Oh my word I am astonished at you all. This is completely and utterly without question my favourite fantasy book of all time. It is PHENOMENAL. I must have read it at least ten or eleven times. Clarke just seems to get fantasy and magic in a way not many writers do. She is also an exceptional writer, and within a few pages I was able to relax and trust her, which is not always possible with weaker authors. Every sentence was perfect and deliberate. The book had a refreshing self-awareness and confidence which meant it avoided the familiar cliches, stereotypes and tropes which can make being a fantasy fan a bit frustrating sometimes. When I first read this book a couple of years back I literally could not put it down. It was one of those books I had to force myself to stop reading so that it would last longer. It's obviously polarizing, mostly along the lines of 'boring' as far as I can see. It's difficult to guess who will like it and who won't, I'm not usually a fan of period/historical fiction or book heavy on imagery. But then I found Terry Pratchett's books too boring to finish (I'd like to add here I think he is an exceptionally talented and self-aware writer, and the bits of the books I read have always been written well and make me literally laugh out loud, which is rare, but for some reason I always get bored and can never finish them). So I'd say to any fantasy fan to deffo give it a go, but if you're not hooked in the first 100 pages maybe save time by giving up.

Also, Heather: The 'spelling errors' were deliberate, they were the contemporary spellings at the time the book was set.

It seems like there is a divide between readers. There are the people who were so bored they couldn't finish it, and those who whole-heartedly support it. I have to admit I'm one of the former.

I read plenty of literary fiction, and completely disagree with people claiming that if you don't like this book you can't appreciate anything without someone shoving a sword up a dragon's ass. I wonder if they realize that such overbearing comments detracts from their arguments. I read Shakespeare dammit, and for me, it was exponentially more interesting than this. That's not to say this book doesn't have merit. The writing was of high quality and the characters were multi-dimensional.

But at the end of the day, I don't like the author's slow approach to things. I don't like that I'm given dump load after dump load of information that did nothing but detract from an already slow moving story.

That said, many books are famous for info dumping (Tolkien), and still loved. And I have read other books with a slow moving story that I enjoyed. It's a taste thing, and quite frankly, this book didn't work for me.

This is the second most overrated book I've ever read. I did get it. It has some good qualities. I would not recommend it to anyone other than those with an academic interest in literature. I suspect that the heavy PR it received was due to trying to make up for the mistaken decision to publish it it unedited. Not worth your time.

I loved this book. But then I enjoy Tolkien, Jane Austen, Anthony Trollope and Ursula K. LeGuin's collected works (including her standard fiction). Basically, if things don't need to move quickly for you, and you like to sink into something for a while, this is a very satisfying book that is extremely atmospheric and original. Magic, top hats and fairie = splendid!

Combine all those authors the reviewer mentions, and I'll tell you what you get. You get bored to tears.

I made it about 6 chapters in and tossed the book. Boring as heck.

I should hope Tolkein, Dickens and Austen would formulate some kind of plot, unlike Clarke. The use of the folly of manners in Victorian England was charming for about a quarter of the book, then it became the centerpiece of the book. Dickens used this mechanism in David Copperfield superbly by applying to secondary characters while the main character remained the "straight man." Also, Clarke needs to never write another footnote.

Did I read a different book to half these people who left comments, in no way is this book dull or stale, its fantastic! At the start of the book it explains that, in terms of magic, there to types of books, the 1st is about magic, the 2nd is OF magic. This book is a book OF magic.

I listened to this book while driving, and I loved every minute of it. The narration was superb, and the story dark and humorous. Clarke's dry wit was wonderful. However, I tried reading it and found I couldn't. I guess the story was much better heard than read in my case. Still, I reccomend it to anyone who asks for a good read.

I just got bored to be honest... the characters were interesting, well written and fascinating. The detail and back story were sublime. But the main plot was just a bit dull. I didn't care for what was occurring. I got halfway before giving up. Not intentionally but reading this webpage reminded me that I never finished and it remains on my bookshelf.

Comments like "This book is too slow and boring" illustrate the reason why many, many people read only fantasy: they are intellectually lazy, and it serves the same function for them as does reading romance novels. This is precisely why the vast majority of fantasy is not worth reading - most is written by people who sit down at their computer and "make things up", give quick answers to impossible problems, and create scenarios which are ridiculous. The result is usually horrible.

This list is an attempt to identify notable exceptions to this sad state of fantasy books. Those of us who love fantasy, who love nothing better than finding something new, different and stimulating, look for books like Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell. It is excellently written, has an (accurate) historical base, and, most importantly, it was something new and refreshing.

I listened to the audio version, and I can't praise it enough.

I agree -- a refreshing read -- but I'd rank Gentle's Ash above it as an alternative history.

one word for me
MEH
i couldnt get into it
i read to page 200 and just decided to quit

... You do realize that the "misspellings" were intentional usages of historical spellings, right?

Yeah, the book is slow. So?? When you can breeze through most novels in an evening or two, it's great to have something that you can dive into and live in before you finish. If I wanted a story that would move quickly, I'd watch a movie.

I am currently listening to the audiobook version and loving every minute of it. Simon Prebble is a great narrator and it makes the footnotes easier to deal with. I hope to see more books from Clarke in the near future.

I am simply shocked by some of the comments I have read here. Susanna Clarke has created a rich, diverse and peculiarly-accurate world through her novel. All of you who have donned it as having been a boring read seriously need a cauldron of culture and a tablespoon of proper discrimination for aesthetics. For anybody else reading this comment, I truly prescribe this novel. The sublimity with which Clarke writes is unutterable.

if you locked Tolkien, Dickens, and Jane Austin in a room?

The answer - an amazing cure for insomnia.

I thought I would absolutely love this book.... boring, boring, boring. I will say though that the way she writes is beautiful, but the plot seemed a bit stale to me.

I was happy to see this book listed at #11. And I was excited to click on the "Comments" link thinking that I would soon read seven glowing reviews from fellow admirers. I was quickly shocked, however, to see that four/five of the seven comments were negative! This was a wonderfully written story. The contrasting Norrell and Strange are great fun, the Victorian London landscape was painted beautifully, the refreshing idea that magic is for gentlemen, and the notion that magic is and always has been real, were all things that quickly sucked me into this story. And last but certainly not least . . . The Gentleman With The Thistle-Down Hair was simply unforgettable. He was a brilliant character! I agree with Joey that this book is a perfect marriage of fantasy and just plain classic fiction. And so maybe that's why the dissenters in this chat-room didn't have better things to say. This book is not a typical fantasy story, but it's a great story nonetheless. If you want wizards, dragons, destinies, sorcery, etc., then yeah, this book isn't for you. But if you want a great read (and you don't care if it's strict fantasy or not), then don't waste one more second reading this post. Get off your ass and go to your nearest bookstore or library and check it out!

This book is too slow and boring to be on a list like this. I finished it in the hope it would live up to the hype but I cannot image why it became a best seller.

I read this a while back. The footnotes drove me crazy - especially when they traversed three pages - and somebody needs to spell-check it. SERIOUSLY.

One or two spelling errors in a book are typos. However, when I can make a list of different words that are spelt wrong (and the page numbers where they're misspelt) that in itself covers half an A4 piece of paper before I'm halfway through the book...

The story itself wasn't that great either. The best I can say for it is that it's a vaguely interesting take on magic, and I can read that somewhere else.

If this book was in the top ten I would dismiss this list entirely. I can't get past the first page, it takes someone really crazy to discuss magicianslike this. The only reason this book is popular is because people think it is intelligent because it is "historical". Adding to the list from last post, where is Terry Pratchett?

Same here. Very interesting in the beginning, thought I had a real pageturner in my hands. But stop. No. Mr. Norell seems to be a mysterious and very dangerous character at first, but then all falls apart. Opening scene and developement (or better, no developement) of Mr. Norell are not fitting.
I agree Jonathan Strange is a great character. There are others with interesting backgrounds (Uskglass, and this kidnapping "ghost"). But that's it. Overlong footnotes are sometimes boring (better solved in Scott Lynchs Books as reminiscences). The story itself does not develope into something surprising, something with more depth. There is not enough mystery and no really superbe ending as it is expected. The story of those two (or better 3-4) magicians could be much more interesting. I can't help that i had the feeling while reading: "that's it?". I don't mean the end alone. I mean this question appeared many times, every 50 pages.
And of course the book is way too long.

My rating is 6.8 to 7.8 ... depends on my mood

I don't think it has to appear in this list, but when I go further down I have to admit, that it's ok. There are really not all the best ones in there.

Where is Paul Kearney with Monarchies of God?
Where is Gene Wolfe with his New, Long, Short Sun Cycles (the most intelligent books I've ever read)?
Where is China Mi