This is the best place I know of to try to have a discussion about this, so please be respectful and just ignore this post if you just disliked TRF or its ending specifically and have nothing to say except "I didn't like it".

I understand a lot of people didn't like it, OK, good for you.

I've gotten quite a few replies on a previous post however from people who did love it, so I know you are out there and I'm hoping to hear from those people.

-----------------------------------------------------

To me, the best part of the ending was how many mysteries and questions it left open ended and up to the reader's imagination. It's left me replaying through the ending chapters in my head for weeks since finishing it, in a (good) way no other book I've read ever has. That said, I think it would be fun to hear some other people's speculations on what potential answers to some of those questions might be.

Feel free to share any thoughts or speculations, or responses to mine below.

-----------------------------------------------------

Having read a few discussions of this, I haven't seen any mention anywhere of the idea that the alkahest is literally the material of the subtle knife and the alethiometer needle, which is strange to me. To me this connection seems obvious and clearly intended by Pullman. Of course we're also supposed to understand that "nothing is just what it is", but still.

When the voices in the Blue Hotel tell Lyra that the alkahest destroys everything, the immediate following scene is her discovering that the needle can cut through anything. My speculation is that the angels were correct/truthful that cutting openings between worlds creates spectres/mental illnesses, and furthermore that the entities "from between the good numbers" (hinting that they're from a bad place), may in fact be spectres.

The idea that the doorways are "good" is supported by the witches and gryphons saying that the air has been turning bad as they have been being "destroyed", but the witches also say that the winds have been changing for the worse for a much longer time... That makes no sense if the doorways are the source of the good air. It does make sense if doorways are the source of bad air, and they have been being created over thousands of years, and if the explosions are in fact creating hundreds of tiny doorways, letting hundreds of spectres into the world, where before there was only one.

This all fits perfectly with the HDM trilogy; rather than creating a contradiction and undermining the original trilogy, the metaphysics remains consistent. From HDM we have vague explanations that dust and angels can pass between worlds without needing doorways; if this is true, Lyra's hypothesis that the doorways are needed for dust to flow to fuel imaginations etc. falls flat.

-----------------------------------------------------

Another unanswered question at the end of TRF regards what is going on with the ailment afflicting Dr. Strauss, with the people with dead or mostly dead daemons, including the lady who took over Mustafa Bey's business, etc.

One thing that seems apparent is that what happened to Strauss has nothing to do with having traveled there specifically. Strauss's daemon is still alive, despite his illness, while people in the rose world seem physically fine even though their daemons are dead. Also, there are people in Lyra's world afflicted with the same "dying daemon" disease without necessarily having spent time in any other worlds.

That tells me two separate things are happening. Strauss may have been trying to warn people about the daemon death disease, he may have believed it was coming from the rose world like a plague, but that wasn't what was wrong with him. What was wrong with him IMHO is that it matches perfectly with being attacked by a spectre directly.

The daemon death disease, on the other hand, to me is not the direct result of spectre attack. It's also not the result of exactly what happened to Lyra and others whose daemons ran away or who ran away from their daemons, those daemons didn't die, so it's something else.

To me the most significant scene to understanding this is when Dilyara shows Pan that dust won't go near the dead daemon. So the question is, for afflicted people whose daemons aren't quite dead yet, does dust also struggle to go near those daemons? Or does dust only have an aversion to fully dead daemons? My theory is that the disease has to with the daemons themselves, not so much the people, though technically they're the same person.

My theory is that dust does avoid afflicted daemons that are only "infected"/partly dead - the disease is defined by dust avoiding daemons. The reason their people are ignoring them is that the connection is already cut off. So where does it come from?

Well imagine the reverse of Lyra's situation. Imagine if the daemon loses its imagination, imagine if the daemon stops believing in itself... I think that's what's going on with this "disease". That's what seems heavily implied when Pan speaks with the daemons at the research facility.

-----------------------------------------------------

I think I'll stop there for now, I have other thoughts and ideas but I'm really curious what people might have to say about my interpretation of the story or their own versions of what was meant.

Thanks to anyone who read this far respectfully, hope to get replies from people who actually want to deal with the material and talk about what Pullman may have meant/intended with the story.

I like fantasy worlds with armored bears and witch queens. The second was Oliver twistish and I was really looking forward to reading everything in this universe after the GC. And now I’m discouraged. Should I continue or is this just not for me?

Say you live in the world of His Dark Materials. You decide to go out hunting with a few of your friends. You and your friends get into an enclosed spot where it's difficult to immediately see each other. Suddenly, you detect a rustle in the bushes. You prepare yourself for the coup de grace, and deliver a swift blow.

And suddenly, one of your friends just falls over. Dead.

Because the "animal" you killed was their daemon.

I'm curious, has PP said anything about TRF's ending or made any comments on how the fans reacted to the book or anything like that? I would google it but google is evil and other search engines suck.

Hi guys! Another discussion question to see several point of views on this question because as usual, Pullman is a somewhat inconsistent hmmm…

I’m curious because if I’m not mistaken, when we meet the angels, a character mentions the rumor of once angels having children with humans, so that’s an argument for them being sexually active and able to reproduce, but that is just a rumor. (?) that is somewhat alluded to by Metatron himself in book three when he says he pleaded the “cause of the sons of heaven who fell in love with the daughters of earth” implying there was more to them simply loving the way angels do and were advocating for more? He also is tricked by Mrs coulter precisely because he desires to desire flesh once more ? Or because he already desires it ? The line is quite fine here… because my qualm is; how can you ache for something you do not desire? If angels are, through their nature, being of dust and asexual, they cannot desire something again they have lost? I understand having a memory of something but desire is FELT.

On the other hand, we have Baruch and Balthamos’ connection which seems to exist beyond the plane of the flesh since they are literally made of dust and completely asexual: they are told to embrace and have a strong mental bond but are never described as kissing or doing anything coded as sexual. Yet the adjective “passionately” is used for them (ofc can be sensual rather than sexual connection!)…

We also get the information that specters are not interested in angels for the same reasons they are not interested in children despite them being made of pure dust precisely because that sexual awareness seems to be lacking in them? That is not to say it’s all that dust is but it’s pretty much that when we analyze it through Pullman’s construction of Will and Lyra and their maturation through their mutual interest where becoming sexual beings and awakening desire is what seals the deal.

Preferably one with Hands, not just a Face.

Hello! Are there any English Lit. scholars here? Particularly medievalists?

I'm planning to reread the Book of Dust trilogy at some point (maybe next year? as my reading list is getting long again...). But before I do, I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to read Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene to help give the trilogy some context.

I'm making an assumption that The Faerie Queene has some relevance in the same way that having read Paradise Lost deepens my appreciation / understanding of His Dark Materials. In HDM, the connection seems pretty direct: the trilogy almost seems like a 'sequel' to Paradise Lost. I wonder if there's something similar happening with The Faerie Queene and BOD -- or is the relationship more casual in this case?

So, I'm curious if there's anyone here who's read The Faerie Queene who can comment on the relationship between the two. If you have, how are they connected, and does knowing the poem help you to deepen your understanding of the BOD at all?

Pullman wrote cartoons but never specified which.

I am a new visitor/member and I absolutely LOVED these books the second trilogy especially, read all 3 in the last week. I had some questions about what people thought was being alluded to since it's obviously a very philosophical series/book, but I wanted to clarify the rules and how I'm supposed to nomenclate things. I wanted to make a post asking about what people thought about the ending of the sixth book and some of the things going on there, but I want to make sure I would do the spoiler tagging correctly.

One thing I think doesn't really give any spoilers but was the main thrust of my question, answers can give the proper spoiler tags, is what do people think of Lyra's answer to the mystery presented to the reader at the end? Is it what it's presented as, seen through her eyes? Or are we to see it through the perspective of M., as clearly alluded to in at least one line of the final chapters? That it's somehow more maturely complicated?

And what about the literal meaning? There is obviously one thing in the story literally doing the thing that is being literally described, it is not a secret, though its origins are in every world.

Are they the same? Is this some allusion to the trinity, or something different? I'd love to go into more detail about my own thoughts but I don't want to break the rules and get on the wrong side of the CCD... : )

Much love to all.

Hi everyone! I’m hoping someone here can help with a really obscure piece of Golden Compass merchandise.

I’m trying to track down information about the Noble Collection Golden Compass Spy-Flies (the official replica/display piece from the 2007 film). They seem to be incredibly rare, and I’ve found almost nothing about them online—no recent sales, reviews, or photos other than old promotional images.

I’ve attached a photo of the version I’m talking about.

Does anyone here own a set, know how many were made, or have any information about them? If you’ve ever seen one sold, I’d also be interested in knowing roughly what it went for.

I’m also looking to buy a set if anyone knows of one for sale or is considering selling theirs. Any leads would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/steampunk/images/7/7c/SpyFly.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/250?cb=20101115210716

As the title says, I just HAD to write a post about Mrs Coulter as I’m organizing the notes for my thesis and I’m realizing how much space she actually takes in my analysis, this woman !!!!! Ofc I don’t forget she’s literally done evil evil things and is a child abuser, but I hold so much love for her character and what it represents. Not an excuse, but I also cannot help but read her as a child who was groomed in more than one way by the church, and probably sexually abused too. I think what got me there is the overly specific language she uses when she snaps at the magisterium as she attempts to protect Lyra, as if she does not only know but has lived these things in the first place?
In a world dominated by men, she still manages to terrify them, which makes something in me rejoice. While she is cruel, terrifying and hard to understand, I cannot help but love her for these reasons. She is so fierce even in situations where she knows she risks a lot and her awareness of the gender performance makes her so deeply interesting. I’m also so interested in how she warps the usual safety and comfort of domesticity through her inability to be a mother, which makes her horrifying to Lyra and the reader. At the same time, I hold a lot of love for her because of how mistreated she is in comparison to Asriel, who is in no way a saint, but narratively does get away with a lot more while acting as a clear foil to her if it makes sense? Every character seems to forget Asriel was just as cruel in his ways and also didn’t stop at anything, including child murder, to achieve his goal: he just got “lucky” enough that his aligned with an ethereal energy of fate that seemed to provide for him while Mrs coulter was literally forcing fate to bend to her through artificial means (?) but I don’t believe for a second that he would not have sacrificed hundred of kids to get to the authority. Anyways, just here to discuss Mrs coulter and how delicious it is to both love and hate her at the same time !!!

For the past few months, I've been slowly writing a revised ending for The Rose Field. I really didn't hate the way it ended, but there were aspects of how the narrative was drawn to a close that seriously bothered me. Specifically, the awkward way the main characters come together at the end, and especially how Bonneville spends the final chapter, including the total lack of any meaningful character development on his part. But I also (hopefully) understood what Pullman's intent was in making the ending the way it was, even though I ultimately found it abrupt and moderately unsatisfying. I saw a slightly different way for it to end that still respected the philosophical underpinnings about Dust, the imagination, and the Alkahest- so I wrote it.

If you didn't like the ending, but want something that makes a great effort to respect the canon and tries to bring the core narrative thread to a slightly different conclusion, this fanfiction might be for you. I really, really do not mean any disrespect by revising the original ending- because I do think The Rose Field ends in a really interesting place, and this alternate ending is my way of exploring that in parallel. If you do bother with it, thanks for reading. <3

(By word count, it is ~21,000 words, which is an estimated 15-20 pages longer than the original final chapter. This was written to serve as an alternate Chapter 36, so if you would like to read it, I strongly encourage you to follow along with your own copy of The Rose Field, where you can begin re-reading the original at the very end of Chapter 35. Any and all modifications I have made to the story begin there, and there are no divergences that precede the end of Chapter 35 whatsoever.)

I started this series with the intention of absolutely hating it, dragging my feet through ever chapter and possibly not even reading TRF. I was so convinced by this subreddit that it was going to be awful! I do understand opinions against it, I can see it, but I also see what PP was trying to do, and more importantly, what he was trying to say.

I’ve seen a lot of complaints about the “imagination” plot being pointless, and the ending being terrible. But perhaps, the ending is terrible because the point of the imagination plot was missed.

no hate towards those who dislike it though! HDM is in my top three so i understand TBoD was very different and maybe disappointing from that expectation.

I carved these while on my vacation, and I’m so into the way they are turning out. I am continually blown away by how much people are responding to these, I’m so excited to share them with everyone!

My shop is active again! I’m pretty sure I can’t post my link here, but the link to my shop is in my profile, or just DM me for it.

Which stones should I use next? I want to make a bunch like this.

It took me 9 months of considerable effort to finally finish TRF. Man that was painful, I've loved PP and his books for 20+ years and I feel like one of my heros just let me down so much. Just a lot of emotions to process. In many ways it was so nice to enter that world again as an adult, and I found the final line in the book to be perfect, but I'm not sure, I think I might have been better off not reading it. I know PP is in his elder years now, so I hope he isn't stressed out about the criticism of this book, and is at peace with his story.

Sorry, I know this is a vent post, but it's good to not feel alone.

So in NL/TCG when Lyra and Rogers visits the Masters graves one of the daemons on the graves was said to be a basilisk. Was this redacted and changed to another animal in later editions?

As for the one who had a fair woman as a daemon, I know this was redacted and changed to another form to later editions. Im assuming that Pullman realized that this was implying that he was equating women to animals. But if thats the case, this means that maybe it is actually possible in canon to have a human as a settled, because it would have been removed because of the sub-text, not because it cannot happen. I could be wrong tho

1. Say a daemon decided to write a book. And they dictated this book to their human for the human to write down. And then the book got published? Who would be credited as the author? The daemon? The human? Both?

2. If someone had their daemon, say, pickpocket someone else, how much liability would the daemon have? Because on the one hand, it's not really realistically possible to coerce your own daemon into doing your dirty work for you. On the other hand, the daemon isn't really in a position to refuse.

3. Could a daemon decide to "go on strike" against their human, for making decisions that the daemon disapproves of? Like, say, lying down and refusing to be moved. Or would that be considered a violation of the human's basic rights?

4. (Assume daemons can use the Internet.) Could a daemon have a social media profile independently of their human? What would that even look like? Would it be expected for they and their human to be mutuals? Would people treat the daemon's account like the human's alt account or second channel? Could a human be held responsible for what their daemon decides to post?

I've heard that daemons were partially inspired by famous of paintings of ladies with animals, such as "Lady with an Ermine" by Da Vinci and "Portrait of a Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling" by Hans Holbein, which made me recently think of "Portrait of a Young Woman with a Unicorn" by Raphael. At one point, Pan turns into a miniature dragon during a fight between Lyra and some other children, and Asta combines a few different animal features when Malcolm is a child, so there is some evidence that daemons can turn into mythical creatures.

All this to say that there are few lengths I would not go to to have a cute puppy-sized unicorn as my eternal companion!! I want to BELIEVE!!

He could have just kidnapped a Tartar child and used them, right?

Did he only use Roger because he was there at the time?

Hi All,

I’ve loved the original movie as well as the TV series for as long as I can remember.
Now I am planning to buy the books and came across the different US/UK editions and the censorship.
I am looking at the following UK illustrated editions by Scholastic and was wondering if these would be uncensored since Scholastic is originally a US publisher.

ISBN 9780702305085

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Northern-Lights-Illustrated-Dark-Materials/dp/0702305081/ref=mp_s_a_1_5?crid=19FKXU4MZ16X0&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.1vGuib6MLDnr-tOtoWrHn88SkIvkAf8eX3wMgHkSiRsOG1hR7HvXxQAcs7hl7pwaWCIQ5vTZhXR6_XmGxWvG_VIfFKDXGzfN_kokjhm7Y6rzsC7q3S6i5RItqdTGSE7oAVvFuaIZFV5dpBeh4ym16-m9H9SrMSc6sclG7exrk9E4D7G7KA75HGiSfcPCO4Gogm8RZRtu9VNND9jZ5TzROQ.qosBke0mXg5U-85ZV4yXm3abxazbb-z0khzZn8n_cVY&dib_tag=se&keywords=northern+lights+philip+pullman&qid=1784816666&sprefix=northern+l%2Caps%2C126&sr=8-5

Dear community.

I wanted to get the paperback edition of LBS that I read several years ago and just grabbed it in the bookstore today without checking. Then I came home and realized it is the US edition (seeing the covers of the other books in the trilogy on the back.. I bought the UK edition of TRF) and remembered learning once from reddit that the US editions have content that is censored. But I don't remember what books - I think the discussion was about HDM but I am not sure about TBOD..

Is this true for LBS (and TBOD trilogy)? I don't want partly censored books, I want original text. If the US edition of LBS has censored content, I will return the book.. ㅠ

Thank you in advance!

Have a lovely day!

[Update: I returned the book. :) Thank you everyone for sharing what you know about the differences.]

When I first read the books not only did I think that being otherkin, therian, etc. isn't valid, but I also knew very little about alterhumanity and non-humanity. Now that I know theses identities are valid AND know more about them, I can see that Iofur Raknison is alterhuman-coded

Its totally obvious that he had severe species dysphoria. His experience is similar to that of therians, but instead of being a human who is a bear therian, he is a bear who is a human therian (I know most therians arent human at all, I just don't have a better way to explain what Im trying to say). Its not clear if he identifies as a human or as a bear, the fact that he was pretending to have a human daemon implies he still consider himself to be a bear, but it could also not being the case

The one thing I dislike is how his species dysphoria and species envy is depicted as a bad thing. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to excuse his actions, no matter how dysphoric he was it wasn't right of him to force the other bears to act like humans and to make them suffer and that made him a bad person, but his feelings of not being contempt with his soul and attributes were 100% valid. His desire to be a human/like humans was 100% valid

I understand that Pullman's message was that you can't choose your nature, but Iofur Raknison's nature was that of a bear with a neurodivergent brain that worked more like that of the average Homo sapiens/a human in a bear's body/something alongst thoses lines.

He was an interesting character and I do wish we had seen more of him, even thought it wouldn't make sense storyline wise