. Just in case I am wrong-

Heidegger was a German professor who was in love with philosophical fundamentalism. He sought to reduce things to the essence of their being. He looked to ancient greek definitions of words and meaning thinking this was most fundemental to western experiences of reality. He attempted to reduce being to its essence.

He saw the Nazi movement as a social order that fit nicely with his philosophical views. the nazi party sought to reduce germany and germans to that which was fundementally german. Some would claim that his beliefs in fundamentalism created a natural path to extremism.

My question is- does the act of reducing the world to fundementals lead to extreme views? I think fundamentalism in any aspect is inherently reductive and I think reductive is always a crutch. I think sometimes crutches are very good as they enable us to move on. I think sometimes crutches are bad because they ignore important truths that can matter.

I think extremism and fundamentalism are different but related. I do not think all religious fundamentalism and /or extremeism is the same-

look at any extremist group in this country and ask- is the underlying ideolgy 'fundamentalist' I think this applies to religious groups and non religious groups. anarchists- weather underground- all sought a return and change in fundementals without religion. KKK, Black Panthers had/have religious fundementals.

I am not saying all fundamentalists ARE extremists, just wondering if fundamental ideology is more likely to breed extremeism given the way we humans carry ourselves in this life.

when liberals are being reductive, they are also being fundamental...

Anyway- I like the points coming up and risk being straffed [Smile] by throwing some ideas and questions into this volcano of a forum. any thoughts?

Posts: 359 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
i haven't a clue what you are saying to me. i was struck by how pullman comparing the christian right to islamic fundamentalists was very much "like" card comparing the liberal left to nazis with his "hate filled lies of hitler" remark.

if YOU do not see a similarity between these 2 remarks by these 2 fantasy authors then you are missing something more than a sense of style...

I do see the similarity. Both are using extreme, inflammatory, and arguably irresponsible comparison. But I also see a difference. Card identifies a specific behavior "hate-filled lies" that *does* create a colorable analogy between Hitler. You can't credibly argue that some on the left have not used "hate-filled lies" to attack Bush. Pullman, on the other hand, uses fuzzy and subjective assessments like "baying certainty" and "fervent zealotry" in order to make his inflammatory comparisons.

But all of that totally misses my point. I wasn't griping because Pullman was being unfair. Credible writers can be unfair. I was griping because Pullman shows no respect for his craft. Manji understood some of what I was saying: Card doesn't come and compare a polititian to Peter Wiggins. But even more critically, Card doesn't come out and muse about basing a supervillain on a living public figure. Pullman's shown himself as nothing more than a cheap political whore. If he has talents, as Tom claims, then he clearly has no respect for himself as a writer. It's one form of debasement to turn your fiction into cheap tracts for or against a political candidate. It's a worse form of debasement to announce what you are doing to the press (suggesting that your writing is so unskilled that you need to tell the reader what you are doing). And to make matters even worse, Pullman makes the announcement before he even writes the stupid book.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jouissance
Member
Member # 784

 - posted      Profile for jouissance   Email jouissance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You have something against Fuzz?

[Roll Eyes]

Posts: 359 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete, if you read his books, you will see that his 'villains' aren't parodies of human beings, in fact they are very human. They have their own motivations, which the narrator might disagree with, but to others seem perfectly sensible. Of course, his comments were a bit "out there", but are you actually judging a man's writing ability on some of his off-the-cuff comments? really?
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jouissance
Member
Member # 784

 - posted      Profile for jouissance   Email jouissance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sounds like a fuzzy distinction to me...

[Eek!]

Posts: 359 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Reread what I said, canadian -- my more recent posts, where I qualified and took back a little of what I said in the first post. I'm not judging his WRITING based on his remarks. I'm judging him as a WRITER, and particularly as a writer of Fantasy. JRR Tolkien had very harsh words to describe the sort of hack that turns a work of fantasy into a cheap political allegory. And that's what Pullman has done, perhaps not by shoddy writing, but by framing it in the press as a cheap political tract.

Tolkien complained that CS Lewis laid on the allegory too thick, but even Lewis never stooped to creating a glaring charicature of a contemporary public figure, let alone announcing his intent to do so to the press.

Anyone who sincerely values what JRR Tolkien did for the Genre will dispise this Pullman son of a bitch.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you don't get it, Jouissance, then you have no respect for the Fantasy genre. I'll bet Tom D understands what I am saying, even if he's annoyed with me for pointing it out.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okay, I see what you are trying to say, Pete.

I disagree, but I understand.

And I don't think he is actually going to "put" Bush in his books, at least, that's not what I gathered from the article. I wonder if you would be so vociferous in your denunciations if it was Kerry about whom he was speaking.

Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jouissance
Member
Member # 784

 - posted      Profile for jouissance   Email jouissance       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i think maybe you think my fuzzy comments were to your "reread what i said...' post (good luck with that btw)

they were not.

if i am wrong about that then i have no idea what you are saying to me.

also, i am anyone and i do not despise pullman. sorry to prove you wrong. i appreciate tolkien's attempt to avoid allegory, but much of his rant against allegory strikes me as both an overreaction to hack reviewers of his work and a bit o denial. but i am not going to debate that with you.

regardless, just cause tolkien did not do it doesn't mean it is worthless. and regardless of that, i can think pullman was being a tool to make the specific comment he did (like card) and still think him a great writer.

i do not think him a great writer btw- i have never read anything by him. card i think a great writer.

Posts: 359 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I wonder if you would be so vociferous in your denunciations if it was Kerry about whom he was speaking.
I would be even more vociferous, if Orson Scott Card (living in North Carolina, which was strongly anti-Kerry) made an announcement that he was writing up Kerry as a villain. Or even if he announced that he was writing a piece of fantasy based on Osama Bin Laden as an arch-villain. Such an announcement would be cheap political whoring, to the detriment of the Fantasy genre.

What Pullman has done as a Fantasy Author is the professional equivalent of a psychiatrist sleeping with his clients, calling it therapy, and billing Medicaid for the time.

[ November 08, 2004, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
canadian
Member
Member # 1809

 - posted      Profile for canadian   Email canadian       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Again, he never said he was going to 'write up' Bush as a villain.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OK, Jouissance; I'll qualify: you have no respect for what many Fantasy enthusiasts (including Tolkien and myself) consider the essence of Fantasy. This is the same verbal quandry we have with marriage, or psychology. Some psychologists might argue that sleeping with a patient allows the therapist to channel transferrence to effect specific results in the patient. But most psychologists would see it as a base betrayal of every principle in the craft. You can use the words as you see fit -- but that doesn't require others to give credence to your usage.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
does fundamentalism point to extremism?
I think that when fundamentalism doesn't allow you to view things realistically, then it's a bad doorway to open. But again, that's what fanatiscism and extremism does - closes one's mind. I think that "going back to the fundamentals", when done with an open mind, is really saying, "Wow, we've gotten really far away from these core understanding, and we've perhaps lost what they've meant. Let's par back the stuff we've built on this foundation, and, starting from there, go to where we need to be to make it work today."

So, I guess that's my understanding of a fundamentalist versus an extremist and/or fanatic. Fundamentalists are often looking at dogma and saying "that ain't right, let's take a closer look" - and this has been my experience. I don't pretend it's always true - lots of people just want things to be simple. But that's not really going back to the "foundation" - that's trying to ignore the complexities of reality again.

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Van Aaron
Member
Member # 98

 - posted      Profile for Van Aaron   Email Van Aaron   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If Pullman announced a plan to base a future villain on Dubya, then I would agree with Pete.

He didn't say that. He simply compared Dubya to villains that he has created in the past. I think the comparison is absurd, but making the comparison does not show any disregard by Pullman for his craft. Tolkien himself made a very similar comparison, when he denounced Donald Wollheim for publishing an unauthorized paperback edition of Lord of the Rings, saying that was the kind of thing Sauron would do.

Posts: 997 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ben5
Member
Member # 1488

 - posted      Profile for ben5     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete-You seem to think that just because tolkien (who was a great writer) didn't like allegorys doesn't mean that every writer who uses allegorys has bo respect for their proffesion.
look at C.S Lewis who was a great writer and a freind of tolkien used allegory all the time.

Also - you really should read a writer work before critizizing it.

Posts: 138 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
manji
Member
Member # 1912

 - posted      Profile for manji     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow, ben5, you sound like you know Mr. Tolkien a great deal. Like you can read his mind. Or maybe because they were friends, you think that Mr. Tolkien automatically liked whatever C.S. Lewis wrote.

[ November 09, 2004, 07:19 AM: Message edited by: manji ]

Posts: 143 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The point, Manji, is to stop caring what Mr. Tolkien liked and decide for yourself about allegories or anything else.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ben, you should read what I actually said more carefully, before you criticize it.

I was criticizing Pullman's announcement, not his actual use of any analogy.

Ricky's right: make up your own mind. If you haven't read Tolkien's actual arguments about analogy, then this whole conversation is over your head. The mere fact that Tolkien thought such and such, is authoritative nonsense. But I happen to find his arguments compelling.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KidA
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm really amazed everyone's making such a big issue out of an off-hand remark.

Writers are always saying and doing outrageous things. That's normal and expected. Doesn't anyone remember William Faulkner saying he'd defened the South against forced integration, with his shotgun if necessary? Or Ernest Hemingway partying with Fidel Castro? Or Philip K. Dick claiming in earnest that aliens had shot him in the head with a laser beam? H.P. Lovecraft being a white supremicist? Jean Genet raped and murdered several people, and he's still considered one of the great writers of the twentieth century.

Philip Pullman says Bush would make a good villian and eveyone flies to pieces. And the weird thing is - I don't think Bush WOULD make a good villian. He's too shallow. I like my villians smart and crafty. But maybe Pullman could pull it off, I dunno.

I've read both Pullman and OCS. What's interesting is that, were I to judge both writers from their fiction, I would've pegged OSC the liberal, and Pullman the more conservative. Freaky.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Van Aaron
Member
Member # 98

 - posted      Profile for Van Aaron   Email Van Aaron   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I doubt you would have pegged Pullman as a religious conservative.

And I hope you're not implying that Philip Dick was not zapped by aliens! [Mad]

Posts: 997 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1