The Golden Compass was intriguing and very original. Beautifully written, too. It was in The Subtle Knife, which was still interesting in its way, that it became clear that this was not a children's series, and I began to suspect the author had an Agenda. The Amber Spyglass left a really bad taste. Not only had the writing deteriorated, but the Agenda became transparent and paramount. The story at times seemed incoherent. The ending may have been appropriate, but it left me feeling sad for days.

~Beth

Of course, Raph, you're right. I just question Pullman's judgment in regards to his ideology.

I wish I could quote him directly, but Lewis wrote or said somewhere that, with Narnia, he was trying to sneak certain Christian concepts and archetypes past the "lions" and into children's minds. His novels may be seen as allegories, and his good friend Tolkien himself believed that allegories made terrible fantasy - good fantasy was feigned history. Pullman has done a better job than Lewis in making his subcreation seem more "real" and not just an aid to a lesson plan, but in his use of Blake's revisionist take on Milton and Biblical concepts he begins to commit the same "errors" as Lewis did.

Tolkien believed, and I think many fantasy writers today continue to believe, that children are some of the sharpest critics, and they hate to feel like something's being "put over" on them. As children grow older and begin to peel the allegorical skin away from Narnia, they often feel somewhat disrespected and manipulated. A perfect example of this reaction is found in Neil Gaiman's short story (in SMOKE & MIRRORS) "One Life, Furnished in Early Moorcock" (I just now tried to find the pertinent passage but sorry, it doesn't matter). I guess what I mean is stories like THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA or HIS DARK MATERIALS (especially in THE AMBER SPYGLASS) begin to put forth such a clear "argument" for a position that one feels like the text is beginning to read like an essay and wonders why it wasn't presented as such in the first place. Why wasn't it? Because it's pitched at children! Sneaking past the lions indeed! Through fun, through narrative, rhetoricians attempt to get children to adopt their pet ideologies, and not necessarily through the head (logos) - they would have written an essay - but through the heart and one's sense of "right" (pathos or ethos).

I recognize that many authors reach some kind of ultimate conclusion in their works (indeed, this feature often tends to characterize some of the best and most classic works of world literature, Tolkien not excluded), but I think Pullman and Lewis are set apart by their methods, their audience, and their level of sincerity. They're just so damn "serious." Other authors seem to make suggestions, but don't lead the reader inexorably to any systematic conclusion. This is part of what Tolkien means by "applicability" in opposition to "allegory."

All that said, I read Pullman at a time when I was not sympathetic to his ideology. I was a kind of Jesus-freak fundamentalist (please don't think I am now!). Later I became Catholic, and now I consider myself post-Catholic. If I read Pullman now, I probably would enjoy the "story" a lot more but still would question his heavy handed "lesson."

      Because hollywood is known as champions of red-state mentality or because they'd be afraid people wouldn't spend money to see something that sticks a finger in their eye? (I'm not arguing I should hasten to add, I just didn't quite get what you were saying due to Red Bull deprevation)

What a great conversation. I really have to read this book. In fact I'm ordering it on Amazon used now. Some of these comments by people here really peaked my interest about themes and percieved themes in writing and the Narnia books in particular.

Thanks much.

I understand you saying you meant the other books are uncommercial due to mainstream sensibilities and that Pullman speaks for Pullman and that I didn't inadvertantly overlook a huge "Aslan backlash" somewhere along the line.

I think I'm up to speed, for a minute I thought I'd missed out on something obvious and big.

And note, I'm in general not opposed to any theme per se, I was just a little bewildered because the Narnia stories seem to exist in such isolation that I was wonder how they could have energized that much to-do. I didn't stop reading the Dragonlance novels for instance when I spotted LDS references.

However everyone seems to be saying that P committed the real sin in books 2 & 3--the one of not telling a good story. Still, I'll read the Golden Compass.

the easiest one off the top of my head is the golden glasses used by the kender. Once I spotted that (it's like stone tablets with 10 commandments on them you can use them in whatever story or way you want but it'll be recognized for what it is) I remember seeing other gentle allusions once I caught that but its been 10+ years so they drift...

My point isn't that it was bad, just that I didn't stop reading because of it, as it pertains to the thread discussion of themes.

When Joseph Smith discovered the hidden documents left by Jesus with the Indians he couldn't read them. An angel then provided him with Golden Spectacles so that he could read them.

The Kender (name?) of course used them in exactly (if slightly more generic) the same way.

I think you're correct, it was a blatant easter egg for those in the "know".

You're on fire today.

Of course if you want to eshew your chance at ruling your own planet in the celestial kingdom and deny your wife her secret name as revealed to you by the higher power then whatever.

Just don't come crying to me later. Now, I have to go find my magic underwear.

(very poor form this all this  )