You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
meopushkin 's review for:
The Amber Spyglass
by Philip Pullman
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I appreciate how Pullman structures the His Dark Materials trilogy: Northern Lights functions as a classic fantasy adventure, The Subtle Knife deepens the emotional and philosophical complexity, and The Amber Spyglass brings it all to a crescendo - combining metaphysics, theology, and a bittersweet coming-of-age arc. It’s sweeping in ambition, and at times genuinely brilliant in its scope.
That same ambition, though, also creates its blind spots.
The reinterpretation of Paradise Lost, the subversion of authoritarian religious institutions, and the celebration of self-determined free will are all elegantly rendered. The metaphorical layering - dust, consciousness, authority, innocence - is satisfying, particularly for readers familiar with Christian belief system.
Yet for all the talk of rebellion and liberation, this is still a deeply Christian book. Not merely in its iconography, but in its underlying theological architecture. It isn’t anti-Christian, nor entirely anti-theist. If anything, it seems to yearn for a better divine order - one less authoritarian, more benevolent. Mary’s monologue in particular suggests a continued spiritual longing, rather than an outright rejection of divinity.
As someone raised in a non-Christian and atheist background, I find this theologically murky. The idea that destroying "God" equals liberation feels too symbolically neat. Institutional oppression comes from humans, not deities. Theocratic institutions are human inventions; removing a figurehead doesn't dismantle belief or power structures. The novel doesn't fully interrogate the persistence of theism after the fall of God.
My second issue is with Mary’s anthropological encounter with the Mulefa. While I understand Pullman's intentions - to contrast exploitative Western science/religion with a harmonious, ecological worldview - the Mulefa fall into a familiar trope. They are the idealised “primitive” civilisation: peaceful, wise, in tune with nature, and conveniently waiting for the enlightened outsider to arrive. It evokes the same discomfort I feel when Western literature romanticises Buddhism or Aboriginal cultures as vessels of salvation. Despite their central metaphorical role, the Mulefa are largely passive, with Mary (and by extension Will and Lyra) occupying the saviour position. It's a softer, subtler form of the white saviour fantasy.
I may sound critical but only because the book invites scrutiny. Its imperfections make it more intellectually engaging, not less. The Amber Spyglass is flawed, ambitious, conflicted, and unforgettable. It’s the sort of novel that rewards revisiting, precisely because your perspective is likely to change with time.
I was also not a fan of melodramatic ending but that's probably just me!
That same ambition, though, also creates its blind spots.
The reinterpretation of Paradise Lost, the subversion of authoritarian religious institutions, and the celebration of self-determined free will are all elegantly rendered. The metaphorical layering - dust, consciousness, authority, innocence - is satisfying, particularly for readers familiar with Christian belief system.
Yet for all the talk of rebellion and liberation, this is still a deeply Christian book. Not merely in its iconography, but in its underlying theological architecture. It isn’t anti-Christian, nor entirely anti-theist. If anything, it seems to yearn for a better divine order - one less authoritarian, more benevolent. Mary’s monologue in particular suggests a continued spiritual longing, rather than an outright rejection of divinity.
As someone raised in a non-Christian and atheist background, I find this theologically murky. The idea that destroying "God" equals liberation feels too symbolically neat. Institutional oppression comes from humans, not deities. Theocratic institutions are human inventions; removing a figurehead doesn't dismantle belief or power structures. The novel doesn't fully interrogate the persistence of theism after the fall of God.
My second issue is with Mary’s anthropological encounter with the Mulefa. While I understand Pullman's intentions - to contrast exploitative Western science/religion with a harmonious, ecological worldview - the Mulefa fall into a familiar trope. They are the idealised “primitive” civilisation: peaceful, wise, in tune with nature, and conveniently waiting for the enlightened outsider to arrive. It evokes the same discomfort I feel when Western literature romanticises Buddhism or Aboriginal cultures as vessels of salvation. Despite their central metaphorical role, the Mulefa are largely passive, with Mary (and by extension Will and Lyra) occupying the saviour position. It's a softer, subtler form of the white saviour fantasy.
I may sound critical but only because the book invites scrutiny. Its imperfections make it more intellectually engaging, not less. The Amber Spyglass is flawed, ambitious, conflicted, and unforgettable. It’s the sort of novel that rewards revisiting, precisely because your perspective is likely to change with time.
I was also not a fan of melodramatic ending but that's probably just me!