Rating: 
Summary: A Marvelous Book!
Review:
I just finished reading this book. To my great delight, it's neither "Harry Potter for adults," nor a Lord of the Rings clone.
Then what is it? It's a beautifully written, witty, and enchanting tale. It's full of deep and interesting characters, it's full of imaginative little anecdotes and fables, and it's full of adventure. There is more imagination and detail in this book than could possibly fit within its 800 pages, and so I can only suspect that it has been enhanced by the subtle use of magic that its main characters are more than capable of. So no, it isn't Harry-Potter-like, or Tolkien-like.
However, if you dislike footnotes, be warned, for there are many of them, and they can reach impressive lengths. Similarly, if your attention span is only a couple of seconds long, then maybe Harry Potter is more suitable to your taste: In Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, not every chapter ends in a cliffhanger. It is a compliment to the author's skill that no such cheap tricks are needed, and that the story is engaging and involving despite its (initially) leisurely pace.
This book is hyped up to be THE book of the year, and having read it, I am quite willing to believe it. Don't hesitate to pick up a copy of Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell. In addition to this book, I recommend another oddly entertaining (but quite different) novel, The Losers Club by Richard Perez.
Rating:
Summary: Exceptional First Novel
Review: Before reading this book several people told me it was being hailed as the 'Harry Potter for adults.' Something I found a bit odd, considering I thought Harry Potter was the Harry Potter for adults. Despite the fact that I do not agree with this speculation, Ms. Clarke has given us a tale as wondrous and intoxicating as those of everyone's favorite adolescent wizard. There was so much detail put into this novel that I don't find it hard at all to believe it took ten years to write. The footnotes used throughout to give depth to the rich history of magic Ms. Clarke has created were fantastic. At times I found myself so enraptured by the specifics that I could almost believe I was reading a history book rather than a work of fiction. The characters were well developed, and the settings were so vivid I still have scenes burned into my imagination. Hopefully they will remain there for years to come. For a first novel, Ms. Clarke shows exceptional skill in her craft, and I look forward with much anticipation for her next work. Any fan of words would do well to read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Strangely Gripping
Review: Despite some not very likeable characters, heroines carelessly disposed of and then revived and then doomed to be separated from her love, I did enjoy reading the book. There was something beautiful, yet real, grounded, yet surreal about the world evoked; and the many strands of the story came together in the end rather neatly. It falls between the epic scale of Tolkien and the contrived phantasia of fantasy-fantasy, which is refreshing. Less footnotes please. Really, it does NOT read in anyway like a historical account, and it shouldn't.
Rating:
Summary: Another helping please
Review: First, let me start by saying that JONATHAN STRANGE is not an easy read; the novel is long, the book is heavy and not easy to carry around. But that is all the bad I can say about it. If you like history, like stories about magic, like to read, this book is for you. The story is so compelling, the way Clarke take history and blends it with her story, the intricacies of the characters, and the way it was written makes not want to put the book down. Having read other stories of Magic, including J.K. Rowlings Harry Potter Series with my kids (which I love, by the way), this book surprised me and made me think and say: finally somebody thought about us who like to read fantasy books and are adults. Finally something that can entertain us without to be thinking as kids. This book to me was wonderful! Must also recommend another great book, though it is MUCH shorter and compact-still, a great read, and that is Jackson T. McCrae's THE CHILDREN'S CORNER, which is a fantastic collection of stories that entertains and touches the soul.
Rating:
Summary: Loved it
Review: I could tell by other reviews that this is one of those books one either loves or hates. I am on the love side. The one thing I did not see mentioned in any of the reviews are the lovely illustrations by Portia Rosenberg which added so much to my reading pleasure. In fact, the copy of the book I bought (from Amazon) turned out to be a First Edition printing, and the entire book is amazingly beautiful, which also added to my pleasure.
Rating: 
Summary: Be wary, be very wary
Review: I have a Ph.D. in English Literature, and have spent the greater portion of my life reading novels and writing about them. I enjoy a good fantasy novel, and bought into the "buzz" surrouding JS.
Luckily, I grabbed a copy from the library, and didn't purchase it.
It boils down to this:
1) JS fails as a standard pot-boiler fantasy/adventure novel. That's fine. So does, for example, Mervyn Peake's "Ghormenghast." It's not necessary for every novel to grip you by the lapels and drag you on a wild ride.
2) JS fails as a literary work of art. That's ok, so do lots of fun and interesting novels. So does the "Harry Potter" series.
3) JS fails as a historical novel. The "period" evoked is done so in an amateurish way; in some ways, it's not even up to Regency romance novel standards. But that's ok, not every book manages this trick very well.
4) JS fails regards structure: it's not just a shaggy dog, it's a dog that's never been within 10 miles of a scissor. But that's ok, sometimes lack of structure opens up interesting narrative possibilities.
5) JS fails to be interesting stylistically. The prose is very straightward and dull. This is pretty bad, but can be overlooked.
6) JS isn't that funny. Very unfunny, actually. This is a serious strike against it.
It's ok if a novel lacks 1 or 2 of the above. 3 or 4 is not so great. Sadly, JS lacks all 6.
To sum, JS simply fails to qualify as a good or interesting or even mildly gripping novel.
Take, for example, the very few and awkward uses of "archaic" words sprinlked through the text. Or old spellings, such as "surprise" rendered "surprize". That's fine, in moderation, or when done well. But honestly, Susanna Clark uses the word "surprize" on almost every page. I'm not kidding you. Go back and read the first 100 pages of the novel. Count the number of "surprizes" that stick up and poke you in the eye. It's an astonishingly amateurish display.
I'm amazed that anyone's charmed by the "footnote" ploy. It's a very old trick at this point (entire novels have been written consisting of nothing more than a footnote in a footnote in a footnote, etc. Refer also to Nabokov's 'Pale Fire' for another take on it.) I found the footnotes:
1) Not interesting or funny enough to warrant their inclusion,
2) Not adding to the plot, mystery, sense of wonder, etc. of the overall novel.
3) Irritating after a while.
For those people comparing Susanna Clarke to any of the great writers of old, Austin or Eliot or whomever -- it's balderdash. Dickens infuses more life into a character in one page than Clarke manages in 700. There are more out-loud laughs in a paragraph of Austin than a chapter by Clarke. There is no emotional connection betwen the characters, between the reader and the characters -- nothing. It's empty.
Once the loud buzz dies down, I think people will end up shoving this book off the nightstand and into a box, soon to be shuffled off to the attic or garage.
I'm sorry to put it in these terms. I came to the novel with great hopes and expectations and plenty of good will. I now regret the time I've wasted reading it.
Rating:
Summary: Like No Other Book I Ever Read
Review: I just closed the back cover of this book, which I started well over three months ago. I agree with much of what everyone else is saying here; it is enjoyable entirely all the way through, but not until book three does it ever become a "page turner," it is absolutely not in the same realm of "Harry Potter," and it is oddly more dark and yet more funny than those books. The reason I am bothering to add to almost 300 other reviews is to discuss one aspect of this book. Which is, if you follow along, and read all the footnotes in this book, you come away with the odd sense that you have actually, honestly learned a lot of factual information about 18th century English magic. This is of course, ridiculous, but Suzanna Clarke writes with such authority and confidence (and detail) on the subject that, unlike the Potter books where you come away wishing the world were so, but quite aware it is fantasy, you leave the world of Strange and Norrell, quite convinced that it was indeed so. In this way this book is astoundingly unique. Her writing style, almost a Austen type comedy of manners, works well to make you believe she is just relating a story of everyday life, with all the petty jealousies etc, that people go through. Magic is simply part of the world they live in. You will either love or hate this book, but you should at least try it, and give it a chance to unwind itself for you and leave preconceptions behind.
Rating:
Summary: What a delightfully BIG story!
Review: I truly did not expect to like this book--this big, this enormous, intimidating book. My friends in my book club voted to read it (I didn't), but they were right and I was wrong. And to accept defeat, I announce with a shout: This is one seductively brilliant, imaginative novel! Clarke resurrects nineteenth century England with meticulous skill, then casts over it a Harry Potter-like magical aura. It has to be read to be believed. It all sounds foolish, I know. I was where you are now, smirking, shaking my head, saying, Right, right! But if you have good liberal-minded friends like I do, then you'll see. You'll see.Other recommended books from my book club: AMAGANSETT by Mill and A SECRET WORD by Paddock
Rating: 
Summary: Estranged By Strange and Norell
Review: I've spent several days listening to the unabridged audio version of Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norell. Initially, I was delighted by the world described in this novel: a cool pre-Victorian world where magic is the province of scholarly magicians and where fairies and humans co-exist. I liked the Eccentric Mr. Norell and the young upstart, Jon Strange. But over time, I grew bored with the contrived conflict between the magicians, the endless tedious footnotes and the snarkiness of Norell vs. Strange, neither of whom I ended up liking by the end of the book. (These two male leads remind me of a couple of immature schoolboys rather than the adults they were supposed to be).
While I stuck it through to the end to find out what happened in the Norrel vs. Strange conflict, I found the ending to anticlimactic and not very satisfying. Overall, I would've liked this novel more if I had been able to empathize with Strange and Norell.
3 Stars for an average read which could've been better if I'd actually LIKED Norrel and Strange.
Rating:
Summary: An inferiority complex in the making
Review: One of those amazingly, intimidatingly clever, but witty and compulsively readable books (like The Eyre Affair) that make one glad to be a reader! It seems ridiculous to cite an impressive historical accuracy in a book about magicians, but this period was a favorite of mine to study, and all the little details she puts in seem to be dead on the mark. I like that in a work of fantasy!
|
