Book Review: Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke

In the midst of the Napoleonic Wars in 1806, most people believe magic to have long since disappeared from England -- until the reclusive Mr. Norrell reveals his powers and becomes an overnight celebrity.

Another practicing magician then emerges: the young and daring Jonathan Strange. He becomes Norrell's pupil, and the two join forces in the war against France.

But Strange is increasingly drawn to the wild, most perilous forms of magic, and he soon risks sacrificing his partnership with Norrell and everything else he holds dear.

Susanna Clarke's brilliant first novel is an utterly compelling epic tale of nineteenth-century England and the two magicians who, first as teacher and pupil and then as rivals, emerge to change its history.

I FINALLY finished my reread of Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, which I started last year with the 20th anniversary readalong. I mostly kept up with the reading schedule (albeit a week or so behind) until I didn't, pausing for over a month until I finally finished it halfway through January.

**mild spoilers throughout**

I would say the main plot is "autistic magician and ADHD magician have a friend breakup" if it weren't so contrary to the feel of the book, but that is basically what happens. Mr. Norrell is so obviously autistic in the way he is written: his special interests are books and magic, and he is very rigid with his rules; he has no social skills and doesn't follow social customs, and he gets overwhelmed at parties. I would argue that Mr. Strange has ADHD because he flits from career to career until he lands on being a magician, which quickly becomes his main focus in life over even his wife; he hyperfocuses on his magical studies and makes impulsive decisions on big things like moving mountains and stepping through mirrors to unknown lands without a game plan.

There are many characters in this book besides the eponymous ones; the second tier consists of menservants and ladies, and they are quite well-rounded characters, even if they are trapped by their social statuses (and for most of them, by the fairy villain). The sole character of color is Stephen Black, whose mother was enslaved; he goes through so much stuff that his story's ending is rather sad, to me. The women are controlled and let down by the men in their lives, and their agencies, lives, and voices are taken away. There are lots of duos in this book: the two magicians, the two kings, the two nameless slaves, the two ladies, the two menservants, the two big eras of English magic, doing magic versus reading about it...

SUCH a good book and so excellently written. The Regency England setting makes it familiar (apart from the magic, everything seems to be as it was in our universe, such as the Napoleonic wars), but the magical history stuff is so different and interesting. The fairytales mentioned in the footnotes feel familiar too, especially if you grew up reading Western fairytales a lot like I did. The atmosphere of the magic, how big and wild and ancient it is, is just wonderful; it puts me in mind of what C.S. Lewis called Northerness (and affected me much the same). 

If you've already read this book, this article I found on Pinterest compares JS&MN plot points and themes to Bible characters and stories (heavy spoilers!). It's utterly fascinating, and I can't believe I didn't realize some of those connections myself: the word(s) made flesh! The longing for the departed/absent king! I think C.S. Lewis would have liked this book.

You can read my first review of JS&MN here; interestingly enough, I first read it on its 10th anniversary year.

See my Pinterest moodboard for JS&MN here.

Score: ★★★★ out of 5 stars
Spice score: no spice
Read in: November 4, 2024-January 19, 2025
From: thrift store purchase (old)

Tropes: taken by fairies, the student has become the master, forced proximity LMAO

Representation: Black man secondary character, several working class and poor minor to very minor characters, the neurodivergence mentioned above (it is a headcanon but I am correct)

Trigger warnings: murder, gore, dead bodies, war, slavery (past, discussed), racism, death, animal endangerment, injuries, and death; body horror, kidnapping (by fairies), magical stalking, period-typical sexism & classism, supernatural horror, women let down and betrayed by men, Lord Byron (jk)

Rest of March books - children's books

Continuing my Narnia reread, next up was The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. This book has many of the same characters as Prince Caspian, and introduces the Pevensies' cousin Eustace Scrubb, a deeply annoying stuck-up brat. In the first two books, the Pevensies were called (or blundered into) Narnia to save it from an invading colonizing force; in this one, Edmund and Lucy (and Eustace) just get to chill on the Dawn Treader and go on cool interesting adventures with Caspian (now King) without any specific quest they have to do. Don't Peter and Susan deserve such a vacation?? The gang only has like 2 near-death experiences instead of being in near-constant danger and discomfort! Only 3 years have passed for Narnia, instead of the 1,000 or so in Prince Caspian. Each chapter deals with a new adventure, as Caspian and co. find out what happened to his fathers' friends who went that way some 20+ years before them and were never heard from again. They also try to get to the end of the world. I love VotDT, as the stakes aren't very high (in one adventure, Caspian, the Pevensies and Eustace are kidnapped into slavery but are rescued like 2 hours later) and the different adventures are fun and fascinating to read about. The pacing and vibe is different from the first two books; reluctant readers might do better with this one. 4.5 stars, permanent collection. I read the copy from my OG Dillons cover art series. Trigger warnings for this book: horror (psychological mostly), suspense and creepiness, death (off-page), dragon cannibalism, slavery, bullying, greed, period-typical sexism, feminism depicted as stupid (sole feminist sentiments given to worst, most annoying character), danger, animal bullied (altho Reep can take care of himself), swords and weapons, pro-monarchy statements, they almost run out of drinking water on the boat at one point

I feel like I bought A Child of Books by Oliver Jeffers and Sam Winston (illustrator) from Barnes & Noble, although of course at this point I have no record of that. I bought it several years ago and displayed it propped up on top of my AC unit, then finally read it in March. Summary below:

A little girl sails her raft across a sea of words, arriving at the house of a small boy and calling him away on an adventure. Through forests of fairy tales and across mountains of make-believe, the two travel together on a fantastical journey that unlocks the boy’s imagination. Now a lifetime of magic and adventure lies ahead of him . . . but who will be next? 

 It's exactly the kind of picture book I love to read: full of book love, wonder, and whimsical illustrations. It leaves you with such a wonderful, warm feeling after reading it. I was surprised by how grayscale the illustrations were, however; while beautiful, creative, and text-based (the text is taken from classic works of literature and classic children's books), hardly any colors were used in the illustrations. I would have also liked to see more diversity; both children appear to be white. I do highly recommend this book, especially to metabook lovers (metabook = books about books). 4.5 stars, keeping. Trigger warnings for this book: if I remember correctly, the children get into slightly dangerous situations? being chased by trolls etc. but nothing major or "real"

Sanditon miniseries, and books I've reread lately

I finished watching PBS's Sanditon miniseries, which is based on an unfinished novel that Jane Austen was writing when she died. It was pretty good, but I felt it was too soap opera-y. You already know that I don't like it when people insert random stuff into Jane Austen adaptations, especially if it's only for the drama. There are trysts! Kidnappings! A page is taken out of Cruel Intentions' book! There's a love triangle between two hot dudes and the heroine! There's a love triangle between the hero and two ladies who love him! There's at least one manipulative bitch who isn't afraid to use sex as a weapon! You know, a lot of stuff that does not belong in a Jane Austen adaptation (unless she already wrote it in there).
Also, I didn't like it that the hero walked around in stubble all the time, and that the heroine almost always wore her hair down despite being of Out age. They also did not wear hats and gloves in public/outside nearly enough. I also feel that there was too much obvious makeup on the women (I'm pretty sure ladies did not wear smoky eye makeup with crimson lips in the Regency era). I hate it when historical period pieces aren't accurate.
The heroine felt like a cross between Catherine from Northanger Abbey and Lizzie from Pride & Prejudice. The hero was definitely a Darcy type. The bitchy old rich lady was basically the same as she was in the book. One thrills to think of the frenemy relationship she would have with Lady Catherine de Bourgh. They really fleshed out the sole character of color, a young lady from the West Indies who is an heiress in the miniseries. I liked her and felt bad for her to be stuck in a town full of just white people who were often racist to her. The trips to London showed how diverse it was back then, which was nice and interesting. The ending was very abrupt and unsatisfying, which I thought was because maybe they ended the miniseries where Austen's novel did, but no! They fleshed it way out more than the novel, and just chose to end it that way! WTF. Despite all that, it was pretty good.

So obviously after I finished Sanditon, I decided to reread the book to see how similar the miniseries was to it. The answer is: not very. It was all right. It usually takes me a while to get into nineteenth century writing nowadays, thanks to the Internet and social media, and by the time I was hitting my stride, it was over. Anyway, my volume of Sanditon also has The Watsons and Lady Susan, and I decided to reread Lady Susan because I remember finding it so funny and scandalous. It... was fine. It did make me watch Love & Friendship, its adaptation that stars Kate Beckinsale, who is perfect, if a bit tamer than Lady Susan in her letters to her best friend. So random how they made her best friend American just because Chloe Sevegny (sp?) wanted it be in the movie for some reason. Anyway.

I organized more of my books, consolidating several piles into one megapile next to the stairs. This action of course revealed several books that I need to read and decide whether to keep or not.  I  reread Franny and Zooey for this reason. I wrote about it last time I read it, and I really liked it at the time. This time it was mostly just okay. I still liked the Jesus/religious stuff, but I guess there's something about reading a book where young people in their early to mid twenties have quarter-life crises when you yourself are in your thirties, that lowers the appreciation for the book. I last read it 9 years ago, when I was in my early twenties, so it makes sense that I liked it more then. Anyway. I'll be giving this one away.