DISCUSSION OPEN: Group Read THE GOLDEN COMPASS

[Ruby , Mistress of Chaos]

So what did everyone think of The Golden Compass?
(Or Northern Lights if you prefer the original title)

How did the book cover the theme of "Define magic"?

If others would like to take the lead and add some questions on this one, I'd be most grateful..

[Whitney]

It’s been awhile since I read this, but I’ll throw out a few things that stuck with me.

The Daemons are presented as physical manifestation of people’s souls / personalities. What do you think of the daemon’s form becoming fixed as people get older, apparently somewhere around puberty? It struck me as a rather British attitude, reflecting ideas of a lack of social mobility.

Why is Lyra able to us the alethiometer as a child, but adults require intensive study to even get it to function on a severely reduced level?

Regarding the ‘defining magic’ question, I don’t remember how much we learn about Dust in the first book, so maybe someone else can take this up. Is Dust the explanation for almost everything in the book that we might consider ‘magic?

Are the armored bears the most awesome thing ever, or is there a remote possibility that something more awesome may exist somewhere? (Okay, that’s not a real question, but damn, they so are cool!)

[Riona]

Whitney wrote: "Are the armored bears the most awesome thing ever, or is there a remote possibility that something more awesome may exist somewhere? (Okay, that’s not a real question, but damn, they so are cool!)"

Totally the coolest things ever. Something more awesome is simply not possible.

I was going to try to reread this cause it's been ages, but unfortunately it's looking like I'm not going to have time.

[Ruby , Mistress of Chaos]

Yeah, I'm a bit disappointed I couldn't get the book in time for this one too. Still - the thread will be kept open, so latecomers like myself can jump in later :)

[Ruby , Mistress of Chaos]

By the way, it's worth mentioning that this is one of China Miéville's Top 50 SciFi/Fantasy Socialist Reads. I'd be keen to hear more about that aspect of the book, if anyone can explain..

For anyone wanting to see the full Mieville list, just check out the Group's bookshelves.

[Whitney]

Ruby wrote: "By the way, it's worth mentioning that this is one of China Miéville's Top 50 SciFi/Fantasy Socialist Reads. I'd be keen to hear more about that aspect of the book, if anyone can explain..."

It has a strong anti-authoritarian (and especially anti-organized religion) stance.

[Paulina]

Before I read the book, I had heard that it was very anti-organized religion. That was partially why I picked it up, I wanted to know what all the hype was about. I wasn't very far into the book when I got that "Oh" moment. I'm not very religious so it didn't really bother me (I actually agree with it on a few points) but I can see how this could bother some people.

As for the Dust question, the explanation we get in the first novel is that Dust is original sin "material." It's the physical representation of original sin and it settles on adults more than kids, obviously referring to that eternal theme...kids are innocent and amazing! Yay! I found that explanation interesting but lackluster in terms of fantasy. Original sin? Really? Magic is not some immortal force that exists in all of us? Awww

[[deleted user]]

I just got the book on Sunday from my local library, but I already have a thought about daemons. I see the fixed nature of the daemon-post-puberty as being a symptom of the fixed nature of one's personality. I think children are remarkably more mutable than adults and this is reflected in the shapeshifting of a child's daemon. When most people grow older, their personalities and desires become fixed and naturally their daemon would become fixed as well. If I am not mistaken, in the occult sciences, there is a belief in the adoption of animals as either daemons or familiars. Daemonic pets are usually opposite of the master's personality, or a means of exercising those things that the master is not, whereas familiars are a manifestation of that master's personality or the things that the master is. For example, a daemon of a muscular tough guy might be a sweet feminine cat whereas his familiar would be the cliche of the mean pitbull or bulldog. I am not sure if the author had these concepts in mind but this is my understanding of the occult meaning of daemon. Of course someone like Socrates had a completely different understanding of the word.

I am eager to see the socialist themes emerge in this book. I see hints but nothing solid yet. I am almost 100 pages into it.

[Paulina]

I haven't read Paradise Lost, so can someone who has explain the connections between the two books? How was Pullman inspired my Milton's work?

[Riona]

Okay, I lied. I started re-reading this today.

[[deleted user]]

Here's a great article about Pullman and it will probably shed some light on some of the things that have been brought up.Pullman Article

As I understand it, Pullman got the idea for the daemons from paintings by da Vinci.

Also, about Paradise Lost, I don't think there was a connection as in Pullman was trying to retell the themes of Milton, he was really using his literature to point out that the biblical fall from grace is not such a bad thing at all. I suppose The Golden Compass is the Antithesis to Paradise Lost.

Mieville states that the book is on his socialist reading list because it deals with "political/moral" complexities. I don't think the book is necessarily a socialist manifesto but it addresses issues relevant to socialism.

[Frozenwaffle]

Paulina wrote: "As for the Dust question, the explanation we get in the first novel is that Dust is original sin "material." It's the physical representation of original sin and it settles on adults more than kids, obviously referring to that eternal theme...kids are innocent and amazing! Yay! I found that explanation interesting but lackluster in terms of fantasy. Original sin? Really?"

That Dust interpretation is the one "gobbler" lady believes, I don't think it is the actual meaning of it.

I haven't read the other books yet, but I expect the true nature of Dust to be revealed as something much more logical and less religion-like.

I also thought Lyra's use of the aletiometer was way too easy and underexplained. I'm hoping something other than "ZE CHOSEN ONE" is going to bring light to that :D

Armored bears are cool as hell (xD), but having your soul hang around to play with and sleep around your neck, and fly? Totally awesome!

[Ruby , Mistress of Chaos]

Frozenwaffle wrote: "Armored bears are cool as hell (xD), but having your soul hang around to play with and sleep around your neck, and fly? Totally awesome! .."

Okay. I really do need to get a copy of this, don't I?!

[Zanesh]

It's been a while since I read the trilogy so I am little dusty on Dust. I recall sinking into the books like falling into a soft pillow and I just floated into the story like a divine dream.

Some elements seem quite YA to me -- the armed bears for example, while the daemons seems far more sophisticated, and I know Freud would be turning in his grave to flip through these pages. They obviously play on the Id/Ego paradigm in a way that seems suitably metaphysical for the story.

I think Pullman has talked about religion and science as being 'magisteriums'. Clearly religion has had a major impact on world culture -- not all for the good. Neither can science show a clean sheet. Pullman is clearly a spiritual thinker and humanist who nevertheless is critical of the organised church.

Perhaps in response to Ruby's post we should bring in Arthur C Clarke's third law that "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

While this is often (mis)understood in SF terms as advanced alien technology, consider instead human history. 'Witches' -- women with advanced herbal wisdom -- were burnt at the stake by the church for healing patients in a way not understood by the scientific medicine of the day. Australian Aborigines were considered the most primitive people on earth by the English; yet they could control their fertility with plant knowledge, and could thrive in conditions that killed the English, without the need of tools.

Those looking for a 'technological' or 'magical' logic couldn't see past their own misconceptions. To me, the glory of the books is this faith in humanity, imagination and tolerance.

[Frozenwaffle]

Ruby wrote: "Okay. I really do need to get a copy of this, don't I?!
"

Yes. And to spike your curiosity up a bit, there is something of zombie-making in this story :P

Zanesh wrote: "I think Pullman has talked about religion and science as being 'magisteriums'. Clearly religion has had a major impact on world culture -- not all for the good. Neither can science show a clean sheet. Pullman is clearly a spiritual thinker and humanist who nevertheless is critical of the organised church."

I agree.

Also, regarding magic, there are the sorcerers connection to the paralel(s) world(s), beyond the obvious flying and long lifespawn and such.

[Whitney]

Frozenwaffle wrote: "I haven't read the other books yet, but I expect the true nature of Dust to be revealed as something much more logical and less religion-like..."

I don't think I'm giving anything away, but I'll put the following comments in spoiler mode for the very sensitive, since I mention in a general way how dust is treated in the later books:

(view spoiler)[yes, what Paulina wrote is correct for what we learn in the first book, that is the Church's view of Dust. It gets explored from different perspectives (scientific, humanist) in later books, as you speculate.

It's interesting that this probably repeats the way a lot of people gain their understanding of things. Essentially learning whatever dogma is presented by authority as children, later learning about scientific explanations for things, and finally seeing things from the perspective of a mature personnel philosophy. (hide spoiler)]

Armored bears are cool as hell (xD), but having your soul hang around to play with and sleep around your neck, and fly? Totally awesome!

Yeah the daemons are totally awesome! The scene where the boy has been severed from his daemon and is wandering around clutching a dried fish is one of the most devastating things I've ever read in fiction. It still chokes me up when I think of it.

[gigi]

Loved this book.

[Ruby , Mistress of Chaos]

My copy just arrived Friday. Typical! I'm heading off to a remote Aboriginal community this week, so I may not be online much, but I'm taking this book with me :)

[Anna]

I'm reading now second book and I like it more than the first.

[Paulina]

Anna wrote: "I'm reading now second book and I like it more than the first."

Good to hear! I was scared it wouldn't be as good as the first!

[Frozenwaffle]

I'm planning on rolling on the grass (or on the sofa, regarding the rainy diposition of late) with the second one as soon as I finish House of Leaves! Thanks for keeping my motivation up Anna :D

[Leanne]

Anna wrote: "I'm reading now second book and I like it more than the first."

I have only just finished the first book literally five minutes ago, so apologies for weighing in on the discussion so late!

Anna I am glad to hear it gets better! I enjoyed this book, although I am not certain it lived up to the hype - I think when it comes to imagination, J.K. Rowling beats this any day. But I did really like how Pullman attempted to bring science and religion closer together in his story.

Things I really liked about it were the bears (obviously), and I found it really evoked a lot of emotion in me at the end - I felt pity, anger, sadness and depression all in one go when I got to the end - and a lot of admiration for Lyra and Pantalaimon. Pullman does create atmosphere very effectively and not in a long-winded way at all, and I always appreciate that :)

[Maggie the Muskoka Library Mouse]

I read this book a couple years back, and thought it very well-done. I am hoping to revisit it soon.