His Dark Mother

[Tabouli]

Luke:
> I think Philip Pullman often misrepresents himself through sensationalism by making himself sound a little more extremist than he actually is.<

(grins).  Hey, why not.  I admire people with the courage to provoke.  I'm apt to be a little cowardly on that front.  Or, perhaps, more concerned with sinister social science than I am with expressing my own views when they conflict violently with other people's, especially in person (in writing is much easier, for various reasons).  A lot of people seem to spend most of their time socialising with people who are similar to themselves.  Who hold similar views, are of similar demographic profile, and so on.  It's affirming.  But it also limits your breadth of perspective on things.  Me, I like to dabble in a range of circles, and if some of them hold views very different from mine, so much the better, I'm being educated.  It helps that there are few subjects on which I have a certain, stridently held opinion.

I can think of only two occasions on which I felt strongly enough about a difference of opinion to cease contact with someone, one over homophobia (which the person in question espoused in a way I found utterly contemptible), and one over politics (this person espoused a ruthless survival of the fittest philosophy - no welfare state should exist At All because it's unfair to people who *want* to work - from the perspective of someone whose parents are very wealthy and has never known anyone who would be dead were it not for social security).  Both situations caught me by surprise - I actually berated myself for restricting my perspective in that way - but there you have it.  Moreover, *both* individuals were very similar to me demographically.

To return more specifically to Philip Pullman (SPOILER WARNING!), any thoughts on his characters?  One thing I noticed immediately was that he has no shortage of strong female characters at all.  Plenty of 'em flitting around the trilogy, quite apart from Lyra.  And I did like the Dark Mother Figure.  Now there's a villain worth reckoning with.  Especially with that ghastly golden monkey of hers.  I never quite figured what her motivations were, though - sure, she was power-hungry and ruthless, but to what end?  What was she trying to achieve (pre maternal epiphany)?  Did anyone figure this out, or did Pullman leave it deliberately obscure?

I admit I groaned when the "Eve" twist was unveiled at the end of Book 2.  It felt a bit trite, or... something, but never mind.  I also wasn't totally sold on the temptation scene... surely the real temptation wasn't falling in love, but staying together whatever the cost to themselves and the universe. I've read Pullman's explanation of it all (Mary is the serpent, who teaches them how to fall in love and gives them fruit and the rest), but it still seems to me that the new Adam and Eve *don't* succumb to the far more tempting temptation offered them at all, they behave like good children, do what they're told by a higher authority (Xaphania), and sacrifice their own self-interest to save the universe.  Which sits a little awkwardly with Pullman's overall message.  I liked the concept of Dust, though. And daemons.  Very clever.  And I'm always in favour of non-humanoid intelligent creatures, so the mulefa appeal.  Does anyone know enough about skeletal structure to know if a diamond shaped skeleton is plausible?

Two other series came irresistably to mind as I read Pullman - one being Madeleine L'Engle's "A Wrinkle in Time" trilogy and the other being Tanith Lee's "The White Unicorn" trilogy.  Parallels on a number of levels, though neither of these is as dense and complex.  Any thoughts from people who've read them?

Tabouli.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]