Friday, 26 February 2021

Critique: The Amber Spyglass (His Dark Materials #3) (Philip Pullman) 1/2

This book was a good attempt at rounding off a trilogy. After the second book, anything would have been great in comparison. Luckily book three had enough to be good in its own right. 

The world of the mulefa was so fascinating. The author did an amazing job in bringing that to life. Everything about the mulefa was stunning. Their looks, their way of life, their language: simply perfection.

 

Good Writing

The very first paragraph was pure perfection. It was far more interesting than all of book 2 combined.

            But this book continued to pull literacy brilliance from the bag. There are too many to list them all. For example, the harpies called Lyra ‘liar’ so they began to sound the same: if there ever was an appropriate name for a character, it is this.

            Again with the harpies, their ‘shrieks hang in the air and stung like jellyfish’.

The one time when Pan is in stoat colours rather than their winter form (ermine, which is white), he gets scared enough to turn white. This in itself was good but it was described as ‘fog-pearled hair’.

My final note in this section isn’t a description as such. Asriel called Lyra ‘impulsive, dishonest, greedy’. Mrs Coulter counters this by called Lyra ‘[b]rave, generous, loving.’ This simple exchange displays their different worldviews with both detail and succinctness.

 

Grammar

As clear from all my critiques, grammar, and particularly punctuation, grabs my attention. Unfortunately, it’s hardly ever good news.

The author writes ‘h’mm’. Without doubt, ‘hmm’ without the apostrophe would be better because what exactly are you abbreviating.

            As in book one (but not book two), ‘he’ is used instead of ‘He’ for God. This shows a stunning lack of consistency within an omnibus.

            Of Mary Malone, she wonders how to label the mulefa she’s bonded with. ‘She settle for – friend.’ This is truly awful sentence structure. Ellipses would have been far more appropriate.

            In book three, the author has a habit of writing a piece of information and then repeating it almost instantly. Eleven lines after the first time, she again says that the creatures’ speed terrifies her, yet pretends as if this is new information. Within half a page of prose, he twice mentions that they have no idea how long redoing the knife took. That’s too short amount of time to need reminding. Also, far more important information is never repeated so this can’t be brushed away as establishing vital information in the readers’ brains.

 

Lyra’s Character

Lyra’s always come up with daft conclusions. The fact she continues this in book three shows consistency.

            When Lyra has to leave Pan behind, this is apparently the betrayal that the Master of Jordan College spoke about. But Lyra isn’t leaving Pan forever. Plus Pan agreed that Lyra needed to do this. How is it betraying someone to do what they agreed?

Whilst Lyra might view this as a betrayal, no one else could. For Lyra to do her job, the Master was told to not tell this information to Lyra. So if it’s something that only Lyra would think is a betrayal, but Lyra would never told about it, why would the Master be told that Lyra would betray someone.

 

But some of Lyra’s actions don’t fit the character. Lyra sobbing when she left Mrs Coulter, for example.

            Lyra’s infatuation keeps on building and it annoys me so much. Not because the lead female/male characters get together (because I think that was the right call) but because it makes an independent character completely dependent on another. Lyra is too rebellious for this.

Since book two, this growing dependence has been essential for Lyra’s behaviour and the plot-at-large. Yet as it doesn’t fit the character, it makes the plot crumble under its own weight.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment