1. Which book actually talks about killing God.
2. Where does it state that the missing boys are castrated and the missing girls have female circumcism performed on them?

I'm asking these questions very seriously as they both came up in a conversation that I had earlier today with someone. I had read about the killing God issue (still don't get that one, but it's been a while since I last read the books), but #2 really and truly blew me away. I find the analogy quite revolting actually. Spiritual castration I can visualize, but where, pray tell, is there anything of a sexual nature mentioned?

Cher

Cher, this is pretty generic for the questions you asked, but not sure if you've seen the Snopes write-up.

Thanks, John. So, to quote Snopes,

"The Amber Spyglass" concludes with the two child heroes participating in the dissolution of "the Authority," a senile pretender God who has falsely passed himself off as the creator of the universe.

Alrighty then, this sounds pretty much like the conclusion I came to about 20 years ago myself. No wonder I couldn't recall a killing of God. As I found myself in this discussion, I quickly surmised that this man has not read the books although he wouldn't answer that question when I posed it. I quickly changed the subject to the weather as I could not see the feasibility of continuing a discussion of the movie.

I still am, however, very troubled by the castration/female circumcism analogy.

Cher

I was thinking of starting a thread for these books but never got around to it.

I am halfway through the last book, and the only thing I can think of that even loosely pertains to circumcision and castration is the machine in the first book that separates children from their daemons (souls).

One thing that I don't understand is Pullman's inclusion of souls, the afterlife, and a supreme being into a book that is supposedly based on athiest/agnostic views. Did he just concede these things in order to lure in the indoctrinated masses?

As most of you know, I am pretty conservative in my Christian beliefs, and when I first started reading the books, I did not know anything about the author or his intentions. I can say, however, that they are still pretty good storytelling, and everything else aside, I have enjoyed the books (for the most part) up to this point.

Having said that, however, I will not endorse the material, or even recommend it. I did buy the first book new, but the subsequent ones I purchased used. I also have a couple free passes to the film which I will see this weekend. I mention this because I don't want Pullman to have any more of my money. I cannot endorse any effort to rob children of a belief God.

Anyway, sorry to hijack the thread, but these are some of the things I wanted to say in my thread if I had started one. If anyone is offended, I will gladly edit and paste these comments in a new thread that is more appropriate.

Having read that Pullman himself claims to not understand spiritual things makes me truly wonder. I literally cried in book 3 when Lyra has to separate herself from Pan (her daemon) when they make the voyage through the underworld (the world of the dead). I ACHED as I read that part and find it hard to believe that someone who claims to not understand spirituality wrote it. I guess it's possible.

Thanks for responding.

Cher

I know what you mean.

For a writer, how silly is it to say that you don't understand something so universal to the human psyche as spirituality? The statement feels a bit dishonest to me.

And as for the book, I just finished the part you're referring to. It was very painful (the separation). One thing was disjunctured for me though. I couldn't recall Pan ever taking on the shape of a dog before that, and I felt a little manipulated by the imagery of "man's best friend"--what with the sounds of the clicking claws on the dock and all that--very self serving IMO. Just a thought. And the part in the world of the dead left me feeling cold and lonely.
I know we don't have the same world view, but that chapter was so depressing. How utterly sad to think that all there was after we die would be some dark holding area in a cave...or even just returning back to nature.

And on another note, the segment in book one with Peter Makaros and the dead fish was equally heartbreaking too. Both examples of very good storytelling. And I'm anxious to see how Pullman reconciles the story's ending with the theme of the daemon (soul) that has been carried throughout the entire trilogy. I know Lyra gets Pan back because he's in the fourth book, but I still want to know how and learn the rejoining process and how it meshes with the atheistic theme of the books.

And thank you for responding back.

Just want to clarify that the "senile pretender" IS God. In Pullman's stories, God was actually one of the first angels and fooled everyone into believing he created the universe, etc. And it's more an act of euthanasia--because as another character states, if you truly love God and found that he was old and senile and cripple, wouldn't your love be best demonstrated in helping him die?

And Mark is right--the "circumcision" thing is just someone who has read a bit too much (!) into the machine that separates children from their souls.

I would really like to see more discussion of Pullman's literary influences (Milton and Blake). His Dark Materials is actually a retelling of Paradise Lost, but I haven't found any discussion/article/book that delves into this. Also, does anyone know Pullman's take on Paradise Regained?

... double post ... sorry!

I stumbled across this very good article about Pullman, the books, and the movie.

Cher

Thanks for responding. I'm getting ready to reread the series during XMas break. It's been a while since I last read them. I'd like to see more discussion of his influences as well. He's really taking a beating because of his atheism which simply strikes me as absurd. I could go on and on about Gibson's own issues with alcohol, racism, etc. and yet he was lauded for his "Passion." Another absurdity IMO.

Cher

Good article--thanks for that. You're right that discussion of an artist's work should be completely separate from discussion of an artist's personal life. But, to be fair, Pullman does have very specific agendas in His Dark Materials. You cannot take out the atheism from the stories without robbing the trilogy of its center, of its entire reason for existing.

What I'm really worried about is what they'll do with Dust. I found this concept the most fascinating of the series (and the reason The Amber Spyglass was so disappointing, imho). It sounds like they've taken the mystery away--which would be a shame.