|
|
|
|
#1
10-08-2004, 07:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell Appreciation Thread
I just finished reading the marvelous Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. This book was a joy to read. As I read, and re-read the book's final paragraph, I found I had both tears in my eyes, as well as goosebumps up and down my arms.
There were times when I was reading this book when I had to put it down, I was so thrilled with the story, with the writing, with the sheer pleasure of reading it. Do you remember thanking Charles Dickens in your mind for writing Bleak House? You may also wish to thank Susanna Clark after you've read Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. And this is her first novel. Hooray, hooray! 
|
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#2
10-08-2004, 08:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I, too, loved this book.
|
|
#3
10-08-2004, 08:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
One of the things I was most impressed by was how well she kept the novel in a 19th century mode. As far as I can remember, the narrative never enters any character's thoughts -- we may get a "Strange looked pensive" or "he brooded for a time," but we never hear anyone's stream of consciousness, which is absolutely appropriate and quite an achievement.
I have noted in other places that a reader needs to like 19th century novels to really enjoy Jonathan Strange. But it certainly does reward those readers.
__________________
Not just a wiseacre, a highly-paid professional wiseacre. http://www.antickmusings.blogspot.com
|
|
#4
10-31-2004, 03:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
So, I'm 40 pages into it and really disappointed. There are some great ideas in there, clever scenes and all, but damn, is it really trying hard. And what's with those damn footnotes? I feel like I'm in some sort of David Foster Wallace throwback (or was it Dave Eggers?).
I was hoping to run through this at about 100 pages/day, but it seems like it took me nearly two hours to get this far. Is the book just more of the same, or does it lose its infatuation with its own voice?
|
|
#5
10-31-2004, 05:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The only 19th century writer I've read much of is Emile Zola, and a comparison with Norrell would be apples and oranges. I haven't read Austen or Dickens or any of the other writers Clarke is being compared to.
I'm really glad that so many people are getting pleasure from the book. I stopped reading a couple hundred pages in, but may well try again someday.
|
|
#8
11-01-2004, 06:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Loved it, loved it! I dig Austen and Trollope most of the big 19th century English writers, and so I did adore the style Susannah Clarke used. I didn't really feel like it was trying too hard, she seemed to have a natural feeling for the cadences of the language. I particularly liked the Dickens touch - that it seemed to have been written in retrospect, a few decades after the events that took place in it. I loved the little touches like "you will remember learning in school", that set the period so nicely. And of course it helps that I'm a giant fan of footnote heavy fiction. Pale Fire is one of my all-time favourite novels, so I can't help finding the use of footnotes for foreshadowing and to give the reader information that the protagonist seems to be overlooking endearing.
|
|
#11
11-01-2004, 01:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#12
11-01-2004, 03:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#14
01-18-2005, 10:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oh man, but I loved this book! I bought it for burundi for Christmas, but she read other books first, so I snatched it up. I'm no big fan of nineteenth century literature--Jane Austen bores me to tears--but this was just delightful to read.
Daniel
|
|
#15
01-18-2005, 10:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another who was really delighted with the book. A pure pleasure to read.
Is it just me, or is there a lot of really good fantasy literature comming out reasonably recently? It seems to me that, for decades, fantasy as a genre was overshadowed by LoTR, to the extent that much fantasy was in essence inferior copies of Tolkien - or was outcompeted by science fiction. Nowadays, fantasy seems (in general) more innovative and just generally better than it has been.
|
|
#16
01-18-2005, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I loved this book. How much did I love this book? When faced with a potentially very high luggage overlimit charge in bringing stuff back from the cruise, and forced to choose between shoes and this book (which I had finished reading about halfway through the cruise), I chose to leave the shoes and take the book.
Ultimately, I ended up giving the book to my mother to read with the caveat that I'd get it back next time I was out west, and took the shoes. But at the point where I thought it was a choice book > shoes. Also, I love footnotes in all contexts, and these were especially fabulous. I want to be able to read all those delicious books referenced.
|
|
#17
01-18-2005, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I just finished it last night. It was... very 19th century. Very good, but a very, very good mimic of the style. Which to me often brings a wierd reading experience of "boring but unputdownable". Throughout the book there's that crazy frustration of knowing really fascinating stuff is happening... somewhere else. And these dumbass people haven't the sense to go to where it is so we can see it.
 And then I got to the last few hundred pages and couldn't put the thing down; I was so pissed when I had to go to work!SPOILER:
|
|
#19
01-18-2005, 02:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I, too, adore this book. The first time through I found it very dry and slow reading, but I took it home for Christmas holidays and basically lived in it for a week, read it three times over. It's such a distinctive fantasy, as good as the Gormenghast novels IMHO, and the characters...! Furthermore, it's a book for people who love books - not just the stories, the actual books.
Unfortunately I can't quote my favourite bits because I've lent it to two friends. Each only gets to keep it every other week because otherwise they don't get enough schoolwork done. 
|
|
#20
01-18-2005, 02:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
That's okay though, because I'm sure to do the re-reading. Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norell may well be more lyrical; but for sheer perversity, nothing beats Gormenghast. Some frivolous cake, anyone? 
|
|
#21
02-21-2005, 06:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Finished this last night, and wanted to bump the thread, because I know I'm not the only one who's been reading it.
I don't think the characters were necessarily particularly stupid -- though Norrell's "half and half" mistake was particularly boneheaded -- since that was damn close to the first magic he'd done, I didn't find it hard to believe that he'd miss the obvious loophole. I loved that the man with the thistledown hair was never named -- I spent a while thinking he might be John Uskglass, then realized that didn't work. I loved the relationship between him and Henry Black, and I looooooooooooooved the fact that Henry Black SPOILER:
I loved the final scene between Arabella and Jonathan. I loved the way the relationship between Strange and Norrell was resolved. I loved the way the author (and characters) talked about English magic as though it were a tangible thing, not an intangible concept. The footnotes were great, and I loved the way Clarke kept the tone totally 19th-century -- except for these tiny glimpses of a more modern humor in the occasional turn of a phrase. Great book!
|
|
#22
02-21-2005, 10:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Not done with Strange and Norrell yet, so I'll have to come back to this thread later.
|
|
#24
02-21-2005, 11:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#25
02-21-2005, 12:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here's the review
What convinced me from the review was that Sawyer had some of the same problems I did -- expecially the "indistinctness" -- at times it was like reading through a curtain, there was too much distance, and I didn't engage with any of the characters. Despite that indistinctness, or maybe even because of it, Sawyer found a lot to like. I think I expected more fantasy, more magic, less drawing room banality. The characters said everything they were thinking. There was nothing to question. Everyone's plans and motives were out there. (Except for the Thistledown Hair guy, of course.)
|
|
#26
03-04-2005, 04:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I just finished listened to an audiobook version of this book, and I had to run back here and find this thread and comment.
WOW! What a fabulous book! Yes, it's a little slow to get started. But the ending -- what a marvelous and satisfying ending. I thought there was plenty of magic in the book -- the kind of magic that pervades everything. Magic was happening everywhere, not just being performed by Strange and Norrell. And Stephen (not Henry, twickster) Black's fate -- perfect. Absolutely. Perfect. I was a little skeptical whether audiobook narration could handle the footnotes, but I didn't find them intrusive at all. But why in the world the narrator thought it was proper to pronounce "Sidhe" as sid-hee and not shee, I'll never know. Susanna Clarke says that her next book will likely be set in the same world as JS&MN (see here. W00t!!! I can't wait!
|
|
#27
03-04-2005, 06:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#28
03-04-2005, 06:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Khadaji, if you have a chance to get the audiobook (maybe from the library?) that might be easier for you. I started out with a print copy and bogged down a bit. The footnotes actually seemed less intrusive in the audiobook than they did in the print copy.
|
|
#29
03-04-2005, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 Wasn't that totally satisfying? I'm curious -- how exactly do they handle the footnotes in the audio version. Do they say "footnote," or wht?
|
|
#30
03-04-2005, 07:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#31
03-04-2005, 09:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
No, seriously. Don't think of them as distractions, or digressions from the story. If you notice, they're very often placed at breaks between scenes or chapters--I don't recall many at all that were smack in the middle of a scene, where you had to read five hundred words of footnote and then come back in the middle of a conversation you'd forgotten. And even so, they're not extraneous. Once you decide they're part of the story, they're no longer a distraction. But then, I adored the footnotes. I'd see that little superscript number and think, "ooh, a footnote!" Because they were just lovely. I'm going to have to read that book again.
|
|
#34
04-21-2005, 08:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bumping because I finished this book last night and it was frickin' sweet. One question I had, though:
SPOILER:
What a great book. I can't wait for her next one. I did notice, though, that she started this book in 92 or 93, so hopefully she'll be a little bit faster on the next one.
|
|
#35
07-21-2007, 06:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm bumping this thread 'cos I've just finished this book, after a marathon reading session: you can't read "just one more chapter" in this book; you have to keep going until you just can't keep your eyes open. This was the first book I've read since His Dark Materials that I devoured in about three sittings - pure reading bliss.
A few observations: I thought the writing style was closer to Thackeray than Dickens myself, though with less authorial omniscience, with its dry archness: definitely a touch of Jane Austen, too. Susanna Clarke absolutely pulled off a mid-19th century "voice", though. Loved the characterisation: nobody was two-dimensional, and almost everyone had a sympathetic streak, even Mr Norrell. Great development, too, as all the characters grew more rounded throughout the novel: even the bad guys, Lascelles and Drawlight, matured - Lascelles in particular convincingly grew from an idle, self-interested fop to a ruthless bastard who'd do anything to protect his stake in Mr Norrell. Great comeuppances for the pair of them, too: Lascelles' fate was chilling. The women characters were great, and made the romances of Jonathan/Arabella and Jonathan/Flora romances, completely believable: convincing relationships between men and women is almost always a weak point in fantasy, but Clarke nailed them dead on. Ditto the race angle: Stephen Black was convincing as an outwardly accomplished but inwardly bitter and insecure black man in Regency England, and I liked the way The Man With The Thistledown Hair didn't exactly manipulate him, but encouraged him in his hostility with his sympathy and support. I thought I had Stephen pegged as John Uskglass, too. Now I have to go back and read it again, to savour it more slowly.
__________________
Detrimento malignitas; victoria ultio
|
|
#37
07-21-2007, 12:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Slight hijack --- I you liked this book, and specifically liked the use of footnotes, I want to recommend the Bartimaeus Trilogy by Jonathan Stroud.
Oh, and FTR, loved the book (JS&MN). Bought it in London when it came out (on a whim) and was pretty much blown away.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
