The Subtle Knife
The Subtle Knife, Phillip Pullman
Pullman is, so far, superb. Compass and Knife, so far, deserve massive accolades both as children’s books and as actual thought-worthy literature on several counts. The plot is engaging and forward moving. The characterization of Lyra last book and Will this book (less so Lyra here, though- Will overshadows her more than I expected) are incredible. Will especially is an amazing, tough, vulnerable, sad figure, and his mixture of fierceness and tragedy is heartbreaking. His Maguffins- the Compass and Knife- are interesting. My objection is that the Compass is rather overpowered, such that in order to keep dramatic he has had to come up with rather strained reasons Lyra won’t/can’t use it (in both books now).
The Spectres from this book are not a unique creation on anything like the scale of the bears or the daemons last book, but the basic mechanism of the many worlds and the tangles of the plot make up for it. Mrs. Coulter and her monkey are still terrifying, the witches are still mysterious and haughty, there are still good, down-to-earth people around helping the children. The way Lyra’s hunt for Dust and Will’s hunt for his father intertwine is good.
The allegory of Dust as sexual maturity/original sin/human nature is still there, and it is made richer by the issues of Shadows being deeply intertwined with consciousness- it makes the allegory less simple, less one-for-one, leaves open that little window of Shadows/Dust being in some sense the real god, that which endows us with spirits and consciousness and free will, perhaps?
His allegorical attempts with the Spectres fall much flatter. They are connected to mental illness, but they are also connected to nuclear power. It’s messy and doesn’t work- he skipped the step of laying down the fundamental symbolism and skipped straight to the “rich and convoluted” stage and it fails. They work better as monsters than as a philosophical part of the world building, and stick out like a sore thumb for it.
It is a clever, original, erudite bit of philosophy, allegory, and riffing on Paradise Lost. The essential philosophical stand, the willingness to write a book about a war against God, is great. But all is not sweetness and light. The problems:
Poor characterization of Lord Asriel- cold-blooded murderer or hero in the war? If both, then why not acknowledge his very problematic double nature?
Messy symbolism with the specters
Neglect of the very cool aleitheometer.
Vagueness with John Parry’s powers- it’s a bit “waves hands, does magic” in a world that hasn’t yet allowed that.
And the big problem: his issues with fate versus free will. In most fantasy books this would not be a problem- but this is not most fantasy books. It is doing an incredibly ambitious thing about Paradise Lost and free will and sin and human nature and taking charge of your destiny, even if it means a war against God, and the power of human spirit and human achievement to throw off the shackles of religion and humility and authoritarianism… Then how is it that all of our characters main victories are because of Fate? Lyra can read the aleitheometer through some sort of divine blessing. Will is fated to be the Bearer of the knife. Mary is ordered by an angel to leave her whole life behind to fill her destiny, and goes without another word! Lyra’s role has been prophesied. Will is told he is a warrior whether he likes it or not, and has no choice but to fight this war.
And yet, the main theme of this book is about humans throwing off authoritarianism, facing down God himself, and creating their own destiny. Seriously.
None of these flaws are fatal. Some- the characterization of Asriel and the fate issue- could still be worked into the philosophy of the book, made strengths and not problems. The good outweighs the bad by a mile in these first two books, and these criticisms only come up because it’s so far above and beyond most fantasy books of its type. Pullman could easily, from this base, create a masterpiece of philosophy, allegory, allusion, and adventure.
Of course, I’m spoiled for the third book and know that he DOESN’T, and that this is one of those trilogies where your best bet is to “read the first two and make up your own ending,”… but from right here, it’s still wonderful.
Pullman is, so far, superb. Compass and Knife, so far, deserve massive accolades both as children’s books and as actual thought-worthy literature on several counts. The plot is engaging and forward moving. The characterization of Lyra last book and Will this book (less so Lyra here, though- Will overshadows her more than I expected) are incredible. Will especially is an amazing, tough, vulnerable, sad figure, and his mixture of fierceness and tragedy is heartbreaking. His Maguffins- the Compass and Knife- are interesting. My objection is that the Compass is rather overpowered, such that in order to keep dramatic he has had to come up with rather strained reasons Lyra won’t/can’t use it (in both books now).
The Spectres from this book are not a unique creation on anything like the scale of the bears or the daemons last book, but the basic mechanism of the many worlds and the tangles of the plot make up for it. Mrs. Coulter and her monkey are still terrifying, the witches are still mysterious and haughty, there are still good, down-to-earth people around helping the children. The way Lyra’s hunt for Dust and Will’s hunt for his father intertwine is good.
The allegory of Dust as sexual maturity/original sin/human nature is still there, and it is made richer by the issues of Shadows being deeply intertwined with consciousness- it makes the allegory less simple, less one-for-one, leaves open that little window of Shadows/Dust being in some sense the real god, that which endows us with spirits and consciousness and free will, perhaps?
His allegorical attempts with the Spectres fall much flatter. They are connected to mental illness, but they are also connected to nuclear power. It’s messy and doesn’t work- he skipped the step of laying down the fundamental symbolism and skipped straight to the “rich and convoluted” stage and it fails. They work better as monsters than as a philosophical part of the world building, and stick out like a sore thumb for it.
It is a clever, original, erudite bit of philosophy, allegory, and riffing on Paradise Lost. The essential philosophical stand, the willingness to write a book about a war against God, is great. But all is not sweetness and light. The problems:
Poor characterization of Lord Asriel- cold-blooded murderer or hero in the war? If both, then why not acknowledge his very problematic double nature?
Messy symbolism with the specters
Neglect of the very cool aleitheometer.
Vagueness with John Parry’s powers- it’s a bit “waves hands, does magic” in a world that hasn’t yet allowed that.
And the big problem: his issues with fate versus free will. In most fantasy books this would not be a problem- but this is not most fantasy books. It is doing an incredibly ambitious thing about Paradise Lost and free will and sin and human nature and taking charge of your destiny, even if it means a war against God, and the power of human spirit and human achievement to throw off the shackles of religion and humility and authoritarianism… Then how is it that all of our characters main victories are because of Fate? Lyra can read the aleitheometer through some sort of divine blessing. Will is fated to be the Bearer of the knife. Mary is ordered by an angel to leave her whole life behind to fill her destiny, and goes without another word! Lyra’s role has been prophesied. Will is told he is a warrior whether he likes it or not, and has no choice but to fight this war.
And yet, the main theme of this book is about humans throwing off authoritarianism, facing down God himself, and creating their own destiny. Seriously.
None of these flaws are fatal. Some- the characterization of Asriel and the fate issue- could still be worked into the philosophy of the book, made strengths and not problems. The good outweighs the bad by a mile in these first two books, and these criticisms only come up because it’s so far above and beyond most fantasy books of its type. Pullman could easily, from this base, create a masterpiece of philosophy, allegory, allusion, and adventure.
Of course, I’m spoiled for the third book and know that he DOESN’T, and that this is one of those trilogies where your best bet is to “read the first two and make up your own ending,”… but from right here, it’s still wonderful.