More on "His Dark Materials"

[asterroc]

Here's a review of the series in the Boston Globe. It definitely contains spoilers, and I'm not sure I agree with the final punchline about exactly what Dust is, but it's worth reading. It focuses on just what about the series mainstream Christianity finds so subversive, and why, in fact, those things are actually pro-religion. Of course, entirely dismissing the fact that Pullman is a self-proclaimed atheist in the process, but still intriguing.

Comments

[freakylynx.livejournal.com]

Ugh, unbelievable how many spoilers they lay out in that review. Someone reading that would probably lose all interest in reading the series, I can't believe they spoil the whole trilogy in a review of the first part.

I honestly didn't like the third book as much, the first two lead me believe it wasn't really anti-religion, the third had me questioning if that really wasn't the case. In the third he takes a number of jabs at the religious establishment, at one point one of the character's describes religion as a "beautiful lie," and goes on about how science was preferable - and that's referring to our world's religion where we we're not under the fascist rule of the Magisterium. Not to mention that every religious character was on the villain's side, or how in hindsight maybe he put in the witches as almost exclusively heroes and daemons to represent a person's soul in an attempt to squick christians. I don't think it's anti-Christian so far to the point where people should skip out on reading it or watching the movies, but I do see where some of the critics are coming from.

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

The part I wanted to know about was near the end of book 3 when Xaphania the angel says that Lyra was only able to read the aleitheometer by "grace". Was that "grace" or "Grace"? Another person told me it was lowercase.

Spoiling everything is common in book reviews.

every religious character was on the villain's side,

Waitasec, which side were the villains? I never really felt there were any good guys, so I can't really say who the villains were. Neither Azriel nor Coulter was a sympathetic character.

[freakylynx.livejournal.com]

No, neither of those two were very sympathetic but they did sacrifice themselves to take down Metatron. And it was stated that if Metatron (or his successor on the side of the Authority) won, they'd tighten control over humanity and such through the church. So, the battle against "God" was a battle between freedom and slavery - so although I thought Asriel was going to be a villain at the end of the first book, his goal turned out to be unquestionably noble; plus souls were kept as a power source for the authority in a hellish limbo, hard to sympathize with the authority or metatron by the end. So, the good guys might have been a little fuzzy but the villains were pointed out fairly clearly.

[zandperl.livejournal.com]

Oh right! I guess I didn't feel like they were villains b/c I didn't feel like they were people, more forces of nature, or an established governmental system without any individual in charge of it. To me it was bad guys vs. body of power, which doesn't have any good guys or real villains in it... :-P

[meleah.livejournal.com]

I think you're making the mistake of only characterizing as 'religious' those characters that were part of an organised religious hierarchy. The review is arguing that the books aren't anti-Christian spirituality (if you like), just anti-current Church doctrine.

In fact, I'm pretty sure the equivalence of daemons with the Holy Spirit rather than the soul or something is made by someone whilst they're in the underworld in the third book. So there's the ghost, the daemon, and the body - which is its own trinity.