Philip Pullman is not a Blyton fan, it seems...

[Busy Bee]

particularly with the Famous Five and Secret seven, I would say Blyton's use of 'two dimensional characters' is extremely effective. Characters that arent too 'fleshed-out' help the reader to more easily put themselves into the characters they are reading about, and help them to feel more a part of the story. i would say this was Blyton's biggest strength as a writer. ANYONE could identify with most of her characters, because they were shadowy figures that we ourselves as readers could imagine and interpret in our own ways as we were reading.

Did anyone here find themselves doing detective work like the Secret Seven, eg. examining tyre markings? Also, were secret clubs popular among children of your age?

I think the classic nature of certain books is proven when your children read and enjoy the same books that you did at their age.

Happy New Year!

Gillian

[Yak]

Philip Pullman always seems to be griping about other authors - he had a big "Why C.S. Lewis isn't worth reading" thing going a couple of years ago. I find all his sniping very off-putting and tend not to buy his books for that reason (though I do have a couple, but they seem more 'adult' than most other children's books). He doesn't seem to have a gracious bone in his body.

I was irritated at Pullman's comments about Lewis also, being a big fan of the latter (I might very well enjoy the former too but as yet have not got around to reading any of his books .. I will one day). Although I agreed with him about some aspects of the Narnia books I was left with the impression that he did not know the series all that well... I wonder.

[Petermax]

Philip Pullman perhaps lost the plot after writing The Subtle Knife and over exceeded himself with The Amber Spyglass. J K Rowling did likewise after The Prisoner of Azkaban. The wisest people keep their silence, Mr Pullman would have done well to have kept his.

[Boodi]

Philip Pullman perhaps lost the plot after writing The Subtle Knife and over exceeded himself with The Amber Spyglass. J K Rowling did likewise after The Prisoner of Azkaban. The wisest people keep their silence, Mr Pullman would have done well to have kept his.

Well said Petermax! That was always my impression with the Harry Potter books, but when I commented on it, people said I was talking nonsense and I began to believe them. For that reason I was most relieved to read your comment above....it is always nice to know that one is not alone in one's opinion!!!!

Cheers,
BOODI

[Philip Mannering]

Philip Pullman perhaps lost the plot after writing The Subtle Knife and over exceeded himself with The Amber Spyglass. J K Rowling did likewise after The Prisoner of Azkaban. The wisest people keep their silence, Mr Pullman would have done well to have kept his.

I never read any Philip Pullman books, they don't seem "my type," such as adventure/mystery/children's genre. But I agree with you on Harry Potter -- the last three books were more than 700 pages long Not that I had any trouble reading them within a day. And I even liked them, although have to say that they're not better than Azkaban....

[Boodi]

Yes, "The Prisoner of Azkaban" was my favourite Harry Potter book. I did read "The Chalice of Fire" but after that I seemed to lose interest and started the books but never finished them. The reason for this was that I found them unduly complicated and difficult to follow and I also considered them somewhat violent and chilling. As I mentioned above, my friends were amazed when I expressed these views and considered that I was talking utter nonsense. It is a pity, as I really enjoyed the first three books in the series.

Like you Philip, I have never read any Philip Pullman books.

Cheers,
Boodi

[Rob Houghton]

Philip Pullman's books are okay, but I wouldn't put them in the same class as CS Lewis Narnia Books. Time will tell, maybe. If Philip Pullman is still being read (and turned into movies) in 50 years time, then we will be able to say he stood the test of time, as have CS Lewis and Enid. The same can be said for JK Rowling.

[Fiona1986]

I've never bothered myself to read anything by Phillip Pullman, or any Harry Potter books. I am far too busy reading quality like EB.

I have seen the films based on the above though

As for

The characters are two-dimensional and the stories are mechanically recovered, like mechanically recovered meat

.

Unless this was edited by the BBC, it isn't a particularly elloquent or well thought out comment, is it? It's like he described them as "mechanically recovered, like" then panicked, not able to think of any other description, and so repeated himself, and added meat.

[Rob Houghton]

guess he was just trying to say something academic, and failed

[charmstar]

If its worth comment, I LOATHED Philip Pullman's books.
With all due respect to a published author, each to their own Mr Pullman. I suspect you will never have as many fans as Enid Blyton nor publish anywhere near as many books!

[hobbes]

The Pullman trilogy is a great piece of work - it isn't fair to compare with Enid- just because a novel is more sophisticated doesn't make it a better book.

Enid's appeal is more about nostalgia and the recognition that she understands a childs (and often an adults mind)

Yes her prose can be clunky and her dialogue often stilted. No one can deny that there is a degree of repititon in her plots- how many undersea tunnels and secret caves behind waterfalls and sliding panels.

However her books evoke a certain pleasure in her readers that I am sure will endure

[rogoz]

Well, the great critic Pullman struck again recently, calling Dan Brown's characters [ author of The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol ] completely" flat and two-dimensional - - his basic ignorance about the way people behave is astonishing, talking in utterly implausible ways to one another - - all the usual literary things he just doesn't know how to do, but he's not interested in those and nor are his millions of readers. There's nothing wrong in writing as he does, but it is not great writing." He concedes [ for reasons not given or possibly not understood ] that Brown does know how to tell a story in a way that "makes people want to keep turning pages".

Does all this astonishing arrogance sound a bit familiar ?

[Wayne Pyer]

I think it is a shame that a man who wrote 'His Dark Materials' can be so blinkered and self absorbed that the greatest writer in his world is himself.
He obviously has talent but spends all his time critisizing everyone else.
It must be a pretty boring life when you have to put most of your focus on negativity.
I will never watch him in a documentry again because he just puts a downer on other authors.

Thats enough of that. Back to EB.

[Jeffery Greyling]

I haven't read any of his books, but it seems to me that he's making a pretty bad name for himself. In Wikipedia, I've read some of his comments on the Narnia series (a favourite of mine), and I was frankly shocked to see them. Most of the books were written at least 50 years ago, so if the ideals are not exactly the same, it's nobody's fault. Take the Agatha Christie books for one - Ten Little Niggers gets into so much trouble for racism, and people hat AC for it, but the book was written 70 years ago! Society was different then.

John K

[rogoz]

And to the applause of gasps, Phil, called an Atheist, has now decided to re-write parts of the Bible on account J.C. didn't get a proper trial. As a devout Atheist myself, I'm not quite sure what School-of-Atheists he belongs to. Or is it simply a penchant for meddling in everyone else's work ?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... Bible.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;