Toby D. (bookswapper) reviewed The Magicians and Mrs. Quent (Mrs. Quent, Bk 1) on + 188 more book reviews
Helpful Score: 4
Thought that this book would be better than it was. Kept flipping between multiple major characters, several young college students/young aristocrats, and a family of three girls. The situation just seems to go downhill for all the characters and I was hoping for more forward momentum. The planet has a strange day/night cycle, astronomy, and witches/magicians, but otherwise is very similar to elements of Regency England social norms and lifestyle. Some strong minor characters, but slogged thru parts of the book.
Stephanie S. (skywriter319) -
Helpful Score: 4
THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT sure sounds like something I would love. Historical fantasy, particularly with a Regency feel (although the story is set in a different world) Im all over it, right?
This book was of that strange breed for which I know there were deep flaws with its premise, execution, and more, and yet found myself reading all the way through.
First off, I dont think I have ever read a book before which so blatantly copied from famous authors works. Beckett was clearly influenced by Austen and Bronte, not simply in terms of writing style, but in the storys actual content. Parts 1 and 3 of THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT consist of the social pettiness and satire of an Austen novel, while Part 2 is blatantly reminiscent of Charlotte Brontes gothic, mystery atmosphere. The influence of these two authors on this book goes so far as to manifest itself in the books point of view: Parts 1 and 3 are told in third-person omniscient, whereas Part 2 switches to first-person from Ivys point of view. What, Beckett, you couldnt even integrate it so that Ivys time at Quents place could be told in third person? As a reader, I simply did not see the logic in dividing these parts so. Ivys first-person narration in Part 2 seemed to have no significant influence on the story whatsoever, except that it makes it easier to borrow from the likes of Jane Eyre. Blergh.
Similarly, the disjuncture of Part 2 from Parts 1 and 3 made it feel like two different stories were being told. Even in Part 3 the happenings of Parts 1 and 2 didnt fit together in any believable way, leaving me no choice but to conclude that Part 2 seemed like an authorial indulgence in Victorian gothic storytelling with little to no bearing on what readers are led to believe should be the primary plot of the bookthat is, the goings-on of Parts 1 and 3.
So obviously the characters and their predicaments were pretty much completely jacked from Austen and Bronte (go on, read a few pages and tell me if any of Altanias characters have never appeared in an Austen or Bronte work before). This led me to have a different reading experience with THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT than I usually have with a booknamely, that I knew the story was flawed and not very original, but continued to read out of my enjoyment of the, shall we say, smallness of the story. The story elements were poorly integrated, but it possesses the addictiveness of reading about petty peoples petty problems (from Austen) and the melodrama of an innocent girl exploring the haunted grounds of a tortured man (from Bronte). In short, what I liked about in book lay in its completely unoriginal elements. This makes me feel a little like a sellout.
So THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT is not going to win any prizes, but if you cant get enough of Austen and Bronte and dont mind when some rather illogical magickal elements are thrown in, you might consider checking this book out. It serves, at the very least, as great entertainment as you count how many phrases come right out of the two famous womens works.
This book was of that strange breed for which I know there were deep flaws with its premise, execution, and more, and yet found myself reading all the way through.
First off, I dont think I have ever read a book before which so blatantly copied from famous authors works. Beckett was clearly influenced by Austen and Bronte, not simply in terms of writing style, but in the storys actual content. Parts 1 and 3 of THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT consist of the social pettiness and satire of an Austen novel, while Part 2 is blatantly reminiscent of Charlotte Brontes gothic, mystery atmosphere. The influence of these two authors on this book goes so far as to manifest itself in the books point of view: Parts 1 and 3 are told in third-person omniscient, whereas Part 2 switches to first-person from Ivys point of view. What, Beckett, you couldnt even integrate it so that Ivys time at Quents place could be told in third person? As a reader, I simply did not see the logic in dividing these parts so. Ivys first-person narration in Part 2 seemed to have no significant influence on the story whatsoever, except that it makes it easier to borrow from the likes of Jane Eyre. Blergh.
Similarly, the disjuncture of Part 2 from Parts 1 and 3 made it feel like two different stories were being told. Even in Part 3 the happenings of Parts 1 and 2 didnt fit together in any believable way, leaving me no choice but to conclude that Part 2 seemed like an authorial indulgence in Victorian gothic storytelling with little to no bearing on what readers are led to believe should be the primary plot of the bookthat is, the goings-on of Parts 1 and 3.
So obviously the characters and their predicaments were pretty much completely jacked from Austen and Bronte (go on, read a few pages and tell me if any of Altanias characters have never appeared in an Austen or Bronte work before). This led me to have a different reading experience with THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT than I usually have with a booknamely, that I knew the story was flawed and not very original, but continued to read out of my enjoyment of the, shall we say, smallness of the story. The story elements were poorly integrated, but it possesses the addictiveness of reading about petty peoples petty problems (from Austen) and the melodrama of an innocent girl exploring the haunted grounds of a tortured man (from Bronte). In short, what I liked about in book lay in its completely unoriginal elements. This makes me feel a little like a sellout.
So THE MAGICIANS AND MRS. QUENT is not going to win any prizes, but if you cant get enough of Austen and Bronte and dont mind when some rather illogical magickal elements are thrown in, you might consider checking this book out. It serves, at the very least, as great entertainment as you count how many phrases come right out of the two famous womens works.
Robin M. (faburobin) reviewed The Magicians and Mrs. Quent (Mrs. Quent, Bk 1) on + 7 more book reviews
Helpful Score: 3
I liked this book very much. I thought the integration of society romance and fantasy was very well done. There were a lot of deep undercurrents to the story, and although the main conflict is successfully resolved, there is a sense that possible sequels would have plenty of territory to cover. Even though the first third seems predictable, it is very enjoyable, and then, bang, what you predicted is turned on its head. :) I love fantasy, but the pseudo-medieval/anarchy-ridden worlds it's usually set in get boring. I enjoy prim, proper romances, but nothing ever happens in them. This book is truly the best of both worlds.
Helpful Score: 2
While the characters in "The Magicians and Mrs. Quent" are clearly beloved Austen and Bronte characters with new names, this book is still an enjoyable read. Following several main characters - primarily a gentle heroine who wins the admiration even from her most severe critics - into mysterious situations, from London-like "Invarel" to the gothic and brooding moors of an British-like empire. This book pieces together a story whose entire picture is not clear til the end. The pacing for most of the book is good, though the point-of-view changes between the main characters is a bit jarring at first. Otherwise, a pleasant summer read if you are not too much of a purist.
Marna C. (feritgrrl) -
Helpful Score: 1
As others have noted, this book starts slow and can be confusing as the viewpoints shift between characters. Despite this,the book grew on me- and I found it better to savor it slowly rather than try to read it in big chunks. The style and pacing mimics 19th century novel conventions, but is more reminiscent of "Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrel" than Austen or the Brontes. The subject matter is similar JSandMN,being concerned with a sort of alternative England,where magic is practiced amid English society of the Regency/mid 19th cent.Once I became used to the flow and pacing, I enjoyed the book, but did feel that the denouement, after the slow deliberate build up, was resolved too quickly and neatly.
Very much a Jane Austin/Louisa May Alcott/Thomas Hardy/every Bronte sister plus magic story. Truer to the original genre than Gail Carriger's Alexia Tarabotti novels. More interesting than the originals for me, but that era always gave me the worst headache. Starts slow but picks up the pace a bit later on. I'll read the sequel if I run across it, but I'm not looking all over for it.
Note: PBS has this listed as a mass market paperback, but it isn't -- it'a s trade paperback.
