2009
Yes, Virginia, there is a world without soul-destroying alien sky gods, and it is grand. I’m talking about Pandora. It’s not a real world, but for three hours it can be yours, and you can revel in it and enjoy the seething disapproval of conservative Christians at the idea of a fulfilling religion without their god.
It is chock full of spirituality – ethnic spirituality – in other words, Paganism – religion of the place and its inhabitants are truly people of the place. The people are called the Na’vi. And you find them in James Cameron’s Avatar.
It’s exciting. A people so much a part of their environment, and a spirituality so much a part of both. We can imagine that early Paganism was like this, being a religion of the place, shaped by but also shaping the people, shaped by the environment but also shaping understanding of the environment. Organic. It belongs. It belongs in a sense an imposed alien sky religion never can.
You can probably assume that the bulk of the human mercenaries working for the exploiters of the planet are Christian – or at least monotheistic – that would be logical given the balance of the world’s religion is monotheistic. But it’s not even implied. In fact, it’s never mentioned.
The spirituality reminded me of the spirituality of Dances with Wolves. It was, perhaps, even discussed a bit more in this film. The goddess of the natives is a “she” – Eywa - and if you want you can take away from the film the explanation is that the “goddess creator” thing is a spiritual understanding of a scientific explanation mentioned in the film or you can take away the opposite understanding. It doesn’t really matter because what’s important is the spirituality so beautifully expressed.
It was very refreshing. Very beautiful. Very pure. Very much the religion of a world filled with the divine.
The spirituality is so organic to the place that you are transported. And Heathens will not walk away without images of the World Tree – Yggdrasil, in their heads.
Ross Douthat’s 12/21 column in the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html exemplifies the “offended” attitude. For Douthat, pantheism can never be more than a poor replacement for a real religion with a real Jesus to lift folks out of the “mundane” world. He felt threatened by the Force too, in Star Wars. I almost responded on the 21st to Douthat’s column, but I wanted a chance to see the film for myself first.
And now I have.
By no means did all Christian reviewers condemn the movie for its non-Christian spirituality. For example, Christian Spotlight on Entertainment gives it an morality “offensive” rating http://christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2009/avatar2009.html but this is for language and misuse of “God’s” name rather than the nature of the film’s spiritual message. Similarly, I have to give credit to Christianity Today’s review as well http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/movies/reviews/2009/avatar.html
It’s also been pointed out that though Disney’s new Princess and the Frog has voodoo but no Christianity. But why should it? The argument I’ve seen raised that because the New Orleans of the era was an in your face Christian city doesn’t mean that there weren’t parts and people in New Orleans that weren’t.
Why should every movie made have a Christian theme, or even a Christian in it, as though Christians are the only people on the planet?
One reviewer http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/12/18/conservative-christians-dont-crown-princess-and-the-frog/ actually has the temerity to say, “Not so much for the 1920s New Orleans of “The Princess and the Frog.” As with most of the Potter series, there’s not even a tip of the hat toward explicit traditional religion.”
Excuse me, but “traditional religion” is Paganism. It is not Christianity
Very few movies are made today about Paganism – or that even have Pagan themes. Only one recently even portrays it in a sympathetic fashion – Gladiator – and the piety of Maximus to traditional religion was roundly condemned as dangerous – it lacked Jesus after all and so could not possibly be meaningful or fulfilling.
Most movies, regardless of what conservative Christians might say, are full of Christians. Ordinary Christians going about their ordinary lives, not preaching, not witnessing, not bothering anybody but keeping their religious beliefs to themselves. Characters wear crosses around their necks; often, the central characters, one or more of them. They don’t talk about their beliefs but do they need to?
If this is somehow anti-Christian I fail to see it. But the moment any character looks even remotely non-Christian it becomes a bit deal to some of these people. Non-Christian religions should not be portrayed in a sympathetic light, apparently – only Christianity – anything else somehow equates to a Hollywood war on Christianity.
It’s madness I know, but those are the cards we have been dealt as a religious minority – listening to the majority whine because 99.99% isn’t enough – they want 100%. What these critics really want is a return to the days of Ben Hur and Spartacus, where Christianity not only gets mention, but Paganism gets denigrated in the same breath.
It isn’t a question of equal representation for them – it’s a privileging of their viewpoint they demand and a concomitant rejection of all others.
And the suggestion that the release of Avatar at this time of year could be a slap in the face to “believers”? These people need to remember this is our time of the year – a holy time for Pagan peoples across the board, and that even non-Christians are entitled to entertainment on December 25.
New York Times has a good review of the movie here looking at it from yet another perspective: Editorial Observer
