Chicks On Lit discussion
Archive 08-19 GR Discussions
>
Jonathon Strange & Mr. Norrell with READING SCHEDULE
Mod
Well this book is fantasy, right? It is not "historical fiction", as none of these main characters and events really existed (footnotes be damned, it is all make believe). So while the setting is 'supposedly' the 1800's England, what we are reading is not actually factual 1800's England in my opinion. :-)
Just like the Harry Potter books are set in "present day" England, yet they are not an accurate depiction of the real, present day England.
I have not yet decided if I will read this book or not. I am not a fan of this type of fantasy with magic spells and the like. But, I am wondering why this has become so popular recently. If you had told me you were reading a book about magicians twenty years ago, I would have assumed you meant stage performers who created illusions. Any talk of magic spells would have conjured (every pun intended) children's entertainment. Why do you suppose this fantasy type of magic has become so popular among adults recently?
I think this book is more historical fiction than we are giving credit. I could be way off here but I think the historical background and life in England to be factual based to start.As we read, one scene had a "magician" administer magic serums to save a stepdaughter which eventually killed her.
We have Mr Norrell as being credited for bringing Lady Pole back from the dead. Then at the beginning of the third reading and she is feeling poorly and they are being questioned as to why they haven't brought Mr Norrell back to readjust his magic serum.
Again, I believe that doctors and medicine wasn't valued with everyone and therefore people resorted to magicians to concoct serums to replace medicine.
I don't believe that serums were only for people who had no other methods. I believe that magic was viewed as real and an alternative to some
Ahhh....I see what you're getting at, Meg. Yes, in that sense, there was magic in the 1800s. Things that (in those days) had no explanation were considered magic. Some elixirs and potions would solve the problem as they would, by accident, contain the cure for the illness. But it was so chancey.
For example, years ago I read that people used to feed moldy bread to people with fevers and other ailments. Who would have thought to feed mouldy bread to sick people?! But it worked in some instances because it contains enough of penicillin to stop some infections. It was a crap-shoot, though. A person had to have the right infection at the right place in order to be fed the mouldy bread. All smoke and mirrors.....magic!
Lady Pole! I hope to reach that part soon. I'm only in Chapter 4 of the audiobook. I'll catch up next week (I hope).
Hmmm, I never think of that sort of belief in "magic" as being wide spread in post-Enlightenment Europe. Were there people who believed in magical forces? I am certain that there were, just as there are people who believe in such things today. As for the "snake oil" cures, I don't think people approached them as Magical potients, but as medical break throughs. I think they were the equivalent to many "alternative" medical treatments today, things with testimonials promoting them, but without hard scientific proof. I have had the impression that, if people looked to supernatural answers to problems or causes for the inexplicable, they turned to Christian religion. God, through the intercession of the saints, effected these happenings or could effect the desired outcome. They did not turn to magic spells and potients. Every Christian denomination has forebad belief in "magic", so I do not think many people would have sought answers there. I think that Christian culture had largely wiped out more ancient "magic" traditions by that point.
That's true, Irene. In real life people would most likely have seen the elixirs as alternative medicine or medical breakthroughs but in this book these are looked upon as magic potions. Because that's the nature of the book and fits into this form of alternative history. I think that's one of the things I enjoy about this sort of book: it puts a different spin on real life and looks at it from another angle.
No one is saying that magic potions and magicians truly existed in the 1800s but what if they did? How would they and their art have fit in? Susanna Clarke did a very good job of blending the real world of the times with this magical element.
I think I'll have to return the audiobook before I finish it. Someone has already requested it. Bummer! Why is the book so popular all of a sudden, I wonder?
Mr. Norrell certainly is a social misfit, isn't he? I'm finding the audio to be a lot of fun. I'm glad that this is a reread, though, because there's a lot of names being introduced and bantered about, which is harder to keep straight in audio format.
He's a very strange sort of man. Very scholarly, knows how to do magic (as seen in the Cathedral scene) but refused to do so. He's also got a dangerous blind eye to the Raven King, refusing to acknowledge him. He has a library of books & knowledge (more than any other magician), yet he plays in the sandbox alone and won't share his toys. Very much a loner.
Petra, I thought that Meg was saying that people did believe in the existance of magicians and potients in that time period. Maybe I misread her post.
Maybe I did, Irene. I don't know if we can be sure what people in the 1800s really thought was true. There are people today who believe in "the dark side" of spells and such, so I imagine there were people in the 1800s who also thought so. The Inquisition was all about superstition (perhaps spells & magical elements?), as well as the Witch trials and persecutions.
Magic, spells, etc. does seem to wind its way through society over the ages, including ours.
I definitely do believe that people believed in magicians, potients and ghosts etc. Look at Shakespeare. How about Merlin? Look at the Kings of England and the people in their courts. Witches? isn't that a form of misunderstood magic? The more I think about it the more I think that magic did play a part in history as long as we define it more than pulling a rabbit out of the hat.Just think when we say "God bless you" when you sneeze. That derived at people thinking the evil spirits were in you and you needed to be blessed to ward them off.
That's true, Meg. I think the unexplained could be seen as magic.....whether people looked at it that way or explained it through God depends, I think, on the beliefs of the time. Imagine what cavemen thought about the world and its wonders back in the day. Everything was unexplained and mysterious. They probably didn't have a word for "magic" (possibly no words at all) but the concept of "magic" and the belief in the unexplained must have been with them.
The more I am talking about this book the more I am liking it!
I did not intend to suggest that people did not believe in magic at various points in history. I was addressing the specific time and place of 19th century Western Europe. Certainly 200 years earlier, we have the "Witch Trials" and the Inquisition 300 years earlier The belief that we can manipulate the powerful spirit world is what is behind practices like Vudoo to this day. I was only answering the question about how much this can be read as historically accurate as opposed to fantasy. Someone, I think Sheila, compared reading this as an historically valid portrayal of 19th century England as reading Harry Potter as a historically accurate portrayal of modern England. I tend to agree with this position.
Mod
Yes, it's fantasy based on historical facts in a small way. Susanna Clarke didn't bend history facts to fit her story but her elements are fantasy. I would agree with Sheila.
People may shelve this as Historical Fiction but people shelve in some very strange ways. On the other hand, fiction implies that it's been changed from reality, so there's an argument for including this into historical fiction. I would shelve it as fantasy. Or perhaps, if there is such a shelf, as Historical Fantasy fiction.
Petra wrote: "Renee wrote: "I read this book when it first came out. I found it surprising. It was different from what I expected. I would love to hear suggestions on other books that are similar"Renee, have y..."
I love all the book you suggested Murakami and Gaimen are all time favorite autors of mine. I will look into Amnesia Moon . Thank you so much
Amnesia Moon was a surprise. I didn't have any expectations and had never read Jonathan Lethem before. I liked it a lot and will look into other books by him.Maybe also have a look at Beat the Reaper, although I've forgotten enough details that I don't remember whether there's a magical element to it but have a gut feeling that it kind of fits somehow.....maybe.
Gods Behaving Badly and maybe some of Christopher Moore's books might be of interest.
Glad to help, if I can. Book recommendations are tricky.
For me the jury is out on whether or not I consider this in the genre of historical fiction. I haven't read enough of it yet to rule it out.
It's a fine line. The Invention of Wings is considered historical fiction. Yet many of the elements of the actual historical facts were changed to fit the story of the book. Therefore, is it truly historical fiction or just fiction?
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell sticks to the history that occurred but adds magic. Therefore, is it fantasy or truly historical fiction?
The incident with Miss Witherspoon (Mrs Pole) was interesting. Norrell is so concerned and focussed on his needs/wants. He's so arrogant and conceited. He so wanted to get into Mr. Pole's good books and into a position where Pole will allow him to put his plans in helping the war effort into action that he doesn't really consider the deal he's making for Mrs Pole. Sigh. It's all about Norrell in Norrell's mind. So far, I haven't gotten a good impression of Mr. Norrell. He's stuck-up, snooty, conceited, arrogant, dry and boring. He's the type of person one only spends time with when one must and one leaves as soon as one can.
I had to laugh when the thistle-haired fairy mentioned another magician and Norrell was confused. He's so certain that he's the ONLY magician in England. LOL!
Well people look at Norrell as the end all be all which adds to his conceit. They are looking at him as restoring magic to England. I wonder if a lot of "magicians" at that time were conceited because they were considered so "wonderful" I wonder if it went with the territory, you really had to believe in yourself to perform!
Or do you? If magic were truly like another profession, would you need to believe in yourself or did you just need to learn the tools? Mr. Norrell bought up the majority of the magic books to monopolize them and keep others from learning the secrets of magic. He's a manipulator and hoarder of information for his own use. That sort of personality trait is more along the lines of a small, insecure person who needs/wants to rise to the top and the only way he knows how to do so is to monopolize and control.
Petra wrote: "It's a fine line. The Invention of Wings is considered historical fiction. Yet many of the elements of the actual historical facts were changed to fit the story of the book. Theref..."
I guess I would answer your question with another question. If the book had paralleled historical 19th century events but, rather than witchcraft, had added modern technology, characters had access to computers and cars, would it still be historical fiction? Maybe I don't really know what constitutes historical fiction.
I guess it depends, Irene, on whether the computers & technology changed history (ie: the storyline didn't follow true historical events). If the computers change the actual historical events (ie: the Grimke sisters used computers in some way to free the slaves), then it's probably not a historical fiction book.
If, though, the computers were just there and didn't change historical facts (ie the Grimke sisters life rolled out as it actually did but they did their reading on computers, for example), then maybe it would be historical fiction.
It's certainly a difficult question to answer, isn't it? I don't know how I'd answer the question for myself either. I can see it both ways.
Personally, I don't follow genres very much. I either like the book or not or something in between. There are so many genres nowadays and more being added all the time.
The newest one that I've heard of is Slipstream; a kind of fantastic or non-realistic fiction that crosses conventional genre boundaries between science fiction, fantasy, and literary fiction. That one is odd. Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell may possibly be considered Slipstream as it passes between fantasy and fiction (historical or not).
Wow I didn't know about new genres being added. That is extremely interesting. A lot of book ordering websites have not added new genres. I wonder why they have not. Slipstream huh?
It's a very strange genre that I don't really understand but it's out there. What did you all think of the rain ships? I thought that was genius. I found that scene rather humorous and got a chuckle out of how in opposition that was to Mr. Norrell, who is very much not a humorous guy. :D
I'm in I have a lot of catching up to do.
Welcome Nekoshia, we are glad to have you join us
Everyone has such articulate comments. I am enjoying reading the discussion. I don't have much to say except that I am throughly enjoying the story and can't wait to find out what happens.
Mod
How is everyone doing with the reading? Any thoughts on this week's reading?
Petra wrote: "Amnesia Moon was a surprise. I didn't have any expectations and had never read Jonathan Lethem before. I liked it a lot and will look into other books by him.Maybe also have a look at [book:Beat ..."
Petra your recommendation have all been spot on for me.I love Moore's books. I had forgotten about them. Now I have so many great books to reaf. Thank you
Mod
This book still is certainly fantasy magic in my opinion. The magic that our characters do is not any type of magic that I think would ever have been considered realistic in the time setting of this book. I would think that this type of magic would have actually freaked people out, as it was too real, to obvious, and would have probably been considered evil and sinister.
Sheila can you give us some examples of what scenes you are referring to?
Mod
OK I didn't get that far, I am convinced!!!
That was a particularly strange scene, Sheila. I did think it was rather genius.....but then, I was the kid that stayed up 'til midnight to watch horror movies on Friday nights (if my parents let me stay up that late).
Sheila wrote: "The magic that our characters do is not any type of magic that I think would ever have been considered realistic in the time setting of this book...."Sheila, this statement came to mind as I was listening to Mr. Norrell tell Jonathan a Fairy story.
He was saying that there were roads leading to Fairy Land throughout England. They run behind the normal roads, behind hedges and such. He was saying that no one uses the roads anymore (human or fairy) as they are afraid of travelling on them and that the roads are overgrown but still there.
From that, I think Suzanna Clarke is trying to make this England different than our England of the 1814 era. I think she isn't adding magic to our England of that time but creating an England where fairy and human people have lived together always and have just recently (in historic terms) moved apart.
If so, perhaps any magic would seem "normal" & realistic to the world (unlike ours)? Is this what you meant?
**Mr. Norrell is a bit cowardly in the above scene when he states that no one would call on a fairy to help with magic. :D
I'm really enjoying the audio of this book.
I just saw a new genre that this book could fall inHistoric Fantasy. What do you think?
Mod
Petra, I'm still not sure what to think of this book. It is interesting though, but some of the 'magic' seems so morbid, yet so easily accepted by those around the magicians.
I agree too that Mr. Norrell was very cowardly when she said no one would call on a fairy for help, when he had already done so!
A quote from this week's reading:Yes, he does love me, or at least he tells me that he does. But what good is that to me? It has never warmed me when I was cold--and I always am cold., you know. It has never shortened a long, dreary ball by no much as a minute or stopped a procession through long dark ghostly corridors. It has never saved me from any misery at all. Has the love of yiur husband ever saved you from anything?
Lady Pole
any comments?
Mod
I agree with you about Lady PoleThe quote seems pretty risqué for the early 1800's It seemed even feminist. What do you think?
Mod
Did Mr. Pole ask for his wife to be resurrected? I can't remember whether it was his idea or her mother's. Either way, it was Mr. Norrell who made the deal with the fairy, so he's to blame for poor Lady Pole's predicament. Mr. Pole has no idea what's going on. How can he help her if he doesn't realize that enchantment is occurring? It's a situation of ignorance without blame.Meg, it is a risqué and enlightened statement to make for that time. It's also one of complete and utter destitution and misery; uttered by someone who has nothing to lose.
Sheila I know that quote just really surprised me.I think Mr Pole asked for the resurrection but I am not going to swear to it. It kind of reminds me of "making a deal with the devil".........
Mod
I am still behind myself. It is hard to keep everything straight. There seems to be so many sub plots. I agree I am wondering where this is all going myself
Chicks On Lit
Books mentioned in this topic
The Invention of Wings (other topics)The Invention of Wings (other topics)
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (other topics)
Beat the Reaper (other topics)
Gods Behaving Badly (other topics)
More...
As for magic, a lot of people didn't respect and/or put much faith into doctors. Therefore, some referred as magicians offered serums for restoring health. There were a lot of charlatans as we read about in our first week's reading. I think that magic that we refer to today differed in the past.