| Author |
Topic:
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
|
Zaz
Title: Manager:
The Amphitheatre
Registered:
Oct '98
|
Date Posted:
9/3/07 2:22pm
Subject:
RE: Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
|
*Sigh* You asked.
Here's my review from Amazon:
"Let's start with what this book is not:
1. It's not Jane Austen: Jane may have used archaic language, but she is neither boring nor long-winded. If this was a genuine imitation of Austen, it would be one quarter of the length. Austen studied economy. Clarke does not. And Clarke, though she tries, also can't manage Austen's wit; she imitates it without having it.
2. It's not `Harry Potter for Adults': shrewd marketing ploy, but there is no resemblance other than the inclusion of magic. Rowling isn't much of a technician, but she is an excellent storyteller, with a casual, throw-away wit, which makes her work the exact opposite of this book. "JS & MN" is so calculated it's practically a literary computer.
3. It's not Charles Dickens: Charley is long-winded, but at least his characters have life. And he was a lot later.
4. It's not a Victorian novel. Victoria's reign started in 1837, and this book is set about thirty years or so earlier. So it's supposed to be Georgian pastiche, but it never comes alive, as some historical novels do. I have never understood the point of trying to use an archaic writing style if the culture and ethos that produced it is long gone. I hated Charles Palliser's "The Quincunx" to which this book bears an unfortunate resemblance; it was a similar exercise in stylistic futility. But if you're going to do it, get your idiom right. I'm sure Clarke thought using what she deemed to be the style of the book's setting was clever, but that's all it is. It's a cake-walk: a needlessly elaborate dance, the point of which is to show off, rather than make an aestetic point. The style always feels forced and fights the content the whole way, eventually winning a Pyrrhic victory.
5. It's not interesting: When you read your first dull resurrection, you know you're in trouble. I had to flog myself to read farther: life's way, way too short. And I've read and enjoyed some very dry books in my time. The only remaining mystery is all those glowing reviews. This isn't Austen, or Rowling, or Dickens, or even Thackeray: it's Mrs. Humphrey Ward. (A once very popular, and now completely forgotten 18th century novelist.) To adapt one of the book's own bad jokes: "'Tis a Pity She's a Bore."
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JediTrilobite
Registered:
Nov '99
|
Date Posted:
9/20/07 9:53am
Subject:
RE: Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
|
|
I've started it, but put it away for a little while - it's slow going, but it's not a bad read.
-----signature-----
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Sith_Lord_Linkoping
Registered:
Jan '01
|
Date Posted:
9/21/07 7:28am
Subject:
RE: Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
|
It's a wonderful book that I really love. The characters are very interesting and ingenious. The story are somtimes slow-moving but in the end the pace turns out to be one of the thing I like about the book. There are also some very fascinating surroundings that strengthen the story and the characters.
Simply put, a "one of a kind" book that I personally love and admire.
Has anyone read Susanna Clarke's collection of short stories in her book The Ladies of Grace Adieu and Other Stories? Is it good and will I like it if I love Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell?
-----signature-----
Bianca 1990-2006 - Lost but not forgotten.
~
"Birth signals the arrival of death." - Tekkonkinkreet
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
