Customer Reviews

Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ (Myths)

5 star:		(32)
4 star:		(34)
3 star:		(16)
2 star:		(10)
1 star:		(16)

 

 

The story of Jesus has been proclaimed by Christians as "The Greatest Story Ever Told". Pullman in his story "The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ" makes the point that we can never know what happened especially when we were not present when a story was made. The story of Jesus Christ is a story. It was not sufficiently documented to be history, but even if it were to be taken as history for the sake of argument, Pullman's point was that history as told is not necessarily truth. Truth, he thinks, can be injected into history in any way the story teller wants it. When it travels far enough and is retold often enough, and is, above all, a good story, people will believe it.

Christians may likely find this book heretical and blasphemous. If the very idea that Mary, the mother of Jesus gave birth to twins, naming one "Jesus" and the other "Christ", may be sufficient justification for a charge of heresy, then to say that it was Christ who betrayed Jesus to the Roman governor must surely carry the aggravated charge of blasphemy.

However, this book is much more complex and complicated than that. Pullman did not write this book because he was an atheist with the intention of annoying Christians by disparaging Jesus Christ, God, and the Biblical account. He recaptured many of the teachings of Jesus - all taken from the Bible - and cast them in a context that made those teachings far more meaningful than they do coming straight from the Bible. His citation of the Lord's Prayer in the context that he had created would have moved many a Christian. It has many a teaching attributed to Jesus Christ that any man, Christian or atheist, will like to embrace. For example, "'Lord, if I thought you were listening, I'd pray for this above all: that any church set up in your name should remain poor, and powerless, and modest. That it should wield no authority except that of love. That it should never cast anyone out. That it should own no property and make no laws. That it should not condemn, but only forgive."

Slowly and ominously, Pullman spun a version of the life and death of Jesus, explaining the necessity if not the veracity of miracles in the story of Jesus. If miracles do not happen in real life, they had to be created. And the greatest miracle of all was the Resurrection. Pullman's account was contrary to popular Christian belief that the Roman soldiers did not break the legs of Jesus to hasten his death (a conventional practice in the art of crucifixion at the time). I will not add the spoiler here so that the reader can enjoy the book even more.

This is not a book that is proclaiming that the Bible was false, and it was made clear that the book was only a story. Pullman's is a story that we don't quite expect; but was the Biblical story of Jesus one that we do? The point that runs through it is that a good story is still a story. Its success depends on many factors, among them, the credulity of people and the desire to believe in miracles. It depends as much on the listener as it does on the storyteller. It depends, in other words, on you.

If you look at the back cover of this book you'll find only four words: "This is a STORY." And at the most basic level, it is. It is a fictional story about Jesus and his brother Christ. But beyond that, and significantly more important, it is a story about stories, truth, humanity, religion, and how they all tie together.

If you are used to the writing style of His Dark Materials, you may be surprised to find that Philip Pullman has chosen to take up a completely different style of narration. This book takes a much simpler approach-- it almost sounds like it is written so that an adult could read the story out loud to a child. While it is a bit off putting at first, particularly for those who love the style of His Dark Materials, it functions perfectly for the book's purpose.

As the plot progresses Pullman beckons the reader to question whether or not truth and historical accuracy are one in the same; if an historical event is edited so that the truth is better portrayed, does that in some sense make the events that occurred more true, or more meaningful?

The beauty of the book is that Pullman makes us question this on two levels--through the story the characters write and the story he himself writes. Pullman obviously doesn't see his story as historical fact (as I'm sure certain reviews that pop up will miss), but by blending the New Testament, what historians can guess, and some fiction of his own, we are left with a unique work that in many ways is more interesting and fascinating than the sources he draws from.

As one might expect, the book, particularly by the end, is very critical of the concept of the Judeo-Christian God, as well as Christianity as it is often practiced today. Philip Pullman forces particularly the Christian reader to question what kind of person Jesus actually would have been--not as God, but as a human, and what beliefs he had as to what the Kingdom of Heaven is and how God should be worshiped. It's a shame that most Christians will be turned away from the book because of ideas they consider "blasphemous" (which is ironic because in the book Pullman cleverly explains how the ideas are not) because I truly believe, in the end, it will make the average Christian question if they are practicing their religion in a way that Jesus would approve of, and what needs to be done to become more "Christ-like."

In short, I highly recommend this book to anyone, nonreligious and religious alike. I would also strongly suggest this book to be taught in English classes to discuss storytelling, although of course the subject matter is quite controversial, which of course could spark even more interesting conversation.

This is an amazing book. One chapter in particular is positively mind-blowing--the chapter with Jesus "praying" in the garden on the night before his crucifixion. I can't say more without spoiling key elements within the story the uncovering of which are among the book's chief pleasures.

That the overall impression one takes away from "Good Man" is so overwhelmingly positive is all the more remarkable because the book is, in so many surprising ways, profoundly flawed. Pullman says that "Good Man" is in part an exploration of story itself, and yet the narrative structure of "Good Man"--ingenious though its central conceit is--seems confused. A book that starts off with a character apparently able to perform "authentic" miracles (turning clay birds into live birds, for example) and then moves to a naturalistic explanation of Jesus' miracles would be, in less skilled hands, something of a disaster. Yet, for its brilliant ideas, winsome prose, and compassionate wisdom, "Good Man" overcomes chapter-by-chapter the yawning failures of the whole. The parts are greater than the sum of the parts.

Is the story offensive to believers? I suppose so. It seems rather tragic that such an honest and heartfelt--and uplifting--exploration of the Jesus story should offend Christians, but I reckon that inevitable. It's hard not to think that Christians offended by a work of such sheer grit and earthy beauty have their offendedness coming to them, though.

With the criticisms I offered in mind--and a further note that the earlier chapters are not as compelling as the later chapters, so don't give up too soon--I recommend "Good Man" as highly as it is possible to recommend a work of fiction. And remember, this IS a work of fiction, and makes no pretense to be anything but. So those who complain about it not being "factual" or "biblical" enough are missing the point in a truly astonishing display of obstinate ignorance. I have a degree in biblical studies from an evangelical college and imagine I know the Bible better than most believers do. It is precisely in its departure from the original Gospel stories that the reason for the book's existence lies.

In Pullman's latest, there is no poetry, no complexity, no inspiration nor illumination. I usually love retellings of ancient religious/mythological stories, but this one is heavy-handed and stylistically inconsistent, as if the author both doubted his readers' intelligence and invested little of his own into a masterful recrafting of this tale. I can only suppose that the professional book reviewers at The Guardian, The Independent, and other big-name blurb providers have frothily praised this book on the bases of their expectations--or else of what they felt they were supposed to say. I was disappointed too, after enjoying Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy so much. Maybe I would not have expected all that I did of this book if it too were intended for children; in fact, it might even be a fine piece of literature for parents to share with young people they would raise to be freethinkers.

Rather than adding dimension or at least an interesting twist to the story or significance of a major religious figure, this book reflects a rather childishly dry interpretation of the words attributed to Jesus and a distant, erratic picture of its character by the same name. The other main character--the one called Christ--is just a nitwit, not a sympathetic or engaging figure at all; his idiotic credulity under the influence of a mysterious personage is the sole engine prodding the plodding plot along (and a book that takes only 3.5 hours to read out loud should not impress one with its slowness). It is not even fictionally plausible. The premise of Pullman's book--that Christ & Jesus are two people, twins--seems pointless in hindsight, when the author neglects to build great relevance upon that potentially promising foundation. The rest of the content is basically the original gospel story unaltered--another opportunity Pullman failed to cash in on. It is as if the author got so lost in hammering (and hammering, and hammering) home his bluntly single-pointed message that all other considerations were left by the wayside.

Oh, and that message? In sum: the story which many take to be true about Jesus and the institutionalization of Christianity could just as easily have been made up or wildly refashioned by its tellers. There, i've just spared you a great waste of time. Normally i expect stories of this genre to move me to a deepened perspective, or at least to fascinate with their recreation of the source material. Instead, i found myself turning the pages of this one as quickly as i could just to make it go away.

It's been a while since I read a book that I did not like, but here was one. Not because of the topic or that it rankled me a bit the way in which the author presented it, but rather that fact that there was really little added to the conversation about said topic. The book: The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ by Philip Pullman. Pullman's been very outspoken about his beliefs and that he calls himself an atheist, so I was expecting a total ripping apart of Christianity. What I got was a retelling of some of the Gospels in a contrived manner to make the topic fit the title.

The premise is basic enough. The Virgin Mary gave birth to twins. The robust Jesus and the weaker Christ. Christ was Mary's favorite and Jesus took after Joseph in learning carpentry. Christ always bailed Jesus out when they were kids and never thanked his bro. But yet, Jesus was the one everyone would soon follow and Christ, in his apparent wisdom wrote down Jesus' teachings for all posterity. He even has help from an unnamed disciple. Along comes a stranger (who could be an angel or a member of the Sanhedrin or simply someone from somewhere else - quite possibly the author; this is never cleared up), and Christ is told that he is, in fact, writing truth and history. And from there it gets kind of tricky. Because, as the stranger says, "[Jesus] is the history, and you are the truth" (125). After several retellings of sermons, with slight changes made by the author, Jesus dies and Christ is the betrayer. Christ is mistaken for the risen Jesus and thus, eventually, Jesus the Christ comes to be. Except Jesus is dead and Christ is living somewhere far, far away with his guilt at having betrayed his brother.

This would not be so bad, but the main chunk of Pullman's writing focuses on what is little more than occasionally changing Jesus' words from some of his more famous sermons to make Jesus less of a family and man and a little more bigoted. Christ wants to make changes the words so that they reflect better on the supposed family hating Jesus.

The whole truth/history aspect of the book is what Pullman seems to be referring to when he says on the back of the dust jacket that the book is about how stories become stories. But, really, the truth versus history aspect only confuses the book and makes the character of Christ seem all the more contrived. In a sense, the whole book is a sham, then, because Christ is changing the story, or lying as he believes Jesus would say.

Some of the jumps in Jesus' behavior are a little inexplicable. His dislike for his family is never really explained and the fact that the stranger is never named or identified is frustrating. Pullman has proven he likes to write religious themes in his storytelling, but, perhaps, this one is too big even for someone of his apparent abilities. The book was written in conjunction with Canongate's Myth Series which boasts other big name authors such as Alexander McCall Smith and Margaret Atwood, and this may well be an indication of the intent. But Pullman's own beliefs (or lack thereof) undermine his attempt to subvert the subject and only create a flat story that anyone who knows the Gospels will have trouble enjoying. And for those that don't know much about the Gospels, this is not a good place to start . . . poor execution and convoluted writing in the end from an otherwise good author.

I had high hopes for this book because it's a subject area I often really enjoy. What a disappointment it turned out to be! As others have noted, the tone is ponderous and dry and 90% of the book is simply the retelling of biblical stories I already knew nearly verbatim. I was reading this hoping for something subversive or enlightening or amusing or deep - for the author to in some way expand upon these stories and make me think about them in a new way. Aside from the book's central conceit, that there are two children of Mary, with predictable results, there's almost nothing new to be found here.

There's one -- ONE -- chapter near the end where the writing suddenly comes alive and I was riveted. Just one. Then back to the deadness of the rest of the prose. I have to admit I half skimmed the remaining few chapters because I just couldn't stay interested.

I've loved Mr. Pullman in the past, but there are many, many finer examples of how to approach a retelling of the biblical life of Jesus than this. Save your money. I wish I had.

What an amazing book. My first by Philip Pullman. As an adult Christian, I've been more moved by Jesus the man then Jesus the Christ. It was his humanity that inspired me to be a better person - to strive to bring God's kingdom to our lives on earth and not some far away heaven. The scene of Jesus in the Garden - his doubts, his fears, God's silence brought tears to my eyes. Thanks Mr. Pullman for making me continue to question my faith as I journey through life.

Phillip Pullman must annoy his fair share of die-hard Christians. Like Christopher Hitchens, he dares to challenge us on our most sacred ground, but unlike Hitchens Pullman uses an intellectual rapier rather than Hitchens' hefty broadsword. Among the many common denominatri these two share, they both can write and write well.

With "The Good Man Jesus," Pullman takes on the foundation of the Christian faith, the life of Jesus. In this telling, Jesus and Christ are twins. Jesus is a powerful voice challenging the corruption of God's message. Christ is a cowardly chronicler who agrees to work with an unnamed advisor who wants somebody to keep track of Jesus's travels and teachings. Pullman tracks the well-known life of Jesus, including the Sermon on the Mount, the Garden of Gethsemane, and the other famous events. The question of Jesus's divinity is left a bit murky, but what is clear is that Jesus has no intention of creating a major politicial institution, the Church.

Which is exactly what has happened, and according to Pullman it is due to the works and naivete of Christ.

More thought-provoking than bomb-throwing, "The Good Man Jesus" offers a respectful alternate take on Jesus that would have gotten Pullman burnt at the stake for heresy in many a bygone age. Thank goodness he lives and writes now.

In this audiobook version, Pullman reads his own words, and he reads them well.

I've read a number of retellings of the central Christian story recently: C K Stead wrote a fascinating and surprisingly faithful (irony intended) secular retelling from the eyes of Judas Hiscariot; I was fortunate enough to attend a performance of the famous, once-in-a-decade Oberammergau Passion Play in Bavaria, and now I've stumbled over the famously atheist Philip Pullman's take - which involves a fair bit more licence than Stead's but is otherwise of a similar demystifying disposition: rationalising miracles into ordinary materialistic phenomena, and rebasing Jesus from mystic to idealistic, but nonetheless political, historical figure.

Pullman's licence is to pull Jesus Christ apart into two figures: Jesus (an idealist if naive populist) and Christ, his twin, a more introverted, but more intelligent, dark inversion.

Curiously, the Passion Play - which is entirely reverend to orthodox Christian doctrine in a way that Stead's and Pullman's works are not - also de-emphasises the spiritual in favour of the political machinations of the Sanhedrin and the political dimension of Christ's mission. All three, in some way, accordingly miss what's so special and clever about the passion. But we live in rational times - or so we like our chroniclers to tell us.

All three also bring the character of Judas into sharp relief: Stead and Oberammergau by his prominence, Pullman by his notable absence.

The thing is, unless read purely as a pantomime villain, Judas is the not only the central driver of the passion's narrative, but also the most interesting and recognisably human character of the lot: he means well, but is naivety/stupidity/vanity/self importance (delete as applicable) lets him down. His is the character arc which gives us lessons: if this were a Shakespearian Tragedy he would be the lead: a complex, brooding anti-hero in the vein of Macbeth. Jesus, by contrast, is a rather cardboard cut-out good guy not unlike the fated Duncan: At key points in the drama, Christ remains passive and stays pointedly silent. By contrast Judas agonises, soliloquises, and, for better or ill, acts.

While Judas is not represented by name here, his actions are, and it is telling how Pullman has re-designed the whole myth to accommodate them (it would spoil it to say more: you'll have to read the book to see what I mean). Much of Pullman's industry is to illustrate that there is no such thing as truth other than the compelling story contextualised and carved out of events which, in their unfinished natural state, don't have a moral or didactic dimension. Jesus provides the unshaped events, Christ the chronicle. Christ is, by turns, appalled by and drawn to the power he derives from his narrative talent.

This brief book is written stylishly and evenly in Pullman's curt and economical prose. He might seem a controversial choice to retell this particular story, yet despite his inventions Philip Pullman generally does not let his atheism get in the way of the thrust of Jesus' central message. Indeed, as a storyteller of the first order, you wonder whether he doesn't see a little of the tragic scoundrel Christ in himself.

If you like this, try C.K. Stead: My Name Was Judas

Olly Buxton

If Chaucer were living today and were stuck in his most philosophical of moments, he might very well produce the kind of down-to-earth, thinking person's tale that we get in _The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ_. Angels become lusty young lads who've found just the right way to trick themselves into the windows and beds of beautiful damsels, for instance. But Pullman's miracle is taking things of the flesh and dust and showing how the lower road and its taking is, perhaps, the most miraculous and noble thing to be had in this world. I'm not going to argue theology, because anyone reading this should know Pullman's background by now, but, to be fair, Pullman's not really arguing theology here, either. He's arguing with the tale, with religious stories as literature and what fascinating puzzles and possibilities these stories hold if they are, indeed, divorced from religion and operating outside its dominance and control. This is a wonderful piece and something very much needed for our, at risk of sounding cliche, new age. Pullman brings newness to this tale in a respectable, literary manner that has even won over people from at-first dissenting camps.