When I started reading the New York Times article "Susanna Clarke's Magic Book," I was not impressed. Another supposed successor to Harry Potter, I thought, when will these publishers ever learn? Then I saw the endorsements from Neil Gaiman and Patrick Nielsen Hayden. Interest piqued, I downloaded the first chapter [PDF] and read it.
I liked it enough that I am actually thinking about buying the book (in hardcover, nonetheless). It manages to be entertaining without being insipid. I would argue that it is far closer to the roots of English fantasy that J.K. Rowling's work (which is formulaic, unnaturally centered around a single protagonist, and clearly written for a global audience).
What do you mean by "unnaturally centered around a single protagonist"? How is that unnatural?
Traditional works of English fantasy normally center on a range of characters. We see this in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, where while the main story is that of Frodo's quest to destroy the ring, there are distinct subplots involving Gandalf's rebirth, the adventures of Pippin & Merry, Aragorn taking up his birthright, etc. Similarly, C.S. Lewis' Narnia novels always focused on a group of characters, most notably the four original children (Peter, Susan, Edmund, & Lucy).
You could claim that Rowling's focus is on Harry, Ron, & Hermione, of which Harry is the main character, similar to Frodo and Peter. The ultimate difference is in the powers that the protagonist holds. Frodo would have been unable to defeat a man in single combat; the sole power of the ring that we see is to make its wearer invisible (which, while useful, is hardly awe-inspiring). Without the power of Aslan behind him, Peter is just a virtuous English boy. This powerlessness of the protagonist gives the books in each series a sense of danger, because there is a serious chance that the entire enterprise being taken will fail.
On the other hand, Harry Potter is "The Boy Who Lived." Every single Harry Potter book ends with a conflict between the young Harry and the wizard of immeasurable power Voldemort, which Harry always wins (whether it is by actually defeating Voldemort or by "living"). The first two books suffered from the defect of being rather boring, for the simple fact it never really seemed unlikely that the fresh-faced young Harry would not succeed. The later books have partially corrected this by giving Harry weaknesses (inabilities to confront Dementors, the reborn Voldemort, Cho Chang, etc.), but do nothing to flesh out the enigmas who share Harry's world. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien both used narration that was unafraid of separating itself from the protagonist in order to properly tell the story. While Rowling writes in the third person, it is extremely rare for Harry Potter not to appear in a scene.
Finally, both the importance of the central character and the formulaic nature that Rowling uses is seen in the titles of the books in the series (i.e. Harry Potter and the Twisted Paperclip), which serve as not-so-subtle reminders of who exactly is important here.
Wow. Interesting. Thorough. I would argue that Harry Potter is certainly less sophisticated than the other works, but I think that's okay; Rowling is less trying to be Tolkien or Lewis than she's trying to be Roald Dahl (though the difference there is that she actually likes children whereas he disliked most children that weren't his own– and that he much preferred writing for adults). Tolkien and Lewis were much more aware of the allegory and mythology inherent in their work (or in Tolkien's case, the possibility for allegory– his intention was not to create an allegory, but the mythical aspects of his story made it easy to see it that way). I think that Rowling is trying to do a very different thing– much less intellectual. She's created a standard framework within which a single protagonist grows up, learns more about himself and the world around him. I still disagree that a single protagonist is unnatural– unsophisticated, and, without a certain level of introspection, uncomplicated as well, but not unnatural.
Book Review: Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell
Considering I spent about 4 hours this morning reading the latest Harry Potter book (what can I say? I read fast), I figured it was past due time for me to write about Susanna Clarke's novel Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, which I completed…