This scene in the novel is very affecting in the TV version it wasn't half as magical, reminding me more of those irritating 'statue' mime artists, covered in grey paint you get in all public tourist spaces these days. I disagree about the statues for instance. I suspect somewhere in the production is someone who, perhaps like me, doesn't 'get' the book, resulting in pantomime performances from some of the cast and a lot of over egged set pieces.
I'm filing it next to Gormenghast and Neverwhere as a well meaning failure. Am I wrong? Is it worth pursuing? Is there reward for renewed perseverance?Īs to the BBC TV adaptation.
It's 'slow burn' wick actually fizzled and died for me. Despite it ticking any number of boxes for me (English Gothic fantasy / Slightly alternate history / experimental writing style / etc. But Strange is increasingly drawn to the wildest, most perilous forms of magic, straining his partnership with Norrell, and putting at risk everything else he holds dear.'What kind of magic can make an 800-page novel seem too short? Whatever it is, debut author Susanna Clarke is possessed by it.'- USA Today'From beginning to end, a perfect pleasure.'-Neil Gaimanne.I got about as far into the book as this opening episode gets and my reaction to both was the same. He becomes Norrell's student, and they join forces in the war against France. In the year 1806, with the Napoleonic Wars raging on land and sea, most people believe magic to be long dead in England-until the reclusive Mr Norrell reveals his powers, and becomes a celebrity overnight.Soon, another practicing magician comes forth: the young, handsome, and daring Jonathan Strange.
'Ravishing…Combines the dark mythology of fantasy with the delicious social comedy of Jane Austen into a masterpiece of the genre that rivals Tolkien.'- TimeAt the dawn of the nineteenth century, two very different magicians emerge to change England's history.
0 kommentar(er)
