Phillip Pullman

[Dollpiglet]

I'm not a huge user of Twitter but I do follow Phillip Pullman who seems to have stepped out on this issue now. I'm gutted!

twitter.com/PhilipPullman/status/1417467807873241088?s=19

It'll be interesting to see if he replies to Jo's tweet.

No chance.

He weighed in again recently on the Kate Clanchy debate. He had nothing useful to say, regardless of which side one was on there.

Re the books whole heartedly agree, Oxford, Svalbard, Citigazze, armoured bears, witches, spectres, daemons and Lee Scoresby were brilliant. The third book was overwritten. La Belle Savage was interesting but largely unnecessary. I gave up 2/3rds through The Secret Commonwealth.

Now I am seriously considering whether to boycott buying Pullman's books. I already own the His Dark Materials trilogy and really enjoyed it, but was going to wait until the 3rd volume of Book of Dust is released before I buy a box set of the Book of Dust trilogy. I borrowed the first and second volumes of BoD from the library and I agree with PP that La Belle Sauvage was ok. The Secret Commonwealth's core premise was very interesting but the writing was very rambling and introduced far too many side characters that were very difficult to keep track of. It did end on a big cliffhanger though and I am definitely going to read the 3rd BoD to see the resolution.

The question is, should I refrain from purchasing all 3 BoD volumes and just be content with borrowing them from the library? The thought of giving money to this incorrigible misogynist makes me sick, and yet I feel that I ought to apply the 'separate the artist from the art' principle here!

Jo Bartosch's Spiked Online piece is dated July 2020. The tweets are July 2022. I wonder why Pullman is commenting now, especially as things have move on - not that PP would know that - and not in Mermaids' favour. Curious.

HelenaRavenclaw

If you're still reading the books, and making both positive and megative comments, you've sufficiently separated the art from the artist. You're not proposing stealing his work, but borrowing from the library, and libraries buy books (money to author!), replace copies damaged by wear and tear (money to author!), and make annual royalty payments to writers and illustrators through a Byzantine scheme known as public lending right (money to author!)

The campaigning of the Society of Authors led to the creation of the scheme in 1979, so I guarantee that he is registered for it.

Borrow the book and fret not. If you end up really liking how he's ended the trilogy, you might end up wanting the set so you can reread them any time you want. If he hasn't written the book well enough for you to want to own the set, that is his problem.

@HelenaRavenclaw charity shops are always full of Pullman books, so have a look there. Or ebay, secondhand bookseller Abe books or similar

The (wonderful) writer Amanda Craig tweeted the piece. He's replying to her. And now Jo Bartosch, who actually wrote it, has replied.

To use the parlance of Georgette Heyer, she's given him a true set-down!

Philip Pullman: You believe spiked-online?

Jo Bartosch: Hi Philip, that’s my article. Would you care to point out any errors or inaccuracies? I take my job very seriously, unlike you I don’t write fantasy.

Check out that ratio! 2,217 likes and counting. Philip's comment has received... 27 likes

Oxford, Svalbard, Citigazze, armoured bears, witches, spectres, daemons and Lee Scoresby were brilliant. The third book was overwritten. La Belle Savage was interesting but largely unnecessary. I gave up 2/3rds through The Secret Commonwealth.

I don't think I got that far. Loved the first two books, some brilliant conceits, characters and a good pacy plot. Then it all got tortuous, overdone, and tedious: like Pullman was trying to work out deeper and more and more portentuous and Important meanings, tying himself in knots with the Dust theories etc.

He's high on the smell of his own farts, I'm afraid.

You believe spiked-online?

That counts as nuanced these days. No need to actually address what an article says, just disparage the platform.

Mr Pullman is struggling today. Sneering at an outlet was momentary fun but he doesn't have the courage to directly address an individual author. Now he's prevaricating all over the place.

Person on twitter: It would be polite to respond to jo_bartosch, Philip Pullman, since you have so publicly called her work into question.

Philip Pullman's reply:
I wish my critics could actually bother to read what I say. I didn't mention Bartosch's work. I said not a word about it. I'm not interested in it. I'm just curious about why anyone should believe Spiked-Online.

twitter.com/PhilipPullman/status/1543537946346799104?t=yCgD8kQYLGQKKau5oPA6JA&s=19

He seemed interested enough in it to ask a question earlier!

I wish writers wouldn’t do Twitter. Disaster.

How the fuck did he think the article came into being? He seems to have some kind of weird misunderstanding of what a website constitutes. "Of course I'm not casting aspersions on you, I'm just slagging off the name of your publisher and everything they publish."

Honestly, he just reveals himself to be an ever greater dipshit with every tweet.

But why would anyone listen to someone writing for Scholastic Point, anyway.

Thanks, this makes me feel better. Yes, I know that by borrowing from the library, I am still indirectly contributing to his royalties, but at least the amount that I am personally responsible for will be far less than if I directly bought the book myself. Just like paying a low fare to take the Tube shared with other passengers versus paying a high fare to take a taxi by myself. I will definitely borrow the 3rd volume first when it is released, and if I like it enough to want the trilogy available at home all the time, I will buy the set. But I will definitely wait until it is released in paperback as a set so it is cheaper! (I am not a fan of ebooks.)

On the other hand, I am eagerly awaiting the release of the remaining volumes of Jim Kay's illustrated editions of Harry Potter. I will gladly buy the full set in hardcover at full price, for myself and as a gift for others, and proudly give money to JKR!

Thanks for the clarification Purgatory. I'm not on Twitter and missed some of the finer points of the exchange.

It's sometimes a very difficult website to use, Rightsraptor. Sometimes I absolutely hate it. But I have to stay on there so I can get screenshots.

PearlClutch I have horrible real life to get on with, but I am just longing to go through his publisher's back catalogue of titles, so I can make derogatory comments on his stablemates.

The conversation continues, as do Philip's attempts to draw invisible lines between the casting of nasturtiums on Jo Bartosch and casting nasturtiums on the platform that publishes her, as part of a conversation about her article.

Another twitter user observes: You said it in response to a jo_bartosch article though …

Philip Pullman: No, it wasn't in response to the article. It was an expression of surprise that anyone should believe Spiked-Online.

Interesting article here on Scholastic and consumerism in children (from the Boston Globe, reprinted here):

forum.netmuslims.com/showthread.php?5700-Taking-consumerism-out-of-school-book-fairs

'For decades, Scholastic Book Fairs has been the biggest provider of school book fairs in the country. Especially in these days of tight public school budgets, school libraries have come to count on the Scholastic fund-raiser that turns back a percentage to the host school. School libraries nationwide earned $95 million from 120,000 Scholastic book fairs last year.

A small but growing number of schools are turning their backs on Scholastic nonetheless. These parents and educators say Scholastic carries too many books and other items featuring cartoon and movie characters that are thin on literary merit. They say the novelty pencils, calendars, posters, and other paraphernalia Scholastic offers is more about turning children x into consumers than it is about encouraging them to read.'

I can't disagree. I put a lot of effort into encouraging a love of reading in my children and it was an uphill struggle. One of the tricks I used was making a big thing of spending their world book day vouchers at the bookshop, and I could go on and on about the techniques I used. One thing that I couldn't use, was the Scholastic Book Fair at the primary school. I'd tow the kids round to the school hall, money in hand, ready to throw it at the visitors from Scholastic.

Then I would spend twenty minutes explaining that I had brought money to spend on books, with words in, not giant novelty pencils, plastic clappers, or glorified colouring books with the Avengers on the cover.

The weightiest tome any of them ever chose voluntarily was Lightning Girl, a work of children's fiction by Alesha Dixon the pop star, "in collaboration with Katy Birchall", and I was genuinely overjoyed that it had been chosen over the dot-to-dot books.

I didn't even bother going last time.

Explaining to the offspring that is.

I didn't bother telling the visitors what I thought of their stock.

I assume Scholastic are the providers of the book fairs in the UK, anyway. Sounds similar.

And one time, I put my eldest in charge of buying his own book while I dealt with my younger child's desire for an activity book, and the stallholder didn't have the 50p change for the pound coins my kid had handed over. And they tried to keep the 50p instead of asking him to wait until they did have the change.

I was in hearing range so I sorted that out, but what if my kid had been there without a parent, as some in his year were? He was absolutely not bold enough to insist on getting his change. Conducting the transaction himself was a big step.

Gah.

It doesn't impact directly on them. So whatever their true opinions, they choose the path of least resistance.

Philip continues to draw artificial distinctions. You'd think it would be easy for him to admit that he can tell men and women apart!

In reply to a twitter user asking, If you're questioning the integrity of jo_bartosch & her article - why not step away & investigate the evidence for yourself? The thecassreview is a good place to start, by the time you've read through ThebWebberlys gmcuk tribunal, you may think differently.

Sorry, posted too soon.

Philip Pullman: Think differently about Spiked-Online? I've expressed no view at all about Jo Bartosch's work.

S, Twitter user: For a supposedly intelligent person, that is an incredibly stupid answer 🙄

Philip Pullman: But I don't claim to be intelligent. I make no claims about myself at all.

Hmm ... the path of least resistance would be to say nothing at all.

Not this pathetic squeaking of some vague 'now come on then, ladies, I don't think that sort of behaviour is very becoming' followed by weaselly 'I didn't mean you ladies, of course, why on earth would you say that you horrible presumptious harridens'