Gay Angels?

[Adamoun]

How do we know that, after all? It was stated that they both had male bodies, but does that necessarily mean they were male? I remember having read that the human shape was just something humans see, because the real structure of an angel would be something... bigger and more complicated than we can understand? Pullman didn't put it this way, but he said something quite similar.

If I wrote in English all the time (which I don't) I would choose a "gender" for my angels to make it easier to understand them - it would be dull to call them "it" all the time - it would make them like.... something less than human? I dunno, but that's how it feels. This is exactly why I love Finnish language - it has only one word for he/she : hän, and it refers to both male and female.

Hah. It seems like I cannot get an idea go when I've got it stuck in my head...

[Pilgrim]

You know, that's what I hate about my language. Too dictatorial.

[Belaam]

Definitely. The whole series is largely a reproduction of Milton's Paradise Lost and more contemporary literary criticism of it.

In Paradise Lost, it is clear that angels all have male on male sex with each other. Evidence shown below:

First off, Adam asking why there are two sexes for the animals but only one for angels:
… O why did God,
Creator wise, that peopled highest heav’n
With Spirits masculine, create at last
This novelty on earth, this fair defect
Of nature, and not fill the world at once
With men as angels without feminine, (PL 10.888)

So angels are all male. (without females)

Then when Adam asks if angels have sex:

Bear with me then, if lawful what I ask;
Love not the heav’nly Spirits, and how thir Love
Express they, by looks only, or do they mix
Irradiance, virtual or immediate touch? (PL 8.614)

Rapahel blushes and says they do:

… we enjoy
In eminence, and obstacle find none
Of Membrane, joint, or limb, exclusive barrs:
Easier then Air with Air, if Spirits embrace,
Total they mix, union of pure with pure
Desiring; nor restrained conveyance need
As flesh to mix with flesh, or soul with soul. (8.623)

So, the source material in question (Paradise Lost) says that angels are all male and do have sex, both spiritually and physically.

Obviously, most religious people who talk approvingly of Paradise Lost aren't familiar with that, and I think Pullman was just having a bit of fun at their expense. What has often been praised as a work of great religious art features gay sex.

[Pilgrim]

Well, Paradise Lost has always been a little difficult for the church anyway. It makes no mention of priests, they are not important in Milton's version of Christianity. And his portrayal of Satan is very sympathetic. I was probably this odd approach to Christianity that attracted Pullman to it and as you say it is the source material for the entire series. Frankly, given their spritual nature, gender is probably optional for the His Dark Materials angels anyway.

[Phit]

That's really fantastic seeing those excerpts from Paradise Lost! It really brings in another element to the discussion. Thanks for posting that.

I'd always felt that it didn't terribly matter in the literary sense and in the sense of mattering to the characters it was not even issue enough to gain mention.

It's very interesting though to think that Pullman may have chosen to speak of them as male for the original text not necessarily for the sense of adding more elements into all the differences accepted in the republic --- most of them far more subtle than homosexuality because most of Asriel's forces - like the Gallivespians - would be quickly dismissed as fictional, where when if you'd look at it from his perspective it's really just having more people as part of your forces who are different than you.

[alexwesley10]

LOL i think they are because they loved eachother and longed 2 be with eachother

[Neptune]

I know HDM is kinda based on Paradise Lost, but in the end, it is still a book that stands by its own, doesn't mean what is in Paradise Lost applies to HDM as well.

[dannyyyy]

i would say it was more best friend luv than gay luv

[Dustbin]

It's platonic because they don't have flesh, but clearly they love each other, and clearly angels are capable of feeling desire as Metatron did for Mrs. Coulter. They're obviously gay and in love. They embrace passionately - that's about as sexual as two males are going to get in anything even close to a children's book.

They embrace...

...hey, aren't angels naked?!?

[Mils]

Ya but its stated many times in the books that it doesn't matter. They are beings of light, and can't wear clothes. Nakedness means nothing to them.

[Æsir]

I thought they were, but as said above...It is very much considered a "Children's Book" so it's possible the nature of their relationship was left intentionally vague, to avoid..."HE'S TURNING OUR CHILDREN OVER TO THE GAY AGENDA" or some such nonsense. Or...Just because he wanted you to wonder. If I ever met Pullman I'd probably ask him that, among other things.

[Mils]

Same. I have ALOT of unanswered questions that I would really like to learn answers for from him.

[Neptune]

I just thought he thought it was natural.

[Dustbin]

I don't understand why Pullman would make the gay angel reference to Paradise Lost, and still include Xaphania is HDM.

[willislyra]

were Balthamos and Baruch gay? i mean they loved each other!!
i think not i think it was more fraternal love than gay love
wat did u think????

it said baruch was once a man but balamithos didnt know for certian because he forgot so ill put it as gay because angels only have 1 sex and not 2 but nobody knows for certian

[Knight]

All I am going to say is this sentence and yes. Yes.

[irrevilent]

Oh yes, they're more than blatently gay.

Firstly, there are discernable genders for angels, Xaphania being the proof for that.

Next up are the quotes which, unless you don't take English for your first language, are sooo obvious that they are homosexual lovers.

Pullman's delighted angelology comes from Paradise Lost, where Raphael chats with Adam and Eve as he shares a delicious breakfast in paradise with them. In The Amber Spyglass, the angel Balthamos is a junior spirit who becomes Will's and Lyra's guardian. He somewhat grumpily shares Will's Kendal mint cake and has a distinctly human line in sarcasm when addressing his young mortal companion. "Oh, I find whatever you do a source of perpetual fascination." Milton's Adam is intrigued to hear from Raphael that angels have sex, which is even better than the human version, for "if spirits embrace, / Total they mix, union of pure with pure /Desiring". Pullman pairs Balthamos with another angel, Baruch, and Will witnesses their amorous, non-corporeal embrace. "They loved each other with a passion". Mischievously, Pullman has made them both male.

They do not talk as if they're like siblings; go talk to your brothers or sisters, reguardless of your gender, and watch them get freaked out as if you're coming on to them. You're doing just that.

[jfrcoates]

I didn't really think there was much of a doubt that they were homosexual. I knew it the first time I read it. Didn't think much of it, either.

[Huhsz]

I voted for no, because it was said about angels, that they took the shape which the one watching them expected. They were otherwise told to look more like something geometrical creatures. So I assumed they had no genders, not really.

Totally agree. Even if they were previously men (not sure if PP meant men as in human or not) then they would have been sexless angels for thousands of years.

[rawwr]

I have to say yes because in the Amber Spyglass Balthamos says that "Will needs him" to act like his dæmon and he also turns into a bird for Will which means he can change like a real dæmon. That being said would he be able to change into a human like he did changing into a bird? Even without genders does it really matter with angel? You can only assume that Baruch was cast out for being gay. The Amber Spyglass say that they "loved each other with a passion". That is not a brotherly love. Brotherly love would be more of an "affection" as the book states. It also states like I said before that they loved each other with a passion, not just affection.

[Danz]

Definitely gay. They obviously couldn't consummate their love because they have no physical bodies.
But their feelings toward each other were not brotherly love, they were romantic love for sure.

[epic over]

y do u care?

[ArG]

When I read it I just figured they must be gay. therefore it's a yes for me

[professor_a]

Of course they're gay, but who cares?