The golden compass - Part 3



in the little spare time that i usually have at night before i sleep, i will try to read something light. so, since i have finished the golden compass (but don't have the subtle knife), i might as well read the amber spyglass (the last of the pullman's trilogy). about to finish the book which i will by tonight.

without the middle book, there's a lot of guesswork needed - like 'who is will?, or dr. mary malone? etc'. yet, it is possible to move into book 3 without book 2 without missing too much (except things like the origins of the knife which can cut into other worlds, that Dust is called Shadows in our world etc). the beginning of book 3 doesn't mention much about Dust but only in the second half. it took some time to find out why the 3rd book is entitled amber spyglass! once that is revealed, everything falls into place. the 3rd book picks up the pace towards the end, culminating in the big battle (like the LOTR and Narnia) between good and evil and the meeting between the 'tempter' and lyra.

it is interesting to do a further critique of pullman's 'theology' i.e. his understanding of God as a created being himself, Enoch who became Metatron, ghosts and the land of the dead, Dust and Shadow, angels 'weaker' than human beings, what happened 300 years ago at the same time in all the worlds etc. a comparison between the eschatology of Narnia and His Dark Materials would make an interesting thesis (both masteral and doctoral)!

Comments

Unknown said…
I am Samuel age 16. Thank you for your advice for this movie.Can I just know your opinion on another movie called Stardust. Thank You.
dear samuel,

thank you for reading my comments on the movie. yes, i have also watched stardust but not sure whether you have or have not.

i find stardust a more typical fairy tale (unlike pullman's trilogy which are more serious stuff). stardust ends like a typical fairy tale - boy and girl and everyone lives happily ever after.

but there are some good things to ponder over from stardust e.g. the witches' desire to be young and beautiful, the scheming king's sons who wanted their father's throne at all cost to the extent of killing one another, the pirate captain who maintained a facade of ferocious chivalry but is soft inside, the hero who loves a girl who doesn't recipocrate his love but meets another who truly loves him so much as to literally 'shine', etc.
of course, the theme of good triumphening over evil.

in all, it makes a good movie to watch, for the young especially. no serious 'theological' stuff like what we find in the golden compass. so, see it for the fun and the innocence. it's about love.
why the name 'stardust'? if you want to know, i can reveal.
Anonymous said…
Er...LOTR does not 'culminate' in a battle. That is Peter Jackson's warped myopic vision of the book; love, violence and machoness. There are plenty of chapters between the battle and the end, in which the hobbits return to discover a Shire that has been ravaged by 'pollution and modernisation', brought about by Saruman. The climax is when Frodo out of pity does not elect to kill him, despite having the power to and how much the wizard has done to M.E.. It is the story coming full circle here - the main message of the whole book is essentially about character decisions and morality. Not a shampoo model prancing about killing orcs.

So.

In case you haven't figured out yet, this is me, your daughter :D
i know that because you told me earlier about how the actual book's ending is different from the movie's ending. when i made the comparison between the 3 books in my earlier post, it was just a general statement, not into actual details about each book.

from your loving father :)