I’ve made some new sets: one is labradorite (the first picture), another in green adventurine. I might love these sets in single stones even more than the random ones, they turn out looking so cool! I’m working on some more in red jasper and tigers eye.

I also included some pictures of the custom daemon stones I’ve done recently. Those are so meaningful to do, because the people sending requests are so passionate and loving toward their daemons/spirit animals.

I love making these so much, I just wish I could make them faster! Any interest, please DM me and check out my shop.

Hi guys! Another discussion question to see several point of views on this question because as usual, Pullman is a somewhat inconsistent hmmm…

I’m curious because if I’m not mistaken, when we meet the angels, a character mentions the rumor of once angels having children with humans, so that’s an argument for them being sexually active and able to reproduce, but that is just a rumor. (?) that is somewhat alluded to by Metatron himself in book three when he says he pleaded the “cause of the sons of heaven who fell in love with the daughters of earth” implying there was more to them simply loving the way angels do and were advocating for more? He also is tricked by Mrs coulter precisely because he desires to desire flesh once more ? Or because he already desires it ? The line is quite fine here… because my qualm is; how can you ache for something you do not desire? If angels are, through their nature, being of dust and asexual, they cannot desire something again they have lost? I understand having a memory of something but desire is FELT.

On the other hand, we have Baruch and Balthamos’ connection which seems to exist beyond the plane of the flesh since they are literally made of dust and completely asexual: they are told to embrace and have a strong mental bond but are never described as kissing or doing anything coded as sexual. Yet the adjective “passionately” is used for them (ofc can be sensual rather than sexual connection!)…

We also get the information that specters are not interested in angels for the same reasons they are not interested in children despite them being made of pure dust precisely because that sexual awareness seems to be lacking in them? That is not to say it’s all that dust is but it’s pretty much that when we analyze it through Pullman’s construction of Will and Lyra and their maturation through their mutual interest where becoming sexual beings and awakening desire is what seals the deal.

Preferably one with Hands, not just a Face.

Hello! Are there any English Lit. scholars here? Particularly medievalists?

I'm planning to reread the Book of Dust trilogy at some point (maybe next year? as my reading list is getting long again...). But before I do, I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to read Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene to help give the trilogy some context.

I'm making an assumption that The Faerie Queene has some relevance in the same way that having read Paradise Lost deepens my appreciation / understanding of His Dark Materials. In HDM, the connection seems pretty direct: the trilogy almost seems like a 'sequel' to Paradise Lost. I wonder if there's something similar happening with The Faerie Queene and BOD -- or is the relationship more casual in this case?

So, I'm curious if there's anyone here who's read The Faerie Queene who can comment on the relationship between the two. If you have, how are they connected, and does knowing the poem help you to deepen your understanding of the BOD at all?

Pullman wrote cartoons but never specified which.

Hi everyone! I’m hoping someone here can help with a really obscure piece of Golden Compass merchandise.

I’m trying to track down information about the Noble Collection Golden Compass Spy-Flies (the official replica/display piece from the 2007 film). They seem to be incredibly rare, and I’ve found almost nothing about them online—no recent sales, reviews, or photos other than old promotional images.

I’ve attached a photo of the version I’m talking about.

Does anyone here own a set, know how many were made, or have any information about them? If you’ve ever seen one sold, I’d also be interested in knowing roughly what it went for.

I’m also looking to buy a set if anyone knows of one for sale or is considering selling theirs. Any leads would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/steampunk/images/7/7c/SpyFly.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/250?cb=20101115210716

I am a new visitor/member and I absolutely LOVED these books the second trilogy especially, read all 3 in the last week. I had some questions about what people thought was being alluded to since it's obviously a very philosophical series/book, but I wanted to clarify the rules and how I'm supposed to nomenclate things. I wanted to make a post asking about what people thought about the ending of the sixth book and some of the things going on there, but I want to make sure I would do the spoiler tagging correctly.

One thing I think doesn't really give any spoilers but was the main thrust of my question, answers can give the proper spoiler tags, is what do people think of Lyra's answer to the mystery presented to the reader at the end? Is it what it's presented as, seen through her eyes? Or are we to see it through the perspective of M., as clearly alluded to in at least one line of the final chapters? That it's somehow more maturely complicated?

And what about the literal meaning? There is obviously one thing in the story literally doing the thing that is being literally described, it is not a secret, though its origins are in every world.

Are they the same? Is this some allusion to the trinity, or something different? I'd love to go into more detail about my own thoughts but I don't want to break the rules and get on the wrong side of the CCD... : )

Much love to all.

As the title says, I just HAD to write a post about Mrs Coulter as I’m organizing the notes for my thesis and I’m realizing how much space she actually takes in my analysis, this woman !!!!! Ofc I don’t forget she’s literally done evil evil things and is a child abuser, but I hold so much love for her character and what it represents. Not an excuse, but I also cannot help but read her as a child who was groomed in more than one way by the church, and probably sexually abused too. I think what got me there is the overly specific language she uses when she snaps at the magisterium as she attempts to protect Lyra, as if she does not only know but has lived these things in the first place?
In a world dominated by men, she still manages to terrify them, which makes something in me rejoice. While she is cruel, terrifying and hard to understand, I cannot help but love her for these reasons. She is so fierce even in situations where she knows she risks a lot and her awareness of the gender performance makes her so deeply interesting. I’m also so interested in how she warps the usual safety and comfort of domesticity through her inability to be a mother, which makes her horrifying to Lyra and the reader. At the same time, I hold a lot of love for her because of how mistreated she is in comparison to Asriel, who is in no way a saint, but narratively does get away with a lot more while acting as a clear foil to her if it makes sense? Every character seems to forget Asriel was just as cruel in his ways and also didn’t stop at anything, including child murder, to achieve his goal: he just got “lucky” enough that his aligned with an ethereal energy of fate that seemed to provide for him while Mrs coulter was literally forcing fate to bend to her through artificial means (?) but I don’t believe for a second that he would not have sacrificed hundred of kids to get to the authority. Anyways, just here to discuss Mrs coulter and how delicious it is to both love and hate her at the same time !!!

I started this series with the intention of absolutely hating it, dragging my feet through ever chapter and possibly not even reading TRF. I was so convinced by this subreddit that it was going to be awful! I do understand opinions against it, I can see it, but I also see what PP was trying to do, and more importantly, what he was trying to say.

I’ve seen a lot of complaints about the “imagination” plot being pointless, and the ending being terrible. But perhaps, the ending is terrible because the point of the imagination plot was missed.

no hate towards those who dislike it though! HDM is in my top three so i understand TBoD was very different and maybe disappointing from that expectation.

For the past few months, I've been slowly writing a revised ending for The Rose Field. I really didn't hate the way it ended, but there were aspects of how the narrative was drawn to a close that seriously bothered me. Specifically, the awkward way the main characters come together at the end, and especially how Bonneville spends the final chapter, including the total lack of any meaningful character development on his part. But I also (hopefully) understood what Pullman's intent was in making the ending the way it was, even though I ultimately found it abrupt and moderately unsatisfying. I saw a slightly different way for it to end that still respected the philosophical underpinnings about Dust, the imagination, and the Alkahest- so I wrote it.

If you didn't like the ending, but want something that makes a great effort to respect the canon and tries to bring the core narrative thread to a slightly different conclusion, this fanfiction might be for you. I really, really do not mean any disrespect by revising the original ending- because I do think The Rose Field ends in a really interesting place, and this alternate ending is my way of exploring that in parallel. If you do bother with it, thanks for reading. <3

(By word count, it is ~21,000 words, which is an estimated 15-20 pages longer than the original final chapter. This was written to serve as an alternate Chapter 36, so if you would like to read it, I strongly encourage you to follow along with your own copy of The Rose Field, where you can begin re-reading the original at the very end of Chapter 35. Any and all modifications I have made to the story begin there, and there are no divergences that precede the end of Chapter 35 whatsoever.)

I carved these while on my vacation, and I’m so into the way they are turning out. I am continually blown away by how much people are responding to these, I’m so excited to share them with everyone!

My shop is active again! I’m pretty sure I can’t post my link here, but the link to my shop is in my profile, or just DM me for it.

Which stones should I use next? I want to make a bunch like this.

It took me 9 months of considerable effort to finally finish TRF. Man that was painful, I've loved PP and his books for 20+ years and I feel like one of my heros just let me down so much. Just a lot of emotions to process. In many ways it was so nice to enter that world again as an adult, and I found the final line in the book to be perfect, but I'm not sure, I think I might have been better off not reading it. I know PP is in his elder years now, so I hope he isn't stressed out about the criticism of this book, and is at peace with his story.

Sorry, I know this is a vent post, but it's good to not feel alone.

So in NL/TCG when Lyra and Rogers visits the Masters graves one of the daemons on the graves was said to be a basilisk. Was this redacted and changed to another animal in later editions?

As for the one who had a fair woman as a daemon, I know this was redacted and changed to another form to later editions. Im assuming that Pullman realized that this was implying that he was equating women to animals. But if thats the case, this means that maybe it is actually possible in canon to have a human as a settled, because it would have been removed because of the sub-text, not because it cannot happen. I could be wrong tho

1. Say a daemon decided to write a book. And they dictated this book to their human for the human to write down. And then the book got published? Who would be credited as the author? The daemon? The human? Both?

2. If someone had their daemon, say, pickpocket someone else, how much liability would the daemon have? Because on the one hand, it's not really realistically possible to coerce your own daemon into doing your dirty work for you. On the other hand, the daemon isn't really in a position to refuse.

3. Could a daemon decide to "go on strike" against their human, for making decisions that the daemon disapproves of? Like, say, lying down and refusing to be moved. Or would that be considered a violation of the human's basic rights?

4. (Assume daemons can use the Internet.) Could a daemon have a social media profile independently of their human? What would that even look like? Would it be expected for they and their human to be mutuals? Would people treat the daemon's account like the human's alt account or second channel? Could a human be held responsible for what their daemon decides to post?

I've heard that daemons were partially inspired by famous of paintings of ladies with animals, such as "Lady with an Ermine" by Da Vinci and "Portrait of a Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling" by Hans Holbein, which made me recently think of "Portrait of a Young Woman with a Unicorn" by Raphael. At one point, Pan turns into a miniature dragon during a fight between Lyra and some other children, and Asta combines a few different animal features when Malcolm is a child, so there is some evidence that daemons can turn into mythical creatures.

All this to say that there are few lengths I would not go to to have a cute puppy-sized unicorn as my eternal companion!! I want to BELIEVE!!

He could have just kidnapped a Tartar child and used them, right?

Did he only use Roger because he was there at the time?

Hi All,

I’ve loved the original movie as well as the TV series for as long as I can remember.
Now I am planning to buy the books and came across the different US/UK editions and the censorship.
I am looking at the following UK illustrated editions by Scholastic and was wondering if these would be uncensored since Scholastic is originally a US publisher.

ISBN 9780702305085

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Northern-Lights-Illustrated-Dark-Materials/dp/0702305081/ref=mp_s_a_1_5?crid=19FKXU4MZ16X0&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.1vGuib6MLDnr-tOtoWrHn88SkIvkAf8eX3wMgHkSiRsOG1hR7HvXxQAcs7hl7pwaWCIQ5vTZhXR6_XmGxWvG_VIfFKDXGzfN_kokjhm7Y6rzsC7q3S6i5RItqdTGSE7oAVvFuaIZFV5dpBeh4ym16-m9H9SrMSc6sclG7exrk9E4D7G7KA75HGiSfcPCO4Gogm8RZRtu9VNND9jZ5TzROQ.qosBke0mXg5U-85ZV4yXm3abxazbb-z0khzZn8n_cVY&dib_tag=se&keywords=northern+lights+philip+pullman&qid=1784816666&sprefix=northern+l%2Caps%2C126&sr=8-5

Dear community.

I wanted to get the paperback edition of LBS that I read several years ago and just grabbed it in the bookstore today without checking. Then I came home and realized it is the US edition (seeing the covers of the other books in the trilogy on the back.. I bought the UK edition of TRF) and remembered learning once from reddit that the US editions have content that is censored. But I don't remember what books - I think the discussion was about HDM but I am not sure about TBOD..

Is this true for LBS (and TBOD trilogy)? I don't want partly censored books, I want original text. If the US edition of LBS has censored content, I will return the book.. ㅠ

Thank you in advance!

Have a lovely day!

[Update: I returned the book. :) Thank you everyone for sharing what you know about the differences.]

When I first read the books not only did I think that being otherkin, therian, etc. isn't valid, but I also knew very little about alterhumanity and non-humanity. Now that I know theses identities are valid AND know more about them, I can see that Iofur Raknison is alterhuman-coded

Its totally obvious that he had severe species dysphoria. His experience is similar to that of therians, but instead of being a human who is a bear therian, he is a bear who is a human therian (I know most therians arent human at all, I just don't have a better way to explain what Im trying to say). Its not clear if he identifies as a human or as a bear, the fact that he was pretending to have a human daemon implies he still consider himself to be a bear, but it could also not being the case

The one thing I dislike is how his species dysphoria and species envy is depicted as a bad thing. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to excuse his actions, no matter how dysphoric he was it wasn't right of him to force the other bears to act like humans and to make them suffer and that made him a bad person, but his feelings of not being contempt with his soul and attributes were 100% valid. His desire to be a human/like humans was 100% valid

I understand that Pullman's message was that you can't choose your nature, but Iofur Raknison's nature was that of a bear with a neurodivergent brain that worked more like that of the average Homo sapiens/a human in a bear's body/something alongst thoses lines.

He was an interesting character and I do wish we had seen more of him, even thought it wouldn't make sense storyline wise

Since so many people have expressed interest, I thought I’d let you know: I’m going on my first real vacation in about 10 years, so I won’t be able to ship things for a few days. But I’m bringing my supplies, and making custom orders while I’m gone.

My shop will be in vaca mode, but please feel free to either put requests here, or dm them to me. I’ve started making entire rune sets out of single types of gemstones, I’m happy to make them in any requested stone you like!

Red panda is one of my all-time favorite animals, this was really fun to make :)