Alex, great interview! David: Thank you - very much looking forward to reading the book!

I particularly appreciate that David did NOT fall into the moral trap of criticising anyone's faith per se. What clearly concerns him (and what can be usefully critiqued) are the results not achieved: "By their fruits you shall know them."

I'd forgotten how great that quotation from Chuck Colson was. Eeeek!

As a Christian myself I am sad that political 'use' of the Christian right has made so many potential allies (people I want to work with on poverty or whatever) think that Christianity = hypocrisy. I agree with David that the way forward is going back to our roots and simply doing what Jesus told us.

Without going back to the Barnard Scholar and the Feminist conference 1982 (laughs hysterically) may I query a typo? Just on context, I think the phrase

balky, one-of-the-guys chick

should be "ballsy" instead? OCR still not perfect...

Thank you, Ellen, upon whom be peace, and Donna for the intro.

From a reader's point of view, I want to underscore what Steven says about the transition. I've been a paid subscriber to the Online WSJ since five minutes after it became possible to become one. They've done wonderful things with online. (I believe we have to experiment with "paying for content" in order to find out what we can do with this internet thing. Can't wait for micropayments. But I digress.)

It's true that the editorials are hugely upsetting to me, but the journalism is independent and terrific and the amalgamation of it within the Murdoch empire would be a BIG nail in the coffin of the hopes of the US to heal itself of its recent un-americanishness, which embarrasses so many of us (I am currently living abroad and I wish more USians could see how "we" look from "outside"). I wish there was anything specific we readers could do.

I like Steven's idea of doing something with the content to provide an income stream.

Thank you Mary Elizabeth Williams, for your excellent article, which I will forward widely. It's critical for Christians to demonstrate (as you do) that it's possible to be a person of strong faith who also respects the use of reason and free will. Our faith is meaningful to God precisely because we have the choice to believe or not to believe. Fortunately God is not harmed by all this fuss.

Me: a fierce Christian who also fiercely enjoyed the Pullman books. This trilogy is his best fictional work (yes I've read the rest), it has genuine "sense of wonder", and I'm thrilled that the movie and M. E. Williams' article may introduce it to more readers. (SPOILER ALERT) My biggest issue is that in book 3 I worry that the author punished his protagonists for being sexual and I don't want younger readers to infer that all sex is bad. Potentially heartbreaking, as in the book, yes; bad in itself, no.

(Forgive me, I haven't read all the other letters yet so maybe someone else has said this:) Paul Cantor used to say, about Paradise Lost, that Satan is the best-drawn character. (Cantor joked in the 70's that Milton was to Homer as Satan was to God, so Milton identified with the rebel...) In any case, when Pullman drew on the PL arc, that "problem" came along.

Why is Satan-the-rebel so interesting? Simone Weil (to summarise violently) wrote that in fiction (Story), stories of evil people are complex and interesting and stories about good people are dull, whereas in real life it's the opposite: good is infinitely interesting and varied, whereas evil is repetitious and dull. I agree with Weil (who admired the Catholic Church so much that she considered herself unworthy to be confirmed in it, but I digress) about that, without drawing her conclusions...

Perhaps Weil was saying that it's difficult to capture the full adventure of goodness in fiction? One of the strongest aspects of Pullman's trilogy is that some of his characters are "good" but also "real" and very very complicated. If people would read it before jumping all over it...

I agree with the posters who said don't start with a joke and don't play doctor.

Once upon a time my co-workers could smell my body odor. Some of them (I will never know who or how many) asked my boss to discuss it with me. She was great. I was glad to know it was a problem (and to hear that professionally). She said, whatever office resources you need, please take full advantage of them (we had a shower in the building), but it IS your problem that is affecting your co-workers, so please deal with it.

I remember being aghast and asking, how often is this a problem? Are we talking about fifty percent of the time, twenty-five percent...? She said, "More than twenty-five!" Maybe it was 75...

It was worst in winter, what with the snowy walk to the station, then sitting for an hour in the train, wearing the same goosedown parka for 90 minutes each morning and evening. There were things I could do and I did them, but in order to take action I had to be told. My vegetarian palz tell me Beano works a treat.

Even now I still have the issue and it takes "constant vigilance!" (cf. Mad-Eye). If the farter is VERY cool, s/he will check in from time to time after the initial discussion to make sure things are sorted. But this may be too much to ask.

Good luck!