CLOSE
Original image

12 Enlightening Facts About His Dark Materials

Original image

Twenty years ago, British author Philip Pullman published The Golden Compass (or Northern Lights, as it was called in most countries outside the U.S.), the first book in the fantasy trilogy collectively known as “His Dark Materials.” The series’ name referred to John Milton’s Paradise Lost, a heady reference for what were ostensibly books for teens. And indeed, each of the books—1995's The Golden Compass, 1997'sThe Subtle Knife, and 2000's The Amber Spyglass—grappled with questions about philosophy and science, and courted controversy with its critical eye toward organized religion. Yet the series, far from being prohibitively dense, is highly readable and contains all the elements of a spirited fantasy, including armored polar bears, witches, and a Texas gunslinger who flies a hot air balloon. Here are a few things you might not know about Pullman’s books and the controversy surrounding them.

1. IT’S A RETELLING OF PARADISE LOST.

Milton’s epic poem from the 17th century tells the story of Adam and Eve, and of Satan’s banishment from heaven. Pullman read the book as a teenager and fell in love with it. Years later, he got the idea to write a story that flipped the poem on its head. Instead of an all-powerful God, he crafted a frail, petty deity called The Authority. And instead of a great fall after the loss of innocence, the books celebrate a young girl’s growing up and defying an all-powerful order called The Magisterium. Yes, there are more polar bears and airships in Pullman’s version than in Milton’s, but Pullman maintains the series is in response to the centuries-old work he still cherishes. “My story resolved itself into an account of the necessity of growing up, and a refusal to lament the loss of innocence,” he wrote in his introduction to a recent edition of Paradise Lost.

2. THE TITLE THE GOLDEN COMPASS WAS A MISTAKE.

Pullman first called his series “The Golden Compasses,” a reference to a line from Milton’s epic poem: “The golden compasses, prepared / In God's eternal store, to circumscribe / The universe, and all created things." The “compass,” in this case, referred to the tool used to draw circles, not the one that indicates direction. After Pullman submitted the first book’s manuscript to U.S. publisher Alfred A. Knopf, editors there mistakenly referred to it as The Golden Compass, thinking the name a reference to young Lyra’s alethiometer. The name stuck, even after Pullman informed them that the title in the UK and elsewhere would be Northern Lights. Rather than fight with Knopf, though, Pullman acquiesced: “Their obduracy in this matter was accompanied by such generosity in the matter of royalty advances, flattery, promises of publicity, etc, that I thought it would be churlish to deny them this small pleasure.”

3. A DA VINCI PAINTING INSPIRED PULLMAN’S DAEMONS.

In Pullman’s story characters are accompanied by a daemon, an animal that reflects their inner nature. The concept is heavily symbolic, especially since children’s daemons can change shape while those belonging to adults are fixed. The idea, Pullman notes, was visually inspired by Leonardo da Vinci’s painting “Lady with an Ermine” as well as other classical portraits of young women bravely posing with animals, including Holbein’s “A Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling,” and Tiepolo’s “Young Woman with a Macaw.” 

4. PARTS OF THE U.S. EDITION OF THE AMBER SPYGLASS WERE CENSORED.

The biggest change, occurring in Chapter 33, concerns a paragraph detailing Lyra’s sexual awakening. Both the UK and U.S. versions begin with, “As Mary said that, Lyra felt something strange happen to her body.” What follows in the UK version includes Lyra’s physiological reactions: her breathing quickens, she feels “a stirring at the roots of her hair,” and “sensations in her breast.” The U.S. version cuts these sentences and picks up again with a reference to Lyra feeling as if she’s been handed the key to a house. Knopf has never addressed the changes, though many believe it’s because they didn’t deem the details appropriate for a character under the age of 18.

5. RELIGIOUS CRITICS CALL THE SERIES “ATHEISM FOR KIDS.”

Christian organizations have denounced the books and the film version of The Golden Compass, calling them propaganda aimed at steering children away from religion. Bill Donohue, president of The Catholic League, has called the series “atheism for kids,” and his group, along with others, boycotted the film when it was released in 2007. “Atheism is screwy enough,” Donohue wrote in a blog post. “But when it is sold backdoor to little kids, it is downright pernicious.”

6. PULLMAN HASN’T SHIED AWAY FROM THE CRITICISM.

In numerous speeches, Pullman, who has described himself alternately as an “atheist” and an “agnostic atheist,” maintains that his books are more about the dangers of rigid theological doctrine and institutions than they are anti-God or anti-faith. He also argues that his books are a testament to storytelling’s ability to impart morals to children. “’Thou shalt not’ might reach the head, but it takes ‘Once upon a time’ to reach the heart,” he wrote in a newspaper column.

7. THE FORMER ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY ENDORSED IT.

Rowan Williams called the books instructive, saying they are in fact about the death of a false God and the upholding of true Christian values. He and Pullman had a lively public conversation back in 2004, a transcript of which you can read here. Williams even went so far as to say that Pullman’s series should be taught in schools. Fundamentalists, needless to say, did not agree

8. PULLMAN REJECTS COMPARISONS TO OTHER FANTASY CLASSICS.

Some have likened Pullman’s series to C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia and Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings series, much to the author’s dismay. He’s called the Narnia books “blatantly racist” and “disparaging of women,” and wrote an essay called “The Dark Side of Narnia” that outlines his grievances. As for the Rings books, he has this to say: “Tolkien is not interested in the way grownup, adult human beings interact with each other. He’s interested in maps and plans and languages and codes.” 

9. THE STAGE VERSION WAS A HIT.

Bringing Pullman’s 1300 pages to the stage presented a daunting task, but director Nicholas Hytner was more than game. He staged a two-part, six-hour-long production at London’s Royal National Theater that ran from 2003 to 2004, and was revived from 2004 to 2005. In addition to all the daemons, special effects and world-hopping, the play also managed to show an elaborate fight between two armored polar bears.

10. THE MOVIE, NOT SO MUCH.

New Line Cinema purchased the rights to Pullman’s books in 2002 and hoped they would become the next Lord of the Rings franchise. But development of The Golden Compass was mired in controversy, including a boycott by religious groups, an odd choice of director, and its hand-wringing treatment of the book’s religious themes. The film bombed when it finally hit theaters in 2007—so badly, in fact, that it’s been cited as one of the main reasons New Line went under. Needless to say, there are no plans to produce the second and third installment. 

11. PULLMAN’S WRITTEN TWO COMPANION WORKS AND AN AUDIOBOOK.

Lyra’s Oxford and Once Upon a Time in the North include further adventures of Lyra and aeronaut Lee Scoresbee, and include various odds and ends like maps, postcards and playable games. The Collectors, released last year as a 32-minute audiobook read by the esteemed British actor Bill Nighy, tells of a conversation between two Oxford scholars that grows increasingly sinister.

12. AND PULLMAN IS AT WORK ON THE NEXT BOOK IN THE SERIES.

For more than a decade, Pullman has said he’s hard at work on the next book in the Dark Materials collection, titled The Book of Dust. He hasn’t given many details other than to say it won’t be a continuation of the story that ended with Amber Spyglass, but that Lyra will still be the main character, and that it may end up being two volumes rather than one. He’s also said the book will likely explore the origins of dust, the mysterious particle that takes on significant symbolic and narrative weight in the books. In response to a tweet from a reader last year, Pullman indicated he’ll probably finish The Book of Dust this year, with publication coming as soon as 2016. 

Original image
Warner Bros.
arrow
fun
This Harry Potter Candle Melts to Reveal Your Hogwarts House—and Smells Amazing
Original image
Warner Bros.

As it gets darker and colder outside, the thought of lighting a candle in your room and curling up with a good book becomes more appealing. A sorting hat candle from the Muggle Library Candles Etsy store makes the perfect companion to whatever Harry Potter book you happen to be re-reading for the hundredth time this season. According to the Cleveland news outlet WKYC, the candle slowly reveals your Hogwarts house as it burns.

From the outside, the item looks like a normal white candle. But when lit, the outer layer of plain wax melts away, allowing the colorful interior to poke through. The candles come in one of four concealed colors: red for Gryffindor, blue for Ravenclaw, yellow for Hufflepuff, and green for Slytherin. The only way to know which house you’re destined to match with is by purchasing a candle and putting it to use. According to the label, the scent evokes “excitement, fear, and nervousness.” The smell can also be described as lemon with sandalwood, vanilla, and patchouli.

Due to its viral popularity, the Fort Worth, Texas-based Etsy store has put all orders on hold while working to get its current batch of shipments out to customers. You can follow Muggle Library Candles on Instagram for updates on the sorting candle, as well as other Harry Potter-themed candles in their repertoire, like parseltongue and free elf.

[h/t WKYC]

Original image
iStock
arrow
Lists
10 Facts About Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary
Original image
iStock

October 16 is World Dictionary Day, which each year celebrates the birthday of the American lexicographer Noah Webster, who was born in Connecticut in 1758. Last year, Mental Floss marked the occasion with a list of facts about Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language—the enormous two-volume dictionary, published in 1828 when Webster was 70 years old, that established many of the differences that still divide American and British English to this day. But while Webster was America’s foremost lexicographer, on the other side of the Atlantic, Great Britain had Dr. Samuel Johnson.

Johnson—whose 308th birthday was marked with a Google Doodle in September—published the equally groundbreaking Dictionary of the English Language in 1755, three years before Webster was even born. Its influence was arguably just as great as that of Webster’s, and it remained the foremost dictionary of British English until the early 1900s when the very first installments of the Oxford English Dictionary began to appear.

So to mark this year’s Dictionary Day, here are 10 facts about Johnson’s monumental dictionary.

1. IT WASN’T THE FIRST DICTIONARY.

With more than 40,000 entries, Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was certainly the largest dictionary in the history of the English language at the time but, despite popular opinion, it wasn’t the first. Early vocabularies and glossaries were being compiled as far back as the Old English period, when lists of words and their equivalents in languages like Latin and French first began to be used by scribes and translators. These were followed by educational word lists and then early bilingual dictionaries that began to emerge in the 16th century, which all paved the way for what is now considered the very first English dictionary: Robert Cawdrey’s Table Alphabeticall—in 1604.

2. SAMUEL JOHNSON BORROWED FROM THE DICTIONARIES THAT CAME BEFORE HIS.

In compiling his dictionary, Johnson drew on Nathan Bailey’s Dictionarium Britanicum, which had been published in 1730. (Ironically, a sequel to Bailey’s dictionary, A New Universal Etymological English Dictionary, was published in the same year as Johnson’s, and borrowed heavily from his work; its author, Joseph Nicoll Scott, even gave Johnson some credit for its publication.)

But just as Johnson had borrowed from Bailey and Scott had borrowed from Johnson, Bailey, too had borrowed from an earlier work—namely John Kersey’s Dictionarium Anglo-Britannicum (1708)—which was based in part on a technical vocabulary, John Harris’s Universal English Dictionary of Arts and Sciences. Lexicographic plagiarism was nothing new.

3. THE DICTIONARY WASN’T THE ONLY THING JOHNSON WROTE.

Although he’s best remembered as a lexicographer today, Johnson was actually something of a literary multitasker. As a journalist, he wrote for an early periodical called The Gentlemen’s Magazine. As a biographer, he wrote the Life of Mr Richard Savage (1744), a memoir of a friend and fellow writer who had died the previous year. Johnson also wrote numerous poems (London, published anonymously in 1738, was his first major published work), a novel (Rasselas, 1759), a stage play (Irene, 1749), and countless essays and critiques. He also co-edited an edition of Shakespeare’s plays. And in between all of that, he even found time to investigate a supposed haunted house in central London.

4. IT WAS THE FIRST DICTIONARY TO USE QUOTATIONS.

Johnson’s dictionary defined some 42,773 words, each of which was given a uniquely scholarly definition, complete with a suggested etymology and an armory of literary quotations—no fewer than 114,000 of them, in fact.

Johnson lifted quotations from books dating back to the 16th century for the citations in his dictionary, and relied heavily on the works of authors he admired and who were popular at the time—Shakespeare, John Milton, Alexander Pope, and Edmund Spenser included. In doing so, he established a lexicographic trend that still survives in dictionaries to this day.

5. IT TOOK MORE THAN EIGHT YEARS TO WRITE.

Defining 42,000 words and finding 114,000 quotes to help you do so takes time: Working from his home off Fleet Street in central London, Johnson and six assistants worked solidly for over eight years to bring his dictionary to print. (Webster, on the other hand, worked all but single-handedly, and used the 22 years it took him to compile his American Dictionary to learn 26 different languages.)

6. JOHNSON WAS WELL PAID FOR HIS TROUBLES.

Johnson was commissioned to write his dictionary by a group of London publishers, who paid him a princely 1,500 guineas—equivalent to roughly $300,000 (£225,000) today.

7. HE LEFT OUT A LOT OF WORDS.

The dictionary’s 42,000-word vocabulary might sound impressive, but it’s believed that the English language probably had as many as five times that many words around the time the dictionary was published in 1755. A lot of that shortfall was simply due to oversight: Johnson included the word irritable in four of his definitions, for instance, but didn’t list it as a headword in his own dictionary. He also failed to include a great many words found in the works of the authors he so admired, and in several of the source dictionaries he utilized, and in some cases he even failed to include the root forms of words whose derivatives were listed elsewhere in the dictionary. Athlete, for instance, didn’t make the final cut, whereas athletic did.

Johnson’s imposition of his own tastes and interests on his dictionary didn't help matters either. His dislike of French, for example, led to familiar words like unique, champagne, and bourgeois being omitted, while those he did include were given a thorough dressing down: ruse is defined as “a French word neither elegant nor necessary,” while finesse is dismissed as “an unnecessary word that is creeping into the language."

8. HE LEFT OUT THE LETTER X.

    At the foot of page 2308 of Johnson’s Dictionary is a note merely reading, “X is a letter which, though found in Saxon words, begins no word in the English language."

    9. HIS DEFINITIONS WEREN’T ALWAYS SO SCHOLARLY.

      As well as imposing his own taste on his dictionary, Johnson also famously employed his own sense of humor on his work. Among the most memorable of all his definitions is his explanation of oats as “a grain, which in England is generally given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people.” But he also defined monsieur as “a term of reproach for a Frenchman,” excise as “a hateful tax levied upon commodities and adjudged not by the common judges of property but wretches hired by those to whom excise is paid,” and luggage as “anything of more weight than value.” As an example of how to use the word dull, he explained that “to make dictionaries is dull work.”

      10. HE POKED LOTS OF FUN AT HIS OWN OCCUPATION.

      Listed on page 1195 of his dictionary, Johnson’s definition of lexicographer was “a writer of dictionaries; a harmless drudge.”

      SECTIONS

      arrow
      LIVE SMARTER
      More from mental floss studios