Slashdot Mirror
Narnia to be Created in New Zealand
SCS writes "It has been confirmed
that the The
Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe will be made in New Zealand as
part of a five film line-up of C.S. Lewis's Narnia fantasy book
series, with New Zealander Andrew Adamson of Shrek fame as its
director. Filming begins next year, and Weta Digital has already started
the graphics work. Also reported at the BBC
and HeraldTribune.com."
Wow,
so long since ive read the books or seen
the old TV shows..
Wodner how much ive forgoten?
You have 5 Moderator Points!
Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
Just applied as a compositor/photoshop/cinepaint 2D artist.
Sitting by the phone, waiting for them to call and send me a ticket to move to New Zealand.
Gonna call any minute now.
Any minute now...
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
1. Pick a book series and film it in New Zealand
2. ???
3. Profit!
can't belive it?
check it out, yourself!
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
It is expected to be the first of five films based on CS Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia books, and has the potential to top The Lord of The Rings in economic spinoffs for New Zealand.
Strange, there are seven books.
Anyone have any insight into what is being combined or left out?
"If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
With all the fantasy crap that's been sweeping the theaters lately it was just a matter of time before someone got the bright idea to bring those childhood stories to the big screen.
Too bad most of the nerds who are carried away by the fantasy stories are more interested in how to attach a tail to their costume before the furry convention than in the Christianity-laced works of C.S. Lewis.
I have been pwned because my
New Zealand is the next Hollywood! w00t! I guess New Zealand is good for filming because it's got wonderful scenery.
If someone drops a fort on Will, he makes a reflex save.
I think that would be a great book to make into a mini-series. If SciFi channel would do as good a job as they did with Dune it could be classic.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
these books are MUCH better than LoTR.. definitely looking forward to a movie.. i know one already exists for the first book in the series.. it was live action mixed with animation, much like who framed roger rabbit.. cool :)
I may be a lonely voice here, but I didn't care for Shrek in the least. Ugly art direction (it resembled nothing so much as a poorly executed video game to me) and stale, juvenile humor. Hearing that the director is doing these films doesn't exactly fill me with unbounded joy. Why not someone with a more literary bent?
It was with the Narnia Chronicles that I found my way into sci fi and fantasy reading at a very young age. As I got older my interest in sci fi lead to my playing with computers at my Dad's office. Now I'm 36 with a job I actually enjoy. Part of me wishes Peter Jackson had the time to do these movies, but I think NZ is a fantastic choice for shooting. I can't wait.
this sig deleted by another sig
So which 2 books are being ignored for these films?
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
7 - 5 = 2
These were great books and I still have the set at my parents house somewhere.
It seems like they would be aimed towards kids movies like Harry Potter vs how LOTR was aimed at adults more than children.
There are some cheesy versions of the movies floating around at your local blockbuster.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
The Chronicles of Prydain (by Llyod Alexander), while not as well known as the Chronicles of Narnia, is a beautiful series which has captured my heart and my fantasies during my younger days. It seems dissapointing that it has not even gotten a small fraction of the recognition that the Chronicles of Narnia has, with only a long forgotten Disney movie "The Black Cauldron" (also made into a Sierra adventure game) to show. It's the perfect fantasy series suitable even for young children, and I found it a way more fulfilling read even than the Harry Potter series. Try to find the series of 5 books... if you can. It would be well worthwhile.
Would much rather see a movie somehow based on the Screwtape letters.
*THAT* would be worthwhile.
Having been an Atheist since rather early in my
childhood i sure as hell dont see what
all the fuss is about.
Just because there are parallels and story
foundations/ideas borrowed/copyed dosent meen
much at all to the story..
How much Roman history have you realy learnt
from Starwars and Dune?
You have 5 Moderator Points!
Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
Who are these Weta Digital i keep hearing about? ;)
Actually, the heavy-handed smearing of christian admonishments throughout the series largely puts me off what could otherwise have been a very enjoyable story. Not that Lewis is to blame; he was a product of his time and place, after all.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
It's so nifty to see all the books I read as a kid getting a second revival. Problem is, I wish kids would read these books in the first place, and discover that (gasp!) there's more to children's literature than Harry Potter.
Please help metamoderate.
How long more before the Dragonlance movie appears?
Cool! This is good news. As a fan of C. S. Lewis' work generally and also the Narnia chronicles specifically, I think this will give these books the same rich setting enjoyed by LOTR. Tolkien and Lewis did weave much of the same setting into their books. As I was watching LOTR:ROTK last night (what an **awesome** movie) I did think to myself several times, "Wow, if they can make LOTR look this beautiful, the Narnia chronicles could be made just as beautiful."
This is also good news because it means the movies are finally taking shape. They were announced almost two years ago, but there hasn't been much word on them since.
This will, of course, lend to one major disclaimer for all Tolkien and LOTR fans who haven't read the Narnia chronicles: the movies will seem similar in setting, goal, and underlying theme. That having been said, they're drastically different stories. While there will be numerous similarities (which ignorant reviewers will peck at Narnia for, unfortunately) Tolkien was setting out to tell a story, create a world, and totally immerse the reader in Middle Earth. Lewis had more apologetic aims with his books, and this is by no means a secret fact. Hopefully they don't temper this angle too much with the movies. Certainly not everybody is thrilled by an underlying Christian theme, but removing it would make the story anemic.
Even so, Lewis' books are strong strong works on their own, and they deserve as rich a treatment as LOTR received. The two books/series are widely regarded as some of the best fantasy work written in the 20th century. That Lewis and Tolkien were friends sweetens the deal.
I'm looking forward to it!
Lewis's?
Just like D&D and LOTR, this is a production inspired by satan herself! Anyone who has anything to do with D&D should be shot.
No one should even think, much less watch such evil!
Lastly, Where are the Cheetos?
Signed,
Karsus
thats "The Lion and the Witch in the Wardrobe", fool!
and no its not gay porn... its kinda like "beauty and the beast" but instead of a beauty, its a witch.
I suspect (perhaps incorrectly) that the adaptation of the stories of a WWI veteran to movies in New Zealand was given the greenlight because of the success of another WWI vet (JRR Tolkien), but this brings up a question that I've had in my mind for a while "Do good allegorical stories make for good movies?"
An allegory (at least as I use the term) is a subject that is described by using another subject in it's place (sort of like an extended metaphor).
Tolkien and Lewis are on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to allegory. Tolkein despising it and Lewis making heavy use of it. On the written page, I think that the use or avoidence of allegory is fine, but I'm not sure that it works on film.
Film is just such an overwhelmingly visual medium and allegory is such an abstract tool. It may be possible to depict the Lion Aslan as an allegory of Jesus on the written page, but on film you will see such an overwhelming embodiment of "big cat" that unless there's a narrator or someone hitting you over the head with "Lion = Jesus" the allegory will just be overwhelmed.
The only example of strict allegory that I recall in a modern film was Battlefield Earth but that may be an unfair example (as there were many other reasons why that movie was so poorly received).
Of course, many people already know the allegory that Lewis used in his tales and no doubt it will be brought up again and again by movie critics and sunday school teachers before the movie debuts, but if people didn't go in already having been told what to expect, would the allegory have been obvious?
Just idle wondering I suppose...
Actually...I don't think you can explain away the Christian element in Lewis' stories (or Tolkein's, for that matter). It's not "a product of the times" nor an attempt to appease a certain audience... It is rather the point of the story, in fact. If that sort of thing turns you off, then by all means, you are invited not to watch it.
Just a quick aside here...
Don't hate people for being evangelical Christians. Their motivation is to get as many people to heaven as possible. Most other religions can't claim this. How many Muslims have asked you if you've been saved, and if you'd like to be?
But the worst are evangelical atheists. The only motivation there is for you to be godless just like them so you won't be happier than they are.
Hollywood will destroy another good book :-(((
the heavy-handed smearing of christian admonishments throughout the series largely puts me off
Don't worry, rumor has it all that stuff is being removed. It also looks like HarperCollins is spinning this as a way of exploiting the Harry Potter popularity and is planning 'revised' Cristianity-free versions of the books as well. The are also rumored to be working on followup books written in the 'Narnia' universe.
Of course this has the author spinning in his grave, and lots of protest from people who knew CS Lewis.
One person remarked that they are turning Narnia into the British 'Mickey Mouse'.
Sickening IMHO.
So, any bets on how long before New Zealand really does win that Oscar for "Best Supporting Country" like their tourist board is using in its adverts?
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
That's not a complete sentence.
How can the first post be redundant, especially when it merely states one person's situation?
My prediction is that we will see, The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, followed by Prince Caspian, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and possibly The Silver Chair. These "core" books feature a fairly contiguous story, and a steady progression of main characters.
The Horse and His Boy is very much a standalone tale with little to do with the other books in the series (other than the fact that it is set in Narnia and surrounding countries and features brief appearances by Aslan and the Four Children). I'm not sure it would fit well in a series of "sequels".
The Magician's Nephew is actually the prequel to the entire series, detailing the creation of Narnia, etc. It would be difficult (though, not impossible) to integrate it into a Narnia series if it was produced after LWW. Then again, I'm still holding out hope that Peter Jackson will make The Hobbit now that the Lord of the Rings series is complete. So maybe, the producers of the Narnia series will build fanbase with the "core" books first and then bring in The Magician's Nephew to wrap up the series.
However, I doubt The Last Battle will ever hit the silver screen. It was always my least favorite book of the series, for many of the reasons that would probably make it a poor film. It takes a long time to get rolling, it's really kind of a downer for much of the book (well, duh, it's about the end times), and the Christian religious undertones of the previous books become the overtones of The Last Battle. It clearly shifts from being a fantasy series to being a Christian theological tretise.
One other reason why The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle will likely NOT be made into films: without a major rewrite, they both paint the religion of Islam in a very unfavorable light, and in these times of post-9/11 issues of religious discrimination, would likely be more controversial than the studios would be willing to accept.
The original post mentioned a five-movie series, and I couldn't find anything in any of the links detailing what five books of the seven book series would be made. Maybe this was a typo on the submitter's part, or maybe I just missed the reference in the articles. But if in fact, there will be only five movies made, I would guess that The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle would be the ones to be dropped.
They have the torch. ILM was real good at envirnments, hardware, and explosions. WETA seems to bias in the direction of organics. Nifty turn of style and public taste.
AH. Only on Slashdot can you find some of the most insightful content modded as Troll.
I concur. As an avid Atheist I'm not interested in whether this movie somehow ties into Christianity. I even find some the Bible stories interesting. I'm just looking for a movie with a good story - regardless of where it originated.
I read some of these books when I was younger and thought they had a good story and plot. I wasn't concerned with the religious connotations.
Even J.R.R. had mentioned that he got some of his ideas from the King Arthur lore.
-Valiss
I love the LOTR books and loved the movies... love the Narnia books and look forward to the movies (with awaiting wrath if they suck)... love the Ringworld series and can't wait to hear about plans for the movies!
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
"Actually...I don't think you can explain away the Christian element in Lewis' stories (or Tolkein's, for that matter)."
I don't think that anything needs to be "explained away" (why should it?). People simply need to accept things as they are, and enjoy. Not everything in the world needs to be changed.
...how about a TV mini-series (like was done with Dune) on the Foundation series? I'll buy^H^H^H Tivo that for a dollar!
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
Granted, I haven't seen any of these in years... I was a little kid at the time... but those films were great, production values notwithstanding.
I really hope the new films do as well with the text as those did. And, as a side note, I don't remember a whole lot of heavy-handed Christian doctrine in the films... although even at that age, I could see it plainly in the books.
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.
The Lion, The Witch and the Closet doesn't sound the same ...
or at least a signifigant dose of ignorance. Nowhere in that replied-to comment was there a mention of "hate". It was just a knee-jerk example of persicution complex.
Kids *are* reading the books. There have been numerous articles in national newspapers discussing kids reading as a result of some blockbuster movie adaptation in addition to Harry Potter such as Lord of the Rings.
I think the point of the article I read in the NY Times was that pre-teens were more open to read other books at the recommendation of their parents after reading (gasp!) Harry Potter. Why knock it?
One other reason why The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle will likely NOT be made into films: without a major rewrite, they both paint the religion of Islam in a very unfavorable light, and in these times of post-9/11 issues of religious discrimination, would likely be more controversial than the studios would be willing to accept.
Gee, just because the pseudo-Arabs of Calormen worship the pseudo-Satan Tash? I'm sure the Islamic world be be comforted by the idea that "good" Calormenese will be accepted by the pseudo-Jesus Aslan in the afterlife.
It's more character driven than a lot of the other Known Space novels, and the big alien artifact is just interesting scenery to showcase the thinly veiled abstracts of human nature aliens hanging out with humans in glass ships. I just shudder when Hollywood gets hold on science fiction, success stories be damned I still remember Starship Troopers and the various other sci-fi movies that have been completely hacked by people who apparently "can't get" the important bits of what really aren't all that complex bits of fiction. Narnia will probably sidestep any of the growth/morality issues of CS Lewis in favor of jokes from the Badger voice-over of Eddie Murphy. Once they get past that, since they're already in love with PK Dick, I'd like them to do The Man In The High Castle.
The BBC in the UK already made TV series of four of the Narnia books and have just released a 3-disc Chronicles of Narnia DVD box set as well...
But the worst are evangelical atheists. The only motivation there is for you to be godless just like them so you won't be happier than they are.
As an atheist, I think I can say that the ones that "evangelize" are just sick of having Christianity stuffed down their throats (at least here in America).
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
So the derived works are meaningless as a way of teaching about the references, and most people don't care - the books are inspired by something which gives them a bit more story/plot/whatever that makes them great.
There's only 1 way in whcih a derived work will help you learn.. Starwars may have taken huge chunks of Roman culture to base a plot on, which means you have a reference yourself for when you go and learn about the Romans. (I mean, read about the romans in school, kids will start saying.. 'oh yeah, just like the Empire in starwars'.) The references are reversed to them, which should make learning slightly easier, but has nothing to do with being taught by watching/reading the derived work in the first place.
Well that's in general... I learnt most about the Romans from Monty Python. "Romanes eunt domus"
oops. "Romani Ite Domum". silly me.
First they corrupted Dr. Suess, then Lord of the Rings, now this? What's next?
"Where The Sidewalk Ends", starring Ben Affleck as the sidewalk?
When you get to hell -- tell 'em Itchy sent ya!
I think most of us will agree that the lion's share of the success of the LOTR movies is due to Peter Jackson's talent and his obsessiveness about the books. If you look at every other swords-and-sorcerery fantasy movie ever made, they've all been pretty much disasters. "Dungeons & Dragons", anyone? "Dragonheart"? "Legend"? The studio can try to copy the success of LOTR by slavishly filming in the same locales and using the same effects shop, but it ought to be obvious that that won't be enough. Just because you put kittens in the oven, that don't make 'em biscuits.
Is it me, or does that sound like gay porn?
It's probably not just you, but I have to ask, do you find yourself being reminded of gay porn a lot? I think you just failed Rorschach's gay test (or passed, depending on your views). What you see says more about you than it does the ink blot.
...the lion is played by a sheep.
I really would like to see this made. Also, my favorite would be The Dark is Rising series from Susan Cooper. Others that would be great:
Forever War (sci-fi)
The Titan, Wizard + Demon series (sci-fi/fantasy)
On a pale horse series (?) Piers Anthony
-Sean
Speaking of books that captured hearts in younger days... how about the books that make up the Belgariad, by David Eddings?
:-)
I agree that Prydain would be fun too. Make em all!
ohhhh... so this porn has Ron Jeremy in it?
Trolling is a art,
Well, certainly in Lewis' stuff the Christian stuff is the point, but it is quite interesting how unreligious LOTR is, despite the piousness of Tolkien. While there are Middle-Earth "gods/angels" (the Valar) they aren't mentioned at all in LOTR and nobody seems to worship them.
Seems to be quite focused on getting books and novels translated to the big screen.
a ld en%20Media%20%5Bus%5D&&tv=on&&heading=18;produced+ by;Walden%20Media%20%5Bus%5D
http://www.imdb.com/List?production-companies=W
Some of the other books/novels translations recently or will be released include:
Holes (2003)
I Am David (2003)
Around the World in Eighty Days (2004) - starring Jackie Chan
Journey to the Center of the Earth (2004) - not really a translation, but based on Jules Verne's work(s)
-B
Ack! No, don't do that. The books are fantastic, but the movie is absolute dreck. It's really, really terrible.
I mean, you can watch it if you want, but please don't expect it to live up to the movie. It really won't.
Sorry if this is posted elsewhere, but here is the official site...
http://www.narnia.com/
Enjoy!
-B
In the five articles that I have read so far anouncing this, they all say that Weta Workshop will be working on this, but none say that Weta Digital will be. I don't think that the bulk of the visual effects work has been awarded yet. I think that Weta Digital will actually be too busy wth King Kong and Evangelion to do a significant amount of work on this movie.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
I didn't see anyone else post a link to it, so here it is:
Narnia.com
If Hollywood (New Zealand-wood?) is going to jump on the Fantasy Bandwagon, at least let them make a movie from another kick-ass series like Dragonlance.
The Lion, Witch Wardrobe. Sheesh, what's next, A Wrinkle in Time? Let's hear it for grade-school fiction!
And please, no responses about how Dungeons and Dragons sucked (i.e. therefore Dragonlance will suck and/or won't be made). Some people thought that LotR was going to turn out like Willow - well, we know now how wrong they were.
I read some of these books when I was younger and thought they had a good story and plot. I wasn't concerned with the religious connotations.
They do indeed have a nice story and plot; I thoroughly enjoyed them when I was a younger reader. However, I also re-read them as a college student--and was frankly astonished at the religious allegory my young mind didn't see the first time. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing--and I'm a longtime atheist--but it seemed a lot less like "fantasy" and a lot more like "religious propaganda." I think that you'll find these books to have a different focus depending on your religious awareness--and if you went to the movie as an adult after only have read the books as a young child, you would be pretty appallled at the Christian overtones, even if faithfully adapted.
I think, for this reason, that these movies will not escape religious criticism as the LOTR series did. Either the director will adapt the books faithful to a young-child's perspective, heavy on the fantasy and light on the Xtian, which will piss of the Xtians and CS Lewis scholars--or the director will maintain the Xtian overlay in fact in the books, and adult viewers will wonder where all the Xtian crap came from, and wonder why their cherished childhood memories were perverted to serve some Xtian purpose.
It'll be interesting to see how this goes down--but before you say that the religious overtones are minimal, read these books again, as an adult.
--
$tar -xvf
But the worst are evangelical atheists. The only motivation there is for you to be godless just like them so you won't be happier than they are.
Well, there are certainly other motivations. For example, I would prefer not to be burned at the stake for my atheism, as many atheists and non-conforming theists have in the past. Therefore, the fewer religious people the better, for me. Also, being an atheist means I'm free of original sin, which always seemed to be a real downer, so I'm probably happier than most Christians too.
Too bad most of the nerds who are carried away by the fantasy stories are more interested in how to attach a tail to their costume before the furry convention than in the Christianity-laced works of C.S. Lewis.
Just because Lewis figurative picks up the Christian Bible and beats the reader (now "viewer") over the head with it, doesn't mean non-Christians can't still enjoy his work.
For a quick-n-dirty analogy, did the original Star Wars offend non-Christians by portraying Luke as a Christ-figure (or for those more familar with Campbell, just one aspect of the thousand-faced hero)? I would say no, in particular considering its popularity with geeks and their bothersome habit of casting off the oppressive religions of their fathers.
For another, more recent, analogy, did you know that, although Tolkien began writing it roughly a decade earlier, when LotR first came out people considered it as a sort of showing-off to Lewis how to tell the story of Christ in a fantasy setting in a style suitable for adults? And just look at how geeks shunned those movies!
Personally, I would go see this. Like LotR, I may consider it an abomination compared to the original, and not see any of them beyond the first. But I'll give it a shot, despite not considering myself a Christian.
I agree. I am not a Christian, but I also enjoyed these books and LOTR. When I was in Uni, I decided to learn more about stories from the bible, so I took a bible as literature course and I really enjoyed it. I thought most of the stories were quite interesting.
The truth is, so many books in the sci-fi/fantasy genre are inspired by biblical stories - especially the classic ones. This may be a reflection of the authors growing up at a time in the West where Christianity filtered through more throughly into everyday life. It is also arguable that themes in the bible mirror creation myths and legends from different cultures (I am thinking mostly of Old Testament). But ultimately, the theme of good versus evil transcends religion, as it is a reflection of humanity and an indication of an individual's ability to choose how to conduct their own actions.
I think the development of Christian fundamentalism in the past few decades have really given Christianity a bad name. Although I am not a Christian, I do respect people who are, for the bottom-line of the religion is to do good for society and helping each other. But some people have really perverted those ideals and started using them to justify their own bigotry and intolerance.
-B
"Is it me, or does that sound like gay porn?"
Are you saying you know a lot about gay porn? So you must be the guy that is relabeling all the gay porn as "Episode III sneak previews" on Kazaa for the unsuspecting lately...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
And how is Christianity being stuffed down your throat?
How much Roman history have you realy learnt
from Starwars and Dune?
Don't forget Asimov's "Foundation" series which obviously was another work influenced by the Roman Empire, and in turn, influenced Mr. Lucas.
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
You account was one of the more difficult to classify in the friend/foe scheme. Thank you for this post, which clarified for me your position as troll enough I can now safely put you in the foe category. You *are* one of the most clever trolls in the woods - the perfect balance of karma whoring and incendiary comments without overkill. Or maybe you are a right bastard in real life. Either way, I keep my foes with a -6 modifier, so all I can say is *good by*.
Yes, Narnia will be not too far from Oz (tralia).
and is planning 'revised' Cristianity-free versions of the books as well
You must be kidding. They're going to write Aslan out of the series? CS Lewis didn't include this stuff in an off-handed way--Xtian elements are critical to his story-line. I sure as hell won't buy those books, even as an atheist. An author has the right to say what he intends to say, without being sterilized for later generations.
Kind of reminds me of some warnings from Bradbury, as a matter of fact. Who's next? Take the Raven from Poe? Take the Cthulhu from Lovecraft? Will Dracula be beaten by group hugs, in a "modernized" version?
I would like to see links to these rumors, actually, so I can lend my voice to the protest. Removing the Xtian elements in CS Lewis is like removing the logic from Sherlock stories.
--
$tar -xvf
Their motivation is to get as many people to heaven as possible. Most other religions can't claim this.
One thing that Christianity can take credit for is its universalism - in principle at least everyone is equal in the eyes of God. Sure, there have been plenty of Christians who have failed to live up to that ideal, but at least they had the ideal, and they had it a long time before almost any other religion or culture.
How many Muslims have asked you if you've been saved, and if you'd like to be?
In fact Islam has exactly the same ideal. They got it from the Christians. As with Christianity there are Islamic groups that are not very interested in gaining converts, but there are others who are very enthusiastic about it. You will also find many who would be quite happy to send you to heaven.
But the worst are evangelical atheists.
Most atheists think that the only life you get is this one, and that if you waste it then you don't get a do-over. Their aim is to get people to live worthwhile lives instead of wasting their lives on delusions that make them feel good. Of course it might be bitter news if you thought you were going to heaven, but personally I found my conversion to atheism to be like waking up from a drugged stupor. I had never felt so alive until that moment when I recognised that life wouldn't last forever.
without a major rewrite, they both paint the religion of Islam in a very unfavorable light
I'd have to say that Islam has been doing a fine job of painting itself in an unfavorable light lo these past few years.
Heh, it's kind of like a poll. 20% of moderators think you should never digress, 20% hate God enough to call it a troll, and 40% find it interesting. Makes you feel rather optimistic for the Christmas season, no? :)
I apologize for anyone stuffing Christianity down your throat. But do you really think revenge is the answer? That'll show those Christians for wanting me to be happy and go to heaven! Hah!
I guess tone is everything.
Tolkien detested allegory of any kind, whereas the whole Narnia series were just that.
So you're saying that there was absolutely no allegory in any of Tolkien's work?
...while Narnia series was both allegory and a fable
From http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=allegoryBased on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
Don't hate people for being evangelical Christians. Their motivation is to get as many people to heaven as possible.
;-)
Hate them? I love them. They give me something to do over coffee on a boring day.
And I've lost count of how many I've converted to Buddhism (which I don't practice myself) - Did you know that most strongly religious people don't realize that most religions repeat the same tired themes over and over and over, and if you can point them to something "close enough" that entirely predates what they believe, it confuses them?
Boy, would Uncle Screwtape feel proud of me (if he didn't patiently wait for me to fail so he can consume my soul slowly and painfully).
But the worst are evangelical atheists. The only motivation there is for you to be godless just like them so you won't be happier than they are.
Joking aside, I think you have committed the logic error called bifurcation, or the "false dilemma" - You propose that, if they don't want to "save" you so you can go to heaven, they must want to deprive you of that reward. In this case, it counts as a "false" dilemma because they do not believe such a reward exists, therefore they do not intend to "deprive" you of it.
Atheists (who I consider almost as amusingly wrong as anyone claiming to know the "one true" religion) believe, in the same way a Christian believes (ie irrationally, that no god exists. Therefore, they only want to free people from the oppressive shackles of religion. Any resources you devote to a nonexistant afterlife must, in their opinion, count as purely wasted. Any restrained behavior for reasons outside the law (or basic health and safety) deprives you of pleasure for no good reason. Any praying for cures or money or peace or whatever just tries to put off the inevitable outcome of having to deal with your problems yourself, since no divine intervention will come.
For an analogy, if you met someone who, for every dollar they get, they throw a dime straight up into the air so the Great BunnyRabbit will bring them good luck, would you consider that a valid belief, or nonsense that, assuming said person doesn't have a screw loose, you would do them a favor by showing them the error of their ways? (For amusement, now go back and change "Great BunnyRabbit" to "Jesus" or "Jehovah", and look up the idea of the tithe).
So, as hard as it may seem to accept this, the evangelical atheists have just as noble a goal as the evangelical Christians (or any group that hypes itself to an absurd extreme). If, of course, you consider it "noble" to stubbornly considering oneself as absolutely, unyieldingly correct, and all others need to learn "the truth".
How foolish if anyone misses out on reading these books, or watching these movies, because there is an underlying christian tone.
Matt Murdock is catholic. Did you cross yourself when you left Daredevil?
You act as though you'll have to pass a preist and a baptismal fount as you enter the theatre.
Disclaimer: I am Catholic. If you read this post, I hope I didn't somehow taint your purity with my icky Catholicism.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
Wow, there's a couple of misconceptions to base your faith system on. Let's take a closer look...
I meant Christianity, the faith, not Christianity, the set of bastardized religions loosely based on faith in Christ. A real Christian will never persecute you, burn you at the stake, or anything else. Throughout history there have just been too many people claiming to be Christians who were not.
Additionally, being an atheist doesn't mean you're free from original sin, it just means that you either don't believe you're involved in any sinning or don't believe that anyone really gives two shits if you have anyway. And if you think that Christians are sad because of sin, you're wrong. Christians are cognizant that they are involved in sin, and as happy as can be that somebody cares enough about them to forgive those sins.
This brings me to the real point: Christians have a bad reputation because of all the quacks throughout history that've described themselves as Christians but failed to act accordingly. Just like we can't judge Islam and all its followers based solely on the actions of fundamentalist, militant zealots, neither can we judge Christianity based on the same "sect".
I would much rather see Lewis's Out of the Silent Planet adapted to film. Weda could do marvelous work imagining the space voyage and the inhabitants of Lewis's Mars. The hero, Dr. Ransom, who was modelled after Tolkien himself, is much more interesting than anyone in the Narnia books, including Aslan. It would be another great role for Ian McKellan; or if you think McKellan is too old, perhaps Alan Rickman. Just my $0.02 worth.
[this
Several good points here. I do not at all exclude Muslims, Buddhists, etc. from reaching heaven/nirvana/etc. I know the path I am taking, and would encourage others to take the same path because, frankly, it's pretty darn good.
;-D
As to atheism being the belief that you shouldn't waste your current life because it's all you have - hell, I agree with that principle absolutely. Except that I don't have to exclude God from my life in order not to waste it. Maybe an atheist is just someone with extremely poor time-management skills?
Who said life is gonna last forever? I sure as hell hope heaven isn't the same in any way as real life. So I'm not going to waste any of my life away on the basis that I have eternity to take care of shit. If I thought I had all the time in the world with no cares, believe me I'd live it a little differently than I am. And who says a Christian life isn't a worthwhile life? It's basically the same as any other life, except you pray that God will forgive your sins and bless you in each coming day, and you have someone to thank and/or blame for the various luck you have in life.
Now, as to the bitter news part...let's say you're right. I've then lost say an hour a day for my life. Yeah, it adds up, but I was going to waste that time sleeping anyhow, so there's no real loss. And if you're wrong? Bring sunscreen, man.
PS: "Joking aside" - if you take away the joking, half of what I say makes no sense at all and tends to offend. Not my intent at all! :)
light on the Xtian
will piss of the Xtians and
maintain the Xtian overlay
where all the Xtian crap
serve some Xtian purpose
Why not call a horse a horse and a duck a duck?
Christian is a perfectly legitimate and accurate term to use in this context.
I would encourage you to take a look at the current public school system, and then tell me who's stuffing what down who's throat. And don't tell me there isn't an atheist movement that wishes to see all "religion" and faiths outlawed; blaming said faiths for wars and such, as opposed to the more obvious cause, mans evilness. One need only look at the reactions on slashdot.
This comment simply mentioned Christian elements in Lewis' stories. Your lame response suddenly invokes the word "hate" several times and accuses the first comment of it. You took a benign comment and interpreted it as a screed of hatred, a clear sign of persicution complex (something Christians are basically required to have). As a former Christian I know the mentality. Just admit it, you read WAY too much into the initial comment.
'Queer Eye for the Straight Sheep'.....I won't watch that one either. Sheesh.
[SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
I read it, a long time ago. One trouble with the series, if you aren't totally *into* it, is Lewis' usual problem, that of the ham-handedness of the convert/True Believer. (Do *not* get me started on That Hideous Trilogy).
But the real problem with the series is the ending.
[spoiler alert]
He *cheats*. "Oh, well, actually you think you've gone through all this, but actually you were in a railroad accident, and you're all dead."
Deus ex pancake.
Give me Susan Cooper's Dark Is Rising, anyday.
mark
Not that that's necessarily a bad thing--and I'm a longtime atheist--but it seemed a lot less like "fantasy" and a lot more like "religious propaganda."
:-)
I hear this a lot, and I'm genuinely curious (not flamebaiting) about something: if you see the Narnia chronicles as "religious propaganda," would you also grant that Philip Pullman's 'His Dark Materials' trilogy is "atheist (or secularist) propaganda"? If so, we have no quarrel. If not, I'm again genuinely curious as to why not, if you've the time to entertain my question.
Xtian
One other small thing: It should be 'Xian,' not 'Xtian.' The 't' in the latter is redundant, as the 'X' abbreviation is for Christ (from the greek 'Christos,' which begins in a chi [Roman letter X]). I've found that many atheists and Christian fundamentalists alike are disappointed when they learn that words like 'Xmas' are not a removal of 'Christ' from the word but that the X is an old and oft-used shorthand for Christ, including in numerous Christian sources (Christ is frequently denoted as 'Xp' or chi rho in Christian iconography).
Just a nitpick from an old Greek student...
It also looks like HarperCollins is spinning this as a way of exploiting the Harry Potter popularity and is planning 'revised' Cristianity-free versions of the books as well.
Last I heard the rumor wasn't true. This would anger more than just Lewis fans. I would expect and hope that any serious literary scholars would flood the publisher's inbox with angry letters, as revisionism like this is a Very Bad Thing. It's the sort of thing that Orwell alluded to in 1984; although the motives would be drastically different, the end product would be sinister nonetheless.
Revisionism isn't taken lightly, especially not when the author is as prominent as Lewis. HarperCollins probably isn't too serious about this, though. They'd alienate their Zondervan wing (the largest Christian publisher in the world) and without a doubt invite copyright lawsuits galore from the keepers of Lewis's estate.
No that would be "Master and Commander".
Two words- Pluto Nash.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Yes, I thought the "good" Calormenese was welcomed into heaven because he was a true believer, a "good soul".
Why would anyone have problems with this?
here's an interesting article on how the two authors and the the two sagas were intertwined.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Given this news, I also can't help but wonder if C. S. Lewis's magnum opus Till We Have Faces will ever be turned into a movie. In some ways I think it would be a very very difficult translation; on the other hand, it's a story beyond description. The Lord of the Rings moves imagination and emotion, but Till We Have Faces moves the soul. I don't know if the book could be synthesized into a coherent movie (the ending would take a good deal of finessing by a screen writer), but it would be a sight to behold if it could be done.
Till We Have Faces is one of Lewis's lesser known books, but virtually everyone who has read it agrees it was Lewis's finest book, and perhaps one of the finest books of the 20th century (and an undiscovered jewel at that).
They're OK. But like most made for BBC productions, the production values are quite poor.
I really shouldn't be replying to this, because you still can't spell "persecute" correctly.
Pardon me while I go kill myself for making a typo.
I didn't interpret the original comment as anything about hatred.
Then why did you bring it up in the first place? The comment you replied to was fairly neutral, and you replied "Don't hate people". You convientenly (probable typo there, just to save you the time) guided the thread intent to trashing athiests.
I must have read this book (LW&W)25+ years ago; and I can't remember a damned thing about it (getting old does suck).
Can somebody just refresh my memory and tell me what it was about?
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
If any religion is being self-destructive, it's the Catholic Church.
Islam has been painted in an unfavorable light only because of extremist elements.
Who cares anyway... thanks to capitalism and democracy, religions have such little significance left that christianity, islam and judaism end up being basically the same thing.
Computers are useless: they can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
And how is Christianity being stuffed down your throat?
Federal, state, and local laws. Laws that blatently exist to appease the Christians and other theists despite the fact that some things shouldn't be regulated by the government. Why can't I say "fuck" if I'm on TV or smoke a joint in my own home? Cuz the spineless believers can't accept those behaviors and must insist that the government regulate them.
It looks as if the blatant success of Lord of the Rings may start a trend of drawn out fantasy series being made into movies. If or not these will be successful as well remains to be seen, but I personally think that it will be hard to reproduce LOTR's phenomenon.
Narnia's story line is a lot less continuous than LOTR's, especially when you get past the fourth book.
Since they are making five films, it would almost make sense that they are doing LWW, Prince Caspian, Dawn Treader, Silver Chair, and then Last Battle. This would skip The Magician's Nephew and A Horse and His Boy, which would likely be OK. It is also unlikely that they'll make each movie 3 hours long. They may decide to release two a year.
I wonder how mutilated the stories are going to be though. Narnia's "Christian themes" are considerably stronger than LOTR's. The Last Battle especially forces a lot of things down people's throats. I wonder if things will be changed so that these themes aren't as strong.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
If any religion is being self-destructive, it's the Catholic Church.
Er... no.
Islam has been painted in an unfavorable light only because of extremist elements.
No again. Islam looks bad because the mainstream has refused to marginalize the extremists. If you refuse to condemn the extremists, they cease to be extremists and become part of the mainstream.
Of course, the same thing can be said for Arab culture in general. Kids who detonate themselves in pizza parlors are deified in the Arab culture. That's fucked up, man.
thanks to capitalism and democracy, religions have such little significance left that christianity, islam and judaism end up being basically the same thing.
Tell us more about this planet you live on. It sounds like an interesting place. You say that there are Christian and Jewish suicide bombers there? How novel. Here we only have Islamic ones.
In what other ways is your planet different from ours?
I find many atheist have this cloying supuriority complex. If you choose not beleive in soemthign it doesn't make you any better. Statistically devote religious people tend to be happier, live slightly longer, and have a better sense of community than others. Which is a real benifit, God or no God. Also prayer and meditation can be useful tools in treatment of certain diseases. For instance cancer patients do better if they have a positive outlook and organized religion helps provide support and a generally more positive outlook. Even if you completly ignore all the promises of this or that there is real tangible benifits to faith.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Why would anyone have problems with this?
Because it implies that all the other pseudo-Arabs were evil, and that the pseudo-Islamic religion was devil-worship.
Who says its either Christianity or Atheism ;)
Maybe you're both wrong! God really was the goatse.cx guy.. you don't wanna know where you're going (plus you still wasted that hour)
Is it me, or does that sound like gay porn?
It's just you... I can see how one might think the witch and the wardrobe being about a moody drag queen clothes horse, but i'm not familar with any associations between lions and gay men... Let alone porn.
Now "Men in Scoring Positions" which was filmed (at least in part) in Seattle does indeed sound like gay porn, but the crew insisted it was a sports film. I've been too afraid to find out.
A review...
"The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" doesn't sound like gay porn
"Men in Scoring Positions" does sound like gay porn, but might just be sports related.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Have anyone seen the old Narnia movies (Chronicles of Narnia)?
(link to the first)
These stories are beautiful in every sense of the word. Unlike Tolkien (and I will and do directly compaire their books because they were great friends and each directly influenced the others work), Lewis is much more direct and, in my oppinion, a much more skilled writer (notice I say writer, not story teller). The amount of imagery, story, and allegory he fit in such small books is dumbfounding....and yet, when you read the books, you aren't overtaken with them at all. They just work.
I have a bad feeling that The Magicians Nephew will be touched upon at the beginning of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. I, for one, feel that this would hurt the overall effect of the movie. I really doubt that they'll want to try and tackle the Magicians Nephew as its own movie either...it wouldn't be interesting to the masses. I also don't think they'll make a Last Battle movie because of the overwhelming Christian overtones in it.
In fact, I'm worried that they'll remove ALL these religious overtones. I'm agnostic mind you, but Lewis's message is what really makes this series.
All we can really do is wait and see...and cross our fingers. December 2005 couldn't be longer away....
Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
If you want asimov theres a movie adaptation of I Robot coming out next year. And hey, guess what, starring none other than Will Smith!*points and laughs as you curl up on ground in fetal position* IMDB Movies.com
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
In northern Iowa, many small highschool football teams are going to 8 man football.
Last week, one such school decided to stay at 11 man football for the next season, and the local paper said that that school will ---
Continue to play 11 person football!
That's just plain stupid! Women playing football are few and far between - calling it 11 man football is entirely ok and not offensive to anyone!
A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
Ummm, which you could have likely picked some relevant examples, please explain the relationship between saying fuck and Christianity, or smoking a joint and Christianity.
Nowhere in any Christian doctrine do I find anything about the word fuck. And if you want to know why joints are illegal, go ask DuPont, they are the ones who pushed for (and got) laws criminalizing hemp (and thus pot).
Finkployd
I hope they make some Discworld movies...with the right actors, they'd simply be amazing.
Ummm, which you could have likely picked some relevant examples, please explain the relationship between saying fuck and Christianity, or smoking a joint and Christianity.
Christianity itself doesn't mention either (given that weed was likely not around during Jesus' time, nor was the word "fuck"). Christians, however, look down upon these things and will certainly vote for government types to use government force to ban these things from the public eye.
And if you want to know why joints are illegal, go ask DuPont, they are the ones who pushed for (and got) laws criminalizing hemp (and thus pot).
Possibly true (I'd have to research), but my point is "drugs" in general (unless manufactured by big pharmiceutical corporations) are considered a threat to society by many Christians (for example, John Ashcroft stupidly lumped pot in with heroin when he said doctors shouldn't even be allowed to mention medical marijuana). This isn't a rant on Christianity specificially, but to the Christians that support governmnt force to impose certain values they see fit.
You can't have a civil discussion with an atheist. Atheists like to think of themselves as rational, but if you observe their behavior you'll find they are anything but. They are full of anger and bitterness, and react with frightful outrage whenever they encounter someone with different views from their own. Even people who think that atheism is a reasonable philosophy must admit that most atheists did not arrive at their point of view through anything resembling a rational process. Rather, they are poorly socialized individuals who are lashing out angrily at anything which they perceive to be valued by "mainstream" society.
No one's stuffing Christianity down your throat, (especially here in America).
One thing you need to realize in this life is that everyone is different. You will need to grow a thicker skin if you are to avoid being offended by seeing people different than you. That some of these people advertise their differences more than others is beside the point.
A Salvation Army kettle on the street corner shoves nothing down your throat. The Mayor's Prayer Breakfast shoves nothing down your throat. An fish bumper sticker shoves nothing down your throat. Even the evangelist knocking at your door shoves nothing down your throat, because you can always say "go away" and shut the door.
You don't have the choice of living in a world where everyone believes exactly the same as you, but you do live in a world where your "throat" is your own.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
God from pancake? WTF? However, I do agree that he cheats with the ending, although perhaps it works like that. The Dark Is Rising would be an excellent series that could be done too, though. Man, all these great series that could be done, but then you have the problem of the masses only seeing them as the movies and never reading the books.
And so we go, on with our lives
We know the truth, but prefer lies
Lies are simple, simple is bliss
I did not take that away with me from the book.
What I gathered from that was that as long as you were a good person you were admitted into heaven.
The non-believers were painted as heathens, but I did not see that as being equated to Arabs specifically, just to all nonbelievers.
The Christian religious undertones of the previous books become the overtones of The Last Battle. It clearly shifts from being a fantasy series to being a Christian theological tretise.
It's really a matter of subjective opinion but I have to say I disagree with this. I think the christian allegory is quite prominent and more fundamental to the story of The Lion, the Witch and The Wardrobe. Perhaps I see it this way because the story of TLTWATW is really the essential essence of the gospel whereas the theological content of The Last Battle is about relatively perhipheral issues.
I do hope that they don't do anything to make the movie "PC" and lessen or undermine Lewis' christian message. It was essential to what he wrote, and why he wrote it.
But start with the Chapter:Of Feanor and the unchaining of Melkor.
That is where the story starts.
After you read from there to the end (of the Silmarillion, not into the Numenor Stuff) go back and reread the Ainulindale and Valenquenta. Just too fill in the holes.
Or skip em and pick up Unfinished tales, as the best stories are:
The Fall of Gondolin
Turin Turambar
Beren and Luthien
followed by
Earendil
C.S. Lewis books can't hod a candle.
I loved them as a child, but I reread them when I turned 30. I'm non-christian, and the preachiness in them turned me off. He just wasn't as in to his world as Tolkien was into Middle Earth.
Open Source Identity Management: FreeIPA.org
C. S. Lewis and his writings are among the most salvageable things of Christianity. His view on the human condition makes him a British version of Mark Twain in my eyes. C. S. Lewis is most emphatically NOT the sort of oppressive, thoughtless Christian who gives the whole religion a much-earned black eye. Lewis in his own gentle way "calls shenanigans" on many of those aspects of Christian dogma. But he can be just as ascerbic as Twain on theose themes, it's just with a different sensibility.
As a fundamentalist-Christianity-hating reader who would love to see folks like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson magically go away, C. S. Lewis was a major turning point for me in terms of thinking that all Christians must be like Falwell and Robertson. Since I am not a fundamentalist, I will never try and coerce anyone into my viewpoint, but, damn it, if you want a good Christian read, try C. S.
Trends in contemporary Christian thought have to do with recognizing the Bible as what it is: the collected mythology of a particular group of people at a specific place and time in our history. The new view is that doing so is a good thing, and doesn't erase Christianity's merit, but rather salvages its value from the literalism applied disastrously in the past as now. Eternal truths are encoded in *all* mythology, from the Brothers Grimm to the Matrix.
C. S. Lewis could be credited with anticipating this re-mythologizing of Christianity by many decades.
Trivia question: Who converted C.S. Lewis to Christianity? (hint...his own famous trilogy just got made into a famous set of movies starting Elijah Wood and Ian McKellen.)
...but it is quite interesting how unreligious LOTR is, despite the piousness of Tolkien.
LOTR is a fictional prehistory mythology. There's no Catholicism in it because the tale it tells predates Catholicism by tens of thousands of years.
But his Catholic piousness still shows through brightly. The morality that Tolkien portrays is done with a very broad brush, so it's no wonder that the fine details that would explicitly label it "Christian" are missing. But some points to consider:
There is only one God, Eru, and the Valar are merely angels. No one worships the Valar because Catholics do not worship angels. The only Valar that is worshipped is the fallen Valar Melkor, by the "heathen".
There are saints. Earendil is one. Frodo's departure to the Valinor is a kind of beatification.
Chastity. Arwen Undomiel remained a virgin for thousands of years, waiting for the right guy to show up. Would a Scandanavian or Saxon epic do the same? If Aragorn were Odysseus, he would have banged every wench from Bree to Minas Tirith.
The nature of evil. Whole books could be written about Tolkien's portrayal of evil, but it definitely has Catholic overtones.
The books are definitely "unreligious" in their lack of organized hiearchical churches. The religion presented in the books is extremely informal. There are no religious ceremonies. No one goes to mass. But much the same could be said of the Chronicles of Narnia.
Religion is merely the trappings of faith, and LOTR has faith in abundance.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
You can buy the versions PBS showed years ago at Amazon.com. I believe 3 of them were made.
So yes, they make good movies.
Only in the Matrix did they beat you over the head with the rediculous notion that Neo == Jesus (he was far far too flawed to be anything more than a hero).
Those who are familiar with Christian theology will recognize Aslan as Christ without ever being told.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Just so everyone knows, this moron does not speak for agnostics in general... YIKES.
...", etc. 2/3 of those phrases are mandated by my government, which is supposed to keep religion separate from the government. (Let's go back to the original money and pledge, neither of which contained those phrases.)
To answer the original question, "And how is Christianity being stuffed down your throat?" let me say you would only really see how if you are not religious. You tend to notice things more.
I don't give people a hard time about it or make a fuss, but there are constant reminders that I am not your average person. "God bless you." "In God We Trust." "... under God, indivisible
Too many people raising their kids to think agnostics are heathens, we're going to hell, we have no morals, etc. I don't need a religion to give me a moral compass, but try explaining that to a kid who asks me where I go to church or what religion I am (I usually just lie and say I'm Catholic, since that is how I was raised).
Christianity is pervasive in America. We are made to feel as lesser men and women, by our presidents, and often by our Congress.
Bush (senior) once said, "I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."
I would need several pages to list all the condemning quotes from Bush jr.
This is life in America, land of the tolerant.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
You get pissed when people say "God Bless You"? That is one of the things you consider "Christianity being stuffed down your throat?" My God, grow a thicker skin. You sound like one of those that gets pissed when people put up Christman trees.
Or do you wish it to be against the law for Citizens to say God Bless You?
The non-believers were painted as heathens, but I did not see that as being equated to Arabs specifically, just to all nonbelievers.
Well, the Calormenese wore turbans and had titles like "Grand Vizier" so I really doubt they were supposed to be Wiccans or something.
I don't think we have the technology!
Apparently someone is adapting it for film, although I suspect it would get even more thoroughly neutered by Hollywood than Narnia! Materials vs. Narnia would be an interesting box office faceoff, though!
My wife and I spent a few months last year living in New Zealand, and I can assure you that if you end up moving down there you're going to need a lot of sunscreen.
We're outdoorsy types, have spent the last decade living in Texas, and generally enjoy a sunny day as much as anyone. But not in NZ. The sun's power is significantly stronger down there, to the point that you would literally feel pain when sunlight made contact with your skin. I cannot stress this enough. The kiwis are all used to it, and many of them simply dismiss it like it's not a problem (and for them, I guess it isn't, since they're used to it). Consider yourself warned.
Mr. Tumnus: Welcome to Narnia!
Peter: Give me back my sock!
"There is no time, sir, at which ties do not matter," Jeeves, (Jeeves and the Impending Doom)
Not that anyone here has RAFB (read all five books) but it gets real christianity based at the end.... if they make them all movies, a lot of people will be gagging at the last one or two.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Oh, I don't even know where to begin with what is wrong with that statment.
After I posted this I realized that "kick ass" is probably the wrong phrase. I should have had a disclaimer like "this in no way implies that it approaches the same level of Tolkien." On the other hand, while it lacks the prose and complexity of Tolkien, it is a lot more accessible (hence, potential as a movie).
And, it should be noted, the series was largely a marketing ploy for TSR.
On the other hand, it's probably one of the few (only?) D&D novels that non-D&D-nerds (i.e. regular fantasy/sci-fi readers like my wife) have read and enjoyed on a large scale.
Also, I didn't like The Godfather. I don't like movies that glorify (to whatever degree) criminals and evil behavior. Guess I'm just old fashioned. Plus I am young, so it keeps me from appreciating the ground-breaking nature of the film, whose devices and technique we now Take for Granted.
ALSO, I remember reading somewhere that literary critics universally panned LotR when it was first published (they wanted another The Hobbit).
1) For the first thing, I over-spoke when I said "propaganda"; it's really more of a recasting of some of the tenets and ideas of Christianity. "Propaganda" is those "comics" handed out at bus-stops; whereas I don't think that the Narnia stories really proselytize so much as "re-imagine". At least I can't remember the Narnia stories putting pressure on me to redeem myself; that they recast Christian ideology in an interesting and appealing new light I dunno can be really called propaganda--it's more like a long advertisement, actually. 2) I haven't read the Pullman you mention, so I unfortunately can't comment. 3) Point taken about "Xian" vs. "Xtian"; it was before coffee.
But I did know that X was a shorthand for Jesus; I even know that "Christ" isn't Jesus' last name, but is rather the title of "messiah", so it's more appropriately "Jesus the Christ". Not only Xians take Greek!
--
$tar -xvf
As if Peter Jackson has any firm literary grounding!
We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold. - HST
> I've found that many atheists and Christian fundamentalists alike are disappointed when they learn that words like 'Xmas' are not a removal of 'Christ' from the word but that the X is an old and oft-used shorthand for Christ
In my experience, atheists know exactly what it means, and fundamentalists ignorantly complain about its use.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
> And how is Christianity being stuffed down your throat?
Not from the USA, are you.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I wish I hadn't used mod points - don't want to waste them so I'm AC here.
It is the christians with the thin skins and blind eyes. Think of it like this. Let's say you were colorblind and couldn't see red as different from green. One day, you are magically cured - suddenly you will see all those differences you missed before. They will stand out. It's more than just an example or two - it is ubiquitous.
If you woke up suddenly cured of your religion, you would suddenly see all the texture of christian hegemony that was hidden from you before.
And finally, from a historical perspective, christians (and other religious groups) have a tough time suggesting they have a thick skin. Heretics were not simply treated as misguided. Most athiests by contrast, are sick to death of hearing or discussing mythology. And when was the last time you had to dodge a street corner preaching athiest? Or toss into the junkmail pile, the latest athiest tract taped to your door? I suspect the answer is "never".
I'm anagama BTW, not AC. Just saving my spent mods as I said.
I worked at Weta Digital and its basically set up as an enormous tax dodge.
Everyone who works there is a 'contractor' ie self employed, but they treat you in every way as an employee, even paying sick leave... and engage in a 'master-servant' relationship (and do it *really* badly too (almost, but not quite, whips and chains)).
For LoTR they were counting on staff being totally keen on Tolkien and the prospect of working on such an awesome project. Thats the only thing that kept morale high. Narnia isn't going to produce *any* such incentive.
The tax-dodgeness of the outfit was actually confirmed to me, verbally, by management at the site; its how they operate profitably.
If the IRD in NZ ever finds out it'll all be over.
how long before talkbacks and slashdot are crawling with narnia vs. tolkien vs. matrix vs. star wars fanboys?
can't we all just get along?
I wonder how they will handle the heavy Christian symbolism in the books? C.S. Lewis was one of the most famous Christian apologists and he had even said that he intentionally wrote the books to introduce his (grand?)kids to Christianity.
Granted, it might not leap right out at moviegoers, and I'm guessing that Hollywood will probably try to make them as religiously neutral as possible. But to take it all out would involve seriously rewriting the whole story.
Probably few people will notice unless they know it's there and are keeping an eye out.
Movie was already made. Anyonw else see the '88 TV version?
http://imdb.com/title/tt0094500/
Devil worshiping (I got the impression they were Paegans) is not equated Islam. Neither are all Arabs Muslim. I still don't see the connection you're trying to make.
The only point I thought was being made was that those who believed in God were admitted to heaven, regardless of race or religion.
award. Given that no other industry can demand and get such a "grant".
New Zealand is hoping to attract more big-budget film and television productions with a grant that will cut production costs by 12.5%.
Gee, it isn't like these big studios are poor or anything.
between the Chronicles of Narnia and the Perelandra trilogy. Personally I think Perelandra would be a more interesting story, especially in the effects department. I'm trying to image some of those alien landscapes right now...
Yes I am.
And you ignored the question.
Well, without weighing in on the Narnia issue, I can answer your question. His Dark Materials is not atheist propaganda simply because of its fictional nature. I know that sounds silly, but if you think about it, HDM has a complete, cohesive metaphysics and multiverse. The fictional Christianity that Pullman overlays on his setting is intrinsically tied into that, so it can't be seen as having bearing on our world. In fact, it is so different that you can't draw religious conclusions from it at all. While you might take a moment to look at Christianity a little differently, you'd have to be dense or paranoid to take it as pro or anti Christian propaganda.
(Yes, I know HDM has a character from "our" world who lost faith, but this still happened within his setting, which as I said is utterly different from the actual "our" world. Is every work that contains a character that lost faith in religion then anti-religious propaganda, or was it just a character that fit the story?)
Pullman used Christianity's myth in telling his story. He made some (quite clever, actually) changes to it. It doesn't tell you any more about our world than LoTR--the only conclusions you can draw are what you learn about people (and what you learn about people from fiction is of questionable value anyway... Really, you can only learn about yourself). So he used Christianity in an unapproved way. Big deal. Think about it: if he'd used Norse mythology you wouldn't be calling it atheist propaganda.
Really, you could easily argue that the book promotes faith, because there was so much more to the universe than the people in our world could detect.
And when was the last time you had to dodge a street corner preaching athiest? Or toss into the junkmail pile, the latest athiest tract taped to your door? I suspect the answer is "never".
The answer is indeed "never". But I have had to dodge people handing out political tracts, and have had to throw them away when taped to my door. I've also had to throw away pizza coupons taped to my door, and dodged people standing on the corner asking me to sign a petition.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
I loved this series as a child, and infact I created a rather simple text-based adventure game for this series when I was VERY, VERY young (for the Apple IIe computer, using parts of Donald Brown's Eamon Engine as the basic framework). I will be really nice to see these in film again with the modern technologies. (They we in film before; Aired in the WonderWorks series by the BBC (I think it was the BBC)). Anyway, this is really good news to this nerd. :-p
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ http://www.YellowDogLinux.com +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This article discusses a number of things that make Tolkien and Lewis two of my favorite authors. Many of the points discussed I was already aware of (some only recently), but much of Tolkien & Lewis's relationship is not common knowledge to the public. This is unfortunate, because as the article points out, we probably wouldn't have their literary works today if it weren't for their friendship with each other.
Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
Ahh, the adventure game. I remember it well.
The Black Couldron game (by Sierra On-Line, before there was really such a thing as being "on-line") had an interesting innovation over the traditional type-in-commands interface used in games such as Space Quest and King's Quest: It had a "smurf" button.
Okay, really, it was a "do" button. You would push it anywhere your character might be able to do something productive or useful, and sometimes he would do something productive or useful. Usually he just swung his sword. But the phrasing in the manual led my friends and me to call it the "smurf" button, after the most versatile word in the language of the littlefolk.
Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
Christianity in Narnia
I really hope the christian motives aren't going to be de-emphasised in the films. There's little "shoving down throats" and "religious propaganda" in the books, as others suggest. Rather, the Narnia series is telling the story of christianity from an entirely different perspective (in an imaginary world), where the "stained glass images are removed" (as Lewis put it), and the beautiful story, the warmth, the miracles, the courage, love, hope and faith remain.
Tolkien & Lewis
Someone wrote that apart from Tolkien an Lewis being friends, and the stories happening in imaginary worlds, there's barely a comparison.
I beg to differ; they were also both classisists and classically educated scholars, avid christians, and both wrote a series of fantasy novels about a fight between Good and Evil.
Tolkien and Lewis were both members of "the Inklings", a gentlemens' club of Oxford scholars.
Later on their friendship became much weaker, much to Lewis' disappointment.
Allegories
This possibly also explains about Tolkien detesting allegories:
Lewis' books were overtly allegories. Tolkien's books are also about good and evil, his story is intrinsically religious.
Lewis and Tolkien were friends. Both their books were fantasy novels, and became wildly popular.
Of course this led people to believe Tolkien's books were also allegories, and start explaining things in LotR. Tolkien hated that idea, he had meant to do no more than imply religious hints. So he avoided being seen as being close to Lewis. It was reactionarily.
Shadowlands
There's a film about Lewis' life, "Shadowlands" [hollywoodjesus.com] which is excellent. One of the best and most moving films I've ever seen. The story is told and acted beautifully. There's a lot of very subtle symbolism in the film. I recommend watching it to anyone who'd like a bit more background about C.S. Lewis' life.
The BBC films
The BBC films of some of the Narnia books were mentioned earlier here. I've also seen them and I thought they were very disappointing. Very low budget productions. Short films. Important bits left out. B-a-d special effects. And worst of all, none of the magic of the books.
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe animation film
I hope when they start filming "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe", they'll watch the American animation film that was made of that book instead. This was also a low budget production, but it was done beautifully. I must have watched it twenty or thirty times as a child. It had all the magic of the written story, and some clever visual subtleties at that. For instance, Aslan was drawn larger in each scene where he was shown, hinting to an obscure reference in the book that Lewis makes to a verse in the gospel of st. John ("He should grow, and I become smaller.") Or the lamp post with the single stick ornament, as one was torn of by Jadis in Charn.
(Although I really hope the actors will be British children: American kids playing children in a British public school in the mid twentieth century would be so wrong!)
Seven
I really hope that they'll eventually turn all of the seven books into film. (Perhaps after the first five pay off.) I agree that some of the stories are easier to film than others, but after LotR this has ceased to be a valid argument. I remember when in the previous millenium I sometimes asked why a film was never made of LotR, people would always say it was much too long and complex a story to film..
Tax dodge = use the tax department's rules to pay less tax than if you didn't know the rules. As long as they aren't doing anything _illegal_ tax dodging is an important part of running a business.
What do you think a good accountant does?
Saves you money in tax and charges you a [relatively] small fee in doing so.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this, but what if C.S. Lewis's son, Daniel Day were to act in these movies?
Wouldn't that be something?
This person does not get pissed. "I don't give people a hard time about it or make a fuss, but there are constant reminders that I am not your average person," hardly sounds like someone full of anger does it?
I might reccomend looking at the evidence and information around you before jumping to conclusions about things. After all, they are simply siting an example in a calm, reasonable manner. Unless you're trolling, you should consider taking the time to read the post and put it context before flying off the handle.
Cheers,
- Cath
The issue isn't C.S. Lewis' religion but the religious content of his work.
Forgive me, but you are not the one to talk about flying off the handle.
From your posting history.
Fuck Telix... use CCGMS
One other reason why The Horse and His Boy and The Last Battle will likely NOT be made into films: without a major rewrite, they both paint the religion of Islam in a very unfavorable light, and in these times of post-9/11 issues of religious discrimination, would likely be more controversial than the studios would be willing to accept.
Are you kidding? The general feeling that I have picked up is an extreme dislike of Islam. If a film obviously bashed it, the average Joe US audience would absolutly love it. (Its states like that make me sad for the current state of the country.)
It should be common sense that a made for TV series from years ago is going to have poor production values relative to today's blockbuster movies.
This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.
Lewis is much more direct and, in my oppinion, a much more skilled writer (notice I say writer, not story teller)
One of the most beautiful little passages in "The Lord of the Rings" isn't in the book, but Lewis' blurb on the back promoting it: "Here are beauties which pierce like swords or burn like cold iron." which is exactly how I feel about that particular turn of phrase. In itself it evokes the same complex emotion (a pang of nostalgia?) that The Lord of the Rings as a whole did.
I notice the beauty of his writing even more in his theological & philosophical books. I'm always struck with the way he can turn a phrase or craft a perfect, striking metaphor to bring his point home. He takes some of the driest theological or philosphical issue and make it read almost like poetry. It says a lot for the kind of classical education in both logic and rhetoric that he recieved.
It is just me, or does anyone else think that The Earthsea Quartet by Ursula le Guin would be a good next step?
Seems everything old is Jung again...
If true, that would be ba absolutely horrifying. If some people do not like a certain work, the answer does not lie in mutilating the work, but in those people simply refraining from reading it. I would certainly never touch such a revision.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Everything's relative but the BBC quicky adaptions seem poor even for TV series.
I read Neverwhere and made the mistake of purchasing the DVD, and found it dreadful. Neil Geiman said he wanted them to process the video to make it look more "murky" but they ran out of money. So it looks crisp and clear- not a good thing for a dark and gothic fairytale.
From digging through so much babbling about Lewis' series having christian undertones, and LOR being mythos...I come to see that very few have ever read the Tolkien biograpy, and have no idea what Tolkiens view on the religious aspect of his books were. Try readin it sometime.
"I have never concealed the fact that I regarded him
[George MacDonald] as my master; indeed I fancy
I have never written a book in which I did not quote from him."
(C.S.Lewis)
when lewis carrol had doubts whether to publish the 'alice' books,
it was George MacDonald who encouraged him to do so. he came
out with some incredible fiction, among them, 'lilith' and 'phantastes'.
one could say that macdonald was to carroll as tolkein was to lewis.
madame l'engel called him the grand-father of the fantastic.
some of his descriptions make such demands upon the
imagination, that sometimes i think that 100 years later,
the technology to make a film out of the book 'LILITH'
still doesn't exist.
Cheers
AEnertia
Witty, tag line goes here
No, the issue is that this particular athiest doesn't want movie studios to produce movies with religious context. And if a person were to ignore all works with a religious bent, be it catholic or otherwise, he or she would be missing out on some damn fine works, aside from denying said works from reasonable peoples eyes.
Soldier up people. I'm not a lutheran, but I admire the courage and conviction of Martin luther for nailing his treatise to the church door. If your faith in nothing is so shakeable that you can't bear to view the works of someone with other beliefs, then your faith is without foundation. Again, Soldier up.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
From my last post: "You should consider taking the time to read the post and put it context before flying off the handle."
You obviously failed to put "Fuck Telix... use CCGMS," into context. Taking a few seconds to look at the post above it, would have revealed that it was humor, not flying off the handle.
Cheers,
- Cath
These are shit. Comparing these to the upcoming versions will be like comparing Bakshi's LOTR to Jackson's LOTR, or comparing windows to vms. The sooner they are burned the better. Bad acting (including the guy in the lion suit) , and fairly hastily-assembled sets.
Every person has a god. In your case, it is "no-god". You give honor to no-god and disdain all who believe otherwise. You disparage them and call their beliefs crap. But this no-god is formed in your own image. no-god is really me-god. The term self-righteous is intended solely for the me-god worshippers. You love this god and honor him above all others.
Think about what you believe. Do you really think the universe exists so that you can exploit it? How can you think beyond yourself? Or will you continue to be blinded by your own magnificence?
That there is something besides me-god is what these books mean to convey. Think past yourself. If you believe there is nothing, what keeps you from just ending it all? The ectasy of your crusade?
I agree with you on one thing, the religious overtones of the Chronicles of Narnia are far from minimal...they are essential.
Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them? --Abraham Lincoln
...was the scene in The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, where Santa Claus distributes weapons for Christmas presents, to help the war of resistance being led by the kids^Wfreedom fighters^W^Wterrorists.
Probably the most annoying part was the blatantly racist scenes of part of The Last Battle. (There's an entire Narnian race called "Darkies"? What the fuck?)
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
While surprise is nice, when read chronologically, the story serves as a better parallel to the Christian Bible. Mind you, C.S. Lewis was indeed a Christian writer, so this isn't some random religious zealot inserting religion where it doesn't belong. Personally, the parrallelism is what I enjoy the second, what I enjoy the most is how great the Last Battle makes me feel about the possibilities of Christianity. I read the Chronicles better than I read the bible.
If the movie leaves out Lewis' Christian theme, then why bother? The interleaving of Christian morality, how it motivates the characters and drives the story, is fundamental to what makes the series interesting, whether recognized or not.
Maybe it wasn't clear from my post, but I absolutely agree.
Every person has a god.
I don't agree with this, and I don't know why you think so. I rather think it is a circular argument that you use to set up your next point.
In your case, it is "no-god". You give honor to no-god
I don't honor a god, no. Rather, I fail to honor any god. I don't worship the absence of a belief system--I don't celebrate my non-belief. Frankly, I don't consider it much, but mentioned it in this thread simply because it was relevant to the discussion.
and disdain all who believe otherwise. You disparage them and call their beliefs crap.
I apologize if it seemed that way to you, as it wasn't my intent. I think it's a misreading of my phrasing: I was attempting to speculate on what another viewer of a movie would perceive, not my personal perspective. My own perspective is different than that of my hypothetical adult who goes to the movie without reacquainting himself with the books first.
But this no-god is formed in your own image. no-god is really me-god. The term self-righteous is intended solely for the me-god worshippers. You love this god and honor him above all others.
Um, whatever. Just saying "no-god=me-god" doesn't make it so, anymore than if I said "apples=oranges" would do for turning apples into a citrus. As I said above, I don't think your premise holds. I think it's more likely that you can't conceive of existence without the belief of some god, so you project that belief onto me, but change it to match the definition of "atheist" as you understand it.
Think about what you believe. Do you really think the universe exists so that you can exploit it?
No. I think I exist as a byproduct of the operation of the universe. I don't believe that the universe serves me, or that I serve it.
How can you think beyond yourself?
I don't follow that; I think sentients are connected to each other through a web of dependence. I think that web is interesting in the extreme, that we have no ability to fully comprehend it, and that it is vitally necessary to life. Some have called it Gaia, but I don't believe it has a sentience.
Or will you continue to be blinded by your own magnificence?
Speaking for myself, I believe rather in my insignificance in the scope of the universe--a byproduct of an accidental chemical reaction in an obscure ecosphere.
That there is something besides me-god is what these books mean to convey.
I agree.
Think past yourself. If you believe there is nothing, what keeps you from just ending it all? The ectasy of your crusade?
Habit, mostly. Also a strong instinctual desire, which I cannot rationally describe, but I can reason that those without this desire did not survive to pass said desire on to their offspring. I acquired this desire, because those without it died long ago. But beyond that--no, I don't believe my life has any lasting significance. In fact, you mention that I must believe in my own magnificence--rather, I think that you believe in your own magnificence, to think that a being of unlimited power and intelligence would deign to care what you did on a day-to-day basis. What makes you so important? Do you need to believe that a being greater than yourself shows an interest in you, to keep you from "ending it all"? Isn't that a self-satisfied delusion?
I agree with you on one thing, the religious overtones of the Chronicles of Narnia are far from minimal...they are essential.
To be clear, I do as well. I think that the presentation of the Chronicles of Narnia without Lewis' Xian overto
--
$tar -xvf
TLTWATHW? Wow. I'm not sure when this convention of using articles and conjunctions (and extra letters) in acronyms started, but it's kind of unnecessary and annoying. Wouldn't LWW be much nicer? Don't get me wrong, I'm waiting for the LOTRROTKEEDVD as much as anyone else.
You get pissed when people say "God Bless You"?
Where did I ever say that?
That is one of the things you consider "Christianity being stuffed down your throat?"
No, it is just a reminder, one of many, of where this nation stands.
Or do you wish it to be against the law for Citizens to say God Bless You?
Don't be a jackass. I'm a libertarian, and you can say whatever the hell you want.
I find it amusing that you only addressed one very minor issue I raised. How about "In God We Trust" on the money and the pledge? To me those are very severe.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
What I think would be interesting to try a screenplay that merges The Magicians Nephew and The Last Battle into a single film - the creation and destruction stories tied togehter as an intertwined epic.
( The trouble I have with either one individually is that I didn't find that either one really stood on its own as a story )
Tell us more about this planet you live on.
Earth, but outside of the reality distortion field of American mass media. The fact that you don't realise how much its infected your thinking would be funny if it weren't so tragic.
You say that there are Christian and Jewish suicide bombers there?
A classic example, how spin doctors have successfully convinced societies that a few man with bombs can be somehow more evil than an government-sanctioned opression of an entire civilisation.
The twin towers weren't the only thing to be destroyed on that fateful day -- along with the structure went the pinpoint accuracy of the term "terrorism". The word has been so thickly spread that it's lost all meaning.
Computers are useless: they can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
This is the reason why I have been stockpiling older printings of children's classics, such as the Enid Blytons (with Gollywogs and the children Dick, Fanny & Bess), original Grimm's Fairy Tales, the AA Milne books with the EH Shepard illustrations.
While I don't have children currently, if I ever have kids, or am an aunt, I want the kids to have access to the original stories before they were Disney-ed up.
cheers
Sara
a Macgrrl in an NT World
hmm.. and you don't have the balls to sign-in to say that.
We lack perspective when it comes to popular culture.
Will Shrek remembered in 100 years? My take: no. Reasons? Pretty much the ones given by the initial poster.
Just look back at music, movies and TV from before the 50s. We are just begining to discern what was momentous and what was a fad. The more time passes the Beattles look hugher and Elvis seems like Elvis.
The Matrix momentous? Meybe, but the kinks are beginning to show in the aromour, in the other hand a far less pretentious filem like Alien is gaining more recognition.
So sit down 50 or 60 years, relax and enjoy the show, most stuff is worthless fast-food culture, yummy but dammaging for your cultural helath.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Hollywood lacks boldness, they are always afraid to offend this or that for whatever reason.
No wonder the better movies in the last 10 or 15 years normally come from Hollywood outsiders.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I find many atheist have this cloying supuriority complex
As oppossed to Christians that believe they are so superior they send misionaries to other places to rubish other people's beliefs, in some circumstances to the total anhihilation of the local culture. Or Muslims that when a non muslim marries them you are forced to convert.
If you choose not beleive in soemthign it doesn't make you any better
As opossed to religious people I supposse, which surely think they are worst people for being religious. Of course many atheistic people believe they are better, but that is a human condition and not the exclusive preserve of the atheists.
Statistically devote religious people tend to be happier, live slightly longer, and have a better sense of community than others.
I hope you can share your objective measure of happiness with us, it would be also highly entertaining to see how a sense of community is measured and quantified.
Also prayer and meditation can be useful tools in treatment of certain diseases. For instance cancer patients do better if they have a positive outlook and organized religion helps provide support and a generally more positive outlook
Organized religion may be helpful for religious people, for a non believer it means squat, i.e. organized religion means nothing for itself.
Even if you completly ignore all the promises of this or that there is real tangible benifits to faith.
No there are none, I have seen none, I have experienced none, the perceived benefits by religious people has to do more with their preconceptions during positive outcomes and artificially linking that to faith or prayer.
For millenia people believed and prayed and in spite of this the plague and many other diseases decimated (literally) full populations.
It was not until humans began to attack problems of public health by using reason and the scientific methodology that todays high standards of health have been achieved.
It is quite telling how religious people ignore this history of failure of faith but nevertheless push this agenda about "faith heals" with a few freak cases in a background of science guaranteed good health for most.
Our good general wellbeing is thanks to our efforts and the use of our brain, not thanks to prayer and faith in entities that may or may not exist but that did very little to deliver us from pain and suffering accross the millenia.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Wow, can you find this raw footage and provide a hyperlink so I can check it out?
It's just that I'm having a rough time imagining sheep throwing spears, swinging swords, riding on the backs of oliphants, etc... and using a bow is just beyond my comprehension!
Karma: NaN
Utterly content-free post. Smugness value: 11.
Fuck you.
First, your point about the Mayor's Prayer Breakfast is wrong. If I'm working for the Mayor, I may have to attend that meeting. Non-employees (political activists, for example) may also need to be at these types of events. Can I opt out? Sure, but I shouldn't have to do that to avoid religion.
To reiterate the point - Christianity is being "shoved" down everyone's throat in America. I'll cite one strong example of it. There are others, but this is a good simple example.
Read any recent newspaper - the Supreme Court is taking on a case to discuss whether "under God" should be part of the Pledge of Allegiance. Millions of people (many of them children) participate in pledge ceremonies everyday. Although these people aren't forced to say the pledge, not saying it, for whatever reason, doesn't keep Christianity from being foisted upon you. They still have to make the choice whether to say something inherently religious or not, and then, if they choose not, they have to deal with the consequences. It doesn't matter if the consequences are minor, the concern that there may be consequences is enough to make it wrong.
No one should have to choose whether or not to say something religious.
Just having to make a choice like this is one of many ways Christianity is pushed down American's throats everyday.
If you don't see the truth behind this, you're not looking at it honestly. It's not easy to realize that you are one of the people pushing your agenda on someone else, but you are one of those people.
You may think it's right, and that's fine, just don't pretend that something else is going on.
That's as bad as taking Bombadil out of LOTR!
I personally enjoyed the series in my younger years, but when the first display of The Lion,Witch, and the wardrobe came out I thought it was a terrible production. I do hope though that the mythical creatures are shown with such high definition and convincingness as The Return of The King
No one should have to choose whether or not to say something religious.
The only way you're going to be able to shield your child from all displays of religion great or small, is to lock them up in a closet until they turn eighteen. Of course, such a strategy is absurd, so many people resort to lobbying for the banishment of religion altogether from public dispay. But this is an equally ludicrous solution. Your children are going to be exposed to beliefs that differ from yours, no matter how hard you try to prevent it. So you need to grow a thicker skin and accept that it will happen.
Speaking of the Pledge of Allegiance, I went to school with several children who were not allowed by their parent's faith to say it, chief of which were the Jehovah's Witnesses. They didn't seem to be under stress. They simply didn't say it. No one pressured them to go against their parent's wishes. This wasn't in some liberal bastion of enlightenment, but in deep rural conservative America thirty years ago.
If you don't want your children making that choice, then tell them not to!
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!