Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell (1 Viewer)

[demonic_harmonic]

You will either love this or hate it. You will either say it was completely uneventful, or that it was jam packed with little amusing saying and magical events. You will either find the characters totally enthrawling or terribly boring and won't be able to relate to them. You will either read the whole thing and love it, or put it down half way and go 'what the hell?'.


Mmm. Read Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell. Frankly, I don't give a crap if you hate it. I don't care if you feel the need to bash it and rip it apart. I don't care if you think it is terrible. Because, like I said, there are two sorts of people in this world. Those who love Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell, and those who hate it.


You have been warned. *snuggles her book*


And, they are making a movie that will come out in 2006, so you might as well get a head start on it.


Edit: By the way, as for people saying it is the 'Adult Harry Potter', even the author said it wasn't, but it is good. So if you hated Harry Potter, there is still a chance you'll like this.

 

[kerpoe]

I hate Harry Potter more than anything in the fricking world.

 

[Londongrey]

Ah, and so the rational of the back to front baseball cap still lives. Hehe.

Thanks demonic I will have to check those out as I LOVE Harry Potter, I have already pre-ordered the next book for July, Hooray!!!

 

[crzywriter]

HAHA LG, so have I!!

Harry Potter rocks!

...ahem...

demonic will kill me if i wreck this thread...so...

ah...yes, i'll go check that book out, demonic.



please don't kill me.

~Crzy

 

[demonic_harmonic]

hehe i won't kill you.


have fun, londongray.


as for you, kerpoe, i don't really care too much. harry potter is a wonderful series, and snape is sexy, and all is right in the world.

 

[PaPa]

I enjoyed the book, but I wasn't entirely overcome with love for it. I know of people who are incredibly indifferent on the subject, so I would say that your marmite-esque claim is suspect.

However, such things aside and moving on to discussion of the book, the main thing that struck me about the book was the points of similarity with Tolkien. When I say this I do not mean points of similarity with Middle-Earth or with any of his storylines, but rather with the style. Both writers manage to give the impression of an extensive backstory and fully realized world - Tolkien did it through the appendices and Clarke does it through footnotes. They also both write as if they are a chronicler within the fictitious world, although Clarke puts more effort into this illusion.

My main complaint about the book is in part due to its length. You have to wait a very long time before the characters finally manage to work out what is going on, and you know that if only they had made a few connections and had a few conversations they could have worked it all out several chapters ago. The length also contributes to an enormous build-up which is somewhat dissatisified by the ending.

However, upon reading the book a second time I found that these problems disappeared - because you are no longer so bound by suspense, you are more at liberty to enjoy the ride and my estimation of the quality of the denouement increased significantly the second time round.

In conclusion, a book that I would heartily reccomend to all and sundry, but which I would also recommend a second reading of for those who came away with their appetite whetted but unsatisfied the first time.

 

[Saponification]

Hm. Well, from the posts of yours I've seen your tastes aren't that wildly different. I might check it out once I finish the books I have here.