This is so true, I read Mistborn and now I joined the Church of the Survivor and worship Fortnite Kelsier every morning (This is not too far off from what some people believe will actually happen if children read some of these books)
I mean.. to be fair...some people, especially younger people, truly _can_ become quite enthusiastically obsessed with the things that catch their interest and/or sometimes even blur the lines quite a bit between knowing something is fictitious versus literally believing in it actually being out there somewhere. But I don't think that's typically so much the fault of the works they avidly adore as it's usually more to do with the fact that a lot of people don't talk to their kids enough and sort of just leave kids to their own devices, a bit like tossing a kid into the water and just seeing if they manage to swim on their own without any previous lessons or not; Or else people do talk to them, but they more just try to dictate everything precisely for their children without ever letting the children actually do anything or work anything out on their own, a bit like taking a child into the water and then always holding that child too close to ever properly teach them how to swim nor ever let them even attempt trying to swim on their own just with their parents arms as a safety-net beneath them. Because they don't realize that using the human brain[ or introducing things to the brain so that it can attempt to use them] helps the brain develop &/or develop the ability to use these things, much like how a baby using their legs or being allowed the opportunity to attempt to use their legs actually helps the babies' legs develop and/or helps the baby's ability to use their legs to develop. Things don't simply develop to a certain point, and then some switch is magically flipped, where people are suddenly or instantaneously able to do things perfectly that they weren't able to do before-the development of the ability to do things must be progressed gradually, in some way or another, from not doing it to actually doing &/or perfecting it. Growth, in general, must always be properly fed/fueled-or else it tends to waste away and fails to thrive. I think, maybe, most people who feel such extreme fear of the possibility of propaganda they don't agree with manipulating their or their children's minds are actually people who are more afraid of being unable to manipulate minds in the ways they want to be able to-even if, sometimes, unconsciously so. But maybe that's just me and my own misperceptions, idk.
I'm a conservative Christian and loved Mistborn and saw nothing of Mormonism in the serries. I'm looking forward to reading it again, but getting through 30+ Shanarra books and being only 8 into Wheel of Time since reading it 5 years ago takes time for a slow, contemplative reader. I think finishing Wheel will be a good Sanderson lead-in. Can't wait to take on the greater Cosmere.
My new mantra is: "What if instead of being afraid, we just talked about it." It should be on tee-shirts and bumper stickers. Another knockout. Thanks for doing what you do!
Thank you! It's a new thing I'm coming to learn more and more, and parenting is something that has taught me it like no other. Even stupid things like "when your kids are afraid of getting a shot, talk to them about it". I've been shocked how just being open and honest has cut down meltdowns about "scary" things - and it's amazing how it applies to philosophical things too!
@@Macheako I mean childhood vaccines are pretty normal lmao and it was the opposite of conned - it was "hey we are getting a shot and here's why and that might be nervewracking". I am absolutely pro-science on this channel :)
I've been an atheist for decades. When I first started reading Sanderson I didn't know how religious he is. When I found out his religious beliefs I kept reading and listened to his podcast. I've never felt preached to in any of the content he releases. He is my favorite author and I never fear that I'm going to be preached to in his future content.
I think his religion definitely influences things he writes about but I totally agree that it's not to preach, it's just a natural intersection of who he is bleeding into his works!
You grew up in a judeo-christian world, your entire moral systems are judeo-christian. Your basis of thinking is Judeo-Christian, even the english language is heavily influeced by christian latin. Ironically the atheist critiques of christianity are the extension of the Christian virtue that you should seek truth and understanding.
I think it is important, religious or not, to read things that challenge us. It will only further affirm your faith or lack of it. It is interesting too when you have authors, such as Sanderson, who are openly religious and they themselves write religions and faiths that are presented in both positive and negative lights (Hrathen being a great example), and having atheist characters who are viewed as highly respected and intelligent. Good books, regardless of the religious “narrative” force us to ask questions, increase our knowledge on particular subjects (including religion). This is only a good thing! Critical thinking as you said, it is the best way to grow and learn.
This video is excellent! I agree with everything you said. I enjoyed both Narnia and His Dark Materials. I never felt that I was being preached to or the authors were trying to convert me into their way of thinking. They were enjoyable stories built on different worldviews, and that’s okay!
I actually haven't seen the word propaganda being used much against fantasy works, but everything you talked about here sounds eerily similar to the challenges public libraries are facing right now. I've been saying for a while that I don't get why people are so afraid of ideas. I love your deep dives on these topics!
That was an excellent video. I had much the same opinion that you guys reached in your conclusion, but it's always good to get it explored and think about the subject a little more in depth.
Exposure to ideas is so important, this is one of the reasons why I read. I believe seeing the world from other perspectives and trying to understand them helps us all build our compassion for one another and the attempted repression of ideas not only breeds ignorance but is ineffective as ideas will continue to spread potentially unchecked and unchallenged. The ability to grasp new ideas and ideas that contradict what we know (or what we think we know) and form arguments for and against these help us consolidate our understanding of our world
Very elegantly handled, as usual, and I appreciate the discussion. Totally agree. Given Sanderson's personal faith, I've always been a little surprised by how much characters in the Cosmere question and criticize organized religion. I think it speaks to his nuance as a writer and a person, and I've never really felt 'preached' to.
I wish this was longer and had also covered the drama with the HP series and religious drama there. Also, more indepth clarification on what the word allegory means.. especially when it’s misused when dealing with Lewis’ Narnia.
This is a great topic, and one that I haven't seen too many booktubers touch upon, so great job!!! This is just one of the reasons why I love your channel! I was born with the gift of overlooking the influences of what I read. Basically, I really couldn't care less. Whatever contents a book has, I not only shrug off the influence and weave that into the story and take it all with a grain of salt, because that is all it really is... a story. I have my own beliefs and thoughts, and I am vehemently adhered to them.
Phew this was a deep one, great stuff!!! Totally agree that in general we need to chill out when it comes to "propaganda" Especially when we live in time where some places in the world deal with real propaganda's most sinister aspects.
This is something I wish I had stated more explicitly based on the comments on this video. I am not saying propaganda doesn't exist - it absolutely does, and can be EXTREMELY harmful, especially when it dehumanizes (I mean, I put the more squeaky clean propaganda for WWII in this video - the US propaganda and how it displayed Japanese people was legit horrible). Which is why it's so much more annoying when people mis-appropriately use the word for fiction novels that, while they absolutely represent various viewpoints, do not harm like real propaganda spread in governments or schools, etc.
@@Bookborn Nowhere in video did you even imply propaganda doesn't exist. (Funny you mention the propaganda about the Japanese, when you mentioned WW2 and propaganda my mind went to the really old Superman cartoons...sheesh!) There's got to be a better way to express that someone disagrees or doesn't like a work, other than using terms like propaganda completely out of context. That's kind of the point I got from this which I whole heartedly agree with!
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. As my father said, "Eyes see and ears hear what the mind knows". If someone were to become interested in a religion because of a piece of art it inspired, good on them. If someone were to convert to a religion because of a piece of art it inspired, good on them. I don't think a piece of art, even if it is written with the sole intent of converting people (which may or may not be the case), causes the same reaction in every individual. Take me for example, LOTR is my favourite fantasy series of all time. Undoubtedly inspired and influenced by catholic thought and themes. Yet, I'm a devout Hindu.
What if someone read the Turner Diaries and became a religious extremist? Religious conversion is insidious and functionally the same as cult indoctrination.
Yeah, it's only bad if people are forced to pick it up[ or tricked into it under deliberately false or misleading pretenses] rather than merely having the option to pick it up or not at their own discretion, and that applies not just to the book hoping to convert people but to the actual conversion[ or not] itself of people after reading it.
I was raised without religion, in New Zealand. Not anti-religion, but just that religion was never mentioned. I read the Narnia books as a child (they are books aimed at children after all). I loved them and they were the books that started my love of fantasy. At no time did I recognise the religious allegory within or feel a desire to convert to Christianity. I never felt preached to. Aslan was a big majestic magical lion to me, not a representation of Jesus.
More so than Sanderson, i think Orson Scott is the Mormon propagandist. His Alvin Maker series is a Joseph Smith retelling in the same way Narnia is a biblical retelling. Btw, before dismissing Lewis as a propagandist, most of his non Narnia writing it straight up christian apologetics. Its actually some of the more interesting apologetics. Both The Screwtape letters and The Great Divorce were really interesting reads.
I read and reviewed The Sirens of Titan recently by Kurt Vonnegut and it talked a lot about how it's important for a human to "be used." The words propaganda and manipulation have gotten so dirty, but it's a base part of life to be influenced and to influence. The tricky part is being able to effectively process it all
Thanks for this thoughtul essay. I loved Sanderson's Elantris because it critiqued the role of.religion in politics. I do.view His Dark Materials as propaganda simply because i remember reading years ago that Pullman's intent was to convert children to atheism. I choose to not continue reading it after reading the Golden Compass to check it out. It wasnt for me, but i can still recognize and appreciate the role it has in fantasy.
I had the same feeling after reading about Pullman and the origins His Dark Materials books around the time the Golden Compass movie came out. Mind you, the articles were all positive towards the author and series. My takeaway was that I didn't really need to read a book series that seemed to be written as a "anti-Narnia" book first and foremost over anything else. Maybe that's not fair, but it's been nearly 15 years and the tone of all those articles still don't sit well with me.
I think pullman probably is his own worst enemy when it comes to his books lol. Admittedly, I've only read the first two so far (and I heard the third is when it amps up a lot) but there is NO WAY as a kid I would've thought it was trying to convert me to atheism. His insistence that his work is important because it's anti-narnia seems so silly to me, in many ways. The main character is an awesome young protagonist and I think I would've enjoyed them so much if I had picked them up as a kid.
@Bookborn from the first book, I didn't get the sense that he was trying to convert me over to atheism. It for sure had a non-Christian feel because of the daemons. I remember thinking the bool was ok, but not enough to continue on with the series. Mind you, this was years ago.when the movie came.out.
@@emilyreads5207 Whatever Pullman himself may say, His Dark Materials does not strike me as atheistic at all, but rather overtly Luciferian. Which is much worse, IMHO.
A bit late to this party, but Terry Goodkind is an example of an author employing non-relogious propaganda especially in some of the later books in the Sword of Truth series.
I was afraid I wouldn't like this video but am pleasantly surprised. These authors are amazing artists that take you to another world that we need more of!
The definition of propaganda is simple, it is never called propaganda when you do it (because of course you are definitely correct), it is propaganda when your enemies do it.
You left out in your case study Goodkind's books - Sword of Truth got SOO repetitively preachy in an anti-religious/pro-humanist fashion. It wasn't just worldview permeating a work; his characters became his soap-box. @Bookborn are there any fantasy books/series that you do think are propoganda-ish? And yes, I understand and agree, that to really be 'propoganda' it probably has to be more like an institution trying to influence a whole population... but that doesn't mean that certain books aren't very overt in trying to change people's opinions/ideas about a particular topic. It's kind of like the difference between subtle advertising (that is trying to sell you a product) and when a salesman comes to your door and won't leave/repeatedly tries to hard-sell you something!
I actually mention him briefly in text on screen 🤣 I said I remembered good kind after and that he’s often talked about in political propaganda contexts. I do think books can be overt in their own opinions but I still don’t think it’s propaganda because it’s still within your power to read it or not. And, I find those overt books, rarely tend to be good. In fact I have a companion video idea to this where there has been a huge loss of subtlety in SFF that I’ve read recently. I don’t view it as propaganda but I do view it as bad writing 🤣😭
Yeah, I am not happy at all how that ended up porting - it looked thicker on my editing screen. I know it's probably an accessibility nightmare, so I won't be using the combo again in the future 😭
3rd grade, late 1950s, I commented on something about another religion that I had read. My mother calmly asked what I believed. I thought about it and said “not that.” Lesson learned.
This is an interesting topic, it's great to see you discuss it! I'm a Jew, and my dad read Narnia to me when I was a child. I've read it myself later, and I don't think it influenced me to believe Christian ideas - but it kind of helps me understand them. Similarly, I've read and loved His Dark Materials, and while Pullman is definitely pushing his opinions there, it's not necessarily anti-religious propaganda - though I've encountered a Christian RU-vid channel call it Satanist. Either way, even if you don't define those books as propaganda, there's still a gap between them and Lord of the Rings, IMO. Personally, I don't think it's bad to present your views in a work of fiction because they'll come through; your worldview inherently shapes how you write. I also kind of want for there to be more Fantasy books written from a Jewish perspective, as I think current Fantasy lacks in that area.
Supposedly Pullman himself has stated that he views his works as atheist propaganda and he wants it that way, which I think is pretty funny (but I'd agree that it doesn't feel that way to me when I read them). It does seem that when books deal with religious topics then tend to deal with Christianity or anti-christianity, specifically, although hopefully as fantasy continues to expand and represent more people you'll get to see some more Jewish-influenced fantasy!
@@Bookborn Pullmann' attack is actually on Jewish scriptures, including apocryphal ones (the Book of Enoch), Christianity in HDM is not separate from Judaism.
@@francescocarlini7613 Well, perhaps you are right. But: a. The Book of Enoch isn't that much part of Jewish scripture, and b. I have plenty of reasons to not consider those attacks against Judaism - it's all much more about abusing authority. Now, obviously, Pullman wouldn't consider Judaism any better than Christianity in that respect. The fact is tha Authority's stronghold is a mountain - probably suppposed to remind the reader of Mount Sinai. Personally, I prefer a headcanon that the Authority hacked Christianity late in time. But while Judaism itself, with all it's writings and scholarship, isn't really referred to in the book, it's obvious that Pullman meant for the Authority to stand in for the G-d of the Old Testament (Jesus isn't mentioned even once, after all). Long story short: I try to navigate between my headcanon and the likely possibility Pullman didn't really study Judaism, and the author's obvious intentions. I'm at least partially in denial.
@@נעם-קליין Interesting. The Authority is also Pullman's version of the god Urizen from William Blake's mythology. The Book of Urizen is Blake's anti-Genesis much like His Dark Materials is the anti-Narnia. Urizen is the Demiurge, the god of evil that created the material universe and enslaved mankind with wicked systems of rules and the corrupt institutions of religion and marriage. The one moment in human history where Urizen is manifested most clearly is the revelation of the Mosaic Law. By contrast, Blake is living in a time of Satanic rebellion against the powers of Urizen; the revolutionary fire that started in the American colonies and spread to Europe. One of Blake's most famous paintings shows Urizen creating the world using a golden compass.
@@francescocarlini7613 Huh. Didn't know that - also surprised no mention of the apostles declaring there was no need in keeping the Mosaic Law was made. Also, I thought that the Golden Compass was from Paradise Lost. Maybe Blake was inspired by it, too. (Didn't read Paradise Lost or any of Blake's poems yet... Kind of embarrased in that.)
If Sanderson has a million fans I am one of them. If Sanderson has ten fans I am one of them. If Sanderson has one fan then that is me. If Sanderson has no fans that is because I am no longer on Earth. If the world is against Sanderson I am against the world. I love Sanderson until my last breath.
I think Sanderson's personal beliefs and his conservatism is really noticable in his books. Sometimes it hinders the stories a bit, but I've never felt that he wanted to convert me. In his later works (and especially in Stormlight) I feel he does a conscious effort to hide it more.
Lord of the Rings feels pretty clearly religious to me. The story revolves around doing something that is highly unlikely to work (taking the ring to mount doom) after which everyone involved in planning this thing was just sort of hoping for a miracle. No seriously, it's outright stated that people cannot bring themselves to try to destroy the ring. In the movie Gimli just fails to destroy it by smashing it, but in the book he and everyone present fails to even try. What was the plan when Frodo got to Mount Doom, unlikely as that was to succeed? The plan was for providence to make something happen, and it did. In addition, Frodo spares Gollum, not because he feels vague pity (again, the movie changes this) but because he feels it's not meant to go that way, Gandalf (an angel) would not want it, and he still has a part to play. Frodo has faith, yes that kind of faith, that somehow his sacrifice will work, and that somehow, for some reason, Gollum should be spared. If the main characters faith being key to their character and succes isn't enough for you, the background lore is even more religious. Men die, while elves have immortality in this world, but the death of men is a gift, wink wink. The world is created by God and a choir of angels. Evil is brought to the world by a fallen angel called Melkor, the most powerful of Gods servants, a clear parallel to the devil. Melkor falls because he wishes the power of God for himself. Orcs must be corrupted elves because only God can create life, while evil forces can only corrupt what is good and are ultimately impotent and sterile. Then there's the Jesus imagery of both Frodo and more obviously Gandalf being granted a second shot at physical life after a huge sacrifice. You might be able to dismiss individual elements of this, but it all rather adds up especially because we know Tolkien thought of his work as religious.
I feel like I am back to the 90's where there was a crusade against dungeon and dragon because of religion in their books. Gods are just a perfect way to introduce magic in a fantasy world. Propaganda follows because earch religion try to gain followers to manipulate character in that world, and not the reader in the real world. They are often a best way to recognize propaganda than trying to be propaganda
Definition 1 is really the only one applicable to works of fiction. And even that is fairly thin except when authors come right out and say what their alterior motive was such as Pullman. Legendarium had a very interesting discussion recently on the theology of Tolkein. While religion is a popular topic to discuss, I would also add social commentary like Animal Farm on the dangers of communism or just change mutants to a minority or homosexual in XMen for the dangers of discrimination. Regarding 'Its good for the kids', I also find it incredibly ironic, and very amusing, that a lot of the push for book banning is often based on conservative religious fundamentalism has resulted in the Bible getting pulled from the shelves due its incredibly violent and sexual content.
I don't think Lewis' work really tries to promote Christian belief. Sure there are references and a few winks, but there are never any flat out religious references. The closest we get is Voyage of the Dawn Treader which has Aslan say he exists in our world but is known by another name. An even thats vague. I think people get so hung up on his beliefs and his more obvious symbolism they don't see some of the beauty in his work. There's some truly wonderful stuff there
So, C.S Lewis did write plenty of other material direct arguments for Christianity and various philosophical and moral stances. One can argue that it’s possible to see some of those ideas in Narnia. I don’t know whether there is specific evidence to whether he was trying to use Narnia to propagate religious ideas. Well it’s obvious that he did a little bit but it’s debatable whether it should be called propaganda or not. My guess is that if we call works like Narnia propaganda it should be clarified that it’s probably not effective enough to be very harmful or a game changing tool for good (depending on what opinions you have about Christianity). Maybe it could be, I could definitely change my mind about that. But given my current views, I could be fine with calling it light propaganda but I’m not that bothered by it. As long as books aren’t strongly manipulative, reading works with a mix of ideas is probably a decent way to start interacting with different perspectives anyway.
"The religious element is absorbed into the story and its symbols." JRRT What a master of the art the man was! Of course he was also incorporating the symbolism of several language and symbolic tradition which were absolutely pagan, because that is the cultural heritage of the British Isles and the English speaking world as well. Of course both Lewis and Tolkien would have more or less blurred the issue with the idea that all those other world concepts and understandings of the Devine were just beliefs of people who knew no better until the Jesus people came to their shores.
I thought from the 'historian's perspective' the Vampire-Chronicles are much 'worse' than Narnia. Rice's vampires all are horribly anachronistically 'Christians', unimportant what culture or age or even christian domination they're supposed to have been born and socialized in. This is extremley visible in her Roman, Greek, Aegyptian an even early medieval characters. - I mean, there's enough written sourcematerial, and if an author would have bothered to read books or letters from that time-period they probably would have grasped how these people really lived and thought at that time.
I think it is worth going back much further to John Milton's Paradise Lost. I bring this up not as a piece of religious propoganda (which it might be) but as political propoganda. Milton was the official propogandandist for Oliver Cromwell's rule in England, promoting democracy. However, when it became clear that Cromwell was not living up to the ideology and was, in fact, a tyrant, he wrote Paradise Lost, an epic work where Satan was clearly fighting for democracy, while actually having tyrannical asperations and willingness to commit great evil for the sake of his cause (the genocide of the Catholic Irish by Cromwell). Proving that God was justified is propoganda for King Charles II.
I mean i know sanderson is a mormon, but ive never thought it showed in his writing. Especially not compared to something like chronicles of narnia or golden compass.
lol idk if you saw the part where I put his novel on screen. After I said "it's only religious" I was like- wait - we talk about Goodkind all the time in this regard 🤣
Funny, since I'm also a latter-day saint(mormon), I understood all the "nods" Sanderson low key threw into his books, but NEVER have I felt he was preaching. He knows that his job is to entertain you, not convert you to anything. He does touch on certain themes and ideas, but like always it's to service the story, which is the point. Good authors do that.
About the children: The hope is that, by the time they encounter this stuff, they'll have their feet firmly planted on the ground, and it will be too late influence them. I believe this is the precise REASON that children are currently being targeted, and that's why the "leave our kids alone" reaction is so intense. For myself, my parents protected me to some degree as I grew up. Looking back now, some of it was overprotective (like not letting me watch The Labyrinth, because of "witchcraft"). It was also the 90's, so their worldview was the dominant one in media. It did result in one of the most bizarre realizations of my life, when I realized that there are actually a LOT of people in the world who HATE Christians (sometimes passionately so). I found it so bizarre, because I spent my entire life surrounded by them, and they were the most kind and generous people that I knew. Overall, I'm grateful that I was shielded as a child.
I mean, part of the world hates Christians because in the past the Christians brought holy wars to them. Granted, that's a bit in the past, to say the least, but your comment's subtext was kind of like WOW, how could anybody hate those perfect Christians!? There's also the minor fact that Christianity (along with most, but not all) religions tends to claim they have the sole truth, and that if you don't believe it, you'll be going to a bad place. It's also things like that that can rub people the wrong way.
I see propaganda as more overt. When a book feels preachy, for example. I don’t think just having a general religious bent or point of view is the same thing as propaganda though. There’s an aspect to propaganda as well that it’s trying to trick you into believing something that you might not otherwise. You made a good comparison to advertising. That makes sense. To me that’s different from someone just writing from a certain point of view.
Not really sure how you can follow Sazed's journey and say that Sanderson is trying to propagandise any particular religion. When I saw that article going on about his Mormon beliefs my first reaction was "huh, wouldnt have picked that.
Is it possible that those people who shout the loudest that certain books were propaganda are the parents who feel most threatened of their children to actually start thinking critically, as they cannot be controlled as easily anymore? Of course such parents would not phrase it as control but rather as protection... Just an unresearched opinion...
Finishing the video I'm back: You forgot the perhaps most important book-seria on 'western values and wisdom'. I saw and heard many people writing and saying that Terry Pratchett's books and writings made them better and wiser humans. This is also valid for me, because he often puts up a mirror in front of our faces, and it's not that he sounds like Lewis or Pullman that teach and preach when they speak through Aslan or Lord Azrael as if declaring dogma ex cathedra, but Pratchett writes more like a buddy with a benevolent smile and twinkle: 'Did you notice that? Could those characters and their circumstances perhaps be a bit like you? Isn't it a bit ridiculous, how they live and think and act? Hm? - It's very ridiculous here, because it isn't your job/ politics/ faith/ prejudices to the letter, but don't you live and think just like if it was?' One can choose of course to stay ignorant and unattentive to the fool's mirror, and read those books from the outside just for fun without taking anything from it, that is fine. But those readers that realize this isn't just absurd fantasy-persiflage but also about them and the society they live in, certainly take more worth out of the lecture. This is perhaps the main reason I would hand to every narrow minded person trapped in their in-group's black&white echo-chamber 'Small Gods', 'Thief of Time', 'Night Watch', 'The Truth' and perhaps 'Unseen Academicals' or to too aggressive anti/feminists 'Equal Rites' and 'Monstrous Regiment'. You can later try to hear their opinion and if they got the message between the lines and choose for yourself if this person is still worth you bothering. Pratchett is probably the best character-test that is out there.
A religious text is no more important to me than Lord of the Rings. It's all fiction, and the idea that I'm reading an explicitly religious allegory never crosses my mind when I'm reading Sanderson or any other author I enjoy. Religon started as a way to explain otherwise inexplicable phenomena and eventually became a means to control and oppress the masses. I never feel like these authors are fighting for my dogma membership.
I would consider any and every works of Clive Barker are propaganda of anit-Christ: not that he would go against Christianity, but he would like to replace the figure or the structure of mono-theism(or just theism). It's beautiful how he does it, and as a Christian, I don't agree with what he stands for sometimes and I still can enjoy his works... sometimes.
I am a Christian youth director. I love “bad portrayals of religion (especially Christianity)” because I believe them to be portrayals of “bad religion (or bad theology)”. His Dark Materials is a great example of this, but my go-to is a smaller horror flick called Elizabeth Harvest that is about a “god-like” figure who purposely sets his creations up to fail because he enjoys punishing them (the movie also has a lot of other religious metaphors). People should be encouraged to think through negative understandings of religion, why they exist, and how accurate they are.
I've been a fan of Orson Scott Card for decades. I was always well aware of his LDS beliefs and politics. I separate that from his work, despite the fact that his religion often seems into his work. I don't mind because he's a great storyteller. He has zero influence on my belief system or politics. He's a great writer. If he were atheist or Hindu, I'd feel the same way.
I am an atheist. I believe in a lot of the teachings in the Bible. That doesn't make me a Christian. I love Tolkien's world, but I don't want to be ruled by a king. Lord of the Flies would have had a different outcome with a different set of characters. We get to read a story and take what resonates for us into our lives and leave the rest. Reading more just makes that process work better.
Eventhough media have some influence over people, I higly doubt any book can convert anyone into a differente beliefs. Moreover if I found some book with ideas I strongly disagree - I just won't read it and that's enough. We don't need any censorship or bans to fight it. After all - we all know what they say about foribdden fruit.
Statement about CS Lewis and Narnia (stating that he is going out of his way to influence you towards or against a SINGLE religion....this is just not true...maybe guy watched the movies). It has been a long time since I read the Narnia series so I am going to get some of my example wrong but you will know what I am talking about. There is a section in books when they are traveling the desert (I think it is where Aravis gets scratched) and someone says to Aslan that they do not follow the 'way' and Aslan responds back saying it is not whether they follow his way but whether they stick to the morals/direction of their 'way'. He is saying that being a Muslim(etc) instead of a christian does not mean you do not get into heaven it means that those that follow other religions are just as accepted if they follow the strictures/morality of the religion they follow....if anyone can give me the section/scene I am referencing here it would be helpful :). But Narnia has clear religious overtones
He's read the books lol, I've read a lot of CS Lewis (i'm Christian and really love his works on Christianity) and I think it's a stretch to say that Narnia is not trying to point to a single religion - sure, perhaps not a single sect, but it is very Christ-focused.
And yet the final villains of Narnia are just cartoonishly evil Muslims and their false god. For all they say, religious peoples actions do not often coincide with heir words.
@@Bookborn OK, I went down the rabbit hole and had my Narnia stories confused(it has been a LONG time since I read them)...This is what I was referencing and is from wikipedia......Through these evil actions, the conspirators have unwittingly summoned Tash himself into Narnia. Ginger encounters Tash and barely escapes, but loses the power of speech. A devout Calormene soldier named Emeth enters the stable voluntarily, determined to meet his god. He vanishes into Aslan's Country, where he meets Aslan and realizes where his true devotion lies. Aslan tells him that "all the service thou hast done to Tash, I accept as service done to me", and further explains that "no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him". He explains that Emeth's pious devotion, because it was rooted in a love of justice and truth, was really to Aslan rather than to Tash.....This always stuck with me thru my entire life when people view muslims, jews, etc as 'bad' because not christians. This exemplified that it matters not what the religion is but rather your actions.. Evil christians are still evil. Good Muslims are still good (oversimplified but you get the point)
@@Bookborn Yes... but isn't there a difference between an author's work simply pointing to or being influenced by one particular religion itself versus that author actually intending outright to use this particular work of theirs specifically and deliberately to influence or manipulate the beliefs or religion of any others/readers who may read it? There may be a specific religion or system of belief which is pointed to within that particular piece of fiction, but that doesn't necessarily mean that particular piece of fiction was created specifically to try and influence or manipulate readers into also conforming[ or adhering] themselves or their own minds' thoughts/feelings/beliefs/whatever to that specific religion or system of belief outside of that piece of fiction as well. I mean, if we talk about the fact that a certain thing is true[ or at least that personally we clearly think/believe it to be so], are we always trying to force or convince or coerce anyone else to also agree that it actually is-just because we said or believe it is so at all? I think there is a difference between something having extreme overtones of certain things versus something actually being propaganda designed and/or intended specifically to cause/lead others to also believe that thing themselves. But, even if something IS specifically intended or designed to purposefully try and lead others to believe some particular thing(s), that doesn't mean people actually have to do so just because someone or something else believes &/or tries to convince them that they should. I think that people trying to convince anyone else what to believe is only as harmful as we think that ourselves or others are[ or could be] easily impressionable-or as exactly how forcibly &/or underhandedly they are willing to try and do so. (..If that makes sense?)
@@JohnPatron-j5l Well, there is also a difference between believing that a particular religion is good/bad versus believing that every person who follows it is unequivocally or irrevocably also good/bad. But that's a whole other debate, really. 😅😅
Neither Tolkien nor his drinking and thinking bud CS Lewis ever converted me, and I enjoyed them both eve with Lewis's annoying habit of each series becoming less and less of a literary analogy and more and more of a pure propaganda piece.
At some point, in life given, Hallelu YaH. One must ask themselves, do I love truth, as commanded and written, Hallelu YaH! Or do they love their religion and dogma..... All have need to interpret scripture from a Yahudim perspective and tradition 💜 ........ Great grand elder, Yahudim elect Shem'n Kheph'a 👊 Read; Ode of Solomon 38, Job 38:1-3, MatithYahu 12:36 then let's compare the knowledge & intelligence your religion teaches and I'll provide what Yahudim teach. Deal?!!!!👊💜
I converted to Atheism after reading Philip Pullman. No, not really. The religious propaganda tag seems a rather handy but naughty tool to undermine a publication or author by negative association, favoured I wager by someone already nuttier than a fruitcake. Children can most probably remain well-adjusted reading books of all sorts so long as a half-awake parent is around actually giving them time and attention. That’s quantity not quality time; so said Arnie in FUBAR.
I've been an atheist for a long time, and JRRT still remains my favourite fantasy author. I don't agree with the conservative philosophy or the catholic theology which underpins much of his work, but I can also respect that the books wouldn't be what they are _without_ those elements. I can appreciate that those underpinning ideas lend an aesthetic quality to the work which wouldn't otherwise be present. It should be possible to read something and to appreciate the ideas behind it, even come to respect them on some level, but without agreeing with it, or worrying that it is going to 'corrupt' the people who do read it. When I have kids, I'll be raising them in a household where both left-wing and atheistic ideas prevail, but I also can't wait to introduce them to conservative, catholic Tolkien.
For the love of God don't subject your kids to artistic left wing drivel! God exists whether you believe in him or not. Don't sacrifice your child's soul to your Godless ideology.
As a mormon, i thought this was gonna just be a bash session on religion and mormonism and brandon. Completely the opposite! Great video with classic insights.
I don't think the purpose of the video was propaganda as a whole. The umbrella the term covers is ENORMOUS. She states clearly in the beginning she is focusing specifically on propaganda and its relationship with religion. It is a good idea though to find videos/media discussing its role with other types of world views/biases/prejudices. I have a semi-similar video project using a brief lens into the potential religious influences, as definitely among the WWII sentiments but how the Jewish religion specifically influenced it, that played into Superman's creation, much like this video touches on Captain America's influences during WWII.
I feel like pretty much every point made in the video applies to that too. Art that is influenced by the creator’s worldview, or just portrays people living their lives the way they do in the real world, is clearly not propaganda. In the specifics it can be poorly written or executed, or just plain lame, but that by itself is clearly not sinister or harmful. And there was no singling out religion as the big bad. Most of this was defending religious authors for letting their beliefs influence their work. You did watch the whole video, right?
Religious people are bad though. And feminist and non heterosexual "propaganda" usually sounds something like "I and everyone else have the right to live openly in society with all the respect and benefits a good society should offer its citizens." Religious propaganda usually sounds like "I and everyone else have the right to live openly in society with all the respect and benefits a good society should offer its citizens as long as they follow my religion the way I follow it." How incredibly disingenuous you must be. Religion is the big bad and always had been. Organizations founded on social control and power hoarding.
She clearly stated that religious propaganda is not the only kind of propaganda that exists-she simply used religious propaganda and the fantasy genre specifically as one singular example(specifically because it's the one that seemingly gets brought up the most often in relation to Fantasy-genre fiction in particular) with which to question how propaganda works[ or what propaganda is & isn't] and how to use our own critical-thinking to identify for ourselves whether or not a piece of fiction merely contains &/or explores some religious concepts/beliefs/themes[/etc.] at all OR actually is/isn't attempting to use those concepts/beliefs/themes[/etc.] specifically to try and outright manipulate the thoughts/feelings/beliefs[/etc.] of whoever reads them. You can then take that and easily re-apply the same to basically any other type of content or subject independently to identify whether or not something containing that particular content or subject is in fact propaganda[ and actually trying to manipulate how people think/feel/believe about that particular subject/content] or not, on your own, as well. She also never stated whether or not religious propaganda actually IS or _ISN'T_ in fact "the big bad" at all, either-she simply acknowledged the fact that many people do point at it as if it is and then on the tail of that also examined what propaganda itself actually is, in general, and questioned whether or not fantasy books written by people who have specific beliefs(pretty much regardless of whether those beliefs are religious or non-religious or pro-religious or anti-religious or otherwise) are in truth inherently or automatically propaganda. She technically didn't even really pass any judgment whatsoever regarding whether or not propaganda(or things that purposefully try to influence or manipulate how other people think/feel/believe) is bad. She just acknowledged that most people don't like to be aware that they are being intentionally influenced[ or deliberately manipulated], but especially not by things they don't like or don't personally agree with, (and observed that this is likely why it's often a topic that gets brought up & met with so much negativity or opposition) and asked whether or not everything that has been called propaganda was actually aiming to manipulate or influence/alter or control other people's actual thoughts or feelings or beliefs about those things or not. She personally concluded that she thinks many things likely aren't, but also invited her viewers to reach conclusions of their own regarding it and discuss and share or compare amongst themselves as well.
Anybody who says stormlight isn't dripping with mormonism doesn't know what mormonism teaches. The entire magic system is mormonism and the similarities don't end there.
It's not that it's not a reflection of mormonism - it's that he isn't trying to *convert* you. It's not...propaganda, it's just a reflection of his beliefs.
@@Bookborn ahhh okay. Alright fair enough then. As an orthodox Christian who actively tries to refute mormonism I've never felt stormlight was a conversion project or "propaganda" either.
@@Bookborn When do your beliefs stop influencing your writing vs when do you start inserting your beliefs into your writing? That line that our beliefs influence us is such a cop out because it assumes that writing is not a active conscious process. You don't know his intent, but most people know that their world views do not constitute the literal laws of reality. Not only is Sanderson building a universe that functions on the laws of physics but he is blending the laws of physics with the cosmology of his religion. Propagandists don't need to believe their propaganda for it to be so. People can unwittingly create propaganda. Regardless, saying that his innately Mormon writing projects don't have a propagandist effect just because he maybe doesn't totally understand the implications of expounding on his personal religious beliefs across thousands of pages of writing displays an incredible lack of thought into what the creative process is like.
@@ashleyholbird4287 But that's only because you would have to admit that your own religious texts and adjacent material also has the same potential for conversion right?
I didn't join the sect the writer of Wrinkle In Time was apart of after my 4th grade teacher read it to us as kids in the 70's. If a Hugo winner didn't have the skills to convert me I don't know who could.
Way I see it, most art is a form of self expression and for many creators their religious beliefs or lack thereof are deeply apart of them and will come through at some level in their work. Not everyone has an agenda. Most are just expressing themselves and their human experience
Yep. And working through ideas (be it relational, philosophical, etc) as they create their stories. I suspect that if an author tried to consciously separate/avoid their worldview in their storytelling, it would feel forced and artificial.
That Tolkien quote is super interesting! People often cite another quote by Tolkien about how he disliked allegory as “proof” that The Lord of the Rings is completely non-religious. While the story isn’t allegorical, his Catholic faith and military background definitely had an influence on his writing, whether that was intentional or not.
Yes, I've totally read that allegory quote! It's hard sometimes to parse what's allegory and what's not; but it's clear that LOTR has a lot of religion in it, but it is NOT allegorical in the way that Narnia is, where there's a literal one-to-one correlation with religion and religious figures
@@Bookborn Exactly! Non-allegorical does not mean non-religious. Both Narnia and LoTR are religious, but the approach is very different. Narnia is much more overt and like you said, 1:1. LoTR, to me at least, is more so just inspired by Tolkien’s faith and includes some religious themes/symbolism/etc. while not being preachy. Thanks for the video and the reply!
Yes, yes, yes - great video! If we aren't open to hearing about other people's worldviews, even if they might disagree with our own, we are limiting ourselves and our potential to grow. If your worldview is so intolerant of other world views that you can't even allow for a discussion of them, I think that is a bigger problem.
But then what do you do with that? Do you live peacefully next to the group whose propaganda seeks to dehumanize you as a person? And is it really propaganda to teach people to treat everybody fairly and with respect? And not in the fake religious way of saying it and not doing it. Is teaching respect for the whole human population propaganda? And if you think it is what other viewpoint do you hold?
@@JohnPatron-j5l I think that we can all agree that any propaganda that espouses hate is something to know how to recognise, avoid, and absolutely hold against its creator(s). I am not American, but in my country we do have fairly robust laws against hate speech that eliminate some of that problem, but some still gets through, and it's vile.
I’d say what makes it very hard to classify art as propaganda is that it’s art. It’s not invading your life. You picked up the book and asked to be entertained with an idea, a story, a theme. Even if you don’t like the idea, you’re just getting what you asked for.
Yes, and I think that's where the important part of "institutional" comes in. We are choosing to engage in art - it's not something that's being thrown or forced at us at every angle, like perhaps a government or religious institution could do.
@@rogerhuggettjr.7675 if you mean required reading in school, than I suppose so. Depends on how it’s taught. If they’re teaching you properly, to entertain the idea without accepting it automatically, than it’s fine. If you mean required reading on a govt. level, than yeah, that’s kinda hard to argue with.
@rogerhuggettjr.7675 War propaganda was often voluntary in the same way. You'd go to the movie theatre and watch movies supporting the war effort. Many were excellent movies. Art, even good art, has always been a vector to display and support values.
Awesome video! I am so glad you tackled this topic. As a kid, I was heavily censored from reading/watching certain things, specifically Harry Potter since my parents believed that it was propaganda for the occult and Wicca. I believe now that was an over exaggeration from my parents. This topic is near and dear as a renewed reader. As a new parent, I would love to hear a video specifically about content for kids and what you have learned with introducing books to your kids.
I've been thinking about doing a kid-book centered video for a while but am not sure if people would be interested! I've learned so much about teaching kids to read/helping them become lovers of reading and it's been a fun thing to explore. I come from a very religious family and everyone always assumed I couldn't read Harry Potter and my parents were always like "have you met our daughter, she has them memorized" 🤣
My siblings and I were also dissuaded from reading Harry Potter but not because they were viewed as propaganda. My parenta thought they would UNINTENTIONALLY "normalize" the thing they viewed as evil, specifically sorcery, occult behavior, etc. Nowadays, I do something similar with my young kids by not saturating them with nasty or rude main characters. A few are fine, but I'd rather them not saturate their reading time with lying, stealing, or hurting others. As they get older, that threshold will grow. On a seperate note, I read the first three HP books later and (uncultured swine that I am) couldn't stand Harry's complete disregard of rules so I never finished them.
@cytbeth kids now how to make the difference with fiction and reality I read all kind of characters and I didn't become like them 🤣 Also some characters start a certain way and then they have a characters developments arch. I think child see all kind of character and not living in a bubble where everyone is happy and nice. That's why fiction is for.
C.S. Lewis disputed Narnia was a purposeful allegory. He wrote, "Some people seem to think that I began by asking myself how I could say something about Christianity to children; then fixed on the fairy tale as an instrument; then collected information about child-psychology and decided what age-group I’d write for; then drew up a list of basic Christian truths and hammered out ‘allegories’ to embody them. This is all pure moonshine. I couldn’t write in that way at all. Everything began with images; a faun carrying an umbrella, a queen on a sledge, a magnificent lion. At first there wasn’t even anything Christian about them; that element pushed itself in of its own accord."
100% agree with you on this. As parents we need to actively engage with our children about literature. I have always believed the best way to shut down ideas that you don't agree with is to shine a light on them. when we hide or trash ideas by trying to shut down conversations we only tend to extend the reach of those ideas.
absolutely! By shedding light on a lot of different ideas and talking about them, it's less likely they'll hold weight and excitement as "forbidden topics"
Great video as always! To get a bit more serious, I'm almost finished Mistborn trilogy and in no way to do I feel 'converted.' Though I have thought more deeply about religions and faith in general it hasn't converted me one way or the other. I could argue that the books are less an argument for religious, and more an argument against that high depressive nihilism that affects us at some point in life and we have to learn how to get past it to find joy and meaning in life again - even if nothing matters. EEAAO has a nihilistic central theme, and yet optimism, goodness, hope, and acceptance are the film's main goal. I find the same to be true with Mistborn. I don't see the books as 'trying to convert me to any religion' but more trying to help the reading find hope and trust in themselves, the people around them, and goodness on the whole. But then, most books are this way hah If a book 'converts' someone, I think that says more about the person and their relationship to that book than it does the book itself. Some books deeply affect us and change it (is this conversion?) and do nothing to other readers; while other books can deeply impact other readers and are just a fun story to us. As always, this stuff is subjective and anyone trying to ban a book or prevent others from reading it are likely more afraid of what books will do to THEM, than what they'll do to others.
YES! I absolutely agree that books change us. Good books almost always do. I've definitely had fantasy that changed my views on things; and I'm SURE there are people out there who perhaps rethought their relationship to religion because of Philip Pullman or CS Lewis. I just don't think that's a bad thing! Books can help us explore ourselves and how we view the world. I don't think it's insidious propaganda - it's an author showing their viewpoint and allowing us to accept it or reject it. Imagine how boring it would be if books only reaffirmed what we already knew and never allowed us to expand.
Nihilism isnt the word you are looking for there, and the optimism, goodness, and hope is specifically given by a martyr figure who dies trying to relieve suffering in the world. The religiosity isn't being applied by readers to the text, that religious intent is in the text. And no one's talking about banning books but even if a readers experience is subjective it doesn't take away the way a book frames itself. There are right and wrong ways to interpret things that are supported in text and its more than clear that Brandon shoehorns his own religious theory and dogma into the plot in a way as to distance it from Mormon teachings but which align with them nonetheless. The insistence that anything dark in fantasy is nihilism and any wholesome or cozy fantasy is specifically aimed at pushing back against some encroaching nihilism is part of the reason why the fantasy community is being dragged down by "bless your heart" "oh sweetie" conservatives who front progressive social values while erasing true representation and settling for the type of escapism that does nothing but comfort their fragility.
Haha sorry, I wasn't saying that any dark fantasy is Nihilistic. My apologies if it came across that way! Rather, I my comment was specifically referencing Sazed's arc in Book 3, which is absolutely one of a nihilistic path, believing that nothing matters and seeking flaws to prove it to himself. Other characters show signs of nihilism such as Breeze, albeit in a more fun light-hearted light (he sees everything as pointless beyond money), and to a lesser extend Zan and Vin in book 2 grapple with the concept as they learn to find belief and faith in others. I'd even say Elend comes in contact with Nihilism for a brief moment in book 3 when he's about to give up before the mist-spirit shows up to him. So yes, I would say Nihilism is prevalent in the arcs of several mistborn characters; though I also don't think Sanderson wrote a book specifically trying to talk about this - at least that is my interpretation of the text. Just quickly, in terms of 'right or wrong ways of interpreting a text,' I think you are somewhat correct, however I also believe there are multiple theories by which a text can be analyzed that expands beyond simply 'right or wrong.' For example, one can judge any given text by feminist theory, queer theory, afro-centrism, communist theory, class/caste theory, Ayn Rand theory, religious theory, political theory, environmentalist theory, and so on and so on. All are technically correct depending on the reader, their interpretation and understanding of that text, and their ability to state their argument for or against each theory. Lindsay Ellis has a great series at looking at the Transformers films from multiple angles; are any of them right or wrong? No, just different perspectives to view a story. Now, how much you take any serious will be up to your own interpretation - such is all art - but it is certainly a way to enjoy the themes of art should you so desire. (With the understanding that it is also okay to not engage with these theories and just enjoy the story for the pure surface level-enjoyment of it as well!) I'm not entirely sure where you're going with your second paragaph there, but I hope you find the meaning you are searching for one day!
@@6ixpoint5ive it's pretty clear the poster you're replying to has some very deep animosity towards religion and towards authors who include it in their work, judging from their other comments. It's far from my place to comment on whether it's justified or not, but it definitely appears to be leading them to bring their arguments around to "and here is why X group of people is evil and bad and wrong".
Using art as a springboard for discussion? Appreciating the individual life experience that an artist brings to their work? Yes! Yes! Loved this video! If we cannot tackle the biggest questions that dwell in our collective subconscious, such as what lies behind the veil of the physical world without that work being judged as propaganda it is a sad time.
There is also the fact that Tolkien was so well read. He was raised by a priest. There are references to Catholicism plain as day that people don't realise are Catholic. Why is Middle Earth structured as the First Age, The Second Age, The Third Age, The Fourth age? Because that is what St Augustine wrote. Its also that most people aren't well read on Tolkien either. The Athrabeth is explicitly Catholic. Its all about Original Sin and Salvation. The Laws and Customs of the Eldar is Catholic social policy, divorce is bad, sex before marriage is bad. He writes Elves as unfallen humans. In a lot of ways, the ultimate examples of a Catholic life.
I really like how Lois McMaster Bujold weaves the religion into her works. I just finished Curse of Chalion and it was one of the best standalone novels I've ever read.
Fundamentally, while the purpose of propaganda is to manipulate people into feeling a certain way about something, so is art. For many, like you say, people's reaction comes down to their own viewpoints going in. And if, as a parent, the idea of your children's ideas being influenced by books or media in ways you don't like worries you, maybe actually look at what you're giving your children, don't give them things you find age inappropriate, and discuss the issues brought up in these works with them. My parents saw us watch cartoons starring "bad influences" plenty of times, but it was made very clear to us that this was just TV and that us behaving like this could be harmful or hurtful to not just other people, but in how people would view or treat us as a result. They didn't need to ban us from watching it, or insist the network pull it. It's why when it comes to past controversial media that companies want to distance themselves from, I fall far more into the camp of disclaimers rather than cutting bits out. The latter is just mutilating a work to maintain reputation, the former allows the work to remain as intended while also saying "here is the message that this media is trying to push, and we as a company no longer agree with this and here is why...".
