Thoughts of Geresy

A good retelling of the biblical narrative. A lot of thought was obviously put into making the book plausible. My opinion is that although the entire thing is a bit tongue in cheek, its message is still valid, namely that the way people perceive things after the event can often be shaped and distorted. If authors do not take the things they write literally then neither should readers. Pullman is obviously trying to make a point as an atheist here, and wants to emphasise that the idea that one should not believe things blindly and that the idea that God would be annoyed if somebody wanted proof through the physical world is something absurd. Blind belief is criticised powerfully at the end of the book when Christ suppers with the disciples after the resurrection and also in Jesus’ soliloquy at the end of the book.
The only thing I would say could have been improved on was that at the beginning and the coming of the Angel to Mary, Pullman does not really explain how this could have come about banally. Also, certain miracles are almost exactly recounted.

Pullman obviously received much anger and criticism in the wake of publication of this book, but his position is a strong one. He argues that people share their interpretations of history, with the “truth” added to make it better. Why shouldn’t he be allowed to do the same?