Log in

No account? Create an account
16 October 2005 @ 07:25 pm
Philip Pullman has the biggest hypocritical balls of them all.

If you read BagNewsNotes, you know why I find this funny. Even if you don't, I bet you can figure it out.
Musicin68musicin68 on October 17th, 2005 02:37 am (UTC)
So true. My guess is that Pullman is just ticked off that the movies bringing the Chronicles of Narnia to the forefront will make people suddenly realize that someone else wrote those books before he did.
Flombertrichandfamous on October 17th, 2005 03:07 am (UTC)
I don't know- he's entitled to have an opinion about the Narnia books, and it's one many people share. There's also no mention in that article of the context in which he made those comments, other than that he was quoted by the Observer. When there's a headline like 'Pullman Attacks Narnia Film Plans', it conjures up a certain image, and makes him seem very proactive, but the reality probably was not that he called a special press conference and went out of his way to grouse about it, but more likely that either the Observer called him up to ask for his opinion about it, or someone buttonholed him at an event he happened to be attending and asked him a bunch of questions, one of which was that, and then took his answer to that one question and turned it into a whole story. Not to invoke unwarranted authority, but I have witnessed that happen with my own eyes at events out here. It's kind of appriate to ask him that question, since, as I understand, his book series is in the same vein. It's certainly possible that his series also lacks Christian virtue (I haven't personally read it), but there's no mention of him touting his own work as a superior alternative to Lewis'. No doubt he privately thinks it is (or publicly- I don't know)- but there's no mention of it in that article.
Hoc Est Qui Sumusdiscoflamingo on October 17th, 2005 04:19 pm (UTC)
You're absolutely right about not taking it out of context; it's just that Pullman has a reputation (like Orson Scott Card) of shooting his mouth off about other people's faults in writing that he is also guilty of. Considering that the protagonists in one of his books try to kill God, I don't think he has the moral authority to speak to criticize Lewis for the non-Christian themes of his stories. That's not to say that he's wrong - I've been re-reading the Chronicles this year, and there are many instances of "old-fashioned values" that don't pass the moral muster of today's standards. His diatribe is just a little like Aleister Crowley coming down hard on the Second Vatican Council for its non-Catholic leanings.
Flombertrichandfamous on October 17th, 2005 04:34 pm (UTC)
Ah. Well then it sounds like he certainly is a hypocrite. And as I've been reading up on Aleister Crowley in preparation for tackling Maugham's The Magician, I can now appreciate the analogy. I wish somebody would call me the wickedest man who ever lived. That would be so raven. And totally ferret.