[The Saucepan Man]

Just a few thoughts on Pullman's Trilogy. I read the books recently and thoroughly enjoyed them. Funnily enough, whatever Pullman may think of Tolkien's works (and regardless of his intentions), it seems to me that there are a lot of common themes. Friendship, loyalty and trust can be seen in Lyra's determination to rescue Roger, as well as in the relationships that she forms with many of the other characters. Her bond with Iorek Byrnison being one of the most poignant for me. Her relationship with Will also shows the value of trust and loyalty. Misuse of power, and its consequences and pitfalls, is also evident in the characters of Lord Asriel and Mrs Coulter (both of whom are given, and take, the opportunity of redeeming their past sins), and also Metatron and the agents of the Church. And there are for me environmental overtones in the concept of a series of parallel worlds which are at harmony with each other until humans start messing about with the bonds between them. Witness the effects on Lyra's world when Lord Asriel opens the gate into the world of Cittàgazze.

Of course there are a lot of differences too and you are right, davem, to point out the differing approaches to the spiritual side of things in the two trilogies. Child and Bêthberry have pointed out some favourable reactions amongst the Christian community, but I think that we neverthless have to acknowledge that, in Pullman's world, there is no Truth in the metaphysical sense. The Authority did not even create the Universe. He just made out that he did. Where I differ from you is in viewing his message as one which brings no joy or hope. The passage where the dead are released to become particles of Dust seems to me to be one of great joy. They are finding peace in becoming at one with the Universe. And it seems to me that this in itself provides a message of hope. The Dust is in effect a "living" entity and suffuses the entirety of the Universe and those who die become part of that. Indeed, if there is any representation of Truth in Pullman's works, it is in the Dust, which the agents of the "fake" Authority regard as evil. They are in some ways similar to Morgoth's forces, setting themselves against the Truth of the Dust and seeking to overturn the natural order of things.

Yes, there is no Heaven. But there is an Afterlife: a permament existence within the Universe within the matter which suffuses and succours it. Is that so different from the Men of Middle-earth passing beyond the Circles of the World and being at one with Eru? Yes, I suppose it is in the sense that the Dust remains a part, indeed an essential part, of the Universe. But, for me, it is no less a path which can inspire hope. The hope of being at one with the Universe (which was denied to those trapped in the awful dreary Land of the Dead).

As for the Republic of Heaven, this to me represents an opportunity to build "Heaven on Earth". In other words, for the denizens of each of the parallel worlds to live their lives for the good of the Universe on the basis of the qualities which we can admire in the protagonists, rather than being subjugated by the agents of a remote (and false) Authority. An ideal perhaps but, again it is, for me, a message of hope. In the same way, for example, that the Hobbits in LotR are able to develop throughout the story in such a way as to be capable of driving out Saruman's "Authority" from the Shire. The Shire, free from such influence, might be equated to the ideal of the Republic of Heaven.

I suppose it depends how you look at it, but I for one certainly don't see Pullman's novels as propagating a message of hopelessness and despair.

Incidentally, I would agree that Pullman overreached himself during the second book and certainly in the third one. For me, they are just not convincing enough. I do not find it believable that Lord Asriel was able to set up his fortress and rally the forces opposed to the Authority across an infinate number of parallel worlds within the timescale of the books. Nor do I find the depiction of an army made up of such forces and the final battle in which they become embroiled convincing. Perhaps Pullman set himself too difficult a task in trying credibly to portray such epic events. But, in any event, this is where Tolkien wins out for me and why, much as I enjoyed His Dark Materials, the trilogy comes nowhere close to LotR. Tolkien's world, although a fantasy world, is utterly believable. Pullman's worlds, for me, fall short on that count.

Finally, a brief response to the question raised by Fordim:

this has led me to wonder to what extent did questions of the marketplace influence the nature of his story?

I think that I touched on this in an earler post, but Tolkien clearly did have an eye to the "marketplace" when writing LotR, since it was written in response to calls from the public (and therefore his publishers) for a sequel to the Hobbit. Although it turned out to be much more than that, he was conscious of the "requirement" that it should appeal to those who had read and enjoyed the Hobbit. I get the feeling that, but for that, it might (like the Silmarillion) not have included Hobbits at all. And, from my perspective at least, it would have been the poorer for their absence.

In fact, thinking about it, but for the clamour for a sequel to the Hobbit, LotR would probably never have been written at all. And that would have been a great shame.

Oops! So much for "just a few thoughts".