Piranesi by Susanna Clarke
Sep. 19th, 2020 05:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regshoeMy initial thoughts...
Piranesi is told in first person through the journal entries of our narrator, who is called Piranesi but who tells us early on that it's not actually his name. He lives in the House, an immense series of halls and staircases full of statues and containing the sea, where he is the only person except for another man, whom he calls the Other, and thirteen skeletons. He spends his time subsistence fishing in the sea and conducting scientific research on various aspects of the House. As the journal entries go on, it becomes clear to the reader—and, after a while, to the narrator—that all is very much not what it seems, and things develop from there.
It's a fairly simple book, structurally. The actual plot could be summarised in a couple of sentences. Most of the substance of the book consists of the narrator, and the reader, steadily discovering the truth about the state of things we're introduced to at the start, and as more is revealed, most of it is pretty much what it seems to be on first being revealed—there aren't really any big dramatic twists. This is not a criticism—some books are more ambitious than others, that's fine!—but it gave the book a quiet, sort of contemplative feeling, and it felt kind of small. There's a lot that's never explained, which was intriguing and slightly frustrating at the same time.
The cast of characters is also relatively limited. We spend the most time with the narrator, who I liked a lot from the start—he's a sweetheart, with a very earnest and determined approach to his unusual life and his scientific work, but with more than one sort of hidden depths. Further revelations only made me like him more, although that's hardly a simple thing... The rest of the characters are not drawn in so much detail, although what details there are are frequently intriguing, and Raphael in particular is great. And—it feels appropriate to put this in the 'characters' paragraph—there are a lot of birds in this book, and I loved them all, and they felt very familiarly Clarkeian.
I don't really know what I was expecting from this book, to be honest! One thing I certainly wasn't expecting, after the historical setting of JSMN and the historical reference in the title, was that it would be set in the modern world—or rather in an adjacent fantasy world. I was a little bit dubious at first—I don't usually enjoy books set in or about the modern world—but I needn't have worried. Clarke's style deals as beautifully with modern life as she does with everything else—car headlights and crowded city streets are given just the same tilted, otherworldly cast as rain over the moors and bare branches against the sky, and it fits in really surprisingly well. There were, however, one or two instances of a kind of sordidness which is something I associate with modern books, and which I didn't like any better here.
This book has a couple of textually queer characters, which was interesting. I thought the portrayal of Laurence Arne-Sayles—a villain, and a predator in a kind of stereotypical way—was slightly doubtful from this perspective, but on thinking about it—this is, I think, one of those times when a character being a good or bad person isn't really the point—and Arne-Sayles's sexuality is linked to his status as the sort of 'outsider' (a significant word which occurs repeatedly throughout the book—once in reference to fanfiction, haha...) who could understand magic and find the other world in the first place, which I thought was very interesting.
It's surprising how much this book has in common with Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell for a book that's so entirely unlike Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. On the one hand, the setting, structure and narrative style, and much of the mood, are completely different—and it is, as I've said, a far less ambitious book than JSMN—there's much less there there. On the other hand, you could easily make a bingo card out of the incidental details they share—academia and academic drama; significant statues; significant birds; magic as something that vanished in the past; the House as a take on the King's Roads; etc. etc. And, more significantly, the basic sense of what the world is like is the same: in those evocative little bits of description, in the book's metaphysics and what it implies (unlike JSMN, it doesn't say so at much length) about the nature of magic, there is a definite sense that this is the same kind of magical world as JSMN, the same 'other side of the rain' sort of thing. Which in one sense was a little frustrating—you said it so much better the first time!—but, really, reading those significant passages, I just felt that Susanna Clarke was doing what she does best, and it's just as brilliant as it's always been.
From this angle, by far my favourite part of the book was the ending. Once I'd worked out what was going on with Matthew Rose Sorensen and the narrator's past identity I was very curious about how the whole thing would be resolved. And the way it's resolved is one of those endings that, without being a dramatic twist, seems at once something completely different from the obvious 'easy way out' and just as obviously the only way things could have gone. And I thought that both the prose and the ideas in the last section were some of the most beautiful and meaningful bits of the whole thing—although the prose is absolutely beautiful throughout, of course.
So, in conclusion: I think this book is beautiful and I enjoyed it a lot, and I think Susanna Clarke is still brilliant at basically the same things she was brilliant at sixteen years ago. It is, of course, not nearly as good a book or as impressive an achievement as JSMN, but it was never going to be and it didn't need to be, so I'm not holding that against it. It's also not so much my kind of thing as JMSN is, and I think because of that and because of the relative lack of substance it's not going to live in my heart the way that book does. But, overall, a very worthwhile thing to have read.
Anyway—this book has made me remember how much I love Susanna Clarke's writing, and now I really want to get back into Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell fandom (where is it happening these days—Tumblr, Discord? I feel out of touch). I was writing a bit of historical RPF about John Uskglass the other day, perhaps I'll pick that up again...
Piranesi is told in first person through the journal entries of our narrator, who is called Piranesi but who tells us early on that it's not actually his name. He lives in the House, an immense series of halls and staircases full of statues and containing the sea, where he is the only person except for another man, whom he calls the Other, and thirteen skeletons. He spends his time subsistence fishing in the sea and conducting scientific research on various aspects of the House. As the journal entries go on, it becomes clear to the reader—and, after a while, to the narrator—that all is very much not what it seems, and things develop from there.
It's a fairly simple book, structurally. The actual plot could be summarised in a couple of sentences. Most of the substance of the book consists of the narrator, and the reader, steadily discovering the truth about the state of things we're introduced to at the start, and as more is revealed, most of it is pretty much what it seems to be on first being revealed—there aren't really any big dramatic twists. This is not a criticism—some books are more ambitious than others, that's fine!—but it gave the book a quiet, sort of contemplative feeling, and it felt kind of small. There's a lot that's never explained, which was intriguing and slightly frustrating at the same time.
The cast of characters is also relatively limited. We spend the most time with the narrator, who I liked a lot from the start—he's a sweetheart, with a very earnest and determined approach to his unusual life and his scientific work, but with more than one sort of hidden depths. Further revelations only made me like him more, although that's hardly a simple thing... The rest of the characters are not drawn in so much detail, although what details there are are frequently intriguing, and Raphael in particular is great. And—it feels appropriate to put this in the 'characters' paragraph—there are a lot of birds in this book, and I loved them all, and they felt very familiarly Clarkeian.
I don't really know what I was expecting from this book, to be honest! One thing I certainly wasn't expecting, after the historical setting of JSMN and the historical reference in the title, was that it would be set in the modern world—or rather in an adjacent fantasy world. I was a little bit dubious at first—I don't usually enjoy books set in or about the modern world—but I needn't have worried. Clarke's style deals as beautifully with modern life as she does with everything else—car headlights and crowded city streets are given just the same tilted, otherworldly cast as rain over the moors and bare branches against the sky, and it fits in really surprisingly well. There were, however, one or two instances of a kind of sordidness which is something I associate with modern books, and which I didn't like any better here.
This book has a couple of textually queer characters, which was interesting. I thought the portrayal of Laurence Arne-Sayles—a villain, and a predator in a kind of stereotypical way—was slightly doubtful from this perspective, but on thinking about it—this is, I think, one of those times when a character being a good or bad person isn't really the point—and Arne-Sayles's sexuality is linked to his status as the sort of 'outsider' (a significant word which occurs repeatedly throughout the book—once in reference to fanfiction, haha...) who could understand magic and find the other world in the first place, which I thought was very interesting.
It's surprising how much this book has in common with Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell for a book that's so entirely unlike Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. On the one hand, the setting, structure and narrative style, and much of the mood, are completely different—and it is, as I've said, a far less ambitious book than JSMN—there's much less there there. On the other hand, you could easily make a bingo card out of the incidental details they share—academia and academic drama; significant statues; significant birds; magic as something that vanished in the past; the House as a take on the King's Roads; etc. etc. And, more significantly, the basic sense of what the world is like is the same: in those evocative little bits of description, in the book's metaphysics and what it implies (unlike JSMN, it doesn't say so at much length) about the nature of magic, there is a definite sense that this is the same kind of magical world as JSMN, the same 'other side of the rain' sort of thing. Which in one sense was a little frustrating—you said it so much better the first time!—but, really, reading those significant passages, I just felt that Susanna Clarke was doing what she does best, and it's just as brilliant as it's always been.
From this angle, by far my favourite part of the book was the ending. Once I'd worked out what was going on with Matthew Rose Sorensen and the narrator's past identity I was very curious about how the whole thing would be resolved. And the way it's resolved is one of those endings that, without being a dramatic twist, seems at once something completely different from the obvious 'easy way out' and just as obviously the only way things could have gone. And I thought that both the prose and the ideas in the last section were some of the most beautiful and meaningful bits of the whole thing—although the prose is absolutely beautiful throughout, of course.
So, in conclusion: I think this book is beautiful and I enjoyed it a lot, and I think Susanna Clarke is still brilliant at basically the same things she was brilliant at sixteen years ago. It is, of course, not nearly as good a book or as impressive an achievement as JSMN, but it was never going to be and it didn't need to be, so I'm not holding that against it. It's also not so much my kind of thing as JMSN is, and I think because of that and because of the relative lack of substance it's not going to live in my heart the way that book does. But, overall, a very worthwhile thing to have read.
Anyway—this book has made me remember how much I love Susanna Clarke's writing, and now I really want to get back into Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell fandom (where is it happening these days—Tumblr, Discord? I feel out of touch). I was writing a bit of historical RPF about John Uskglass the other day, perhaps I'll pick that up again...
no subject
Date: Sep. 20th, 2020 07:32 pm (UTC)There were, however, one or two instances of a kind of sordidness which is something I associate with modern books, and which I didn't like any better here.
Huh, interesting. In fiction, I tend to read mostly SF, fantasy and historical novels (which could be written long ago or written today, but in historical settings). But I don't know if I am analytical enough to know why that is...
no subject
Date: Sep. 21st, 2020 04:58 am (UTC)In fiction, I tend to read mostly SF, fantasy and historical novels (which could be written long ago or written today, but in historical settings). But I don't know if I am analytical enough to know why that is...
Yeah, for me there are several things that come into it, I think—older books (and fantasy books, or at least the few like JSMN!) tend to have a slower, more detached and descriptive style that works better for me in general.
no subject
Date: Sep. 24th, 2020 05:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Sep. 24th, 2020 06:41 pm (UTC)Thinking about the Arne-Sayles thing—there are several times in JSMN where characters who are socially marginalised, undesirable, etc. become significant in the story, and are able to understand more about magic and the truth of the way the world works, in ways that are linked to that 'outsider' status—even while the ways in which they are outsiders are not particularly nice or ethical. E.g. Vinculus the serial bigamist and conman, Childermass who has no pity for anyone (!)—but whether they're good people or not isn't really the point. I suspect what Clarke was aiming for with Arne-Sayles was the same sort of effect—although it certainly wasn't the wisest of choices to do it quite like that.
no subject
Date: Sep. 25th, 2020 11:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Sep. 30th, 2020 05:16 pm (UTC)It's surprising how much this book has in common with Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell for a book that's so entirely unlike Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell.
yes -- I found that so interesting! As I was initially reading, I was trying not to think too much about JSMN because I wanted to appreciate the book for what it is and not what it isn't but as I progressed I realised how many themes and images the two books had in common. I was also thinking about the connections between the House and the King's Road, and this place as a repository for magic, and that's really compelling.
Did you read Susanna Clark's interview in which she talks about illness? I thought it gave a lot of insight into the germination of this book.
no subject
Date: Sep. 30th, 2020 05:30 pm (UTC)Yes—I think there is certainly value in 'appreciating it for what it is', but also in finding those common themes that both books have deep down. And, yes, the relationship between magic and place is a really interesting one in Piranesi.
Thanks for linking that interview! I'd not seen it, and there is some really interesting stuff in there (plus it's good to hear that she's doing better than she was!). That bit about the world in Piranesi being 'imbued with life', and the importance of Piranesi as a character recognising the world as having life and value of its own, is very important, and—thinking about it—one of the best things about the book. As well as something it has in common with JSMN, of course, though expressed in a rather different way!
no subject
Date: Sep. 30th, 2020 06:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Sep. 30th, 2020 07:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Oct. 11th, 2020 09:51 am (UTC)Piranesi himself is most definitely a sweetheart! He's adorable. I didn't really enjoy the ending myself, because I had come to like Piranesi so much that I really missed him in the end. For the ending to work for me, I think it would have to be quite a bite longer, so we can get to know not-Piranesi too.
Your point about Arne-Sayles being an outsider is really interesting, and I think you might have hit the nail on the head about why he was written the way he was. At the same time, it was pretty tone-deaf to make one of the only queer characters the villain, so I struggle with it. (Honestly, I thought Piranesi was going to be written as gay too, so I was very surprised when that wasn't confirmed.)
There's a lot of JSMN fandom going on on Discord at the moment (it also has a specific channel for Piranesi spoilers). It would be lovely to see you there if you fancy joining. Here's the link:
https://discord.gg/ymnRNV
The link is only active for a day, so let me know if it runs out and you need a new link.
no subject
Date: Oct. 11th, 2020 10:56 am (UTC)I was confused at first by Piranesi not recognising (what I assume was) Ketterley's smartphone, even though he was familiar with stuff like biscuit tins and multivitamins—so once I realised he wasn't 18th century I thought, okay, is he from earlier in the 20th century? And I don't think that was ever explained—presumably it's another thing the House made him forget, but we don't know why.
I think I kind of interpreted Piranesi as gay anyway, but yeah, it would have been really nice if that was text (could set up an interesting parallel between him and Arne-Sayles, possibly? or indeed him and Poor James Ritter).
Ooh, thank you very much for the Discord link! I shall take a look...
no subject
Date: Oct. 11th, 2020 06:37 pm (UTC)I'm glad you interpreted Piranesi as gay, because I did too. (The part where he runs sobbing into the arms of the faun springs to mind.) It was only once I'd finished the book and read other people's comments that I realised that Piranesi wasn't actually confirmed as gay in the text. It's a strange one. If Piranesi was intended to be gay, why not spell it out, like it's done with the other characters? It would have been the easiest thing to have had a boyfriend waiting for Matthew along with sisters and parents.
no subject
Date: Oct. 15th, 2020 10:22 pm (UTC)You know, I also wasn't expecting the modern setting (nor all those F-bombs! They didn't really bother me, as you might be able to tell ocassionally from my journal entries ;) but they were sure unexpected!) I think that sordid mood creates a good contrast for Piranesi's gentleness and innocence, though. And the modern setting works really well, because it's modern, but at the same time, kind of detached from "reality". And it makes it very intriguing! For example, I kept thinking about the House, and where exactly it could be/what inspired it, because it was such an interesting piece of worldbuilding! (I hope that people make lots of fanart because the possibilities are very cool...) So yes, it was unexpected, but it shows that she can tackle different things, while still keeping her lovely, otherwordly style!
The queer coded villain was probably my least favourite part, because do we really needed another villain like that? (I guess I'm always going to be touchy about queer representation!) At least he was nuanced enough to be interesting as a villain, and being queer was not seen as a problem/evil thing... so, it could have been worse, I guess! And I also noticed the whole "outsider"/transgressive thing--she does seem to give this type of character important roles (connections to magic, etc) in her writing, and I agree in that it's interesting.
I also agree with you about all the similarities with JS&MN--it's funny because it seems such a different book at a first glance, but in the end, it's not *that* different! One of the several similar things I noticed was the "back to the earth" type of ending for one of the villains, like the Gentleman and Drawlight in JS&MN, which was intriguing, to say the least.
And I understand it feeling "kind of small", because anything after JS&MN was going to feel that way, I guess. I was trying to avoid getting my hopes up because of this, but actually my experience was the exact opposite of small. I'm still unravelling it all in my head, but I feel that a short book worked better for this universe, because it being "limited" leaves the reader in the dark, feeling like they've missed something, along with the characters. In that sense, it was certainly effective. As i was typing up some of my thoughts about it, I felt it was "exactly the right length"...and also, given all the layers of deception in the story, I feel that the simplicity was, well, deceptive, and went nicely with the liminal feel of the story. And all the loose ends added to the idea of things being hidden or left unsaid, of the impossibility of a complete understanding. It's a bit frustrating, I agree, but perhaps the right kind of "frustrating", that makes it be a very satisfying story, that might keep on expanding.
So I really don't feel this book is necessarily less good/ambitious than JS&MN (and I hope it won't suffer from the comparisons too much), just dealing with some similar themes in a different, "less-is-more" way? Just like JS&MN, it feels like a shadowy story, full of hints and possibilities and things hiding in between the lines, but in this shorter book, it's emphasised even more--I was happily surprised at how visual and thought-provoking it was, and it made me want to dig deeper for what is hiding there, and also all the references I missed on my first read! I'm not saying this doesn't happen with any longer books--JS&MN itself is the gift that keeps on giving, when it comes to finding new things on each re-read... but I am biased about shorter books (possibly because several of my favourites are on the short side) and many times I feel they are a lot more than what they seem at first, hehe! Bigger on the inside, so to speak! :D
Aaand this got super long, oops! By the way, I also don't know where the JS&MN fandom is, but from a very selfless point of view, if it's elsewhere, I hope you still keep posting your stuff here on DW--that historical RPF about John Uskglass sounds *very* intriguing and relevant to my interests!
no subject
Date: Oct. 16th, 2020 04:39 pm (UTC)Oh yes, I agree that this is going to be a very good fandom for fanart! The idea of the House is such an intriguing one—the way it's both a single, limited setting, very different from JSMN's wide open world, but at the same time expansive and unlimited in itself, endless Halls and Seas stretching away...
And, yeah, I think you also get that same sense from the structure of the story itself—as you say, although it's short it is deceptively complex, and despite the relatively constrained focus of the story itself there is an awful lot of stuff going on around the edges of the fantasy world that we get just intriguing hints about... 'The right kind of frustrating' indeed (and just the sort of thing to inspire lots of fic, one hopes...)!
I've found the JSMN fandom on Discord (let me know if you'd like a link, by the way—I'm not very good at Discord but can probably figure out how to invite people :D), but I'll certainly keep posting my stuff here too!
no subject
Date: Oct. 16th, 2020 06:25 pm (UTC)And thanks so much for the discord offer, but I find it kind of unappealing (not as bad as tumblr, but also not my thing...)
no subject
Date: Oct. 16th, 2020 07:38 pm (UTC)I'm sure it will!—I'm delighted with how much interest it's generating already.
Fair enough—Discord isn't my fave either, to be honest, although I will go there when that's where the fandom is.