Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

Woman Scorned edited: In book two Juta really does kill John Parry and offs herself after Will lashes a Dude, Not Funny! moment against her.

:Sorry, used a Wikipedia description as a memory refresher. Headdesk. That Wikipedia entry is either flat wrong about her not killing herself or badly worded so that it gives that impression.

Erm, whose character is derailed?

This is minor enough, but still Headscratchers enough to edit it: atoms are not elementary particles. Atoms are made of elementary particles.


Removed (from the Christianity Is Catholic

  • How the hell is that justified?! To begin with it ignores entire things like, oh, Martin Luther, Henry VIII's break with the Vatican predating Luther by several decades, the Great Schism and the creation of the various eastern orthodox faiths by several centuries before that, and quite a few other things this troper shall not get into. Not to mention the character Mary, who wants to have a sex life and is supposedly from our world, abandons the church and becomes an atheist mainly so she can screw somebody. In Real Life she would have just quit being a nun while still being Catholic or if she still wanted to serve God, let's face it you don't become a Nun unless you got serious faith to begin with, she would have switched to another domination that did allow religious leaders to have a sex life. Totally unrealistic character, but thats what happens when you combine Author Appeal, Strawman Political, and really Did Not Do The Research. Sorry, this troper is a history major and that kills the enjoyment of several movies and books.

Red-Hatted Plumber: First of all, what the motherhumping hell? There's a rule about this.

This troper, another history major, would start by saying that not all Catholics, or indeed, nuns, are created equal. Mary Malone would not be the first woman he's heard of to give up on the habit after taking it. You become a nun for many reasons, and even if you do have "serious faith" to begin with, that changes, because people aren't programmed to behave one way throughout their lives. Furthermore, if she wanted to switch "dominations," she would have to first start worshipping angels. The term is denomination, as any history major should've known. She's no more unrealistic than one of this troper's teachers who was a priest (yes, a Catholic priest) for four years and then married. Actually, for further coincidence, that was this troper's physics teacher.

As for your citing of historical facts: the Great Schism passes, but in case you haven't noticed, I count less than ten total mentions for Greece and Slavic countries (the main sources of Orthodox worship). There's a few side mentions of Muscovites, and then the zeppelin that attacks John Parry and Lee Scoresby, but it's never said that they're under the power of the Church itself. But please, since you're a history major, pay more attention to dates. Henry VIII's break with Catholicism was made official in the early 1530s. The annulment was recognized in 1533, which began the English Reformation, which peaked in 1534 with the appointment of Henry as the head of the Church of England. By this point, Luther had already been forced to come before the Diet of Worms, had been "kidnapped" and hidden away by his allies, condemned the Peasant's War, and gave the Augsburg Confession, the main confession of the Lutheran Church. So no, I'd have to say Luther's break most definitely predated Henry's.

He may not have done so much research, but Pullman definitely thought it through: a man like Calvin, with very profound convictions, could've reached across the proverbial aisle (or, I suppose, the Alps) and joined Catholics and Protestants together. What's weak about this theory isn't so much the religious implications, but the political and military ones: abolishing the Papacy upon his death, thus leaving the Church with no real head, would've destroyed it quite handily, or reduced it to local versions. I'm reasonably sure that part of it was never explained, though it's been a while since I read the books.

Since we're already here, though, why don't you tell us what else you've got for us? What're those other things you won't get into? I definitely would like to hear about them, because it seems as if you got pissed, you posted without thinking, about the rules or about what you were saying.

Unknown Troper: As the editor who added that Christianity is Catholic justification sentence in there to begin with, allow me to thank you.

Red-Hatted Plumber: No worries, mate. There's not much I won't get pissed over at 5 AM.


Azvolrien: So, umm... What is the symbolism of the Alpine Chough?

Red-Hatted Plumber: I'm not entirely sure, but the way it's described in The Amber Spyglass it seems like it's been given to Mary because it's an "odd bird." (Certainly doesn't look so odd to me, though.)

—- The_Barbarian

"When the big reveal comes, "Dust" turns out not to be a substance at all. It's essentially subatomic Angels."

Dust is categorically stated to be dark matter and a particle - specifically, the particle of conscious thought. And "subatomic Angels" is about as accurate as saying electrons are subatomic humans. "Angles" are made up of Dust and only Dust, rather than Dust and regular atoms, as humans are, but Angels != Dust.