Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell

Sir Walter Pole likens England in the novel to ‘an orphaned young lady left in the care of a pack of lecherous, avaricious old men’ who ‘stole her inheritance and plundered her house’ (page 65). What is the narrator’s view of the government ministers, aristocrats and military figures who hold the reigns of power in Regency England? Do you think satire plays an important part in the novel?

Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell interweaves fictional characters with real figures from nineteenth-century England including, among others, King George III, the publisher John Murray, the Duke of Wellington and the poet Byron. What is the effect of mixing fact and fiction in this way? Does the author use any other techniques to convince us of the ‘truth’ of her narrative? Is this kind of writing ‘fantasy’ or ‘historical fiction’?

‘Magicians have no business marrying’ says Mr Norrell, of Strange’s relationship with Arabella. Why does Norrell take such a dim view of Strange’s marriage to Arabella? What does the novel have to say about marriage in general and the nature of relationships between men and women in the society it depicts?

How does Susanna Clarke’s use of the language and idiom of the nineteenth century add to the atmosphere of the book? Does the tone of her narrator or her choice of words remind you of any other writers?

An interview with Susanna Clarke in Time magazine suggested that, if it had not already been taken, ‘Sense and Sensibility’ would have been a good alternative title for Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. How do Strange and Norrell differ in their motivations for reviving English magic, and in their temperaments? Arabella Strange observes that ‘a great disparity of views and temper existed between the two magicians’. Do they have any similarities? Why do you think the author created two contrasting central characters?

What part does madness play in the novel?

Clarke’s narrative is heavily footnoted with references to books, stories, and historical documents both real and imagined. These extensive notes — many of them transfixing short stories in their own right — hint at a much broader historical canvas against which the events in the novel take place. Is this construction successful? Does it add credibility to the fictional universe Clarke has created? Does it detract from the main narrative in any way?

‘“Can a magician kill a man by magic?” Lord Wellington asked Strange. Strange frowned. He seemed to dislike the question. “I suppose a magician might,” he admitted, “but a gentleman never could”’ (page 304). According to the narrator of the story, Strange, Norrell, the York magicians, Lascelles and Lord Byron are all ‘gentlemen’, but Stephen Black and Childermass are not. Is the quality of being a ‘gentleman’ in the novel related to integrity? And if not, what is it dependant on? How does your opinion of characters such as Stephen Black, Childermass and Vinculus change over the course of the novel?

How important is humour in the book? Do you think it is important to the author to make her reader laugh?

How much truth is there in Vinculus’ early prophecy to Jonathan Strange (page 199)? What different kinds of knowledge and wisdom are explored in the book?