Media Reports Avatar Opposed by Church, Political Right

It's only been a couple days since I did my post on "Peace and Ecology."  In it I added my take on the film "Avatar."   Since then I’ve found ample stories on the Vatican and the political right being critical of the film.  I suppose my comments were timely.  It bothers me a little though that the media seems to be trying to portray the Vatican as being narrow-minded.  If anything the pope’s New Year’s address on peacemaking through protecting the environment should prove otherwise.   

Concerning “Avatar” I mentioned briefly in a paragraph what stood out to me in relation to my overall post, and really I'm no film critic but several things appeared clear to me. In my view of the film I mentioned that it seemed to convey a message of opposition to exploitation, though it’s not developed well.  The film also clearly has an underlying philosophy of pantheism and neo-paganism, which are not compatible with Christianity. Add to that the portrayal of the worst militaristic and capitalistic stereotypes imaginable, which are abundant and not easy to find likeable, and you end up with an overall poor view of humanity.  I'll repeat what I actually said, though if you scroll down the page to the January 11 post you can read it in context:

…as a society we tend to listen closely to what film and other media presents.  Undoubtedly "Avatar" expresses a strong theme of respect for nature, but it also has a strong underlying theme of pantheism and neo-paganism based on nature worship.  While I believe the film presents a good message on the importance of being opposed to environmental exploitation, it unfortunately plays too heavily on militaristic stereotypes, demonizes humanity, and is rather pessimistic concerning the future of the human race overall.  In the end it comes off as little more than an epic sci-fi tale of cowboys and Indians.

Now, I must add that I actually enjoyed the movie quite a bit.  In terms of exciting action it had me hanging on the edge of my seat for better than two thirds of the film.  However, I agree with much of what I've read about a lack of depth, though depth is not what gets movie goers out.  We live in a world where depth more often confuses people and they would rather get the simple version.  Frankly, film provides an excellent escape.  It has value often just in its ability to entertain and offer a momentary step back from the events of the week.

So “Avatar” doesn’t disappoint.  It has entertainment value.  It also expresses a simplistic view, one that has roused strong sentiment on both the political left and the right.  I find it interesting that those who can have their political feathers ruffled on either side don't actually need a lot of depth to get them going.  Rather, they seem to thrive on the more shallow expressions of real issues and the accompanying implications.  

I would have personally preferred that the film went into greater depth in making an anti-war message clear.  It could have done better to explore the real need for true environmental activism. It could have better explored the detrimental effects of unchecked capitalism.  It might have even gotten into a deeper exploration of the existential dilemmas of the characters.  However, it only had three hours for all of this and in some ways it did a good job of at least touching on these subjects. 

I found it interesting that the folks at beliefnet.com seem to be not too concerned with the heterodox challenges of pantheism or neo-paganism, rather they seem to feel that the obvious fictions of the science fiction presents a bigger challenge:

But while it's a given that the media outlets of the Catholic Church will, and should, take a particular theological stance on any bit of pop culture that may get reviewed in their pages or on their airwaves, I can't help but think, "Really? Neo-pagan nature worship is a real sticking point here?" What about the fact that human bodies no longer hold special significance, that human consciousness can be transferred into genetically-crafted empty vessels, Na'vi avatars, manufactured through a means of asexual, gene-manipulated reproduction, "matured" on a spacecraft and then decanted? And that's just one example. To worry about pantheism, and that a 3-D movie might inspire a little too much tree-hugging, just seems so antiquated, so very early Church, especially in a world full of poverty, war, and challenging scientific questions.

Actually, when it comes to a world of poverty, war, and challenging scientific questions, I don’t believe the Catholic Church has been silent. Clearly the Church has great concern with such issues and does so in a way that transcends the polemics of political ideology.

Comments

[Elias Chapelle]

You seem to have missed a major plot point in the film 'Avatar'. Perhaps you need to see it again. James Cameron borrowed extensively from other SF source material (including his own SF films of the past) that clearly illustrate that the faith of the Pandoreans is not pantheistic nor neo-Pagan. Religious SF, what there is of it, often explores the idea that there is more than one path to God. Did you miss the part of the film where our tree-hugging hero Pandorean convert realizes that the entire planet is one living organism? If that is not God I guess I don't know what is.

[Deacon DW]

Well, Elias, thanks for your comment--actually, I did realize that there was a lot of borrowing going on in "Avatar" and not all of it was SF. For example, my 15-year-old mentioned "Dances with Wolves" and "Pocahontas." My wife seemed to think it had a thread in common with "The Last Samurai." She also mentioned "Smurfs."

Now, as far as the whole planet being one living organism, wouldn't that more indicate that it's something biological and not God? This seemed more to be the science point of it. Furthermore, saying that the entire planet is one living organism and therefore is God, is, by definition, pantheism. You might say the same thing about earth--one living organism--but the moment you say that makes it God you've identified yourself as a pantheist.

I think there have been films that minimally point to "more than one path to God." "Contact" comes to mind, but it too juxtaposed science with faith in such a way to force the question regarding belief. We end up, by the design of the writer, asking is it God or is it something natural that we do not yet understand completely?

What I found to be neo-pagan about "Avatar" is precisely that the Pandoran's divinized and worshiped nature. An identifying mark of a pagan system of belief, depending on how you define paganism, is that it is a pantheistic or nature-worshipping religion. This is clearly the case among the Pandoran's practice.

While Sci-Fi writers may from time to time explore religious pluralism (more than one path), I don't really see it as being intrinsic to the plot of "Avatar" though that might be your subjective take on it. Keep in mind that pluralism is not compatible with every religion, few actually, but tolerance, by comparison, goes a long way.

[R MacGowan]

To start off with...they were mercenaries not US military. The state of our moral conscience could easily lead us down the same pathway as it has so many times in the past. If that reflection bothers you, I think that says more about you instead of the film.

Again, you missed the important fact that they, as do most Pagan religions, do not 'worship' nature but revere all life and see divinity (God, Goddess or Both) closely intertwined with it. A lesson you should learn yourself.

The fact that there are those of you who oppose a movie that shows the big corporation that wants to commit genocide on a people so they can take what isn't theirs as being the victim frankly disturbs me.

We are doomed to repeat ourselves and past wrongs if we do not open our eyes and see the world for what it is and what it has become. I think this movie has made a great number of people think and that is what scares you the most. People who may start thinking for themselves.

[Deacon DW]

R MacGowan - no, actually I was sort of hoping that people would start thinking for a change.