mjj (flemmings) wrote,


Lud-In-The-Mist reads much better after you've read Susannah Clarke. I wish I'd known this in 1974 when I first read it, though it wouldn't have helped because back then Susannah Clarke was 15. 'In 30 years you'll be in a position to appreciate what this book is on about' isn't much comfort except in L-space.

Yes, I know the literary tradition works the other way, and I'm almost sure that Kingsley contributed to the nastiness of Clarke's fairies as well. But as it is, having seen the notion writ large in Jonathan Strange, I can now deal with it written small in Lud-In-The-Mist.

(I need a-- whatever: bibliography, genealogy, table of literary precedents for JS&MN and The Ladies of Grace Adieu. Because if pressed, I'd say The Rose and the Ring is an ancestor too. Not that I remember anything of it, just that it gave me the same icky antsiness as Clarke's Fairyland.)
Tags: reading_08

  • (no subject)

    Somewhere in this here journal I noted that the coda to Bede's story about the sparrow* in the meadhall was actually a pasage from a Russian short…

  • (no subject)

    Pepys is always writing 'Lay late abed' (except when he's getting up at 4 a.m. to be somewhere downriver at 8) and I fully sympathize with the…

  • (no subject)

    The announcement that acupuncturists and massage therapists will be allowed to reopen soon lifted me out of yesterday's funk, though I still think…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded