Editorial

By Paul Schratz

At the risk of beginning 2008 mirroring the end of 2007, and generating additional publicity for a movie that is mercifully doing poorly at the box office, the issue of The Golden Compass deserves a revisiting.

This week's B.C. Catholic contains a selection of comments we've received about the "Golden Compost," as one newspaper described it.

Most of the feedback has been critical, both of the film and of film critic Alan Charlton's review of it. Although it was less glowing than the one issued by the U.S. bishops' film office, since withdrawn from their web site, Charlton's acknowledgement of the artistic quality of the film and his relaxed attitude about the risks that aggressive atheist Philip Pullman's film or books pose to young people touched more than a few nerves.

It should be noted that in North America, where concerns about the movie's thinly veiled anti-religious leanings were at their height, and where conservatives were warned they were merely giving the movie free publicity, the movie did far worse at the box office than expected. So much for argument that the best way to handle controversy is to ignore it.

The B.C. Catholic's approach to the film was to allow a wide range of opinion. As such, the first editorial comment on the film was negative, urging the movie be ignored.

Charlton responded with his review acknowledging the movie's generally high artistic quality, its problematic elements, and a commentary that suggested these issues be tackled head on by parents with their children. The Catholic school board took much the same approach, calling this a learning opportunity.

This week's letters offer both sides, and at the end of the day, there is some truth in what everyone has had to say.

The one element that has inadequately been addressed is the fact that much of the debate about this movie is taking place in isolation from the surrounding culture, which demonstrates a certain amount of naivete.

This movie is not only a movie; like any other source of entertainment, it cannot be considered in isolation. Every movie, TV show, book, blog, newspaper, and web site is now one element in a mass-media franchise. The Golden Compass is a movie, a series of books, a Burger King tie-in, one plank in an author's anti-religious campaign, an element of the world wide web, etc., etc.

To suggest that viewing one movie or reading a single book will not threaten a young person's faith is simply not true, especially when the book's ideas are being reinforced on numerous fronts.

People's lives have gone off the rails for less: a single action, a random comment from a parent, teacher or priest. I know of a chance remark from a teacher that set a student down a road of sin for half their adult life.

Granted, a diocesan newspaper might not be able to act as a censor in the 21st century, and nor should it. It cannot condemn a movie outright and expect people will stay away from it in a world saturated with popular culture and unwavering belief in unrestricted choice.

What a diocesan paper can hopefully succeed at is to point out that the link between our society's entertainment and its behaviour is very real, just as the link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer is very real. It doesn't mean everyone who watches the film will be corrupted by Pullman's ideas, any more than every smoker will develop lung cancer, but it's the smart way to bet, especially when we're talking about our children.