doesn't anyone else hate this book?

[John]

One of my all time favorite book series. I always find it interesting when a simple book can have such an impact on readers. A testament to Pullman's genius.

[Mary]

Ashley wrote: "To be honest, I haven't even read the book and I already hate the book because its written by an athiest and that contradicts my religion. In plus, my church is bascally banning us from reading the..."

You would let your church BAN you from anything???

[Mary]

chris wrote: "There are reasons for me hating The Golden Compass. First of all, I pretended to like it at the beginning of the year when I actually didn't like it, and then these kids made fun of me because they..."

The book(s) were about the corruption of organized religion, not anti-god. Big difference.

[Sara]

Just...no words. I can't even believe this thread was started the way that it was. "Turning kids atheist"? This, people, is why I try to stay indoors for the most part. Ha ha. ;) Just read books with an open mind and enjoy! That's what they're there for. To open you up to other worlds and experiences that you yourself may never have or be a part of, but that you can delve into with your mind. Geez Louise, it's not rocket science.

[umberhulk]

I think if nothing else, the later two books, in the series, particularly with The Amber Spyglass, force you to wonder what Pullman's mindset is. We do know that he is atheist, and I think this much is true: people involuntarily want the sum of their actions to make it more likely for others to agree with them. There are likely a hundred different reasons he had for writing book, but the complexion of the later two books forces you to be curious about the gears moving in the author's head. It takes you BACK to reality. That's a flaw in any fantasy book.

This works both ways: It's a flaw in more than a handful of Orson Scott Card books, and I'd also say it's a flaw in Narnia, notably in the last battle, when Susan is absent at the very end.

All that said, it's also unfair to reduce Pullman down to wanting-plotting to "turn kids atheist." Without rejecting the idea completely, he's also more than just that.

[Jonathan]

umberhulk wrote: "It takes you BACK to reality. That's a flaw in any fantasy book."

I don't see that as a flaw!

[Venus]

I Like it, I thing it's a little open minded. not all of people have to live just for God matter. In my life a lot of people just speak about go to haven and hell. that this Live isn't really matter than the life after the past. and I found that God didn't work by him self we have the opportunity to change our destiny. so stop just pray and doing something more in your life. I thought this what the book want to say with us.
but it just an opinion of my self other people can thing different. so we can we just collect the good ting and discard the bad one... just enjoy it.

[Breanna]

two words for you.......
HATED IT!!!!!

[[deleted user]]

Questioning, of anything and everything, is an essential and healthy part of growing up and gaining experience. If a book makes you question your beliefs, philosophies, opinions, etc., then it has done its job in helping you reach maturity.

If you hate something for opposing your personal subjective beliefs or making you question, then you are brainwashed and need to crawl out of whatever bubble you've been living in. If questioning turns you away from your beliefs, then your beliefs were no good to begin with and you are better off without them. If questioning strengthens your beliefs, then you are better off keeping to them. Not questioning signifies immaturity...if you cannot question, then you will never fully mature.

[Tremble Cup]

Thea wrote: "chris wrote: "it makes great series like Lord of The Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia look bad!"

I was disappointed in The Golden Compass because it started out fairly good and then the girl, ra..."

THANK YOU. Oh my god, I thought I was the only one who thought it was terribly written. For me, my biggest issue was with the characters. I'm atheist, (not hardcore, just mostly because I've never given religion any thought) and didn't notice any particular religious agenda, though I wasn't looking for it either (I think was maybe 12 when I read it).

Anyway, it was an alright book at the beginning, and I actually really enjoyed the setting. However, as it went on, Lyra became more and more unlikable until, by the end, she was an obnoxious, selfish little brat with not discernible redeeming qualities (in my opinion, at least). In the sequels the male protagonist (I can't recall his name, it's honestly been so many years since I read this series) is also an utterly unlikable, moody, selfish little prick. I don't understand how such popular books can have such unpleasant, unlikable protagonists.

[Lesley]

I think you can forgive him the moodiness - he has recently killed someone and been forced to flee for his life! Nobody would be a ray of sunshine under those circumstances.

[Jenna]

Are you kidding? Northern Lights ( The Golden Compass ) is a great book!

[Jeffrey]

I liked the Golden Compass but the later two books were harder to get into - not because they are not good but because you can tell the author is trying to make a philosophical point. It gets to the point were I almost need a degree in philosophy to understand what is going on. Killing God can easliy be a metaphor with a deeper meaning. I don't think his novels are antiChristian or antirelgion even. I do think he questions the idea of God and challenges our beliefs which is never a bad thing. People went nuts on it because they felt threatened. I am frankly surprised it ever got greenlighted to be turned into a movie.

[Jonathan]

Mademoiselle Catherine le Ninja Coréen wrote: "Not questioning signifies immaturity...if you cannot question, then you will never fully mature."

I agree.

[Jonathan]

Jeffrey wrote: "I am frankly surprised it ever got greenlighted to be turned into a movie. "

Why? Many people didn't and don't feel threatened by it.

[[deleted user]]

Jeffrey wrote: "I liked the Golden Compass but the later two books were harder to get into - not because they are not good but because you can tell the author is trying to make a philosophical point. It gets to th..."

I agree!
Well said!

[Anita]

I wouldn't label it as a 'children's book', because to me children's book falls in the catagory of books for people of elementary school age. I wouldn't even recommend it to some people in middle school because the concept of the story is large and somewhat difficult to grasp. I read it in seventh grade mostly because I needed something to read on the hour-long bus ride to school and home and the first one is a good-sized book. The writing is a bit thick and I'll admit I didn't understand every word of the text, but I was able to get the general idea of what was happening to the characters.
I rather enjoyed it then. I didn't get the big picture of the book then, but I enjoyed the story. I read the next two and was slightly disappointed that they wern't quite as gripping as I found the first one to be.
I re-read the first one in high school and I still enjoyed the plot, but the larger theme was more obvious then.
I personally didn't find it anti-religious, but it is one of those books that makes you think. I think more English teachers would like it because of the critical thinking value that can come out of it.
Overall, I would give it four stars out of five. I thought The Golden Compass was enjoyable.

[umberhulk]

Jonathan wrote: "umberhulk wrote: "It takes you BACK to reality. That's a flaw in any fantasy book."

I don't see that as a flaw!"

I do because escapism and the kindred paradise known as childhood. I want to go off, immersed, skipping in the woods. In a book. And I can do that effortlessly in Compass, because the commentary isn't as overt, and the story feels personal and insulated by Lyra's point of view. I enjoy the later two books; they have amazing moments. But they take a different philosophy to story telling and showmanship than the first one, in my opinion.

[Sophie]

Ashley wrote: "To be honest, I haven't even read the book and I already hate the book because its written by an athiest and that contradicts my religion. In plus, my church is bascally banning us from reading the..."

Really? What church do you belong to? I am part of the Catholic church, and although some people from my faith don't like books like these, I believe since everyone is entitled to their opinions and imaginings - especially authors. Because, if you would admit it, the sole purpose of fiction authors is to entertain the public and welcome us to a world which is mysterious and different from our own. Now, I am only 13, but I think for myself. I don't let my religion decide things for me. I personally believe that no matter the content of the book, but especially if it is fantasy, if we know the worlds they dream of are either imaginary or an extreme case, what is the harm in reading them?

And to answer discussion question, I didn't hate the book, but I didn't love it. And, the movie downgraded it even further down my mental "never to read again" list. :)

[[deleted user]]

Letting your religion decide life for you means that you are brainwashed. You should never ever fornever ever let anyone have complete control over you. That is a set-up for disaster, plus really stupid and giving power to those who have a history of abusing it.

[Victor]

It's a great book!
As to "killing god", that's something that any perosn has to do in order to grow up.

[Feliks]

I do (waving hand in air)

[James]

I find it odd that the people who love books like The Lion, the Witch, and The Wardrobe are suddenly concerned about a book indoctrinating children.

[umberhulk]

Spyglass is a lot more obvious than wardrobe but if we're only talking about compass I agree

[Ree]

huh, I didn't notice the anti-religion sentiment. I haven't read past the first book though. I felt that the Church in The Golden Compass could translate really just into any other institution and wasn't exclusively aimed at condemning catholicism or any other religion.

[Scott]

James wrote: "I find it odd that the people who love books like The Lion, the Witch, and The Wardrobe are suddenly concerned about a book indoctrinating children."

They're only concerned when their children might be exposed to others' beliefs.

[Alejandra]

Since everyone has already commented on the religious side of the matter, I'll not touch that theme. But you -or someone else, I don't remember- said the writing was bad, and the characters weren't lovable at all. As if one couldn't emphasize with them. To this I'll say I enjoyed the writing, I loved Lyra and Pantalaimon, and was fascinated as a kid by Iorek.

I only came here to say that. XP

[Christine]

Anna wrote: "You guys this book is a FANTASY! Don't take it to seriously! I personally thought it was a great book. Pullman has a right to believe or disbelieve any religion he likes. "

I agree. I read this book as a fantasy story twice,in high school and as an adult. I do not read too far into a story.

[Christine]

I read this book as a fantasy story twice,in high school and as an adult. I do not read too far into a story.
And how can anyone rightfully ban someone from reading or listening to something? (As a previous comment stated a church did.) I heard the same of HP. If a religious organization goes so far as directly tell you what you can and can't do, read, or say, then they seem more like a cult group, to me.
Sometimes stories do not have a between the lines that you are required to look for. And if there is ignoring it is ok.
Just my opinion. I like using any angle to determine if I like something.

[Teressa]

Joyce wrote: "I am not particularly religious and not a Catholic. I read the first book and thought, hmm, not fond of Catholics. I read the second and said, that's enough. If you want to write a diatribe against..."

I agree with you Joyce. What we read as fiction has a way of implanting itself into our thoughts. Parents need to be aware of what the undercurrent is in this book series so they can discuss it with their kids.

[Lesley]

Discuss is the right word, of course. Banning people from reading books is wrong - the thing to do is to discuss the book with them, after reading it.

[Mike]

Bottom line, it really shouldn't matter whether this book is anti-religion or not.

If a religion cannot take criticism and debate then it's got to be a pretty weak religion. Trying to prevent/ban people from reading it simply means you are scared that the book's arguments are going to be stronger than your own and so sway people.

A good self confident religion should welcome any book that challenges or casts doubt on it as an opportunity to dispute the arguments made in such a book.

Do atheists condemn and try to ban a book favouring religion just because it disagrees with their particular beliefs or lack of them? That would be silly and yet such an attitude is considered acceptable when the other way round.

[Mary]

It was brilliant.

[eliza]

Molly wrote: "just random... this is my fave book.... nothing against anybody...."

Yeah, that's my fave book too!

[Scott]

If religion were true, its followers would not try to bludgeon their young into an artificial conformity; but would merely insist on their unbending quest for truth, irrespective of artificial backgrounds or practical consequences.
H. P. Lovecraft

I loved His Dark Materials, and I can also read the Chronicles of Narnia without having a total Freak Out despite not being Christian, for the record.

[Teressa]

Mike wrote: "Bottom line, it really shouldn't matter whether this book is anti-religion or not.

If a religion cannot take criticism and debate then it's got to be a pretty weak religion. Trying to prevent/ban ..."

Well, yes, Mike, atheists protest and condemn books with religious themes all the time.

I'm not interested in banning this book. But uninformed readers often take more away from literature than the plot line. The author's attitudes and beliefs can also be adopted in an unconscious way.

[Victor]

Teressa wrote: "atheists protest and condemn books with religious themes all the time."
Just an example: I know many atheists who like Tolkien, and his books are a re-write of biblical stories.

[Teressa]

Victor wrote: "Teressa wrote: "atheists protest and condemn books with religious themes all the time."
Just an example: I know many atheists who like Tolkien, and his books are a re-write of biblical stories."

I'm sorry, I just can't agree with that. True, Tolkien has several themes that reflect Judeo/Christian values. (good vs. evil, doing what you need to do in spite of what you want to do and many other themes one will find in the Bible) But there are no stories of a band of men saving the world from a great evil.

[James]

Tolkien would be appalled to hear that any of his work was associated with biblical stories, as anyone familiar with his writing, his biography, and friendship with CS Lewis would know. They are rooted in very pagan stories, particularly the Nordic stories, with which he had a great fascination.

[Mike]

Teressa wrote: Well, yes, Mike, atheists protest and condemn books with religious themes all the time.

I'm not interested in banning this book. But uninformed readers often take more away from literature than the plot line. The author's attitudes and beliefs can also be adopted in an unconscious way.

I agree and I would condemn those readers for doing so, though I think you would struggle to find an aetheist trying to ban say the Bible or the Koran. I have no problem with anyone, religious or otherwise, arguing for or against the views, attitudes or philosophies put forward in a book; that is good healthy open debate. But when they start talking about banning, then it is merely an attempt to control people's beliefs through censorship and, incidentally, a pretty darn good way of getting more people to read said book. Open debate is healthy, censorship is not.

For example I don't happen to agree with Orson Scott Card's religious beliefs but I consider them interesting to read about in his Ender books and I certainly do agree with some of the attitudes that come out of those beliefs.

Surely one of the main points of reading is to move from uninformed to informed on a subject. Again banning a book does nothing to help that process.

[Victor]

James wrote: "Tolkien would be appalled to hear that any of his work was associated with biblical stories, as anyone familiar with his writing, his biography, and friendship with CS Lewis would know. They are ro..."
Really? One word: Silmarillion!
His imagery and some of the symbolism may be pagan, but even in the LOTR the stories are rooted in monotheism. Or don't you see the parallels? Like Sauron-Satan end others.
Friendship with CS Lewis -- a christian apologist -- only adds to this.

[Teressa]

Victor wrote: "James wrote: "Tolkien would be appalled to hear that any of his work was associated with biblical stories, as anyone familiar with his writing, his biography, and friendship with CS Lewis would kno..."

Perhaps, Victor, you are seeing what you expect to see in the stories. There is no mention of God or gods in the LOTR series or the Silmarillion. If one equates Sauron with Satan that may have more to do with what the reader brings with him to the book rather than what the book says.

I agree that Tolkien would be appalled to think that people saw his stories as allegories like CS Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia.

[Victor]

Teressa wrote: "Perhaps, Victor, you are seeing what you expect to see in the stories. There is no mention of God or gods in the LOTR series or the Silmarillion."
In the LOTR there is no direct mention of god, but in Silmarillion? Come on! The story of creation? Iluvatar and The Music of the Ainur? Melkor? Ainur descending to Earth -- Valar and Maiar? Can't you see the parallels?
In LOTR the main antagonist is Sauron, who is the "right-hand man" (so to speak) of Melkor, the greatest enemy of the creator (Iluvatar) and all creation.
Sauron is also an utterly unsympathetic character -- pure evil without any redeeming qualities. This is not common to pagan mythology, where even the worst baddies aren't so absolutely evil as Sauron.

Teressa wrote: "If one equates Sauron with Satan that may have more to do with what the reader brings with him to the book rather than what the book says. "
When I read Tolkien I had very little knowledge of the bible. It's only later, when I became more familiar with that book, that I made the connection.

It does not matter whether Tolkien would be appalled or not. The fact is that, despite the pagan imagery, his books are christian through and through.

[Teressa]

Victor wrote: "Teressa wrote: "Perhaps, Victor, you are seeing what you expect to see in the stories. There is no mention of God or gods in the LOTR series or the Silmarillion."
In the LOTR there is no direct men..."
One does not need to be familiar with the Bible to have an awareness of a satan/devil character -- that character is replete throughout Western culture.

I will agree that Tolkein's Christian beliefs come out in his books. That is one of the things being discussed in this thread -- that the author's belief-system usually forms part of the foundation of his writing. It may not be expressed overtly (as in LOTR), but it is part of the skeleton of the book, unseen but supporting the surface.

[Gregory]

Interesting debate about Tolkien. For the sake of argument, for something to be considered overtly "Christian" there would have to be a Christ-allegory in Middle-Earth. Who would that be? No one comes to mind. Also, Sauron isn't really a Satanic equivalent in my estimation (Melkor is closer, right)?

Just goes to show what kind of thinking and analysis good writing can inspire, whether Tolkien or Pullman, and all the more reason to encourage reading and exploration rather than ban/limit books or ideas.

[Josha]

Ashley wrote: "To be honest, I haven't even read the book and I already hate the book because its written by an athiest and that contradicts my religion. In plus, my church is bascally banning us from reading the..."

I am agnostic (with an affection for the Pegan community), and yet I read books written by people of all religions. I find different points of view interesting. Also, the church banning you from reading the book cracks me up a bit, because censorship (and suffering) caused by the church is a major theme in the series.

[Leanne]

Amy wrote: "Chris, I agree with you on having a hard time getting through the Golden Compass. I didn't really get too riled about the anti-church parts because that's how it goes sometimes and without question..."

I really hated the first book and enjoyed the second book and loved the third book!

[C.C.]

I don't understand how people can say the books aren't anti-religious, let alone anti-Catholic. In the climax of the story God is revealed to be a fraud and killed. I knew nothing of these books until I saw that there was a movie coming out. I was intrigued by the armored polar bears, so I checked out the story. When I started reading, I immediately picked up that the organization in the book (it's been a few years so I can't recall all the details like names) was a parallel to the Catholic church. Even though, the faux-church seemed pretty bad in the beginning, I thought it might be a fake out until I finished the book and realized there wasn't a twist.

On an unrelated note, I thought the books were largely boring with occasional interesting events. When I got to the end and found that they were anti-religion, it simply added insult to injury.

[Rebekka]

I love the books. I do agree on, that sometimes it can be tough to read and a little thick, but I was so in love with Lyra and Will and all the others, that it didn't matter to me. I loved the idea and the universes. On the anti-God-thing, I actually really enjoyed that. The whole trilogy is about what people with religion can do, not religion itself, and I think it's interesting, and different.

[Jonathan]

Rebekka wrote: "The whole trilogy is about what people with religion can do, not religion itself, and I think it's interesting, and different."

I agree. It is harder on religion, as practiced by humans, than it is on the idea of a creator, I think.