first, i must say that i really loved this book. yes, there’s controversy about it, and i’ll address that in a bit, but on its own merits this book is very well done. it’s a believable “world creation,” the characters are engaging and very complex, the story takes a lot of interesting turns, and the book doesn’t end…….well it doesn’t end, really, as it’s the first of three parts, but the ending of this first part didn’t really turn out the way that the reader probably would have expected it to. i like that in books. i know some people like everything to be all neatly tied up and explained, but i’m not like that. i love books that lead me in a certain way throughout, only to blow away all my preconceived notions of how the book should end at the last minute. i like books that leave me guessing and let my imagination try to fill in the holes. fiction, anyways. that’s not a desirable trait to have in non-fiction books. but i digress.

i loved this book. if you’re unfamiliar with the book or the film, this is the story of a young girl named Lyra. kind of a fitting name, actually, as Lyra is also a liar. a big one, at that. but she does know when she needs to be completely truthful and would probably say that she only lies when it’s absolutely necessary. Lyra has an uncle, or someone she believes to be her uncle, named Lord Asriel who also happens to be a world famous explorer. in this sort of alternate universe from our own, Lord Asriel, while exploring the far reaches of the North and trying to discover the truth behind Dust (more on that in a second), is taken capture and imprisoned by Gobblers, who also happen to be stealing children and performing experiments on them. little by little, Lyra learns what is going on and she sets out to help the stolen children and to free her uncle. aiding her in her task are her daemon (again, more on this in a second), an exiled armored bear, and a an alethiometer, a small golden truth-telling device that much resembles a compass, thus the title of the book.

i should say here that if you have not yet read the book or seen the movie and do not want to be spoiled, then you should probably read no further. so proceed at your own risk.

of course there is widespread controversy regarding this book, and this controversy has been much publicized in the media and throughout the internet. however the controversy is not like the controversy surrounding the Harry Potter books, which is to say that the controversy is not unfounded nor based on ignorance or complete misunderstanding. the controversy surrounding this book, the blockbuster film, and the His Dark Materials trilogy is completely founded and real. the author, Philip Pullman, has stated that his purpose in these books is to create an anti-Narnia narrative as well as “killing God” (the source of the original quote) by the end of the series.

whether he manages to do that is yet to be seen by me, but it is definitely clear in The Golden Compass that Pullman is no friend of Christianity. a self-proclaimed agnostic, which, in my opinion, is an entirely impossible position to hold, Pullman sets up the Christian Church as the grand enemy of the story, and anyone related to or working for the Church is evil. i think it’s interesting that Pullman seems to have all of Christianity in view. whereas The Da Vinci Code was more of a specific assault on Romanism, Pullman craftily combines Romanism and Protestantism in his alternate universe, describing “Pope John Calvin” (the very thought of which would surely cause Calvin to spin wildly in his grave) has having moved the Papacy to Geneva, only to later abolish the Papacy in order to set up the Magisterium, a sort of arch-presbytery, to rule over the one Church.

from my readings on this book and the controversy that surrounds it, this book basically represents “Philip-Pullman-the-atheist-light,” meaning that the major attacks against the church and Christianity are not found until the other two books. but the book in present view does have some significant presuppositions that it sets up for the way the rest of the series will go. now, again, i haven’t read the other two books, so what follows is not a fully developed treatise by any means. it merely represents my initial thoughts as i begin to grapple with what Pullman is doing and saying.

these presuppositions largely center around the mysterious “Dust” that was mentioned earlier. it’s revealed at one point that Dust is believed by the Church and the Magisterium to be the source of Original Sin. this Dust is very prevalent in adults, but not in children, and “settles” on humans during the time of puberty. it’s also at this point that a person’s daemon becomes fixed. this idea of a person’s daemon is quite complex, so for the sake of brevity i will only say that the daemon is a sort of external soul that is spiritually fixed to the human being. the person’s “soul” cannot be separated from the human by any natural means and when one dies they both die. these daemon-souls are in animal forms and can change at will when one is a child, but they become fixed when one reaches the age of puberty. the final form that a daemon-soul takes says a lot about who the person is and will become (i.e. servants always have a dog daemon-soul).

but what’s interesting about all of this is Pullman’s idea that Original Sin enters a person’s life when they reach the age of puberty. even more interesting is his idea that humans become accountable for Original Sin when they reach sexual awareness, for this is the only conclusion that can be taken away from Pullman’s constant references to puberty, as well as his retelling and reframing of Genesis 3 in which he emphasizes Adam and Eve’s coming aware of their nakedness and being ashamed because of it, further signified by their daemons becoming fixed. of this, Lord Asriel states, “that was how sin came into the world, sin and shame and death. it came the moment their daemons became fixed” (274). he goes on to say that the discovery that Dust settles on children around the age of puberty is “physical proof that something happened when innocence changed into experience” (274), or physical proof that one became accountable for Original Sin when one becomes sexually aware through puberty, as it was with our first parents. because of this new discovery, and because of their fear of Dust, the Church and Magisterium believe they can get rid of the effects of Original Sin and Dust by cutting away children’s daemons before they become their fixed states when the Dust settles. again, Lord Asriel states, “perhaps if the daemon were separated from the body, we might never be subject to Dust–to original sin” (275).

i find this fundamental misunderstanding of the doctrine of original sin to be extremely fascinating. especially in light of the character and personality that Pullman gives his Lyra. there are constant references in the book to the “innocence” of children, but Lyra is anything but innocent. she lies constantly, she’s incorrigible, she has fits of anger, her hijinks endanger others, and the list could go on. Lyra is a perfect testament to the fact that original sin is present with humans from birth and does not “settle” on us when we go through the stage of puberty, as if there were a sort of arbitrary “age of accountability” where we are no longer considered “innocent,” but become responsible for our actions and our sin.

so, at the very least, it seems that Pullman’s main quarrel with the Christian Church is its repression of human sexuality. “sin” came into the world when Adam and Eve became sexually aware. humans become responsible for original sin when they become sexually aware through puberty. the Church is so afraid of Dust, that it resorts to torturing and experimenting on children to find a way to escape the settling of Dust, to escape the process of puberty and becoming sexually aware (Pullman even has his characters say that the precedent the Church uses to justify these “cutting” experiments is castration!).

but what if there were another way? what if there was a way to remove Dust, rather than removing the effects of Dust? Lord Asriel says later, “somewhere out there is the origin of all the Dust, all the death, the sin, the misery, the destructiveness in the world. human beings can’t see anything without wanting to destroy it, Lyra. that’s original sin. and i’m going to destroy it. death is going to die” (277). since Pullman has stated, “my books are about killing God,” i’m going to assume that Lord Asriel’s statement is a declaration of war against God. in essence, God is being blamed for sin, death, Dust, and the Church, and he must be destroyed.

i think i’ll reserve further comment on this until i read the other two books, but i will say that it’s interesting that “salvation,” the defeat of death and sin, is taken up by a rational scientist, for this is the only thing the atheist can do. except, unlike a fantasy story, God cannot physically be destroyed. he can only be “destroyed” in the heart and mind, but one is still left with the problem of sin and death. but what if sin and death aren’t all that bad? what if Lyra turns out to be a prophetess, and what if Dust, original sin, sexual awareness, death, and everything that the Church and Lord Asriel are afraid of should not be feared at all?

of course, for the Christian, these things are not to be feared at all. Jesus has defeated sin and death. sexual awareness is good and holy within its proper context, but what is the atheist’s response? Lyra says, “if they all think Dust is bad, it must be good…yeah! what if it’s really good…[what] if Dust were a good thing…[what] if it were to be sought and welcomed and cherished…” (292). what if what the church says and forces upon people as sin and bad, really wasn’t sin at all? what if we realized that there is no God and we are accountable to no one? what if sexuality and sexual expression, regardless of the context, is always good and welcomed? what if everything we have been told all our lives is bad was actually good for us and should be pursued and “cherished?” this a slippery slope to abject relativism and unbridled licentiousness. it will be very interesting to see where Pullman goes with this.

so again, the book, as a piece of art, was very good. it’s an excellent story so far. however the moral system and understanding and portrayal of Christianity are deeply disturbing and i do not have a very good feeling about where the story is going to go from here.