The Fiction Will Set You Free

[vovat]

I was thinking today about fantasy movies, and of course The Wizard of Oz came to mind. Like a lot of fans, I'm not too keen on the "it was all a dream" ending, and Dorothy's conclusion before waking up that she shouldn't want to leave home again. It removes a lot of the magic from the adventure. This in turn led me to consider some comments I've seen on Oz forums throughout the years, and ponder the question of whether fantasy is dangerous. I recently made a sorta-joking comment on Twitter about how easy listening radio is intended to suck the life out of workers, and while I don't think there's any actual conspiracy going on there, I have to suspect there's a grain of truth to it. Is it the same way with fantasy? Are American workers not supposed to be dreaming of more majestic things, because it will give us ideas above our stations? Why work in a cubicle when you can imagine hunting dragons? I'm not saying this is a conscious thought on the part of the establishment, but I'm wondering if there's a subconscious element to it.


And while we're on the topic of control, what about religion? Karl Marx referred to it as the "opiate of the masses." A question I've pondered from time to time is why modern American conservatives are so big on Jesus, when he was a pretty radical liberal thinker for his time. One thing that comes to mind is that, while Jesus talked a good game, he also encouraged his followers to remain humble and not challenge the establishment. Probably a good idea in Roman times, considering what happened later with Simon bar Kochba's revolt, but also a good way for later Christian governments to keep the people in line. Oppressed? Don't worry about it! Just be patient, and things will be awesome when Jesus comes back! We don't know when that will be, but it'll be soon enough, right? Life is just temporary, while paradise is for eternity! I can see where old man Marx was coming from, you know? Of course, the countries that adopted communism just used Marx's own ideas to keep the working classes down, just like Europe had done with Jesus' radical notions. Funny how these things work.


Does fantasy have the same effect? After all, most fantasy that I've read, regardless of the author's political and religious beliefs, has more in common with Jesus than with Marx. It's rare to read fairy tales that actively encourage social revolution. And are we fantasy fans, as an essay I once read suggested, just waiting for the good fairy to show up and wave her wand instead of actually doing anything to solve the world's problems? Really, today's fantasy tales are often based on yesterday's mythology. Look at the Percy Jackson series, for instance. There's even fantasy based on modern religion, although perhaps it's too soon for believers to judge it based on its own merits rather than its position. Some (but by no means all) Christians who hate other fantasy works love Narnia, with C.S. Lewis' pro-Christian message. On the other hand, some of the same people are vehemently opposed to Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials series, which takes a more negative approach to Judeo-Christian mythology. Pullman himself is an atheist, but the universe of these books seems to me to be based more on Gnostic thought. I'm sure Pullman doesn't actually believe in angels, but they exist in his invented worlds. It's all fiction, after all. But considering there are people who are actually feel their faith confirmed by books with a talking lion and threatened by books with polar bears in armor, I'm not sure they all realize this. Harry Potter gets particular flak in this area, despite the fact that J.K. Rowling is a Christian, who's said herself that she believes in God and not in magic. The problem might be that her critics believe in both. Still, if you read some of the conservative Christian reviews of the Potter books and movies, it often seems like the Satanic panic is somewhat of a smokescreen. Perhaps what they're REALLY worried about is how they suggest that authority figures aren't always right, and there are times when it's not a bad idea to break the rules. Come to think of it, there might be some of that in Gnostic philosophy, too. The Demiurge claims to be the Almighty God, and perhaps even genuinely BELIEVES that he's God, but he isn't. Indeed, while we didn't see too much of this figure in The Amber Spyglass, what we did learn of him suggests he was somewhat misguided and naive, allowing Enoch to take advantage of him. This stuff fascinates me, but my point is that powerful conservative interests don't WANT people to think for themselves, and the idea that authority figures (perhaps even including God) can sometimes be wrong encourages just that. And we don't need that in our children, do we? If they ever go looking for their heart's desire again, they shouldn't look any further than their own backyards. Because if it isn't there, they never really lost it to begin with!


Wow, that was a lot more rambling and all over the place than I originally intended. I have a few other thoughts on related subjects, but I'll save them for future posts.

Comments

[vilajunkie.livejournal.com]

Yep, I still prefer the original ending to Wizard. Ever notice that people who despise Harry Potter always mention things like Ouija boards, which never actually appear in the books? And Rowling never says what religion the wizards and witches believe in, if any. Who knows, they maybe be just as Christian as the rest of the UK. But she does seem to promote believing in yourself and depending on yourself, rather than depending on authority figures to guide you.

[vovat.livejournal.com]

This Chick Tract (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5012/5012_01.asp) has some girl say she got into Ouija boards, Tarot cards, and crystal balls through the Harry Potter books. As far as I remember, only the crystal balls actually show up in the books, and it's implied that they don't really work even for wizards.

[rockinlibrarian.livejournal.com]

Thank you for pointing out the Gnostic aspect of His Dark Materials, it makes it all make a whole lot more sense now. Not that I still don't disagree with everything Philip Pullman has ever said on any subject, but that's neither here nor there.

I do still think the fantasy-is-bad-for-you people are also more likely to be the sort of people who prefer the literal to the metaphoric in general. I know, I know, you and my brother are obvious exceptions, but people with Aspergers throw the results.

I follow this community of children's fantasy writers here, [Bad username or site: enchanted inkpot @ livejournal.com], and a week or so ago they asked for discussion questions we'd like them to answer. I thought a post on "What's the purpose of fantasy?" would be really interesting, to get many different views on the subject (although, granted, all coming from fantasy writers, so we'd obviously not have any ANTI-fantasy people speaking there... but still). I'm interested to see if they ever do decide to cover that topic.

[vilajunkie.livejournal.com]

I have AS too, but I'm not a fan of taking fiction too literally myself. Though when I was younger, I DID believe there really was an Oz somewhere that Baum was in contact with. But that may be from wishful thinking and being a kid, not so much the Asperger's. Though it's fun to come up with reasons for discrepancies in the Oz books via Oz-as-History, I know enough of Baum's writing that it's more likely mistakes due to Oz-as-Literature.

[vovat.livejournal.com]

I remember reading something from Eric Shanower where he said he thought Oz was real when he was a kid, too. I never did, but then, I was eleven when I read my first Oz book, and I know many fans were younger.

I kind of think that, with the rise in nerds who take things really seriously despite knowing they're fictional (think the Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons), literal-minded fantasy lovers aren't as rare as they might have been at one time. Perhaps it's more common among science fiction and comic fans, but there's some overlap there.

[suegypt.livejournal.com]

I enjoyed this post. I also liked your pointing out the Gnostic aspect of His Dark Materials, which i quite enjoyed. I didn't really enjoy Narnia, although, maybe i would have if I had read it in childhood. My parents (I'm a priest's kid, remember) never frowned on fantasy like Oz or stuff about magic and sorcery. I think perhaps Lewis' use of magic in telling a christian story took the pressure off of Harry Potter and Miss Osborne the Mop. :)

The mystical aspects of modern day Christianity, especially in the Catholic sects, can predispose children to imaginative tales like Oz and Potter, methinks.

[vilajunkie.livejournal.com]

I've noticed that it's rarely Catholic or Orthodox families that have issues with fantasy books. It's the fundamentalists who are also literalists that have the most complaints.

[suegypt.livejournal.com]

Yes, I was never made to feel my free-running imagination or my gathering of knowledge was a threat to the domain of Jesus/God. On the contrary, my parents always trusted that I knew to separate truth from fantasy from fiction from outright lies (at least in literature, politics probably not being equivalent eventually).

[vovat.livejournal.com]

I think it's difficult for fundamentalists to separate fantasy from reality in general, so they just avoid reading anything that doesn't go along with their preconceived world view.

[suegypt.livejournal.com]

Good point. I don't really know what the difficulty is there; it does seem based on fear of having to suss out the truth yourself...

[vovat.livejournal.com]

Or of having someone else ask questions you don't know the answers to.