Caution: May Result in Ill-Considered Religious Debate With Children
26. The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman
I read this book once in seventh grade, this is my first re-read since. I had a rather hazy recollection, except for one very specific quote, because the idea it contained BLEW MY MIND and continues to do so. However, I read much of this as if for the first time and I think understood it better, though not wholly. In contrast to Tolkien, Pullman's language is simple and his world significantly less developed. Lyra, the protagonist, a familiar urchin-sans-parents, exists in a universe alternate to our own. I think Pullman deserves a special category in fantasy for this, as it is not quite "fantastic," that is between our world and another, like Narnia or Hogwarts, and yet cannot qualify as "marvellous," or in a self-contained world like Middle Earth. Lyra grows up in Oxford, England, and yet it is an Oxford in a world the Catholic Church still dominates, science and religious studies are both known as theology, the Tartars are a threat to Europe, and more supernatural-seeming deviations like witches and talking polar bears abound. The prime difference is that humans have a visible animal soul and companion, called a daemon. Children's daemons change, but adults' become fixed. This represents the fixation of character and identity that we believe is settled at some vague coming of age point. Essentially, Pullman introduces fascinating concepts in an interesting way, but I don't think ever fully satisfies or explains all of them. Certainly not in The Golden Compass, but I have read the other two books as well, and while I found them interesting, remember no definitive clarification, only further mysteries. Such is life, one could argue, but I think he could have made more of an effort. I remembered loving Iorek Byrnison, a talking bear, and he is still my favorite character, though Lyra is very likable and there are other interesting minor characters. Actually, I think minor characters are a particular talent of Pullman's, he doesn't bring in too many, and those he does, he develops just enough to make the reader wonder, but not lose track of the story at hand. I should probably see the movie soon now, I was holding off until I could re-read the book, and am pleased with my forbearance though it was more circumstantial than an effort of will.
"He raised his wings and spread them wide before folding them again.
"There," he said, "I have just brushed ten million other worlds, and they knew nothing of it (188).""
One of my kids was asking me questions about some of the more difficult ideas, elementary particles called Dust that might represent Original Sin, and motivations of certain characters, and after I had answered her to the best of my ability, she said, "I think your daemon would be an owl, because you're very smart."
She said it very matter-of-factly too, and I don't think it was brown-nosing, because I don't grade her. I consider it one of the best compliments I've ever received.
I seem to remember this question from someone else's lj long ago, possibly Karen's or Nevie's, but I'll ask anyway. What do you think your daemon would be? If I weren't an owl, I think I might be a serpent. Don't really want to contemplate that one though!
I read this book once in seventh grade, this is my first re-read since. I had a rather hazy recollection, except for one very specific quote, because the idea it contained BLEW MY MIND and continues to do so. However, I read much of this as if for the first time and I think understood it better, though not wholly. In contrast to Tolkien, Pullman's language is simple and his world significantly less developed. Lyra, the protagonist, a familiar urchin-sans-parents, exists in a universe alternate to our own. I think Pullman deserves a special category in fantasy for this, as it is not quite "fantastic," that is between our world and another, like Narnia or Hogwarts, and yet cannot qualify as "marvellous," or in a self-contained world like Middle Earth. Lyra grows up in Oxford, England, and yet it is an Oxford in a world the Catholic Church still dominates, science and religious studies are both known as theology, the Tartars are a threat to Europe, and more supernatural-seeming deviations like witches and talking polar bears abound. The prime difference is that humans have a visible animal soul and companion, called a daemon. Children's daemons change, but adults' become fixed. This represents the fixation of character and identity that we believe is settled at some vague coming of age point. Essentially, Pullman introduces fascinating concepts in an interesting way, but I don't think ever fully satisfies or explains all of them. Certainly not in The Golden Compass, but I have read the other two books as well, and while I found them interesting, remember no definitive clarification, only further mysteries. Such is life, one could argue, but I think he could have made more of an effort. I remembered loving Iorek Byrnison, a talking bear, and he is still my favorite character, though Lyra is very likable and there are other interesting minor characters. Actually, I think minor characters are a particular talent of Pullman's, he doesn't bring in too many, and those he does, he develops just enough to make the reader wonder, but not lose track of the story at hand. I should probably see the movie soon now, I was holding off until I could re-read the book, and am pleased with my forbearance though it was more circumstantial than an effort of will.
"He raised his wings and spread them wide before folding them again.
"There," he said, "I have just brushed ten million other worlds, and they knew nothing of it (188).""
One of my kids was asking me questions about some of the more difficult ideas, elementary particles called Dust that might represent Original Sin, and motivations of certain characters, and after I had answered her to the best of my ability, she said, "I think your daemon would be an owl, because you're very smart."
She said it very matter-of-factly too, and I don't think it was brown-nosing, because I don't grade her. I consider it one of the best compliments I've ever received.
I seem to remember this question from someone else's lj long ago, possibly Karen's or Nevie's, but I'll ask anyway. What do you think your daemon would be? If I weren't an owl, I think I might be a serpent. Don't really want to contemplate that one though!