Posted by Ashley on 16:17:33 6/14/2001 from 205.188.196.52:
Hi, all! I just wanted to see what people generally thought of the HDM and Sally Lockhart trilogies in comparison (being that they're the only Philip Pullman works I've read).

I, personally, enjoyed HDM much more, for a lot of reasons. I believe that the main one is the complexity of the story and depth of the characters. For some reason, I never felt that I really 'got to know' Sally or any of the other characters in that series... or at least, not the way that I felt connected with Will and Lyra, and emmersed in their story. Perhaps that's because so much of the story in SL had to be devoted to the mysties. In all probability, now that I think of it, it might have something to do with the age of the characters. Everyone can relate to childhood, therefore Will and Lyra. Sally, as she got older, just seemed to be so... prim and practical most of the time, which I didn't like. Then again, that was the era, and for that time Sally was most unconventional. In any case, there were times when I had to make myself read and finish the SL books, which never happened with HDM for me.

A lot of which trilogy you like better depends on what sort of writing you're more into. I'm more of a fantasy person myself, rarely being patient enough for mysteries. I happen to think that Pullman is a BETTER fantasy than mystery writer. He's extremely skilled, and fantasy gives him more of a chance to use description and language that sweeps you up in the story.

There were also elements in HDM that I found more appealing... specifically the theology aspect, but also the quest and unknown fate.

Well... that's about it. What does everyone else think?

Posted by Adobe Scribe on 16:12:07 6/17/2001 from 63.15.255.11:
: Sally, as she got older, just seemed to be so... prim and practical most of the time, which I didn't like.:

It's been a while since I read the books, but I vaguely remember a scene from the first book where Sally is learning to shoot her gun and really unnerves Frederick with her cold demeanor. I seem to recall a couple of other scenes in The Ruby In The Smoke where Frederick is trying to connect with her but just can't seem to get across.

Argh. I've gotta find that book.

Anyway, I think Pullman was *actively* trying to make her distant and prim and slightly unlikable. The people she's surrounded by are largely warm and gregarious, and then you've got Sally here, who's cold and logical, and not really very good at dealing with human relationships. And she never really gets a whole heck of a lot warmer, she just...matures, and learns how to better handle people. Her eventual maternal instincts are not so much warm and nuturing as they are fiercely protective.

She's...slightly reminscent of Will?

Posted by Ashley on 20:50:10 6/17/2001 from 64.12.102.36:
Agreed on most of that, except that Sally is slightly remeniscent of Will. Whereas Sally wasn't made out to be that likable (to me, anyway), Will was my favorite character in HDM. The similarity, I can see, is that they are both brave and both seem to have an aura of power around them. But that's where the likenesses end for me. Will, it seems, has that just because that's the way he is... he doesn't seem to TRY that hard to seem powerful or fearless. He admits that he's afraid sometimes, which I consider an asset. The readers were more closed-off to whatever Sally was feeling, for the most part, as were the rest of the characters. She was brave, yes, but it seemed like she felt she had to be strong and independent just to prove that she didn't need anyone else... which isn't true. (Actually, come to think of it, another of the main reasons I didn't like SL was because Fredrick died). For Will, on the other hand, it was natural, and he wasn't as closed-off about his feelings, although Lyra was certainly more expressive.
:-)

Posted by randa on 21:55:48 10/9/2001 from 209.69.88.89:
Do you recommended these books?

Posted by Meeks on 23:14:31 10/9/2001 from 155.100.27.175:
To be quite honest, I was rather nonplussed by them, though I admit I only made through half of book 2.

Posted by Sophie on 10:09:08 10/10/2001 from 195.92.168.167:
Personally, I loved them.
I thought they were equally as good as HDM until AS came out, and now they're still my number 2 books to read. PP's writing-skill is fantastic, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one crying during Book Two...
Maybe it's cos I've always been a bit obsessed with Victorian England, but I found these books to be fast-moving, well-written, and have amazing characters.
Am I the only one?

Posted by Adobe Scribe on 4:21:29 10/10/2001 from 63.30.138.80:
: Do you recommend these books?

They're dandy if you like Victorian mysteries. If not...eh, might not be your cup of tea. I personally liked Pullman's mildly vicious interpretation of the era, and he goes on amusing technical tangents every so often (was it just me, or did it seem like he had spent a lot of time researching photography and wanted to include every possible scrap of information in Ruby in the Smoke?)