16057Re: Philip Pullman
- Oct 12 2:21 PMI was not aware of his feelings regarding Tolkien, as I haven't really looked
into Pullman himself very much. I enjoy his realistic characters and the
imagination of his writing. Reecently I read his other series (the one beginning
with "The Ruby in the Smoke") which I also found good.
It is interesting to see how a writer's opinions are revealed (or not) in their
writing as hearing that he said nasty things about Tolkien really surprised me.
--- In TolkienDiscussions@yahoogroups.com, "Rob"
> <<A couple of people have mentioned Philip Pullman. I have to confess, I
> mostly know him as "the man who slagged off Tolkien". I seem to recall he
> said some pretty nasty things about the Professor and that rather put me off
> his work, thinking "Well if I like Tolkien and Pullman doesn't, then I
> probably won't like Pullman". Is this a reasonable assumption? Obviously
> Michael Moorcock also slagged off the Professor, but I like his work.
> Pullman's work is good. The third book of his trilogy is a bit of a letdown,
> but... whatcha gonna do? He is definitely no Tolkien or C.S. Lewis in terms
> of religion. As a guy raised Catholic I did find his work a bit off-putting
> in how it seems to have a little bit of hatred against Christianity, but in
> the end I didn't care because it is a fantasy book first of all, and
> everyone is entitled to their worldview. Tolkien's worldview influenced his
> work and lies there underneath the fiction, so does Pullman's. You don't
> have to agree or disagree to enjoy the stories, though.
> So it may be worth chceking out. I suspect Pullman's anti-Tolkien comments
> are more about Tolkien's Catholicism than about Tolkien's writing, you
> That is sad, but there it is. Certainly you can't (legitimately) slag
> Tolkien's writing talent given that he wrote one of the few books of the
> 20th century that will probably be studied in schools from this point
> forward. I doubt you'll be able to say the same for Pullman.
> It is still a fun trilogy of books. Though certainly more deserving of
> fundamentalist haranguing than LOTR or Harry Potter. But fundamentalist
> anythings aren't people worth listening to, I've found, about anything since
> they hate anything that is outside their worldview and then feel attacked by
> anything that doesn't stroke their worldview and they say that thing is
> "attacking" them. Real martyr/persecution complexes. Frankly I believe that
> exact same tendency is what lies behind Pullman's need to subtly attack
> Tolkien. From either direction I find it sad.
> All JMO, of course.
- << Previous post in topic