It's almost that time of year again

[sabotabby]

While good Christian nations slide deeper into barbarism, the self-appointed guardians of everyone else's morality have their priorities straight: Holding back the tide of rampant Jews, Muslims, and atheists who want to herd Christians into camps and feed them to lions and such. In fact, the persecution of innocent Christians is the one thing that both Jews and Muslims agree is a really swell idea.

You might think that there are really deep historical reasons for this, but it's actually quite simple. We hate having to hear bloody Christmas carols everywhere we go.

Anyway, this is worth reading. (Hat tip to rackletang) Because, face it, it's been a depressing morning so far, and we all could use a smile. Fuck Christmas.

Comments

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

Speaking of "persecuted" Christians:

"One of the most ugly, poisonous things I have ever read."

- Philip Pullman (His Dark Materials) on the Narnia series

I posted this to quotes_provoke and added your quote on ex-gays

[ocicat-bengals.livejournal.com]

I wasn't too happy with that Guardian editorial, considering the women usually has her nose up Blair's backside. Even in print, I find her hard on the ears. To me, the movie was a movie. I'm tired of over-psychoanalysis. And if I want to see Brokeback Mountain, fuck them if everyone else canna take a joke. I'm sick of life today from those who are rejoicing from a death. Fuck it all.

[sabotabby]

Hmmm.

I've sort of revised my opinion on the whole Pullman vs. Lewis thing. I agree with Pullman about The Last Battle in particular, and in part when it comes to some of the other books, particularly The Silver Chair. (Interestingly, as a child, The Silver Chair was probably my favourite.) I still love the books overall, though, and Lewis' brand of Christianity is far less pernicious than that of today's American fundies. (He did, after all, let one Muslim and a few Jews get into Heaven.)

I also found a good review that asserts that Lewis was at his best when he was at his least allegorical, which is why people who read the books as children and haven't read them since then remember the lantern in the snow and not the obvious Christ metaphors.

In retrospect, though, I do think that the ending of His Dark Materials, in its recasting of the two adult villains as Nietzschian superheros, was almost as bad as some of Lewis' more blatant propaganda.

I'm still not sure whether I want to have kids, but I can't wait until some of the kids in my life are old enough to read these stories. My friend and I are taking his six-year-old nephew to go see The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and I'm quite curious about what his reaction will be.

[zingerella.livejournal.com]

Discussion about Lewis is almost continually ongoing in some circles. I think many of us were captured by the storytelling, the imagery, and the language when we were too little to notice the ideology, and the sort of person who was captured by storytelling, imagery, and language often grows up to be the sort of person who feels betrayed by Christianity. And we can't forgive Lewis for showing us wonder, but using it to try to make us Christian.

papersky posted on The Last Battle recently. As always, her thoughts are interesting, and the discussion in the comments pretty thought provoking.

[zingerella.livejournal.com]

Here's the link

[sabotabby]

Wow, thanks for that. I can't really get enough of Narnia analysis, which is yet another reason why I'm so excited about the movie.

I get what papersky is saying, but much of my perception is coloured by what I thought about the books when I was younger versus what I think of them now. I liked TLB, although it wasn't my favourite, probably as an early manifestation of my love for apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic literature. I didn't find Tirian as interesting as Caspian, but the slow decay of Narnia was lovely.

Nor did Susan's fate bother me, initially, because I didn't see her betrayal as stemming from sexuality (I was too young to make that connection), but rather from (as many people in the thread point out) from becoming boring and mainstream. As an outsider-type myself, I'd always identified more with Lucy and been picked on by girls like Susan, so I felt a sense of geek vindication. Anger at Lewis came later.

I'm going to have to do an entire Narnia post -- probably in the context of seeing the movie. I meant to reclaim my collection from my parents' place when I was up there the other day, but it'll have to wait for another visit.

[smhwpf.livejournal.com]

Pullman totally gets it wrong about The Last Battle. Susan is not excluded from Narnia for sexuality, but for shallowness. The line says not that she is no longer a friend of Narnia because she is interested in lipstick and nylons and invitations, but because she is interested in nothing but lipstick and nylons and invitations. It is something which Lewis harps on a lot, what he calls "first and second things". That the "second things" may well be perfectly good things, but if you put them first, you end up truly enjoying neither the first nor the second things.

See Lipstick on my scholar for more details.

[sabotabby]

I think he's cutting Lewis too much slack (although he does point out, rightly, that Susan is not condemned to Hell). Lewis' intention may be "shallowness," but it comes off as "sexuality" for a few reasons:

1. "The silliest time of one's life" refers to an age at which one typically becomes, if not sexually active, at least sexually aware -- she's in her late teens or early twenties.

2. The indicators of this shallowness are also indicators of sexuality -- she's not interested in diamond earrings or purses or furs, all of which could be markers of trivial decadence in a more general sense -- but things that relate to interest in the opposite sex, specifically items that relate to female sexuality.

3. The argument that other female characters are allowed to grow up and be sexual is true, to a point. They're only, however, allowed this within the context of chaste courtship and marriage. My memory is a little hazy, but of all the human protagonists, only Aravis ever sees any action, and she's an infidel. Polly is a spinster, and Lucy and Jill get cheated out of sexual maturity. And during Susan's first adulthood, the one guy who actively pursues her gets turned into a donkey.

Of course, as many others have pointed out, if her flaw was being too shallow, she'll probably be cured of it after having her entire family die.