Mark Lawrence's Reviews > The Magicians
The Magicians (The Magicians, #1)
by
by
A definite 5*
EDIT: Having now read the highest rated reviews of the book I'm amazed at the amount of vitriol on show. I've no idea what provoked it. I stand by my opinion and don't recognise the novel portrayed in many of these reviews.
The Magicians immediately appealed to my writer bones. There a great many sharply observed and cuttingly sarcastic lines. There a good few beautiful ones. Along with the Victorian sensibilities of the Brakebills school of magic Lev Grossman adopts a witty almost drawing room prose that has notes of Oscar Wilde and the later Evelyn Waugh. More recently it puts me in mind of the literary excellence of Josiah Bancroft.
So the writing is top notch. The characters? The plot? All very engaging too.
I have seen some reviewers make a big deal of the point of view character, Quentin Coldwater, being an unsympathetic protagonist. I really didn’t get that. The book has been called Harry Potter for grownups (it contains a magic school, what else will people call it?) and certainly Quentin is no brave-hearted, resilient hero-in-the-making in the model of young Mr Potter. He’s flawed, human, he variously feels sorry for himself, or thinks too much of himself… What part of this is not covered by “for grownups”? Quentin is someone unable to be happy. Even when given exactly what he wants. This is a part of the human condition, no rarer than blue eyes, especially in the teenage years. I enjoyed the skill with which it was shown to us and the gradual building of consequences.
The supporting cast are interesting. The magic school is more of a university and so we have drinking and sex. We have rich, privileged kids affecting disaffection, forming cliques, being overbearingly intellectual. It’s all very well drawn and often amusing. It’s often genuinely clever too. I enjoyed spending time in the company of these complex characters.
We rattle through the school section considerably faster than I thought we would. I think a couple of years are knocked off in a single chapter at one point. The magic is interesting too. It’s not handed over in detail, there’s no Wingardium Leviosa, but we get a strong impression of its highly technical and fiddly nature. Thankfully we don’t have to suffer through that like the students do and we get to see some flashy magic later on.
So half the book is Quentin going to school and learning his trade in a Harry Potter minus Dumbledore and Voldemort style. The second half, heavily foreshadowed and linked to in the first half, involves what is an unmistakeable … let’s call it “homage” … to Narnia. It’s called Fillory in the book but we will call it what it is here. Narnia.
Anyway, Quentin has been obsessed with the Narnia books since he was a small child. Narnia is where he wants to go, needs to go, will go and where he will find the happiness that keeps slipping through his fingers.
And yes they go, via the rings (button) from the first Narnia book and the Wood Between The Worlds (now paved over with the pools converted into fountains). Narnia comes complete with fauns in the snow, a family of talking beavers, and a need to have two daughters of Eve and two sons of Adam wear the crowns and sit as kings and queens in Cair Paravel.
Of course instead of the Pevensie children it is now a collection of variously drunk, messed up, twenty-one year old magicians with relationship issues, subcutaneous demons, and at least one handgun. They do have to deal with the aftermath of the Pevensie visit though.
It’s all very well done and both cleverly deconstructs and goes beyond the Narnia books into its own post-CS Lewis plot that feeds nicely back into puzzling elements within the first half of the book.
In short this is a really good read. More sophisticated than most genre work, which I guess is why it is sometimes cited as a “crossover” book. To my mind though it is simply very well written fantasy. Harry Potter for grownups. Plus Narnia for grownups.
Join my Patreon
Join my 3-emails-a-year newsletter #prizes
...
EDIT: Having now read the highest rated reviews of the book I'm amazed at the amount of vitriol on show. I've no idea what provoked it. I stand by my opinion and don't recognise the novel portrayed in many of these reviews.
The Magicians immediately appealed to my writer bones. There a great many sharply observed and cuttingly sarcastic lines. There a good few beautiful ones. Along with the Victorian sensibilities of the Brakebills school of magic Lev Grossman adopts a witty almost drawing room prose that has notes of Oscar Wilde and the later Evelyn Waugh. More recently it puts me in mind of the literary excellence of Josiah Bancroft.
So the writing is top notch. The characters? The plot? All very engaging too.
I have seen some reviewers make a big deal of the point of view character, Quentin Coldwater, being an unsympathetic protagonist. I really didn’t get that. The book has been called Harry Potter for grownups (it contains a magic school, what else will people call it?) and certainly Quentin is no brave-hearted, resilient hero-in-the-making in the model of young Mr Potter. He’s flawed, human, he variously feels sorry for himself, or thinks too much of himself… What part of this is not covered by “for grownups”? Quentin is someone unable to be happy. Even when given exactly what he wants. This is a part of the human condition, no rarer than blue eyes, especially in the teenage years. I enjoyed the skill with which it was shown to us and the gradual building of consequences.
The supporting cast are interesting. The magic school is more of a university and so we have drinking and sex. We have rich, privileged kids affecting disaffection, forming cliques, being overbearingly intellectual. It’s all very well drawn and often amusing. It’s often genuinely clever too. I enjoyed spending time in the company of these complex characters.
We rattle through the school section considerably faster than I thought we would. I think a couple of years are knocked off in a single chapter at one point. The magic is interesting too. It’s not handed over in detail, there’s no Wingardium Leviosa, but we get a strong impression of its highly technical and fiddly nature. Thankfully we don’t have to suffer through that like the students do and we get to see some flashy magic later on.
So half the book is Quentin going to school and learning his trade in a Harry Potter minus Dumbledore and Voldemort style. The second half, heavily foreshadowed and linked to in the first half, involves what is an unmistakeable … let’s call it “homage” … to Narnia. It’s called Fillory in the book but we will call it what it is here. Narnia.
Anyway, Quentin has been obsessed with the Narnia books since he was a small child. Narnia is where he wants to go, needs to go, will go and where he will find the happiness that keeps slipping through his fingers.
And yes they go, via the rings (button) from the first Narnia book and the Wood Between The Worlds (now paved over with the pools converted into fountains). Narnia comes complete with fauns in the snow, a family of talking beavers, and a need to have two daughters of Eve and two sons of Adam wear the crowns and sit as kings and queens in Cair Paravel.
Of course instead of the Pevensie children it is now a collection of variously drunk, messed up, twenty-one year old magicians with relationship issues, subcutaneous demons, and at least one handgun. They do have to deal with the aftermath of the Pevensie visit though.
It’s all very well done and both cleverly deconstructs and goes beyond the Narnia books into its own post-CS Lewis plot that feeds nicely back into puzzling elements within the first half of the book.
In short this is a really good read. More sophisticated than most genre work, which I guess is why it is sometimes cited as a “crossover” book. To my mind though it is simply very well written fantasy. Harry Potter for grownups. Plus Narnia for grownups.
Join my Patreon
Join my 3-emails-a-year newsletter #prizes
...
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Magicians.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
May 15, 2018
–
Started Reading
May 15, 2018
– Shelved
May 15, 2018
–
8.71%
"Well, the first 10% is excellent.
I wonder why the book has such a low average rating? Perhaps it nosedives..."
page
35
I wonder why the book has such a low average rating? Perhaps it nosedives..."
May 23, 2018
–
69.15%
"I've seen a lot of talk about Quentin being an unsympathetic protagonist ... but I'm not really seeing it myself. He isn't heroically saving everyone but then again there's nothing to save anyone from yet. He just seems like ... a guy.
Anyway, I'm enjoying the book. It's not exciting but it is interesting and very well written. Great prose and observation.
Still waiting to find out why wizards don't rule the world."
page
278
Anyway, I'm enjoying the book. It's not exciting but it is interesting and very well written. Great prose and observation.
Still waiting to find out why wizards don't rule the world."
May 25, 2018
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-42 of 42 (42 new)
date
newest »
message 1:
by
Ellie
(new)
-
added it
May 20, 2018 05:24AM
The blurb seems to say what appears to be quite a lot about the story, are you finding that is the case so far? I did initially like the look of this based on the first two paragraphs of the description but I feel like the rest of the description might have given away the whole storyline?
reply
|
flag
Ellie wrote: "The blurb seems to say what appears to be quite a lot about the story, are you finding that is the case so far? I did initially like the look of this based on the first two paragraphs of the descri..."
I never read the blurbs on books. Often the author doesn't get much say in what is written there.
I never read the blurbs on books. Often the author doesn't get much say in what is written there.
Ah OK, but then how do you get a feel for what the book is about?
By blurb, in this case, I meant the Goodreads description.
By blurb, in this case, I meant the Goodreads description.
Ellie wrote: "Ah OK, but then how do you get a feel for what the book is about?
By blurb, in this case, I meant the Goodreads description."
I don't get a feel for what the book is about. I just read it. What it's about very rarely has any bearing at all on whether it is a good read.
By blurb, in this case, I meant the Goodreads description."
I don't get a feel for what the book is about. I just read it. What it's about very rarely has any bearing at all on whether it is a good read.
I really enjoyed the dark tones of the novel, and the focus on the characters’ imperfect personalities, their mistakes and their consequences. Wish we had a bit more on the wizard school though! And you describe it perfectly, Narnia+ Harry Potter for adults! Will you continue the series?
Ella wrote: "I really enjoyed the dark tones of the novel, and the focus on the characters’ imperfect personalities, their mistakes and their consequences. Wish we had a bit more on the wizard school though! An..."
I have no strong motivation to continue, other than for the good writing. It was fairly self contained.
I don't get through many books in a year and I generally try to read many different authors rather than lots of any given author, however good.
I have no strong motivation to continue, other than for the good writing. It was fairly self contained.
I don't get through many books in a year and I generally try to read many different authors rather than lots of any given author, however good.
I completely agree with you! I was swept up by the quick pase in both the sentences and plot. I would highly recommend you read the trilogy, especially the second book is even better that the first.
I started reading it like a year ago, and stopped after 30 pages in (just got sidetracked by other books). I am definitely gonna pick it up again :)
I'd heard so many negative opinions on this that, twinned with the "Harry Potter for grownups" tag, I'd almost written it off. Thanks for reminding me why I considered it in the first place!
This is one of the best series I have read in the past year
Kept me up all night more than once. The world building and the characters evolving we're top notch.
Kept me up all night more than once. The world building and the characters evolving we're top notch.
I love your reviews! I actually saw it in the bookstore a couple of times and said I'd buy it next time and I never did! Butttt now I'm definitely buying it :)
Ok, I'll give this a try now, if just to prepare for the the live-action adaptation arriving on TV this year(?)
Alain wrote: "Ok, I'll give this a try now, if just to prepare for the the live-action adaptation arriving on TV this year(?)"
I thought the TV series had been out for years and was now several seasons old?
I thought the TV series had been out for years and was now several seasons old?
I love your work and to see you review this book that I love is too awesome!! Goodreads is the shit!!!!!!
Have you read the whole trilogy? And now I need a review of the TV show, this review of the book was so good. ☺️
Allie wrote: "Have you read the whole trilogy? And now I need a review of the TV show, this review of the book was so good. ☺️"
Not yet. Lots of books to read!
Not yet. Lots of books to read!
I was swayed by some of those nasty reviews not to read this book. Then I watched the TV series and thoroughly enjoyed it. Which made me wonder if maybe I should pick up the book after all. Your review has convinced me to give it a try.
I didn't like the characters in the book. I read the first 2 and couldn't bring myself to read the third. I didn't watch the show.
Just finished this a while ago. Almost gave up. Every character just s***ed for me, with ALICE being the exception and my reason to give Books 2 & 3 a go. Struggling with it still.
An author shamelessly plagiarises two of the best loved series in fantasy, repopulates them with tedious, miserable characters cribbed from Donna Tartt, and just in case that doesn't shout "I haven't had an original idea in my life" loudly enough, he then sprinkles the lumpen result with pointless literary references. As far as I could work out the sole purpose of this book was to prove that Lev Grossman went to college. Based on the output, he shouldn't have bothered.
A.M. wrote: "An author shamelessly plagiarises two of the best loved series in fantasy, repopulates them with tedious, miserable characters cribbed from Donna Tartt, and just in case that doesn't shout "I haven..."
:D
:D
Alex wrote: "I reread this trilogy regularly. Your review really captures all I love about these books."
Throw it some stars then! Authors love stars :D
Throw it some stars then! Authors love stars :D
My problem with Quentin isn't that he's flawed, that's important for all good characters, but he's ignorant to the fact that his problems are by his own doing and takes no responsibility. He thinks he's a victim, but to what is not explained, but rather, he just complains about things that are easily fixable if he would just examine his situation. I can't root for a self-loathing character, because he doesn't earn any good that comes to him, just self-sabotages himself. If he had a reason to be so miserable, I could root for him, but it seems like he just creates reasons to justify the emptiness of his own making.
Sam wrote: "My problem with Quentin isn't that he's flawed, that's important for all good characters, but he's ignorant to the fact that his problems are by his own doing and takes no responsibility. He thinks..."
Do we have to root for characters? Can't they just be interesting?
Do we have to root for characters? Can't they just be interesting?
No, we don't have to root for main characters, but I don't personally find anything interesting about Quentin. He's just an intelligent, unhappy person, which happens to be most of the characters who attend Brakebills. Same car, different coat of paint.
@Sam W, the fact that Quentin is a self-loathing miserable person with problems that he created is the point of his character. And actually, if you read some of the author's old interview, it's quite clear why Quentin and his friends are the way they are. It's borderline autobiographical.
I guess it's all a matter of perspective and expectation, and sometimes accepting that the author has a different idea of what he wants in his characters.
I guess it's all a matter of perspective and expectation, and sometimes accepting that the author has a different idea of what he wants in his characters.
Sarah wrote: "@Sam W, the fact that Quentin is a self-loathing miserable person with problems that he created is the point of his character. And actually, if you read some of the author's old interview, it's qui..."
Fair enough. I would like to say that I am enjoying the story, but I guess Quentin just doesn't work for me personally.
Fair enough. I would like to say that I am enjoying the story, but I guess Quentin just doesn't work for me personally.
Sam wrote: "No, we don't have to root for main characters, but I don't personally find anything interesting about Quentin. He's just an intelligent, unhappy person, which happens to be most of the characters w..."
Fair enough, but "I don't find anything interesting about Quentin" is pretty different from "I can't root for Quentin". The latter frames the business of writing very differently, implying that the author has to make a character you can root for rather than just an interesting character.
Fair enough, but "I don't find anything interesting about Quentin" is pretty different from "I can't root for Quentin". The latter frames the business of writing very differently, implying that the author has to make a character you can root for rather than just an interesting character.
Mark wrote: "The latter frames the business of writing very differently, implying that the author has to make a character you can root for rather than just an interesting character."
Quentin & Jorg were both 'unlikable' and weren't really people you could root for, but YOU managed to make a character that was at least ...palatable? ...understandable? ...sympathetic? to me. When I first started reading "Prince of Thorns", I had no idea why I'd picked it up. It did not read like the kind of story that I enjoy. But you *made it work.* I'm still amazed at how you took such a potentially horrible character & made him intriguing enough that I *wanted to know what happened.* Jorg was fascinating and I could see why he had the motivations that he did. Quentin was just a miserable shit for no good reason...and while I suppose there are people that are like that, it didn't make for the kind of story that I enjoy. This story was like being around someone who has way more money than you & they bitch about everything. I like novel takes on old stories, but this thing was just miserable.
Quentin & Jorg were both 'unlikable' and weren't really people you could root for, but YOU managed to make a character that was at least ...palatable? ...understandable? ...sympathetic? to me. When I first started reading "Prince of Thorns", I had no idea why I'd picked it up. It did not read like the kind of story that I enjoy. But you *made it work.* I'm still amazed at how you took such a potentially horrible character & made him intriguing enough that I *wanted to know what happened.* Jorg was fascinating and I could see why he had the motivations that he did. Quentin was just a miserable shit for no good reason...and while I suppose there are people that are like that, it didn't make for the kind of story that I enjoy. This story was like being around someone who has way more money than you & they bitch about everything. I like novel takes on old stories, but this thing was just miserable.
I'm actually really excited to see some defense of this book--it meant a lot to me as a person and also has taught me so much about writing and narrative on each subsequent read. Honestly I just wish I could find more like it--genre stories that treat character development as its own plot. Most books do, for sure, to some extent, but I'd never seen the internal narrative pushed quite so far *in a fantasy setting,* to the point it overshadowed the events. This helped me figure out my own preferences at a time when I was starting to think I'd fallen out of love with fantasy. So much of fantasy is about the battles and magic that the people kind of get lost. I love, love, love fantasy and worldbuilding and magic and other lands, but as I've gotten older I haven't been able to immerse in just that. Messy internal narratives, though, in a fantasy setting--chef's kiss. This one's up there with Jonathon Strange & Mr. Norrell for me. (The narrator for the audiobook adds so much ~juice~ to the story, too. Really brings the tone forward and just...gah. It's good.)
I won't say it's for everyone or that everyone should enjoy it or get as much out of it as I did, but the takeaways in the reviews are so cynical, I just...damn, y'all. I weep.
I won't say it's for everyone or that everyone should enjoy it or get as much out of it as I did, but the takeaways in the reviews are so cynical, I just...damn, y'all. I weep.