In which I revisit an 800-page novel
And eat some surprisingly delicious humble pie
This month, I read Susanna Clarke’s Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (2004), an 846-page book about rival magicians trying to bring magic back to England. It’s 1806, and while British scholar-magicians have continued to study magic, magic has not been actually practiced for centuries. Until, that is, Mr. Norrell steps on the scene and turns everything upside down.
Sounds great, right? Well, my 26-year-old self wasn’t so sure. In fact, you might say that my relationship to this book loosely resembles the plot of Austen’s Persuasion (stick with me here). Nearly 13 years ago, I casually rejected Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, thinking it was beneath me and I could probably do much better. But in January 2024, I met Strange & Norrell again, and while I am tragically past my bloom,1 Strange & Norrell looks sexier than ever. I was wrong. I cannot do better. Please, Jonathan, take me back!!
The first time I tried to read Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell was in 2011 at the recommendation of a grad school friend. With delusional ambition, I brought it with me to a resort in Santa Barbara, where my best friend and I were celebrating her recent engagement. I’m sure you can guess how this ends: instead of making significant headway on an 800-page novel, I flipped drunkenly through about 10 pages while lounging poolside before loudly declaring the book “so boring!” and suggesting a photo shoot with the engagement ring instead. Strange & Norrell was cast aside, neglected, forgotten, and almost certainly damp with pool water.
Adding insult to pool water, I recently looked at my Goodreads and saw that I had given Strange & Norrell a TWO STAR review (!!!), which is honestly cruel and insane. What was going on with me? Was I lashing out at random authors because I was miserable in my grad program and needed others to suffer too? (Yes.) Was I consumed with the arrogance of youth? It might be the latter because I gave Hamlet a mere FOUR stars (lol). So what I’m saying is, I was a vindictive and chaotic Goodreads user, and I really can’t vouch for my past rating system. (Susanna, I’m sorry! Five stars!!)
Cut to 13 years later: once again, someone recommended that I read Strange & Norrell, this time for a project I’m working on. I thought fine, I’ll give this boring-ass book another try. And guess what? I LOVE IT.
It’s really not that surprising. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell reads like a magical Austen novel,2 where the main subject is scholars, magic, and fairies rather than romance (but some romance!). For me that just ticks all the boxes. My primary quarrel with Austen is all the love affairs (a post for another day).3 But throw in some magicians, an evil fairy, and a cameo from Lord Byron? More darkness, less Darcy. Sign me up!
Clarke is also the author of the widely-beloved Piranesi (2020) — a book that is so popular that whenever someone recommends it on r/suggestmeabook, everyone is like wow way to mention the MOST OBVIOUS book possible thanks for nothing. I (and apparently everyone else in the world) adored Piranesi. And at 272 pages it’s a more manageable read than Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell’s 846. But if you want to read them both, you’ll notice that there’s a link between them! The idea for Piranesi clearly originates in one of Strange’s adventures, something I was delighted to discover while reading Strange & Norrell.
In sum, read Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell if…
You like long books
You enjoy an Austenian narrator
You have a high tolerance for meandering plots
You like elaborately constructed worlds (in this case, the primary world is just regular London, but Clarke weaves a detailed backstory for the history of magic in England)
You like magic
You’re fine with footnotes
Read Piranesi if…
You prefer shorter books
You have a high tolerance for the strange
You enjoy being immersed in an utterly unfamiliar world
Fuck footnotes
Alternatively, revisit a book you rejected 13 years ago! Who knows? Now might be the right time. Happy reading!
Also check out the adaptation: for all my previous dislike of the book, I watched and loved this adaptation when it came out in 2015.
“…the years which had destroyed her [Anne’s] youth and bloom had only given him [Wentworth] a more glowing, manly, open look, in no respect lessening his personal advantages.” Anne has not seen Wentworth for 7 years, and by the time they meet again, she is 27 and basically a washed up old hag, and he is HOT.
To clarify, the tone and especially the narration is very Austenian. Dry, witty, hilarious.
No shade to Austen or romance. I love Austen: she is a snark queen and a genius. And romance is great! But sometimes you’re just like what would happen if Elizabeth Bennet could go have a goddam adventure on her own?? (And I don’t mean walking through a field!)
So fun! And omg Persuasion should have an index entry for "bloom, withered"