Talk:His Dark Materials

message: Many authoritative commentators have written about the symbolism in Pullman's works, so there's no excuse for the quantity of unreferenced, original theorising that permeates this article. Over the next few weeks, as I find the time, I propose to go through, section by section, and try to find sources but, failing that, make deletions. WP policy here. Any suggestions as to the line to take, before I get going, welcome. --Old Moonraker (talk) 09:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As several editors have attempted to explain on your talk page, it's the theorising and conjecture that's unreferenced, not the article. Please read the post more carefully, and you will see that there's no need to inconvenience the saints with requests for assistance. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:17, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like User:WickerGuy has pre-empted a lot of this: grateful thanks! --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:21, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Atticusattor has been referencing the same problematic book by Leonard Wheat on the page about The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe (from C.S. Lewis' Narnia Chronicles) where my deletion efforts prevailed earlier. Wheat's books makes very extravagant claims (to put it mildly). While much Christian symbolism is acknowledged in Lewis' Narnia books, his claim that the Professor from The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe represents God is problematic to say the least. Wheat has a book on 2001: A Space Odyssey that argues that the four orbiting satellites represent the four goddesses that started the Trojan War, and that TMA-1 (sic) is an anagram of "NO MEAT". This is WP:FRINGE stuff and at most should be mentioned briefly in conjunction with more mainstream scholarship. Atticusattor does not understand the policy of WP:UNDUE and has repeatedly claimed that Wheat's views are blindingly self-evident and appears to conclude they should therefore be treated as fact on Wikipedia. Atticusattor has also misrepresented his own edits which were deleted on the article on Slan. He wrote a section making Van Vogt's Slan an elaborate Christian allegory. He claims on his own Talk page that he cited a source, but he did not. It was entirely unreferenced!!--WickerGuy (talk) 14:36, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

text: I have been trying to point out that my own disagreement with Wheat is irrelevant policy-wise as to whether these edits belong in Wikipedia, but also arguing my own position at the same time (which may be unwise.) I am much less familiar with Pullman than C.S. Lewis. I have seen the 6-hour stage version of His Dark Materials, seen the film The Golden Compass, and read the entire study of Pullman by Donna Freitas and Jason King entitled Killing the Imposter God, but have not actually read the Pullman books, so I am not in a position re Pullman to argue too specifically against Wheat's opinions, but as I said in my edit-sum, a section on symbolism referencing only Wheat and NO use of work of others such as Lois Gresh, Kurt Bruner, Donna Freitas, George Beahm is a clear violation of WP policy!! Same goes for Atticusattor's edits explaining the allegory in the Narnia books on that page over there.--WickerGuy (talk) 14:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation and theorising, throughout 

message: "Apparently a parallel to the North Sea flood of 1953" has been deleted as uncited, but restored again. It's the "apparently" that gives it away: WP:NOR without a source that draws the parallel. Tagged. --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look for a source, and delete it if I can't find one. (I am not the original poster of this material). Your edit sum sounded like you needed a source that that floods happened. I wonder if there is a way to rephrase it to make it less NOR. Perhaps not.--WickerGuy (talk) 16:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That rephrase looks like a fix, until we find a RS making the connection. I'm looking for one, but not too hopefully. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said in the edit-sum, it's on a lot of fansites, but not really mentioned in anything that meets our standard for a reliable source, although it would be worth looking into the book in HDM by Donna Freitas.--WickerGuy (talk) 18:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The OP has made these into a table, which seems like a reasonable fix: we can see the connections for ourselves now. --Old Moonraker (talk) 14:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parallels with real floods in C20 Britain 

message: The gobblers' name actually comes from the General Oblation Board, the church body that runs them--75* 17:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oblation board 

message: I seem to be the only one talking here at present, so I'll talk to myself! I think some tidying and pruning is called for across the whole HDM coverage ... anyone want to join me?
1. I question in Influences section "Pullman also referred to gnostic ideas in his description of the novels' underlying mythic structure." It certainly WASN'T in the ref attached to it (Pullman-Rowan Williams debate), so I moved that reference to the other comments about RW (in Controversies) as it is an interesting insight into PP's beliefs and methods.
Does anyone know whether the 'gnostic beliefs etc.' are in the new Intro by PP. it was unclear as to whether the text is in the Intro or is meant to be supported by the PP-RW debate. Either way, the present wording is so vague as to be meaningless. ('referred to gnostic beliefs', did he say they were there/ weren't there/ that he had no idea what it meant ... etc) Pincrete (talk) 22:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Time for some pruning? 2014!

message: In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, surely the Samoyed are Samoyed rather than Sami.  Iapetus (talk) 14:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to find my e-copy of HDM, but couldn't. To be honest I don't remember Samoyed or Sami. However, since the ref to BOTH is in a 'glossary', there is no need for EITHER if no 'translation' is required. So yes, you are dead right, in the absence of evidence Samoyed=Samoyed.!Pincrete (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've deleted the line. Iapetus (talk) 12:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Samoyed: The Sami hunters of northern Scandinavia." 

message: Similarly to my last point - is there any reason to believe that Pullman's "gyrocopters" are helicopters (as currently stated), rather than actual gyrocopters? Iapetus (talk) 13:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Again not sure, I have now accessed the .pdf of the text. The problem with ALL these terms is that Pullman frequently borrows and 'mixes and matches' terms for things/places/institutions to create a feeling of 'familiar, but not the same' in the invented universes, especially that of the first book (Lyra's world). I will try to check 'copters' and 'Samoyed' when I have time. Pincrete (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gyrocopters 

message: As an influence on the series, albeit an unconscious one, I would argue the Magisterium bears more than a passing resemblance to the Church as it appears in Kingsley Amis' The Alteration. Instead of removal to Geneva by Pope Calvin, the Church in Amis' vision elects Martin Luther to the Throne of St. Peter as Germanian I. Thus, the disciplinary impulses (and abuses) which were occasioned by the Reformation in our world are avoided; as are the nationalist movements of the German princes; and the Risorgimento.
Nuttyskin (talk) 18:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You'd need a source to make that argument. DonIago (talk) 19:14, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influences: [[The Alteration]] 

message: I came to this page to look at the 'Controversies' section and found that rather than this there is instead a section called 'Reactions from Christians'.
I really feel this heading should be changed to 'Controversies', as is the case with most pages. The current heading feels like an attempt to undermine the fact that there are controversies simply because the source of them is Christians  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.25.113.167 (talk) 08:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice that this edit was reverted. If there is a good reason why the section title shouldn't be 'Controversies' then please do explain it or I will simply change it again. 82.25.113.167 (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: "The dominant religion has parallels with Christianity, and is at certain points in the series (especially in the later books) explicitly named so..."
The "In the later books" part is not true. The word "Christian" occurs three times in the series, two of which refer to Will's world. The remaining one is in the first book, where Mrs Coulter has promised Jofur to have him baptised as a Christian.
"... while Adam and Eve are referenced in the text..., Jesus is not."
Technically, Mary Malone does mention Jesus twice, although this refers to her world of course. (Also, there's the Madonna as an alethiometer symbol.) Anyway, The Book of Dust does mention Jesus. So I don't think this factoid should be included in the article. Besides the statement being technically inaccurate, the current source for this is simply a journalist's personal observation; including this here is borderline WP:SYNTH. It would be appropriate to include it if it was brought up as part of the controversy (e.g by a Christian critic or apologist for HDM).
Mats84 (talk) 15:40, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've restored the 'parallels' part of the above - mainly because saying "a version of" implies some real branch of Chritianity. Actually very little is made explicit about what the religion is, though it inherits some of "the trimmings" and terminology of catholicism.Pincrete (talk) 17:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christianity and Jesus in the series' universe