Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell Novel -Tackle the book after the show?

It's a while since I read the book, but my impression was that the book was written in a way similar to a particular type of 19th century novel.

Books like that, such as Vanity Fair and, later, Les Miserables, were partly about character and plot, but also very much about other issues as well, such as politics, history or ethics. Footnotes, breaking of the fourth wall were all part of how the author got his or her meaning across to the reader.

I personally tend to be thankful that the modern novel is usually shorter and more to the point, but at the same time, Les Miserables is one of my favourite books of all time.

Whether the emulating of those styles were done successfully, and whether it was worth trying at all, is worth asking, but I caught some of the references and found the book better for it. Your experience my differ.

You seem an utter titwank, a prat and no doubt a snatchpastry. You missed the entire point of her style.

Might I suggest Dean Koontz? Or The Twilight drivel....

Im guessing you dont read lot of fantasy books, a 1k book is actually incredible dense for fantasy.
No im not joking fantasy books have gotten bigger and bigger over the last 20 years these days 600-1k each book and serie of maybe 3-6 books of those are the standard.

So when i saw this book was a one off only 1k pages from my perspective that was dense and compressed if its under 3000 pages thats short to me.

The authors of fantasy series that release a series of books with only 300 pages long are usually asked why the books are so short its hard to justify being a series of books, and series are were the money are these days.
So the style of fantasy has moved away from being compressed and dense since its harder to sell those books, as the accusations of trying to cash in comes up from the large number of books in a serie.

Its ironic back when tolkien tried to get his LOTR books published as a single book of 900+ pages he was told it would never sell the publishers made him split it into 3 books.
Those days you could not sell a book as long as almost 1000 pages long.
Today if you want to make a fantasy serie you generally need a minimum of 500 pages for each book, simple economics have lead to a sort of enlargement of books.

I actually thought it quite funny. I was in grad school the first time I read the book and I delightedly read every ironic footnote and every ridiculous breaking of the fourth wall. If I had been writing it, I would probably have been giggling every time I did that. It all seemed so very tongue in cheek, especially given the dark turn the book took. It's one of my all-time favorite stories.

Lol@ snatchpastry!My new favorite word! Trying this out.

I'm of two minds.

First, as a reader, I found the book engaging. I ignored most of the footnotes, I did feel it was a bit LONG, but it was a fun, smart, sarcastic read -- very Dickens meets Austen meets General Insanity and Tremendous Creativity. She accomplished what she set out to do, which was to write a Regency-ish novel, pretentious prose and all.

But... as a professional editor... this book gives me headaches. Rabbit trails without going anywhere, unnecessary portions of storyline... the need to go over the entire thing with a red highlighter pen. You could slash a lot of pages and have a cleaner storyline as a result.

But then, would it be as much fun? Maybe not.

Would it be a quicker read, though? Absolutely.