Re: His Dark Materials (was Re: "Da Vinci" Debunking

Yvonne Rathbone wrote about Pullman's trilogy:

> I have read them and they are among my very favorite books.  I can't for
the
> life of me connect them directly to anything classical, but I did want to
> second your opinion.

When the trilogy was mentioned on the list some time last year, it was
pointed out that there are Gnostic ideas in Pullman's view of the
universe -- in which, for the benefit of those who have not read the books,
God is a dishonest demiurge who merely pretended to have created the world,
and has now become senile and has been supplanted by his former servant
Metatron, who has confined the crumbling and batty deity in a glass box.
Towards the end of the book, Lyra and Will open the box and allow God to
die, so that he can be blissfully reunited with the world soul.

> It is interesting what does and does not spark the ire of the
> fundamentalists.  Pullman is worlds beyond Rowling in terms of traditional
> blasphemy or heresy or whatever they're calling it these days, but you
don't
> hear much about him.  I suppose he did sell quite enough books to warrant
a
> response.

It did anger quite a lot of churchmen, by no means only fundamentalists,
when it was first published in Britain. Hardly surprising, considering the
sulphurous hostility to the church that runs right through the work. As an
example, Pullman imagines a religious order of monk-assassins who spend
their lives leading up to the murder by doing penance for it in advance.

I would also agree about the outstanding quality of the books. They are
simply the yardstick by which all other metaphysical fantasies now have to
be measured.

Ralph Hancock
hancock@xxxxxxxxxxxx
www.users.dircon.co.uk/~hancock/antioch.htm