Philip Pullman 🙄

[Daniel27]

Basically, I’m doing an essay for English at university and one of the questions that we can do (which I’m going to do) is on the theme on religion within literature. We choose two books from a selection to write about and one of the books I’m choosing (because there’s not much choice) is Pullman’s ‘The Good Man Jesus & the Scoundrel Christ’.

Has anyone here read this particular work (sorry but I’m not interested in his views found in the Dark Materials trilogy)? Obviously, I’m going to be tackling this from a pro-religion viewpoint without demonising Pullman’s work (because, you know, gotta get marks too), but I’m curious to hear some Catholic perceptions on this work. Preferably, something more that just dubbing the book blasphemous and heresy please.

Also, the other book is ‘The Power’ by Naomi Alderman, so if anyone has read that either, some views on that would be handy too.

Thanks for reading this!!!

Just to clarify, I’m asking this not on the basis that I want to “plagiarise” anyone’s viewpoints or adopt them as my own; I’m just curious on how a Catholic should respond to a text like this - this Catholic perception IS NOT a core element of my essay.

 

[Irishmom2]

Never heard of him or his books. But if I did, I would still tell you that you need to do your own research and writing.

 

[Viki63]

I haven’t read this but I read some reviews on Amazon, which I generally find very helpful. This is an atheistic retelling of the gospel, splitting Jesus into twins, one good and one evil, or at least confused. I would go along with the reviewer who called it a serious waste of time. It’s also a waste of creativity and brain power.
The reason I consider it a waste of time is that the Gospel is so powerful, such a life- and game-changer, that there is simply no point in writing a "retelling’ of it. We will never get to the end of the depth and profundity of these seemingly simple narratives, describing how the creator of the universe made himself human to live and die among us.
Re-telling it in a fictional way is just pointless.
My two cents. good luck with your assignment.

 

[FiveLinden]

Pullman is a literary version of Richard Dawkins and probably as brilliant as a writer as Dawkins is as a scientist. But setting out to assess his work from a Catholic point of view is the equivalent of me, as an unbeliever, setting out to assess C.S. Lewis, with whom Pullman has been compared by negative contrast.

You are doing an English course, not an ideology course. I would be surprised if you have been invited to judge a book by its consequences or its alignment with your own views.

I’m guessing you will be asked to assess it on the writing techniques involved and whether they are successful in their own terms and the intent of the author. Chairman Mao in translation is an excellent example of plain English, so I imagine he wrote in plain Chinese. He was a genius at the brief metaphorical aphorism. In opposing capital punishment: People are not leeks. Their heads do not regrow’. Jesus had a brilliant way of presenting dual perspectives ‘judge not that you be not judged’ to make his points. So anyone can write (or be quoted in writing) and be really good at it and no matter what their moral or ideological position.

You would be better asking about Pullman in a writing forum. Assess him as a writer and if there are additional observations you can make as a Catholic, do so.

 

[Rhubarb]

Obviously, I’m going to be tackling this from a pro-religion viewpoint without demonising Pullman’s work (because, you know, gotta get marks too),

Your professor doesn’t care what side of the issue you fall on. Your professor cares how well you can articulate and support your position. A good thesis should ALWAYS be contentious, that way your essay has something to build towards. The reader should read your thesis and say “Whaaaat? That’s hardly believable” that way when they get through your evidence, analysis and argument they can say “Whoa, okay, maybe that wasn’t BS after all”

The key is your evidence and argument and analysis has to be good. You need good evidence from your texts, and good argument. If you are concerned, take rough drafts to talk to your prof and/or TAs during office hours. They should be more than happy to go over it and explan any points they think are poor evidence and/or poor argumentation or analysis.