The Philosopher Kings... a comment

[brotherguy]

Back in November (this is how long it’s been since I’ve posted) I ran into papersky at Windycon, and chatted with her about the reaction she’s gotten to The Philosopher Kings. One amusing comment was, “why did Apollo have to do that (horrible thing)?” to which her answer was, “because that’s what really happened!” Which got us both laughing, because it’s

Comments

[xiphias]

I think Jo-the-person's attitude toward Christianity comes through a lot more accurately in he Sulien books: the have been some pretty awful people throughout history who have called themselves "Christian", but, on the whole, the fundamental morality of Christianity is really solid, and, long-term, better for more people than the ideas of most things that preceded it.

Knowing Jo, that's the lens I read PHILOSOPHER KINGS through -- Matthias had come up with a particularly nasty thing which he was calling "Christianity", but it didn't line up with what most people would consider "Christianity", and once you removed Matthias and a few other people, you'd end up with a Christianity that was a lot more sympathetic.

For what it's worth

[tlunquist]

I'm afraid I have not read any of the works under consideration here, and am certainly not qualified to launch into a discourse or debate about any of it. I would, though, like to point out that I am your friend, your fan, and an actively practicing Pagan. I like to think that I am living proof that in 2016, it is possible to be Pagan and to be healthy, smart, science-minded, good-hearted, and kind. For that reason, I am hurt whenever I see/hear/read someone I respect making sweeping characterizations of Pagans as unnatural or barbaric or simple or stupid. It is no more appropriate or fair to paint all Pagans with that broad brush than it is to say that all Christians are white supremacists or all Muslims are terrorists based on the actions of a few horrible people

[brotherguy]

Context is everything. To clarify, my comment is not on religion but on literature.

In particular, what I am commenting on is a modern author's take on a very ancient cosmology... twice removed from modern paganism, at least. My point is that her modern portrayal is curiously consistent with a 100 year old take on that same far-removed cosmology.

The paganism that Chesterton was writing about, 100 years ago, was not even that practiced in ancient Greece 2400 years ago, but a version well before classical times... the folklore that went into the classical stories.

I think it's very good writing for Jo to have her Apollo character be anti-Christian. I don't take that to mean either that Jo, or modern pagans, are anti-Christian.

Chesterson's The Eye of Apollo also relevant

[m_colleen]

In terms of similar literary treatment, Chesterton's protagonist Father Brown squared off against nominal Apollo-worshipers in The Eye of Apollo. In Philosopher Kings, my sense was that Apollo's antagonist was not opposed on religious grounds, but on personal ones. Some of the nominal Christians were portrayed as doing some of the uglier types things that have sometimes been done, while others were horrified. In The Eye of Apollo, all of the cultists were villains or fools, and the arguments were more directly about religion. But I think I am starting to understand the literary point. I thought at first that it was that stories are told from the perspective of the protagonist, but maybe it is more that the reality of the story world is suited to the POV of the protagonist. Interesting idea.