Talk:Philip Pullman

message: I agree that some of the material about His Dark Materials is excessive and should be in that article, not the Pullman article.  I also think too much is read into the similarities between His Dark Materials and The Chronicles of Narnia.  "Adult moral choices" are seen in countless fantasy books, that doesn't seem anywhere near derivitave or even similar.  "Talking animals" are also seen in countless fantasy stories.  In Narnia the animals are as intelligent as humans and have somewhat human behaviour .  In His Dark Materials the dæmons, though taking animal forms, are not animals, rather part of humans in Lyra's world.  The panserbjørne, armored bears, are talking animals of a sort, though they are a specific instance.  Though both initial books of both series start with a young girl hiding in a wardrobe, the circumstances are completely different and this is not mentioned in the article.  The wardrobe Lucy Pevensie hides in is a gateway to Narnia and very significant in the series' plot.  The wardrobe Lyra hides in, on the other hand, is of little significance  in itself.  Lucy hides for hide-and-go seek, Lyra hides to watch the meeting and
ends up seeing her father almost being poisoned.  The similarities are made too much of and should either be deleted or more information should be given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omnijohn (talk • contribs) 2 January 2006
A correction should be made where it says that both series have Christian allegories. If you go to the page on C.S. Lewis he specifically states that Aslan is not an allegory. I haven't heard of what he says about other things in his books, but Aslan is frequently misunderstood to be an allegory.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.176.27 (talk • contribs)  6 March 2006
:Author's intent, while interesting, is not the defining characteristic of whether something can be seen as an allegory.  Whether or not Lewis belives Aslan to be a allegorical Christ-figure is important, but it's also important that critical and lay readership have read Aslan as allegory for half a century, with strong textual support. Phrasing could arguably changed to "both series are often read as having strong Christian allegories." Deborah-jl Talk 18:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parallels 

message: In addition to needing references, this article primarily needs some more information about his personal history as well as his publishing history. --InShaneee 02:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: The links in the bibliography section tend to link towards already existing articles about a non-literary concept (e.g. Spring-heeled Jack links to Spring-heeled Jack, not the book with the name).  Not sure what the standard method is for distinguishing a book by a specific author apart from the semantic concept of the title.  So, I'll leave it alone for someone who's more comfortable with Wiki to clean.  TheodoreLarson 05:54, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography Links 

message: I was reading http://www.bridgetothestars.net/index.php?d=commentaries/merlyn&p=part1
That source lists his birth name as Philip Nicholas Outram. It also gives 1954 (not 1953) as the date of his father's death.
I'm not quite sure what to do with this information though. Dfmclean 16:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biographical information 

message: The first paragraph of "Religious Perspective" seems extremely subjective. Can anyone fix it? --Stellaciel  —Preceding comment was added at 03:16, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The quote I removed was uncited ([see here]. A search for the quote as given returned plenty of links from right-wing and conservative religious websites and no links pointing to the Washington Post from which the quote was allegedly taken. Unless you can provide an actual link to the exact, actual quote, I can only conclude that the quote was made up by religious extremists intent on silencing anyone who would challenge their beliefs. TechBear (talk) 00:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

text: What do you mean, uncited? I gave the reference to the date on which it appeared in the Washington Post. My computer skills aren't up to placing a reference on this page, indeed, I can't work out how anyone could do it since when I try to edit the references I can't get in. But perhaps you could. You portray yourself as unbiased in your self-description. Perhaps you'd care to establish this by undoing what you've done, putting the quotation back where it belongs, and linking it to a reference. If you don't,, I shall seek out help elsewhere, but it seems only just given your over-hasty removal of the quotation first time round. You don't seem to have paid much attention, I'm sorry to say, to my last message, in which I drew your attention to the identical link on the Wikipedia 'Golden Compass' entry. You also seem to have ignored my complaint about the mistitling of my article which is indeed apocryphal, and preusmably ought to concern you just as much as the alleged misquoting of Mr Pullman. What, by the way, is an 'extremist'? Does 'NPOV' allow such a usage? And why would anyone try to silence an opponent by giving wider prominence to his words?
For all avoidance of doubt:
THIS links to the WP site:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A23371-2001Feb18?language=printer  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockback (talk • contribs) 09:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Right, I've sort of fixed it now, though a more skilled person might care to tidy it up. Please don't remove it again. It isn't 'apocryphal' and never was. I've also adjusted or evened up a few tendentious verbs ('claims' for persons of whom an editor disapproves, and straight 'says' for those of who he approves is subtle partiality, so I've substituted such wordsd as 'says'(for 'claims') or 'contends ('for 'says' so as to avoid repetition). I suppose a neutral 'says' wopuld be technically better, but would read rather badly. However, it isn't only adjectives that can be used to express an opinion.  And I've removed an 'even'. The fact that a person responds in a civilised way to critics, while meritorious in itself, doesn't affect the weight of his argument, or that of his critics. I've also altered the reference to the headline on my 'Mail on Sunday' piece, reinstating its actual form as a question rather than a statement. I haven't yet worked out how I can correct this in the linked version, which is not from the MoS site, since I don't think the paper was on line at the time. 
Peter Hitchens, signed in as Clockback (talk) 11:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious perspective section 

message: Someone seems to have vandalized this page. Books are referred to as 'stinky maggot' etc. I'd fix it, but I have to dash off. ESO, 01:32 12/11/2007.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.161.190 (talk) 00:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: When users vandalize this page and related ones by going on and on about how Pullman is going to hell and he is terrible, etc., I've started posting the following paragraph onto their talk pages, just because it may be that the user has never considered that critique of organized religion does not have to entail a rejection of all ethics, even of some ethics that are affirmed in Christianity. Maybe some users don't realize that they are allowed to regret the Inquisition without immediately having to start eating babies in satanic rituals. Of course, some won't respond to such enlightenment. But in case they might, feel free, should you be interested, to post something like the following on their talk pages. Best, Anthony Krupp (talk) 16:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One thought for you to consider: don't confuse a hatred of the Inquisition with a hatred of Jesus Christ. If you've read Pullman's book, you know that Lyra descends into the underworld to free souls that have been in captivity of demonic creatures. This theme of redemption is a Christian one. I am not suggesting that Pullman is a theist, but I think that a real Christian can read the books and find themes supported and affirmed in them that are also central to Christianity. But it's true, in my opinion, that Pullman hates what the Church has done in the name but not in the spirit of Jesus Christ. Decide which one you support: the Christian Inquisition or the Christian ideals of love and charity, which Pullman's novels thoroughly affirm. Best, Anthony Krupp (talk) 16:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: My thought too - a vandal won't even read past your first sentence, however well written your argument is.VatoFirme (talk) 04:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Educating the Masses at the risk of feeding the trolls 

message: Someone has entered obviously false information in here.  One example:
"Many people have already been fooled by the trilogy. Nichole Kidman, who is going to star in the upcoming film, The Golden Compass, has even said that she is a strict catholic and that she would not act in any film that would "make my grandmother turn in her grave.""
I do not know how to edit the page to question it's validity, so I will leave you to someone more knowledged.
:Already reverted. And please sign your posts. :-) TechBear 20:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  biased information 

message: http://humaniststudies.org/enews/?id=268&article=0#bluebox
News item #25 in the podcast box leads to the interview, if it doesn't load right away.
Some notable things: Pullman avoids labels like "humanist" or "atheist".  He directly denies having an agenda, because he wants people to think for themselves.  He also professes respect for Narnia for its literary importance and the fact that it takes on large questions of faith, even though he hates the conclusions it comes to - whereas he sees LOTR as pure fantasy that doesn't ask any big questions, doesn't hate it, but doesn't respect it either because it doesn't say anything.  He directly comments on the movie (loved it), and the protesters (he thinks they are acting exactly how the Magisterium is portrayed in his books).
Great interview and pretty long, and he gets a chance to represent his beliefs with more nuance, rather than sound bytes, so check it out.VatoFirme (talk) 04:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pullman Interview 

message: In the interest of presenting relevant information based on facts, I wonder if anyone has more information on this statement:
Literary critic Alan Jacobs (of Wheaton College) argues that Pullman's trilogy is a recasting of John Milton's trilogy, only instead of a theist world-view Pullman presupposes a world-view more in line with the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.[9]
Would it be fair to bring more of the cited reference into this statement? I think it would help clarify the shades of gray between the whole C.S. Lewis/atheist discussion. 
Or, is that more for the subject matter page itself? I wanted to ask first, before adding information where it's not wanted. This is a very interesting guy, and I'd like to see more info on his views and what inspires him to write.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.165.188.130 (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the article for Philip Pullman, not the article for His Dark Materials. Information that is specific to the trilogy belong in that article, not this one, so your question would be better directed there. TechBear (talk) 14:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: TechBear's answer makes sense to me. But I'll fix one thing now: that it is a recasting of Milton is obvious, and we have Pullman saying so himself. (More anon.) The Rousseau thing is definitely an interpretation.Anthony Krupp (talk) 16:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Clarification 

message: This is just a little grammitcal nitpick in the face of all the religion-based vandalism, but shouldn't the speaker be changed in this:
(From 1963 Pullman attended Exeter College, Oxford, receiving a Third class BA in 1968. In an interview with the Oxford Student he stated that "he did not really enjoy the English course" and that "I thought I was doing quite well until I came out with my third class degree and then I realised that I wasn’t — it was the year they stopped giving fourth class degrees otherwise I’d have got one of those".)
Ie: that he "did not.... or and that "[he] thought [he] was doing....
I could be wrong, just a though  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.2.132 (talk) 21:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put the first "he" outside the quotation marks as I'm fairly certain he didn't refer to himself as "he", but as for changing the "I"s to "[he]"s in the rest of the sentence, I don't know about that.  Someone more skilled in writing can decide on that one.VatoFirme (talk) 08:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation 

message: http://www.uce.ac.uk/web2/releases04/3476.html
 This site gives a page not found error. 
I don't know how to edit reference list, so i am writing it here so that somebody who knows can verify this and delete the reference.
I would really like to see a list of the awards and accomplishments of Philip Pullman, please? I am doing a biography about him and I need to know more about his accomplishments and awards, please!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.43.113 (talk) 01:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference List page can't be retieved 

message: Could someone please post some TRUE information about Philip Pullman's childhood on here? I need it for my report...thank you!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.43.113 (talk) 02:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Childhood 

message: Is Pullman an atheist or an agnostic? I believe I've heard quotes that imply the later. He doesn't believe in God, but believes that there is a possibility and there is no evidence either way.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.185.70 (talk) 23:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious Views 

message: The Religious Perspectives section has improved vastly since it was first written and is as about as neutral and reasonable as can be expected of such a controversial figure, so while he may well be going to hell, saying so here is rather pointless as he is not likely to be influenced by it and no doubt gets his jollies by reading of your reaction. Jgk168421 (talk) 05:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious Perspectives 

message: I fail to see the point of the religious perspectives section. He is an author, he writes a few things that some people don't like. Surely the discussion ends there? It is sections like this that allow the hypersensitive to document their indignation with an individual and his or her works (and indeed, in the case of Peter Hitchens a dollop of self promotion) where Wikipedia becomes non-encyclopedic and heads more towards a battleground or editorialising.
What next, a Republican perspective on every Democratic bio? A Facist perspective section on every Communist? A Hip-Hop perspective on the great composers?
It may be within the guidelines of Wikipedia, but it is seriously tedious reading through reams of hurt feelings, thinly veiled character assassination and aspersions. - Anonymous reader of Wikipedia.
I 100% agreed with Anonymous. Is it really so important and fundamental to know what the Hitchens family think about him...who's f**in' care?He is an atheist and wrote a book and then?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.145.153.100 (talk) 17:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tedious religious perspectives 

message: "The His Dark Materials books have been criticized by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights [13] and Focus on the Family[14]. Peter Hitchens has argued that Pullman actively pursues an anti-Christian agenda."
"Pullman has criticized the Narnia books as religious propaganda."
These aren't criticisms, they are just observations, and what they say is already obvious to anybody (or at least any adult) who reads the books.  They don't affect the literary value of the books, unless you're an ideologue who thinks books are Good if they agree with your point of view and Bad if they don't.  
Both writers are highly imaginative, succeeding in inventing complex imaginary worlds and a few fascinating characters (Good).  On the other hand, both writers have trouble with plotting compared to Tolkien or Rowling; the main story of GOLDEN COMPASS ends two-thirds of the way through the book, and Lewis never makes clear just why Narnia needs the English children. (Bad)  That's criticism, though superficial.  
CharlesTheBold (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So since when is it wrong to criticize something that you disagree with? 76.105.5.83 (talk) 07:41, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: who cares what Peter Hitchens has to say? Why are we referring to him? The man is a columnist for a populist newspaper. As far as Im aware his comments on literary ability carry no significance. Can we not leave him out? Likewise Focus on the Family - what does that organisation have to say that really adds any neutral value?81.216.166.32 (talk) 20:39, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism vs Observation 

message: It ought to be clarified in the religious perspectives section that John Milton wrote no trilogy.  He wrote Paradise Lost and the brief Paradise Regain'd.  Regardless of the reference cited, there was no trilogy.  We must, at the least, have the facts straight, regardless of Pullman's misunderstanding of Milton's writing.  That is another matter.
68.14.147.46 (talk) 18:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Milton's "Trilogy" 

message: The Register article doesn't add anything to the excellent article in the Telegraph that it critiques. I suggest that it be deleted. This is not just because it calls Philip Pullman "mean-spirited." Pullman says a lot of contructive things in the Telegraph article that are ignored by the article in The Register.Totorotroll (talk) 08:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The  Register article link 

message: See Talk:His Dark Materials#The Guardian coverage. I have posted links to nine articles published by The Guardian newspaper from 2000 to 2007. These articles review the third volume, cover its major 2001 awards achievements, and cover the 2007 all-time Carnegie Medal achievement by the first volume, Northern Lights (1995).
--compiled while reading the newspaper's coverage of children's book awards in its online archive, which dates only from 2000. --P64 (talk) 00:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''The Guardian'' coverage of ''His Dark Materials'' 

message: Anyone know if there is any truth in this edit?  There is no source and looks a bit unlikely, but I thought I should check.
Yaris678 (talk) 08:26, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted, the mention of the editors name adds to one's suspicions, it would only be notable anyway if Pullman lost 'professional' artwork, and that seems very unlikely. Pincrete (talk) 08:42, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artwork in school fire 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Philip Pullman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110919000756/http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1342 to http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1342
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071011211304/http://citizenlink.org:80/content/A000005672.cfm to http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000005672.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071208222547/http://www.humaniststudies.org:80/enews/?id=326&article=1 to http://humaniststudies.org/enews/?id=326&article=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070310183032/http://www.thirdway.org.uk:80/past/showpage.asp?page=3949 to http://www.thirdway.org.uk/past/showpage.asp?page=3949
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Philip Pullman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.oxfordstudent.com/tt2006wk7/Features/growing_pains
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uce.ac.uk/web2/releases04/3476.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090704114413/http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2009/090624.html to http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2009/090624.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140221064101/http://www.pluggedin.com/upfront/2007/sympathyforthedevil.aspx to http://www.pluggedin.com/upfront/2007/sympathyforthedevil.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090215135813/http://home.wlv.ac.uk/~bu1895/hitchens.htm to http://home.wlv.ac.uk/~bu1895/hitchens.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Philip Pullman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090613052154/http://www.cherwell.org/content/8873 to http://www.cherwell.org/content/8873
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121013111441/http://www.alma.se/en/Award-winners/2005-Philip-Pullman/ to http://www.alma.se/en/Award-winners/2005-Philip-Pullman/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Re: this edit, I've repointed the 'brokenbridge' redirect to The Broken Bridge and added  to the book article: The book article is presently hardly a stub, but it still makes more sense than redirecting to the author. Pincrete (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you  - a nice solution. DBaK (talk) 00:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brokenbridge redirect 

message: It seems he was knighted as an ordinary knight, not CBE or similar, so I think he is entitled to be called Sir Philip Pullman. --Bduke (talk) 05:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: MOS:SIR suggests that apart from the honorific in the initial use and infobox, we don't use it therafter unless use is so widespread that avoiding it would mislead. I think Pullman is rarely referred to with the title. It isn't really a question of whether he 'deserves' to be referred to by the title, so much as whether he ordinarily is. Pincrete (talk) 10:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sir or not? 

message: If I make a new article for Perspective on Religion is this a good idea? I will leave for 24 hours before acting, do not want to upset anyone. NoorStores (talk) 14:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO not enough content to justify a separate article, but I tend to be in favour of 'keeping things together'. Pincrete (talk) 10:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perspective on Religion on its own page?