The Republic of Heaven

Are the daemons of witches always birds? I think every witch in the stories has a bird daemon...Serafina has a goose, Juta has a robin...is this something about the witches' mentality? I would be interested to hear others' views on this.

Maybe what PP had in mind was that witches were more 'free spirits' than humans so their daemons took on bird forms because of this. Also because witches daemons can travel a lot further than humans' ones the bird form could be quite practical.

Practicality does make sense, just like PP never mentions a china shop owner with a bull daemon or something with equally hilarious and disastrous consequences.

Maybe what PP had in mind was that witches were more 'free spirits' than humans so their dæmons took on bird forms because of this. Also because witches dæmons can travel a lot further than humans' ones the bird form could be quite practical.

Yes, Serafina mentions that Will and Lyra's daemons will not be birds, so they will be unlike witch's daemons in that way which makes me think that all witch daemons are birds. Whether this is because of their nature or because it is practical I don't know.

Actually, scrap that last bit. In Northern Lights Serafina says that to be flying is to be "perfectly ourselves" or something. This suggests that flying is in their nature and thus having flying bird daemons is too.

Now the question is, do witches ever have penguin daemons? Flight-less birds.

A kiwi, maybe, an ostrich or penguin, hopefully not. But that's a good point; which part of the witch does the bird represent-the flight part or the bird-like free spirit part?

No, they wouldn't. The practicality argument still applies I think - even though penguins, emus, ostriches and such are birds they wouldn't get them as daemons because they wouldn't be able to keep up.
Of course, they wouldn't get penguins anyway because penguins are single-minded, evil, destructive birds trying to take over the world.

But remember the fellow with the dolphin daemon: it was impractical for him, not his damon. His daemon just was what it was.

A kiwi, maybe, an ostrich or penguin, hopefully not. But that's a good point; which part of the witch does the bird represent-the flight part or the bird-like free spirit part?

If it was only flight that was important, witches could have other types of flying daemons e.g. bats, beetles, dragonflies etc.

I think practicality is part of it; if you spend a huge amount of your life in the air, it's natural that your daemon would be a creature that could fly. But why birds in particular? I think this is the other part of witch nature - the free spirit part. The witches are also pretty emotional, at least all the characters Pullman described, so a bird daemon seems to fit better than an insect. (Is it just me, or do other people think insect or reptillian daemons reflect a less emotional personality?)

It would be really interesting if there was a witch who had a flightless bird daemon like a penguin. I think she would be somewhat of an outcast, someone who doesn't fit in with the tribe. Could make a good story.

It would be really interesting if there was a witch who had a flightless bird dæmon like a penguin. I think she would be somewhat of an outcast, someone who doesn't fit in with the tribe. Could make a good story.

Or even better, one with a dog daemon or something. Something that really didn't fit in with being a witch.

(Is it just me, or do other people think insect or reptillian dæmons reflect a less emotional personality?)

Father Gomez had a beetle daemon, and he was pretty zealous about religion...though you could say he was just emotionally unstable. But perhaps people like, say, Lord Boreal, who have reptillian daemons, are simply better at disguising their emotions.

But remember the fellow with the dolphin dæmon: it was impractical for him, not his damon. His dæmon just was what it was.

He was a sailor, so the sea was apart of his nature just as flying is apart of witch nature. It may be impractical, but he wouldn't have had it any other way, I think. We don't choose the things we love, I believe, or I wouldn't have chosen writing, I would have chosen biotechnology or something useful .

As for the witch with the penguin daemon, perhaps her abilities would be inferior, like perhaps flying wouldn't come to her naturally, like a Harry Potter Squib. Or perhaps she could be a witch who had refused to undergo the seperation test at puberty, which makes her less witch-y, less free. Fanfic fodder, for sure.

I think this is like the 'almost all servents have dog daemons' debate (we had one of those, right?) in that it's hard to say which comes first, career or daemon form. In reference to the servents, Lyra says something about people who have dog daemons knowing their suited to life as a servent but there's probably a fair amount of nurture rather than nature here - people raised by servent parents will have a certain mentality which will result in a dog daemon which will put them on that career path.

As fr witches... not much of their early lives is given away. We son't know if witches were once human women who, through the separation process (and presumably other stuff) became long-lived with magical abilities. If that was the case then perhaps only girls with bird daemons would be initiated. Searfina says the daughters of witches are always witches but we don;t know if that's through tradition or genes. If you are born a witch, with the long life and magical ability hard-wired, then there's no reason to suppose your daemon's form wouldn't be similarly pre-destined - because in this scenario witches would be an entirely separate race from humans and there's be no reason their daemons should behave in the same way.

I always thought witches had magical blood flowing naturally through their veins, so you couldn't really be anything but a witch, and if you didn't take the separation test you'd be a very lousy witch indeed. It must be noted though that for all their love for human men, we haven't seen a single witch child (witchling? ), could be another one of those things Pullman never thought out.
However, the thought that witches were once humans is an interesting one, I've never entertained it before. Perhaps the reason there are no witch children we have seen is that they magically age as soon as they are separated? That may be another thing that is different between Lyra and Will and witches.

It must be noted though that for all their love for human men, we haven't seen a single witch child (witchling? ), could be another one of those things Pullman never thought out.

Perhaps we see no witch girlies because we were never exactly shown a witch community. We see them in action or we saw them at their meeting, which wasn't held in any witch village, if witches have permanent homes at all. I suppose, assuming witch neighborhoods exist, the little girls are back home learning to tell their cloud pine from regular pine or something...But where are the sons of witches? Deadbeat moms leave them with their fathers or do you think they raise them up only to watch them die .

I also assumed that being a witch is genetic.

i think pullman said the witches raised them for the duration (or at least part) of their childhood before they were passed onto their fathers.... this makes it especially sad for mothers to part with their sons.

A kiwi, maybe, an ostrich or penguin, hopefully not. But that's a good point; which part of the witch does the bird represent-the flight part or the bird-like free spirit part?

If it was only flight that was important, witches could have other types of flying dæmons e.g. bats, beetles, dragonflies etc.

I think practicality is part of it; if you spend a huge amount of your life in the air, it's natural that your dæmon would be a creature that could fly. But why birds in particular? I think this is the other part of witch nature - the free spirit part. The witches are also pretty emotional, at least all the characters Pullman described, so a bird dæmon seems to fit better than an insect. (Is it just me, or do other people think insect or reptillian dæmons reflect a less emotional personality?)

maybe because birds are known to migrate and so they travel long distances, requiring powerful and strong wings to get them places. Also they need to get there faster... but i dunno, what goes faster? a dragonfly or a bird?

A large bird would certainly go faster than a dragonfly.

A large bird would certainly go faster than a dragonfly.

And cover more distance without tiring?

A large bird would certainly go faster than a dragonfly.

And cover more distance without tiring?

And look much cooler!

However, since you're new, please introduce yourself on the newbie forum.

A large bird would certainly go faster than a dragonfly.

And cover more distance without tiring?

And look much cooler!

no animal, no matter how great, can go any distance without tiring. though PP could probably have included dragonflies for you dragonfly lovers... *looks sarcastic*... it's PP's book, I guess he found birdies cooler... or maybe saved the dragonflies for the Gallivespians. *shrugs*