His Dark Materials Trilogy (The Golden Compass; The Subtle Knife; The Amber Spyglass) by Philip Pullman
|
List Price: Our Price: $13.40 You Save: $9.10 (40%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $9.24 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of His Dark Materials Trilogy (The Golden Compass; The Subtle Knife; The Amber Spyglass)
Book Review: His Dark Materials Trilogy
Summary: 1 Stars
I am agnostic and not a religious person. However, these three novels are anti-christian and anti-catholic in particular. They substitute another religion in place of Christianity. They deal with organized religion as an absolute evil.
The stories are not nearly as well written as the Harry Potter novels. The universes they portray are dark ones. The title of the trilogy: "His Dark Materials" is a fitting one.
Book Review: OK plot, poorly written
Summary: 2 Stars
First, I went into it with the understanding that it was an atheistic book. And maybe the metaphor he uses simply isn't (to me) accurate and he does mean the antagonists to represent organized religion, not God Himself, but to me, the metaphor seems almost pro-Satan. Again, it may be that I'm being a bit too technical when looking at the metaphor. But when you take character A and equate it to God, then character B does NOT, to me, represent atheism or free thinking, but Satan himself. Or maybe you're supposed to take it a step further, and believe Satan *is* Man and there are no forces of Good and Evil, but rather, Human and a tyrannical higher being. But I was surprised by how the tone of the book (seems to) denounce the actual Person of God, not organized religion. I also found the POV a bit one-sided. Apparently, if you are a God follower, you must be stupid or evil, end of story.
Second, I found his writing style so bad, I'm surprised it made it past the first editing, much less the final. He writes in the third person, but he jumps perspectives within the same page, sometimes within the same paragraph. You don't follow the characters' thoughts very well, because he's constantly jumping from one to another. Additionally, he tries the metaphor technique, but he obviously thinks his audience is too stupid, so he barrels through with an explanation. Seriously...if you're going to use a metaphor for a story, stick with it. Don't SUDDENLY explain EXACTLY in REAL LIFE what is happening because to do so, you must leave the story. In this way, he reminds me of Ayn Rand, who will spend 4 pages on a monologue about real ideas in an otherwise symbolic storyline, but at least her writing style was superb; his is not. Also, everyone -- from the main children character to people who seem to represent the Vatican -- speak in what I assume is supposed to be a low class English (except for the "Texan", whose verbage seems to be based on John Wayne movies). Another thing he does that annoys me is, he fills in parts of the plot by having the characters simply tell a story about how something happened,; the audience does not experience the events as part of the story, but is simply told via the character telling someone else. He also uses the word "desperately" a lot even when it really didn't make sense ("she was desperately hungry", "He seemed desperately naive", "Ann desperately wanted to just finish the series").
Third, some of the ideas are so complex, it's obviously geared towards adults or older audiences. But he tries (to me) to really emulate CS Lewis' simple style (I think he wrote the trilogy in response to the Narnian Chronicles), who writes the NC for children. It just doesn't work. It might have if he had stayed within the story but he REALLY REALLY REALLY wants to MAKE SURE you know what he's trying to say. He is not a subtle writer, in which case he shouldn't try to use a subtle technique.
Fourth, the entire series is plot-driven. I have always been of the thought that any good book/show/movie is character-driven, and you may disagree. But he makes his characters act how they need to act to move the plot along, even if you might think it's very out of character. I didn't feel any of the characters, not even the main characters, or the different worlds, had any depth. He tells you WHAT the characters think/do but not why.
Those are my gripes. Overall, if he had simply stuck with the story, then this would have been a very good children's series, written for juvenile audiences. But he wants to make sure you know he has higher ideas behind it. I think the Narnian Chronicles (and maybe the Lord of the Rings...there is some debate if Tolkien also meant his series to be religious) work because you are never 100% certain Lewis MEANT it to be religious. In fact, reading it as a kid, I didn't realize there was any Christian connotation. But Pullman pulls too many direct parallels to the Bible and the Catholic Church, he leaves no doubt where he is trying to head. One parallel at the end made me LOL; it was so absurd...just ONE MORE NAIL...DO YOU GET IT? SEE WHAT I'M TRYING TO TELL YOU? I HAVE TO TELL YOU THIS ONE TOO, JUST IN CASE THE MILLION OTHER UNSUBTLE HINTS I GAVE LEFT YOU ANY DOUBT. I tried to just read it as an enjoyable fiction but he keeps slamming you with these comparisons so it becomes a chore to read.
Oh one more gripe -- he obviously only has a problem with Western religion, not organized in general. Apparently the Taoists and Buddhists had it right, though.
Book Review: Pullman package
Summary: 4 Stars
Volume 2 of this handsome trilogy package from Knopf came with many of
the later pages improperly bound, with portions of each sentence cut off
in the gutter. Someone in Knopf quality control wasn't paying attention.
I bought the Pullman trilogy for my wife as a gift, and it came shrink-
sealed, so the problem originated with the publisher, not Amazon.
Book Review: Not an antitheistic book at all, but one that opens the mind to all the glorious wonders of our universe
Summary: 5 Stars
I've read a number of one-star reviews that compel me to write a review myself. What I think is disturbing is the lack of recognition of the spirituality in Phillip Pullman's writing that reviewers seem to have. This book is not a testament of atheism. On the contrary. There is a VAST difference between spirituality and religiosity. I think Pullman attempts to make these differences more stark in his story-telling.
That does not make one an atheist.
Like the characters in the book we are invited to look beyond our own limited vision of our world and our concepts of what we believe God to embody. Pullman is not out to destroy God, rather he is out to destroy the reification of spirituality. Those that criticize this series on this basis are missing the point entirely. I suggest you go back and re-read with an OPEN mind.
For those who have not read it, it's an enjoyable series that at times can drag a little bit in plot and have seemingly point-less diversions. The arc of the story is not limited to one book but rather all three. See it through and you will understand. Read with an open-mind...because when it comes down to it there is no other way to be.
Book Review: Very Excellent Work...
Summary: 4 Stars
I greatly enjoyed this trilogy, and would definitely recommend it to other readers. It does have some complicated themes however, so I would probably lean towards 14 and up for the readers age.
One note, the second book had two pages that were narrower then the rest, and error that obviously occurred in manufacturing, fortunately, the text on the pages is complete. Otherwise a very nice package.