Flawed Gnostic Fantasy
When I was a child (and even now) I was always a great fan of C.S. Lewis's Narnia books. So, the thought of reading a vigorous response to those classics struck me as a brilliant idea. Like many others, I was more than impressed with the first book of this trilogy. "The Golden Compass" struck me as an instant classic when I first read it back in high school. Alas, I didn't follow the books after the first one and, truth be told, I sort of forgot them.

Now, ten years later, I have recently finished the whole trilogy and, much like in high school, I felt the first book was superb. What's more, being a little older and better read, I understand the allusions to Kaballah, Gnosticism, neo-platonism, and Milton far better than I did when I was a teenager which makes it all the more enjoyable.

However, after the first book things begin to deteriorate (if not rapidly, then certainly noticeably). The story begins to fracture and meander, the characters become more and more like plot points rather than actors who make their mark on things. The most glaring example of this is Dr. Mary Malone who at one point, just because she is tired, begins to expound upon her team's discovery of "shadow particles" to a perfect stranger just because one of the book's maguffins told her she would. This is a general problem with fantasies that deal in prophecies and the like: nobody in the end except for the vast machines of fate seem to choose anything. Thus, the outcome is never in doubt.

In its mythological structure, the books enact a rather literal version of the gnostic revolt against the tyrannical demiurge. This literalism kind of drags (the original gnostic visions were often far more complex)and forces Pullman to make some (to my mind) untenable metaphysical and psychological conclusions.

The most disagreeable thing about the last two books, especially the "Amber Spyglass" is the moral pass Lord Asriel and Mrs. Coulter are given for being on the "right" side, despite the crimes that both callously committed. I won't spoil things but the complex sense of admiration and distaste we have for Lord Asriel is completely spoiled by the end, not to mention the real and palpable disgust for the venomous Mrs. Coulter (who in the beginning is probably the darkest character ever found in Young Adult fantasy).

Still, I do recommend reading all three because of the surplus of great ideas, the occasionally fine prose, and their serious moral purpose. It's a shame that, in the end, a series of books that seek to be an answer to the incipient racism, christian propagandizing, and Eurocentric vision of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien must stand below them in terms of aesthetic achievement.

Not very subtle
Unfortunately, Pullman lets his personal anti-Catholic prejudice ruin his storytelling. If you're going to attack Catholicism, that's fine, but do it openly, don't pretend to be writing a children's book.

Beyond the atheism, the books just weren't fantastic, and the series ran out of air as it progressed, coming to a very bad ending in The Amber Spyglass.

The first book was pretty good, if a bit unbelievable. Lyra as a character is fairly interesting, and the idea behind the book is intriguing. I especially enjoyed the idea of daemons- as a child I pretended something similar. Pullman describes this parallel reality beautifully. As a Catholic, however, I was slightly offended by the idea of an evil Magisterium. It could happen, of course, since humans are fallible, but I thought it was pretty lame.

By The Subtle Knife, Pullman is losing steam. The plot was confusing, and Will, grown-up and responsible didn't seem to have the same pull and sparkle as Lyra. Again, the premise of a knife that cuts through the boundaries between worlds is interesting, but falls flat towards the end.

The Amber Spyglass is dead. It's poorly-concealed atheism (they go to hell, liberate the poor suffering souls, and then go make war on heaven. Then they kill God, who turns out to be this weak little puppeteer.) The book, even once you get past the anti-Catholic rhetoric that simply drips from the pages, is fairly bad. Weak characters, flat dialogue.

And this is to be compared to C. S. Lewis's beautiful stories of love or Tolkien's sweeping epics? Pathetic. Pullman has forgotten that a story is a story, not a sermon, and an author's first job is to tell it, not to preach. Lewis preached, but he told a good story as well. Pullman does only the first, and fairly badly.

As you'd expect
Bought as a gift for a friend it arrived on time, packaged well and in greatcondition. As described. Not a bad word to say.

Don't be turned off by the first book.
I heard that this series was better than Harry Potter, so of course I had to read them. For me, the first book, The Golden Compass, was quite ordinary. I did not engage emotionally with Lyra - somehow, Pullman's writing did not connect. It was an okay fantasy, and I almost didn't care about reading more. Later, I picked up the second book, the Subtle Knife, and became a little more engaged, at least enough to decide to finish the series. Wow, I am glad I did. The third book, The Amber Spyglass, is full of intriguing ideas. The characters go from static to dynamic, and you finally, finally, get emotionally involved with them. The clear-cut good-and-evil that is so easy to follow in Harry Potter is absent from Pullman's stories, which might be why some people like them better. Pullman has his characters say that people are not good or evil, only their actions are good (if they help someone) or evil (if they hurt someone). So for older kids, this is an important idea to introduce. I would not read this to young kids; it would be confusing and scary.

amazinggggg!!!!
i bought this amazing trilogy and i can totally say that this series is one of my favorites..ever... its too great to resist...4 thumbs up :P :)!!!!

get it