Do Panserbjoerne have Dust?

[Yelbakk]

Just wondering... Humans, Gallivespians, mulefa all have Dust once they become conscious. The armored bears, too, are conscious. They are different from the other species, though, in that they do not have daemons or ghosts. It is those two things that make humans "people", just as the mulefa are "people". Bears, on the other hand, are not.

So, what is your opinion: do bears have Dust?

Y.

[Soapy]

In my opinion no, they don't have dust. PP has said on many occasions that the Armoured Bears are bears at heart but can just talk. He doesn't seem to like it when animals who talk are really just humans shaped like animals. On the other hand, Iorek compares his armour to Pan in NL so maybe.

[Peter]

This leaves you wondering whether the Bears are not possibly in the course of evolving into Dust-endowed creatures. They show many (most?) of the characteristics of hnau such that - whatever PP's intentions - they (or specifically Iorek as he is the Bear we know the most about) come over much more as people than as (talking) animals.

Imagine the scene - the moment when Dust decides Iorek is worthy of its habitation, when his consciousnous has reached the stage when it attracts Dust of its own accord. What a lovely idea for a fic... hands off!!!

[Lord Janguenet]

This is one of the better threads I've seen.
I think that the idea of evolution is a good one—they might not have Dust yet, but they're closer than, say, the fox in TAS that has its head ripped off, and closer than the Cliff Ghasts who could also speak (and in reference to the former example, did the ripping ). But the Mulefa certainly had Dust. Then again, they were "people", and I somehow have the impression that Iorek would not want to be called a "person", however flattering we may think it might be.

[jessia]

i don't think the armoured bear have dust. they possess a different sort of intelligent. mulefa and gallivespians could be related to humans, but iorek made it quite clear the differences between bear-nature and human-nature. humans are fallible, bears don't have that same sort of thing. they think like animals in terms of their necessity, and not so much for the sake of thinking - ie. art's not a bear-thing under normal conditions. they don't act in a manner that should attract dust.

[Soapy]

You mean they don't normally act in such a behaviour. Iofur did, and Iorek is doing so more and more. I think if they were to carry on the way they had been then they might've started to attract Dust. But I also think that when all the openings were closed they returned to the arctic and carried on as normal.

[EngineerScholar]

This is a fascinating topic. It seems to ask the question, 'what does it really mean to be conscious?'

My guess is that the armoured bears do not have dust. As much as I admired Iorek, I find myself wondering how 'human' he really is. Is he capable of 'falling in love'? Will he ever laugh or cry? Would he ever sing a song? These are some of the things that I think separate humans from animals, or perhaps those who have Dust from those who do not. These are also things I do not think the armoured bears are capable of.

(Unfortunately, there are other traits that separate humans from animals as well, such as the ability to lie, or to kill for pleasure or revenge..)

EngineeringScholar

[Dante]

(Unfortunately, there are other traits that separate humans from animals as well, such as the ability to lie, or to kill for pleasure or revenge..)

EngineeringScholar

The ability to kill for revenge is a trait definitely evident of Iorek.

[Soapy]

This is a fascinating topic. It seems to ask the question, 'what does it really mean to be conscious?'

My guess is that the armoured bears do not have dust. As much as I admired Iorek, I find myself wondering how 'human' he really is. Is he capable of 'falling in love'? Will he ever laugh or cry? Would he ever sing a song? These are some of the things that I think separate humans from animals, or perhaps those who have Dust from those who do not. These are also things I do not think the armoured bears are capable of.

(Unfortunately, there are other traits that separate humans from animals as well, such as the ability to lie, or to kill for pleasure or revenge..)

EngineeringScholar

I've heard PP say that he doesn't like it when writers create animals who can talk and they end up just being humans in animal's clothing. That's one of the many unique things about HDM, that he makes the distinction between 'animals-who-can-talk' and 'humans-who-look-like-animals'. This habit has led a friend of mine to believe that all animals can talk to each other. She once asked me what I think birds talk about. I understand they communicate in some ways, but she thinks they actually have conversations. About the weather and what was on Eastenders last night. She's a nutter. She also thinks that babies talk to each other. The point is that Iorek, and all of the bears (apart from Iofur) are bears at heart, although they have the ability to communicate in a more complex way than most animals.

I think that the way Iofur was taking them might have led them to attracting Dust. But then Dust is attracted to consciousness, and I don't think that Iofur necessarily had that. Unhinged might be the word. I think Iorek could've developed it, but I don't think he wanted to and therefore his actions stopped it. His eventual return to Svalbard and destruction of Iofur's palace etc etc

[EngineerScholar]

(Unfortunately, there are other traits that separate humans from animals as well, such as the ability to lie, or to kill for pleasure or revenge..)

EngineeringScholar

The ability to kill for revenge is a trait definitely evident of Iorek.

Hello again, Dante!

I'm not sure I remember everything I read in the trilogy, but my memories of Iorek's 'kills' were that everytime he killed somebody, there was usually some definite purpose or motivation. IIRC, he killed another bear in a fight over a mate; he killed in battle to protect himself and his 'allies' (or maybe friends?); he was ready to kill to get his armour back. (I forgot if anyone actually was killed when he went to get his armour back.) Also, I wouldn't want to be around him if he was hungry, and there was no other food in sight. (At the same time I'm saying that, I find it impossible to picture him killing Lyra, Will, or Lee in that same situation..maybe there is more 'Dust' to this bear than we may think..)

Did revenge motivate him to kill Iofur, or was it a fight over leadership of the clan? Or to stop the bears from helping the 'child killers' further? For my homework, I'll have to go back to the books to find these answers..

EngineerScholar

[EngineerScholar]

The ability to kill for revenge is a trait definitely evident of Iorek.

I did some homework, and reviewed some parts of the trilogy that dealt with Iorek, and found that what Dante said was definitely true. Iorek made up his mind to avenge Lee's death when he found Lee's body at 'Alamo Gulch'. In a talk he has with Will, Iorek later says that the purpose of all that he does will be primarily to help the bears, and secondly to serve Lyra, Serafina, or help avenge Lee. (I suspect that there was so much going on in The Amber Spyglass that I forgot all about this!)

This whole review made me reconsider whether Iorek and the armoured bears 'have Dust'. When I first posted to this thread, I did not believe they did. After I looked through the books again, my view is changed. I think the armoured bears do have some dust - maybe not as much as humans, but I think they have some. Iorek at least seems to be more than a clever animal that can talk. The fact that he was seeking revenge for a comrade's death is certainly not a trait I would ascribe to animals. I think his feelings for Lee went beyond comradeship and respect. I think he felt love for Lee, and probably Lyra and Serafina, and maybe even Will.

The part of the The Amber Spyglass where Iorek was voicing his doubts about repairing the knife was also very revealing. He said that he felt by having doubts about repairing the knife, he might be becoming more 'human'. He thought that maybe repairing the knife was a 'human' course of action that he should not have taken. Will responded that maybe the first bear who made armour felt the same. I have a feeling that first bear making armour was touched by dust. That 'breakthrough' for the bears sounds a lot like the 'breakthough' the mulefa made when one of them first decided to use the wheels.

It would have been interesting if Mary Malone could have viewed the armoured bears through the amber spyglass. I wonder exactly what she would have seen?

EngineerScholar

[Soapy]

I think he felt love for Lee, and probably Lyra and Serafina, and maybe even Will.

I think he did love Lyra, I'm certain he did actually. Will I think he respected. And he also loved Lee. But I also think that Iorek is an exception.

Perhaps all bears have the potential to attract Dust, but most do not. They don't, after all, have souls and their armour isn't quite the same as a daemon. I stick to my original belief that they started to, or at least Iorek did, and then went back to their own ways. At least I hope they did.

[EngineerScholar]

Perhaps all bears have the potential to attract Dust, but most do not. They don't, after all, have souls and their armour isn't quite the same as a daemon. I stick to my original belief that they started to, or at least Iorek did, and then went back to their own ways. At least I hope they did.

This is an interesting comment. I recall one part of the story (I think it is in The Amber Spyglass, but I'm not sure..) where Iorek says that when bears die, they die, they have no ghosts, no afterlife, etc. I wonder how Iorek knew this?

Of course, in the book, we got to visit the Land of the Dead with Lyra, and there certainly were no bears there, in ghost form or otherwise. (I think if a bear or bear's ghost did show up in the Land of the Dead, they would have scared the harpies away!)

Even with all of these revelations from the book, I am not convinced that the armoured bears are souless animals. At the same time, I'm not sure what they are. I now believe that they do have some Dust. Some aspects of the bears attract Dust, other aspect of the bears repel Dust. But I do think that after all this 'attraction' and 'repulsion' balances out, the armoured bears have Dust.

EngineerScholar

[Melancholy Man]

As I remember, the closest the Panserbjoerne had to souls, or manifestations of Dust, was their sky-iron armour. Worship of probable meteorites is common in religions, with one often being located in their Holiest of Holies (the Black Stone in Islamic tradition being one, as well as my own Stone of Scone [1]).

[1] Don't anyone dare call that a tasty pastry.

[Ripper]

I always thought they did have dust. Mainly because they seem as conscious as any human.
They also seem to have a "soul" in their armour.
Iofur didn't because his armour wasn't part of him, like Iorek, and that's why he was tricked.
That's how I see it anyway.

[Jez]

I always thought they did have dust. Mainly because they seem as conscious as any human.
They also seem to have a "soul" in their armour.
Iofur didn't because his armour wasn't part of him, like Iorek, and that's why he was tricked.
That's how I see it anyway.

But Iorek said that he had no ghost - when the bears died, they didn't go to the world of the dead like other conscious beings. At least, they're not mentioned. Is it necessary to have all three parts - a body, daemon and ghost, in order to attract Dust?

[Blackdragon]

I believe so because more dust is attracted to settled daemons so without a daemon at all I don't think you would attract dust.

[Ripper]

We never really find out what happens to panserbjorne when they die.
Do they lie and rot like human bodies, or do they vanish like daemons?

[Dante]

Do they lie and rot like human bodies, or do they vanish like daemons?

I think it's safe to assume they rot, seeing as Iofur's body didn't vanish when Iorek killed him.

[Ripper]

Yeh, but he wasn't a true bear.