The recent boycott of the film, The Golden Compass, has almost reached the heights of ridiculousness found in Harry Potter book-burnings. Having both seen the movie and read the trilogy, (The Golden Compass is only the first novel in His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman), I am greatly bothered by the series of arguments that various religious organizations have launched against the release of the film—not because I don’t agree with their philosophies, but because the “facts” they present about the film and books are, in the majority, grossly untrue!

The main concern of primarily Christian extremist groups, (namely, The Catholic League), is that both the trilogy and the movie strive to promote atheism and muddy the reputation of the Church. (As if they hadn’t done enough of that themselves in past endeavors. The Crusades, Salem Witch Trials, and the Holocaust’s atrocities were all done in the name of God.) However, their argument is false. Pullman is not anti-religion, or anti-God. He is against organized religions that propagate hatred toward those who do not believe as they do. Pullman- "That's not to say I disparage the religious impulse. I think the impulse is a critical part of the wonder and awe that human beings feel. What I am against is organized religion of the sort that persecutes people who don't believe. I'm against religious intolerance." Not to mention, if his aim were to promote atheism, (disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings), why would his books contain the figure of the Authority, not to mention droves of angels, and mentions of the Adam and Eve story without any dispute that it isn’t fact?

Another issue that the boycotters hedge on is that the film/novels are about “killing God,” and promote children who read the books/see the movie to emulate this behavior. First and foremost, the act of murdering the “Authority” doesn’t take place until the third novel, The Amber Spyglass. Secondly, the children are not on a quest to kill God, they actually find themselves mixed up in a war between the “Kingdom of Heaven” and the secular forces fighting for their free will. The kicker in this whole situation is that, in the end, the being that is cast into oblivion is not the true, loving Creator. He is an evil angel named Metatron who overtook the Kingdom, and through enforcing harsh and cruel doctrines, exercises an element of control over all the worlds. (A control very similar to that wielded by organized religion today.)
As mentioned above, the fervor with which those against this movie pursue its destruction is highly reminiscent of the outcry against the Harry Potter series. Now, I grew up with those books, the first one actually came out when I was just turning eleven. After breathlessly reading The Sorcerer’s Stone, I dreamed of the day that my letter from Hogwarts would come. Of course, it didn’t—but that didn’t stop me from prancing around with a twig I found in Oakey Park and trying to cast spells. Obviously, J.K. Rowling’s motivation was to launch me into a devil-worshiping lifestyle, complete with casting spells and mixing potions. Please. Of course, I grew out of my childish imaginings, just as many other children did. Has anyone ever approached you and asked, “Come. Join me in my sacred worship of the Cult of Harry Potter.”

However, the Harry Potter novels were aimed at entertaining a younger audience. Yet another dispute about His Dark Materials is that they contain themes much too mature for a young audience. I agree one hundred percent! Not only are there sexually suggestive subjects at points in the novels, there is mention of castration and female circumcision, there is violence, suffering, and the death of children! This brings up the question: Why would Philip Pullman, a graduate from England’s prestigious university of Oxford, target children with novels such as these? Here’s the truth: He doesn’t. I’m sorry, but after reading the trilogy at least three times, I’m just beginning to pick up on a lot of the underlying meaning—and I am almost eighteen years old. I doubt a ten-year-old would be able to navigate through the first chapter of The Golden Compass, let alone draw every underlying strand of symbolism from every page of the trilogy. And about this business about children seeing the movie and asking for the books for Christmas—thus poisoning their minds… What parent is going to take a five-year-old to see a PG-13 movie?

In my interpretation of the novels, as well as the movie, atheism is not promoted. No, in the act of killing the false Authority and challenging the Kingdom of Heaven, the war is an act of seeking the use of free will. Metatron presses the teachings that sinful urges that bring about worldly pleasures, (sex, the pursuit of knowledge, love), are to be suppressed. What the book does in creating this fictional world is point out inherent flaws in current organized religion. It challenges a few principles that even believers challenge--premarital sex, homosexuality, love, free knowledge. The main point is the question: If something feels good, and doesn't harm anyone, why is it a sin? The “God” that is being destroyed in His Dark Materials is a false usurper of the throne of Heaven, and does not represent any defined religion in real life, be it Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or paganism.

Now, in the defense of the atheists out there. If nonbelievers have to put up with all of the Left Behind books without a fuss, (and while some may fuss, they aren't given any credibility if they try to "boycott" such books), then for the love of God, what is the matter with looking at something that may contain beliefs that don’t fit the social norm? (I've read the Bible, and I didn't burn it afterwards.) Do Christians burn every Torah they come across, every Jew a Koran? No! They respect these as religious texts, (or the vast majority does), so why should it be any different with a book or movie that may or may not promote atheism? Not to mention, these books do not promote atheism. They promote thinking for oneself instead of blindly following rules that have been in place for millennia. And really... There's no such thing as brainwashing. Everyone draws his or her own opinions in the end--and no Christian OR atheist can tell what someone should believe. It's completely up to them.

In reality, the Christian 'right' controls so much of the world, I don't know why there is such an outcry. Christian culture seeps into every pore of daily life, (let's recite the Pledge of Allegiance a couple times), so... shouldn't atheists have gone nuts over The Chronicles of Narnia? When that was actually aimed at children? But really, considering the world is so overwhelmingly controlled by organized religion, they wouldn't have had two feet to stand on. So much for 'equality' and 'freedom of speech' in America. When fanatic Christian organizations go after something as trivial as a set of books or a movie, it really just casts all Christians in a bad light. If the Christian doctrine is so centered on promoting peace and harmony, why is so much energy being used on banning a fantasy movie?

Concerning Pullman’s statement that His Dark Materials are the “anti-Narnia.” Being "anti-something" can mean a lot of things. I think the books are anti-Narnia in the sense that they portray a much darker world where good doesn't always win and human nature plays a very key role. And as for Pullman's hate of The Chronicles of Narnia: "I hate the Narnia books, and I hate them with deep and bitter passion, with their view of childhood as a golden age from which sexuality and adulthood are a falling away..." In other words, he expresses his dislike because of Christianity's view of sexuality as a sin. He doesn't hate the Narnia books because they portray Christian views.

I saw the film on opening day. Regrettably, I found myself looking for statements and incidents throughout the film that would cast it into a controversial light. I wish I could have just gone to this movie and enjoyed myself; after all, the effects were superb, and the storyline was actually quite true to the novels. However, I had to afford special notice to the mentions of the Magisterium in order to write an editorial in rebuttal to all the asinine boycotting going on. What I found actually pleased me quite a bit. While the novels can be tied to resisting major Christian thought, the film went out of its way to not mention any key religion. Instead of mentioning the story of Adam and Eve, Miss Coulter, Nicole Kidman’s character, attributed original sin to mistakes of obscure “ancestors.” Thus, the film was able to make an even broader statement about organized religion than the novels did, by pushing the fact that it as a mode to control the masses.

Finally, Pullman sums up his frustration with organized religion. Again, he demonstrates that he doesn’t promote atheism, but is just fed up with the control organized religion exerts on the population of the world. Pullman- "I don't know whether there's a God or not. Nobody does, no matter what they say. I think it's perfectly possible to explain how the universe came about without bringing God into it, but I don't know everything, and there may well be a God somewhere, hiding away. Actually, if he is keeping out of sight, it's because he's ashamed of his followers and all the cruelty and ignorance they're responsible for promoting in his name. If I were him, I'd want nothing to do with them."