I am thinking about reading His Dark Materials. People seem to like it. At least the first one, the last two I hear less wonderful things about, but still, some.
Anyway. With all the hullabaloo surrounding the release of the movie and religious uproar (which I am generally a huge fan of) and that only makes me very interested and whatnot.
Seriously, there are some huge fans of Pullman, and youth fiction around this area. Should I read these three books?
14 comments:
golden compass was fun. the second and third books are the literary parallel of pullman pooping in a bag and leaving it on my front porch.
read devil in the white city. so awesome.
I agree with big al. the first is good, interesting. The second and third books are painful, as if John Piper decided that a young adult's book would be the best for people to become reformed calvinist, blah.
Of course, if you read the first book, you'll want to read the next two (just to see what happens). You are forewarned.
I am also a big fan of religious uproar of all kinds, which is one of the reasons I bought The Golden Compass. I am half-way through and am really enjoying it so far. So I would recommend it. (I found your blog through LibraryThing; it says we have a significant amount of books in common.)
always good to see a new face (or new name).
i think i'll read them next quarter when i'm teaching, for a light train read.
we'll see.
I really enjoyed them--a lot. I read them when they first came out and they were very entertaining and very exciting. I recommend reading them.
But I did not love them.
When I read them I got the sense that Pullman was writing them as an Atheist apologist, which is fine. However, that prevents me from loving them on a deeper level. I read them purely for entertainment and was surprised at how much relgion factored into the books.
I plan on reading them again soon because of this article that I came across, which offers and interesting interpretation. I'd like to read them again knowing the controversy ahead of time.
I'll see if I can find that article, it's very interesting.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2007/11/25/god_in_the_dust/?page=full
Sorry, I don't know how to make that link.
Anyway, I think the whole debate over these books is very interesting, because I actually think the religious groups have a point on this one. I am, of course, vehemently opposed to censorship. Unlike the Harry Potter books, I think there is actually a debate here.
What do you guys think? I am going to read them again next semester with a critical eye this time.
I like all 3. I found the second and third book as compelling developments to the world only glimpsed in the first book. I was not bothered by Pullman's preaching as it seemed to fit in well to his anti-Narnia goal. If he is writing against Lewis (which he claims) he will attempt to trump Lewis's preaching with his own. I found it did not detract from the story but was an understandable addition. This seems to me no different than Tolstoy or Dostoevsky's preaching.
having not read the books, i don't know.
but i would be hesitant to say that dostoyevsky was too preachy. he philosophized his way through a lot, but i never found that his christianity overweighed the opposition (ivan, for instance, is given as much thoughtful preachitude as alyosha and his ilk.)
Chocolate Milk Girl...
I read the NTY article you posted and found that it actually made me want to read the books. So, I'm curious as to why you think the "the religious groups have a point on this one." Even if they don't want to read it (which is fine--I haven't read it) that doesn't mean they should prevent other people from reading it--or seeing it for that matter. There are a lot of movies out there that seem more obviously anti-religious that they aren't getting all huffy about.
I just mean that there is a lot that's debatable.
I thought all the HP uproar was a lot of fuss over nothing; here I think that there is reason for people to be upset and opposed. I'm not saying it's right to ban the books or protest the movies. But I don't think religious (Christian) parents would want to hand these books over to their kids thinking they were just a fun book to read. These books propose very big ideas that parents should be aware of and ready to deal with.
If I imagine myself as a parent, I would want to have read these first and to read them with my child so that we could discuss the really big ideas involved. I think it is fair for the churches to be telling parents that.
Of course people take it too far, look at all the uproar over last year's Newbery winner using the word "scrotum" (Dog was bit by a snake in the scrotum).
And like I said, that NYT article makes ME want to read them again, because I didn't get anything like that from my first reading.
I may not personally agree with the uproar and ways that people are protesting, but I do think there is cause in this case.
Does that clarify?
Indeed it does. Thanks.
I agree that it makes sense that religious parents might not want their kids reading this book, and if the church wants to intervene and let them know that then its ultimately up to the parents to decide. If the parents are conservative then they are probably already reading the books their kids are reading. My guess is though, that most kids, religious or not probably aren't getting all the anti-god or anti-orthodox undertones. Its probably just a gripping story to them.
I'm re-reading the books again over the holiday. I think they are much better pieces of writing than Harry Potter. However, the world(s) stop being interesting to me in the second and third books. There are some creatures that appear in book three that just bore the hell out of me...
But read the first book, definitely. It's fun.
The book, the Subtle Knife, has one of the best written action/death scenes I've ever read. I loved the first and second, and was disappointed by how agnostically preachy it became towards the end. Aint nothin atheist about em.
Post a Comment