Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norell

I recently finished reading Jonathon Strange and Mr. Norell by Susanna Clarke. This book won the Hugo and World Fantasy Awards for best novel of 2005. It received rave reviews.

The Style
The book reads like a Jane Austen or Dickens novel. Since the action takes place in the early 19th-century, this works to a degree. The style seems more like Dickens, using caricatures and expounded passages. The content seems more like Austen, focusing on relationships and wittiness. Of course, Dickens came much later than Austen, and that fits: the writer pretends to be a late 19th-century British writer chronicling events that took place decades earlier.

Footnotes
Clarke's innovative, endearing use of footnotes everywhere gives the book a twist. Some of the footnotes make better stories than the main action. Others seem dashed-off to lend an air of historicity to this alternate history yarn. This gives Clarke a unique style others can't imitate without seeming preposterous. You have to admire how well it works.

The Story
I found the story interesting, but at some points only just bearable. The narrative doesn't weave every character and every action into a unified plot. Following the axiom of fantasy novels, the book instead elaborates the milieu. Making you believe in this alternate world makes the book work. In certain sections, the story limps along in service of this greater goal.

The Characters
I loved the characters. Clarke handles them magnificently. You know who you like, who you dislike, and how much to like or dislike them. Mr. Norell comes across as creepy but misunderstood (even by himself). Jonathon Strange feels heroic and admirable, but just too energetic for his own good. The other characters have their own feel as well. I make one complaint: I'd prefer all the characters had a more dramatic role in the conclusion.

The World
For all the artistic effort put into making the world feel real, I don't care for it much. The world doesn't challenge my sensibilities the way other fantasy novels do (think Harry Potter). As an alternate Earth, its history feels unnaturally equivalent with our own world. A few dramatic surprises would help. Also it would be nice to visit some of the details.

Religion
In this world of magic, clergy coexists with magicians. As any D&D player can tell you, clerics and mages overlap and rival each other. For some reason, Clarke glosses over this point. She has Christian clergy cooperating (mostly) with magicians. This reverses totally the real world view, in which Christians burned people for using magic, even if they didn't have magic. More explanation would help.

Compared to Lord of the Rings
Finally, the back of the book has a quote from Time magazine saying this book rivals Lord of the Rings. I refute that. Lord of the Rings, for all its problems, weaves a much tighter story. The characters come together better. Instead of an alternate Earth, LoTR gives you a fantastical Earth. You can't navigate Tolkien's Middle Earth without a special map. Hobbits, dwarves, elves, orcs, goblins, ogres, trolls, balrogs, ringwraiths, dragons, and ghosts all appear. Most play integral roles in the story (or in the prelude, The Hobbit). Lord of the Rings gives us a much richer fantasy environment than Jonathon Strange and Mr. Norell.