A review of Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke for my Fill in the Gaps: Project 100 list.
Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norell is an alternate-history (or fantasy) that’s set in 19th-century England during the Napoleonic Wars. It’s based on the idea that magic once existed in England and that it will be brought back with the help of two practicing magicians: Gilbert Norrell and Jonathan Strange. The story centers on their relationship (or lack there of) as they make England into a land where anyone can perform magic.
I looked forward to reading this book, particularly because it is a Hugo winner. In the end, I was disappointed. I could not finish the book fast enough. I found it completely intolerable.
Ms. Clarke writes in (my opinion) an archaic style akin to Charles Dickens and Jane Austen, and, in fact has been criticized for writing a pastiche of them (and others). While I agree that her style mimics many of the old classics, I think I’d draw the line prior to pastiche. Although, like many of the classics, I feel that the book sufferers from extreme wordiness and could have benefited from some judicious trimming….probably 300-500 of the nearly 800 pages comprising this tome could have been deleted.
A good editor could have made this an outstanding read. I felt that there were so many words–such a lack of focus–that as I read, I continued to ask myself…so? So? SO!? Had I not committed to reading this for the Project 100, I’d have quit reading very early on. Very little held my attention. This is sad, because the story is such an interesting one.
Still, the book is not without its merits. There were occasions when Ms. Clarke created the perfect turn of phrase and wonderful lyrical description. Her world-building is superb. If only one didn’t have to plod slowly through the muck to get to the beauty.
As I complained while I read, one friend told me that the last 100 pages makes the entire book worthwhile. I disagree. The pacing did pick up toward the end, almost feeling as though the book raced to its conclusion. It did become more focused–loose strings were tied up–but it failed to provide me with the satisfying conclusion I’d longed for after investing so much time. I found it lacking.
If you like Dickins and Austin, you might like Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norrell. For me, I won’t be picking up the sequel.
Post Script: I failed to mention one of the most annoying things about this book: fictitious footnotes. There were hundreds, printed in minute type at the bottom of the page, often spanning two or more pages. The most annoying of the annoying were the footnotes which referred to other footnotes in different chapters of the book.
Interesting. This is on my fill in the gaps list, too, and I recently picked it up at Half Priced Books. See, I like Austen, and am not sure about Dickens, and I read tons of classics for fun, so maybe the wordiness won’t bother me as much. I hope not. It’s always scary to see a negative review of a book you’ve committed to read…
Hi Amanda! Thanks for visiting.
I hope I haven’t filled you with trepidation at the thought of reading JS! Soooo many people adore it… I did like some things, including the underlying story…I just felt I had to plow through so much to get to it. If you like Austen, you’ll probably enjoy this too.
haha–i LOVED the fictitious footnotes! they were one of my favorite parts 🙂 alas–i hope our tastes don’t vary TOO much, since we have a lot of reading together in the near future! but maybe that will make it more interesting.
i read this book in 2004, and five years later i have a vivid recollection of the beginning and of the end. and NOTHING in the middle. i did like it an awful lot, but i remember even then wishing it was shorter. and apparently i didn’t remember large passages of it.
It’s funny, usually I hate books that waffle on and are too wordy – but I absolutely love JS. I think I just got caught up in it!
The book does tell an interesting story, and I’m glad I read it. It just won’t be one of those books I keep on my shelf for a re-read…I can’t see myself slogging through it again.