Widely regarded as one of the best works of the modern fantasy canon, JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL was a book Ive been meaning to read for a while. And while every one of these 1000 or so pages is evidence of literary brilliance, it wasnt something I was fully emotionally invested in. Still, though, Im glad I finally read it.
Susanna Clarke takes the subgenre Regency fantasy to a whole new level with her superb command of that time periods language. Think Austen with a heavy dose of magical elements: not only was the language reminiscent of Regency England times, but Austens almost insidious portrayal of ridiculous people had a heavy showing in JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL. While Strange and Norrell are arguably the main characters of the eponymous novel, we readers dont really like them the way we usually do protagonists, because most of them are not good people: Norrell in particular manipulate nearly everyone out of fear of a loss of influence, meanwhile letting his even-less-appealing friends manipulate him in turn. All the unsavory characters in the book make Jonathan Strange look very good indeed, but hes no real wounded hero, just another self-centered guy who does not give enough consideration to others in his life.
That, I guess, is what ultimately disappointed me about this book: it doesnt break any conventions or tread new ground in terms of genre or sociohistorical issues. Clarke crafts an alternate, magician-focused history for England, but, with the exception of head-scratchingly long footnotes showing just how in-depth Clarke has got with her alternate history creativity, JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL didnt blow me out of the water with originality in its fantasy genre.
Additionallyand this may just be meI found it a bit off-putting how small a role women played in the novel. For a book written by a female author, I had expected a bit more subversion of historical attitudes toward the role of males vs. females in society; yes, the book doesnt attempt to focus on the inequality and tensions between different parties, but I was surprised that the book didnt take such a step with potentially strong and interesting female characters such as Arabella Strange and Mrs. Pole. No, at the end of the day, things and people seemed to be pretty much what they had been before the book started, which results in readers confusion along the lines of, I just spent three weeks reading 1000 pagesand did anything significant really happen? Hrmph.
So, in some ways, reading JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL was for me like reading a classic that the great authorities of literature say is a must-read but on a personal level was a slog to get through. While I certainly appreciated Clarkes Austenian writing style, I closed the book realizing that 500 pages couldve been cut out and I would have thought nothing was amiss.
Susanna Clarke takes the subgenre Regency fantasy to a whole new level with her superb command of that time periods language. Think Austen with a heavy dose of magical elements: not only was the language reminiscent of Regency England times, but Austens almost insidious portrayal of ridiculous people had a heavy showing in JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL. While Strange and Norrell are arguably the main characters of the eponymous novel, we readers dont really like them the way we usually do protagonists, because most of them are not good people: Norrell in particular manipulate nearly everyone out of fear of a loss of influence, meanwhile letting his even-less-appealing friends manipulate him in turn. All the unsavory characters in the book make Jonathan Strange look very good indeed, but hes no real wounded hero, just another self-centered guy who does not give enough consideration to others in his life.
That, I guess, is what ultimately disappointed me about this book: it doesnt break any conventions or tread new ground in terms of genre or sociohistorical issues. Clarke crafts an alternate, magician-focused history for England, but, with the exception of head-scratchingly long footnotes showing just how in-depth Clarke has got with her alternate history creativity, JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL didnt blow me out of the water with originality in its fantasy genre.
Additionallyand this may just be meI found it a bit off-putting how small a role women played in the novel. For a book written by a female author, I had expected a bit more subversion of historical attitudes toward the role of males vs. females in society; yes, the book doesnt attempt to focus on the inequality and tensions between different parties, but I was surprised that the book didnt take such a step with potentially strong and interesting female characters such as Arabella Strange and Mrs. Pole. No, at the end of the day, things and people seemed to be pretty much what they had been before the book started, which results in readers confusion along the lines of, I just spent three weeks reading 1000 pagesand did anything significant really happen? Hrmph.
So, in some ways, reading JONATHAN STRANGE AND MR. NORRELL was for me like reading a classic that the great authorities of literature say is a must-read but on a personal level was a slog to get through. While I certainly appreciated Clarkes Austenian writing style, I closed the book realizing that 500 pages couldve been cut out and I would have thought nothing was amiss.
Back to all reviews by this member
Back to all reviews of this book
Back to Book Reviews
Back to Book Details
Back to all reviews of this book
Back to Book Reviews
Back to Book Details
