What do you think?
Rate this book
The Magicians #1-3
The Magicians Trilogy Boxed Set
The entire Magicians trilogy, including The Magicians, The Magician King, and The Magician's Land, now available in a gorgeous boxed set
Including four fan-designed character cards.
The Magicians
Quentin Coldwater is brilliant but miserable. A high school math genius, he’s secretly fascinated with a series of children’s fantasy novels set in a magical land called Fillory, and real life is disappointing by comparison. When Quentin is unexpectedly admitted to an elite, secret college of magic, it looks like his wildest dreams may have come true. But his newfound powers lead him down a rabbit hole of hedonism and disillusionment, and ultimately to the dark secret behind the story of Fillory. The land of his childhood fantasies turns out to be much darker and more dangerous than he ever could have imagined… The Magicians is one of the most daring and inventive works of literary fantasy in years. No one who has escaped into the worlds of Narnia and Harry Potter should miss this breathtaking return to the landscape of the imagination.
The Magician King
Quentin Coldwater should be happy. He escaped a miserable Brooklyn childhood, matriculated at a secret college for magic, and graduated to discover that Fillory—a fictional utopia—was actually real. But even as a Fillorian king, Quentin finds little peace. His old restlessness returns, and he longs for the thrills a heroic quest can bring. Accompanied by his oldest friend, Julia, Quentin sets off—only to somehow wind up back in the real-world and not in Fillory, as they’d hoped. As the pair struggle to find their way back to their lost kingdom, Quentin is forced to rely on Julia’s illicitly learned sorcery as they face a sinister threat in a world very far from the beloved fantasy novels of their youth.
The Magician's Land
Quentin Coldwater has lost everything. He has been cast out of Fillory, the secret magical world of his childhood dreams that he once ruled. With nothing left to lose he returns to where his story began, the Brakebills Preparatory College of Magic. But he can’t hide from his past, and it’s not long before it comes looking for him. Meanwhile, the magical barriers that keep Fillory safe are failing, and barbarians from the north have invaded. Eliot and Janet, the rulers of Fillory, embark on a final quest to save their beloved world, only to discover a situation far more complex—and far more dire—than anyone had envisioned.
Along with Plum, a brilliant young magician with a dark secret of her own, Quentin sets out on a crooked path through a magical demimonde of gray magic and desperate characters. His new life takes him back to old haunts, like Antarctica and the Neitherlands, and old friends he thought were lost forever.
The Magician’s Land is an intricate and fantastical thriller, and an epic of love and redemption that brings the Magicians trilogy to a magnificent conclusion, confirming it as one of the great achievements in modern fantasy.
Including four fan-designed character cards.
The Magicians
Quentin Coldwater is brilliant but miserable. A high school math genius, he’s secretly fascinated with a series of children’s fantasy novels set in a magical land called Fillory, and real life is disappointing by comparison. When Quentin is unexpectedly admitted to an elite, secret college of magic, it looks like his wildest dreams may have come true. But his newfound powers lead him down a rabbit hole of hedonism and disillusionment, and ultimately to the dark secret behind the story of Fillory. The land of his childhood fantasies turns out to be much darker and more dangerous than he ever could have imagined… The Magicians is one of the most daring and inventive works of literary fantasy in years. No one who has escaped into the worlds of Narnia and Harry Potter should miss this breathtaking return to the landscape of the imagination.
The Magician King
Quentin Coldwater should be happy. He escaped a miserable Brooklyn childhood, matriculated at a secret college for magic, and graduated to discover that Fillory—a fictional utopia—was actually real. But even as a Fillorian king, Quentin finds little peace. His old restlessness returns, and he longs for the thrills a heroic quest can bring. Accompanied by his oldest friend, Julia, Quentin sets off—only to somehow wind up back in the real-world and not in Fillory, as they’d hoped. As the pair struggle to find their way back to their lost kingdom, Quentin is forced to rely on Julia’s illicitly learned sorcery as they face a sinister threat in a world very far from the beloved fantasy novels of their youth.
The Magician's Land
Quentin Coldwater has lost everything. He has been cast out of Fillory, the secret magical world of his childhood dreams that he once ruled. With nothing left to lose he returns to where his story began, the Brakebills Preparatory College of Magic. But he can’t hide from his past, and it’s not long before it comes looking for him. Meanwhile, the magical barriers that keep Fillory safe are failing, and barbarians from the north have invaded. Eliot and Janet, the rulers of Fillory, embark on a final quest to save their beloved world, only to discover a situation far more complex—and far more dire—than anyone had envisioned.
Along with Plum, a brilliant young magician with a dark secret of her own, Quentin sets out on a crooked path through a magical demimonde of gray magic and desperate characters. His new life takes him back to old haunts, like Antarctica and the Neitherlands, and old friends he thought were lost forever.
The Magician’s Land is an intricate and fantastical thriller, and an epic of love and redemption that brings the Magicians trilogy to a magnificent conclusion, confirming it as one of the great achievements in modern fantasy.
1280 pages, Paperback
First published August 5, 2014
970 people are currently reading
4283 people want to read
About the author
Lev Grossman
70 books10.2k followersHi! I'm the author of the #1 New York Times bestselling Magicians trilogy—The Magicians, The Magician King, and The Magician’s Land—which was adapted as a TV show that ran for five seasons on Syfy.
I've also written two novels for children: The Silver Arrow, which the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, People magazine, Apple and Amazon all put on their best-of-the-year lists, and its sequel The Golden Swift. I do some journalist and screenwriting too.
I grew up in Lexington, Massachusetts, the son of two English professors. My twin brother Austin is a writer and game designer, and my older sister Sheba is an artist. Sometimes I live in Brooklyn, New York, other times in Sydney, Australia, where my wife is from. I have three kids and a somehow steadily increasing number of cats.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 117 reviews
October 6, 2014
Even though I am touching on familiar territory here, I want to recommend Lev Grossman’s fantasy trilogy - The Magicians, The Magician King and The Magician’s Land. This is very adult stuff and not for younger readers, but from mid teens upwards, it’s fine. It is such a well constructed and well written story I cannot say enough good things about it. As stories go, I admire this one greatly. It is one of those rare cases when I can say that this is a set of books I wish I had written. You would do well to give it a try.
December 21, 2014
As a fan of magical fiction, I wanted desperately to love these books. However, I'm an even bigger fan of Literature's potential to challenge, transform, touch the reader in some way. With each book I was waiting for some of that to come by the end—something that made me think or feel something deeply, a grace note or a deep truth about life. By probably the middle of the second book, I was just hoping some clever plot structure would emerge by the end of the trilogy. I was not satisfied by the time I finished all three.
The most prominent feature of most of the characters in the books seemed to be a "death to all gods"/nihilistic/hedonistic outlook on life and existence, so the books might perhaps be metaphorical for the lives of those who live with a similar frame of mind. At least they're accurate in regard to what you're left with after you've pulled down the idols and smashed the icons: just yourself as god of your own existence—and it's not that great.
Even if conveying this message was the point (and I imagine that this message is meant in a postmodern, this is reality so deal with it kind of way), it wasn't done in an appealing manner. I ended up spending the whole time hoping I'd find a character that had some redeeming quality, but down to the last one (except maybe the sloth in the second book), I just didn't like or relate to any of them.
Okay, what about the technical side, then? I kept wondering, what is the overarching structure? I never found any evidence that there was much. The prose itself was entertaining at times, but often verged on the pompous. And by the way, whoever was the manuscript editor for these books should be fired—there were way too many mistakes to excuse.
But what about the magic? The descriptions and hints of how spells are cast in the first book were tantalizing, but there was little description, development, or extrapolation of the interesting parameters alluded to throughout the trilogy. The clever framework the author developed for the practice of magic was rarely employed to satisfying effect. I was disappointed that magic wasn't developed more in the Magicians trilogy.
On the good side, I have to admit that these were books that kept me coming back. Admittedly, a large part of that was my desire to see these characters actually develop into something worthwhile, a desire that ultimately was not fulfilled. But I also was interested to see where the story was going, what would happen next. This is why I can recommend the books to people who don't seem to bring such stringent demands to a novel that I do.
In summary, I wanted to love these books, and I continued to hope for that possibility, which is why I read them all. For my high hopes, I was severely disappointed, though.
The most prominent feature of most of the characters in the books seemed to be a "death to all gods"/nihilistic/hedonistic outlook on life and existence, so the books might perhaps be metaphorical for the lives of those who live with a similar frame of mind. At least they're accurate in regard to what you're left with after you've pulled down the idols and smashed the icons: just yourself as god of your own existence—and it's not that great.
Even if conveying this message was the point (and I imagine that this message is meant in a postmodern, this is reality so deal with it kind of way), it wasn't done in an appealing manner. I ended up spending the whole time hoping I'd find a character that had some redeeming quality, but down to the last one (except maybe the sloth in the second book), I just didn't like or relate to any of them.
Okay, what about the technical side, then? I kept wondering, what is the overarching structure? I never found any evidence that there was much. The prose itself was entertaining at times, but often verged on the pompous. And by the way, whoever was the manuscript editor for these books should be fired—there were way too many mistakes to excuse.
But what about the magic? The descriptions and hints of how spells are cast in the first book were tantalizing, but there was little description, development, or extrapolation of the interesting parameters alluded to throughout the trilogy. The clever framework the author developed for the practice of magic was rarely employed to satisfying effect. I was disappointed that magic wasn't developed more in the Magicians trilogy.
On the good side, I have to admit that these were books that kept me coming back. Admittedly, a large part of that was my desire to see these characters actually develop into something worthwhile, a desire that ultimately was not fulfilled. But I also was interested to see where the story was going, what would happen next. This is why I can recommend the books to people who don't seem to bring such stringent demands to a novel that I do.
In summary, I wanted to love these books, and I continued to hope for that possibility, which is why I read them all. For my high hopes, I was severely disappointed, though.
August 16, 2015
I recently finished the last of the trilogy. I didn't have the boxed set, but I sent it to my niece. Now, I have to preface this review by saying that I am almost 70 years old. This series was certainly engrossing. It had all the parts left out of the Harry Potter series, because that was for juveniles and this is for the 20-35 year-olds. I say this because it is very hip in language, references to pop culture, and so forth. And Magic is still interesting. They are a sprightly read, very inventive, quite absorbing, and I am not sorry I read them, but...
I have grown up too much for them.
The first book begins very slowly. Quentin is an interesting person, but far too self-absorbed. About ¾ of the way through, I was about to say, "okay; time to grow up and stop whining." Then, things began to change and happen.
As my daughter in law promised, in interest, Book 2 surpassed Book 1 and Book 3 surpassed Book 2. Quentin and his friends continue to go on their quests and weave their magic. I am glad to have read them, but I would not recommend them to my other age peers. As Coming-of-Age books go, these are a bit more pop and glitzy, but I have read better.
My favorite scene? The bacon sequence near the end of the 3rd book. Bacon? Really? That's all it took???
I have grown up too much for them.
The first book begins very slowly. Quentin is an interesting person, but far too self-absorbed. About ¾ of the way through, I was about to say, "okay; time to grow up and stop whining." Then, things began to change and happen.
As my daughter in law promised, in interest, Book 2 surpassed Book 1 and Book 3 surpassed Book 2. Quentin and his friends continue to go on their quests and weave their magic. I am glad to have read them, but I would not recommend them to my other age peers. As Coming-of-Age books go, these are a bit more pop and glitzy, but I have read better.
My favorite scene? The bacon sequence near the end of the 3rd book. Bacon? Really? That's all it took???
July 20, 2018
¿Quiere saber más de esta trilogía, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com....
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com....
May 22, 2016
I went into this book thinking it was geared towards younger audiences. I came out of it with the elevator pitch of, "It's Narnia meets Hogwarts but in grad school, so with profanity, sex, and drugs,". The series doesn't peak at number one, for me the first book is the weakest: not because it's weak, but because it simply has to do all the heavy lifting and mechanics of setting up a complex set of worlds and fully-formed characters, which Grossman does beautifully. It supposes that magic exists — but in a totally self-conscious way that makes for equal parts hilarity and heartbreak.
*TRIGGER WARNING* This book deals with some very real, very ugly things in a very realistic and unflinching way. I found myself cringing in recognition at several places dealing with loss, trauma and depression. I also laughed out loud at several points, so there is levity to balance the darkness.
I love these books and highly recommend them.
*TRIGGER WARNING* This book deals with some very real, very ugly things in a very realistic and unflinching way. I found myself cringing in recognition at several places dealing with loss, trauma and depression. I also laughed out loud at several points, so there is levity to balance the darkness.
I love these books and highly recommend them.
August 15, 2025
This was an enjoyable read, but the show took this world and characters to a whole other level.
Recommend
Recommend
October 23, 2016
I started reading this series because I liked the SyFy adaptation TV series. As usual the stories of both formats are a bit different. To be honest. I liked the build up of the story in the books a lot better. You get to know the characters an the worlds they live in. Thus getting some kind of connection with them all. And the books are a lot less gory than the TV series.
February 13, 2016
The trilogy was HIGHLY enjoyable. However, 5 minutes into the made for TV Syfy adaptation ... It is a complete TRAVESTY.
Read the book. Watch the series at your own risk.
Read the book. Watch the series at your own risk.
December 27, 2025
A magic school, gay characters, portals to Narnia (er I mean Fillary) and a magic quest to save magic. The tv show was brilliant. The books are brilliant. ❤️
August 31, 2015
Each one of these got better and better.
July 23, 2017
Wonderful!
Really loved these books and the ending was not exactly what I was expecting. These books are a good balance between looking lighthearted and dark.
Really loved these books and the ending was not exactly what I was expecting. These books are a good balance between looking lighthearted and dark.
October 30, 2024
হ্যারি পটার সিরিজ শেষ হল এই শতাব্দীর প্রথম দশকে, সাথে সিনেমা- সে এক তুমুল উত্তেজনা। আর সবাই হুমড়ি খেয়ে পড়ল এই জাতীয় ফ্যান্টাসির ওপরে। আমিও তখন হ্যারি পটার হ্যাংওভারে ভুগছিলাম, আর মাত্র কলেজও শেষ, তাই যখন শুনলাম অ্যাডাল্টদের জন্য হ্যারি পটার জাতীয় সিরিজ লেখা হয়েছে, তখনি লেভ গ্রসম্যানের “দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ানস” সিরিজটির খোঁজ পেলাম। আবার সাইফাই চ্যানেলে এর ওপরে এক টিভি সিরিজও নাকি আছে, তাই দেখার আগে ভাবলাম একটু পড়ে নিই।
প্লটঃ
কুইন্টিন ক্লিয়ারওয়াটার সবার থেকে অন্যরকম, হাইস্কুলে তেমন বন্ধুও নেই। সে পছন্দ করে সহপাঠী জুলিয়াকে, কিন্তু জুলিয়া ভালবাসে তারই বন্ধু জেমসকে। তার পারিবারিক জীবনও তেমন সুখের নয়। এর মধ্যে এক বিষণ্ণ বিকেলে সে হঠাতই নিজেকে আবিস্কার করে এক পরীক্ষাকেন্দ্রে, জাদুর কলেজ ব্রেকবিলসএ ভর্তির প্রতিযোগিতায়। জুলিয়াও ছিল সেখানে, কিন্তু কুইন্টিন ভর্তির যোগ্যতা অর্জন করে। ব্রেকবিলসএ তার সাথে বন্ধুত্ব হয় ইলিয়ট আর এলিসের সাথে। গ্রাজুয়েশন শেষে অলস সময় কাটায় কুইন্টিন, আর সেই সময় খোঁজ পায় জাদুর দেশ ফিলোরির, যার অস্তিত্ব কিনা এতদিন কেবল ছোটদের রূপকথার বইয়েই ছিল।
রিভিউঃ
হ্যারি পটারের বই গুলির শুরুতে যদি হ্যারির বয়স ১৬-১৭ হত, তাইলে যেমন হত, এই সিরিজের শুরুটা তেমনই। সিরিজের প্রথম বই ““দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ানস” এর প্রথম দিকে কুইন্টিন শুরু করে জাদুর কলেজে যাওয়া, যেখানে কিছুটা হগওয়ারটসের স্বাদ পাওয়া যায়। অবশ্য সিরিজের প্রথম বইয়ের মাঝখান থেকেই প্রধান চরিত্র কুইন্টিনের গ্রাজুয়েশন শেষ হয়ে যায় এবং আমরা পুরোপুরি অ্যাডাল্ট জগতে প্রবেশ করি। জাদুর কলেজ ব্রেকবিলসএ সময় অল্পই কাটে আমাদের। এখানে প্রেম, সেক্স, ড্রাগ, বেকারত্ব সবকিছুই লেখক কুইন্টিনের জীবনে দেখিয়েছেন। আর আছে জুলিয়া, যে কিনা ব্রেকবিলসএ ���র্তির প্রতিযোগিতায় ফেল করে অন্য উপায়ে জাদু শেখে। এই বইয়ের শেষ ভাগে আমরা কুইন্টিনের সাথে যাই ফিলোরিতে, যাকে কিনা ডার্ক নারনিয়া বলা যেতে পারে। প্রথম বইটা আমার তেমন ভাল লাগে নি, মনে হয়েছে লেখক নারনিয়া আর হগওয়ারটসের অদ্ভুত মিশ্রণ করতে চেয়েছেন, কিন্তু উপাদানগুলি ঠিক মতো মিশেনি। আর কুইন্টিন বেশ বিরক্তিকর এক চরিত্র। একমাত্র আমার ভাল লেগেছে ইলিয়টকে। আর এলিস তো হারমাইনিকে নকল করে যেন লেখা। আমি সিরিজটা ছেড়ে দিব ভাবছিলাম, আর ভাবছিলাম কেন এই সিরিজটা এত জনপ্রিয়, কিন্তু এই বইয়ের শেষটা এমন এক জায়গায় শেষ হল যে, পরের বইটা পড়ার কিছুটা আগ্রহ পেলাম। সিরিজের দ্বিতীয় বই “দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ান কিং” শুরু হয় আগের বইয়ের কয়েক মাস পরে, ফিলোরিতে, যেখানে কুইন্টিন এখন রাজা, কিন্ত সে খুঁজে ফেরে এলিসকে। গুরুটা ছিল মোটামুটি নারনিয়ার রিপ অফ, এবং কুইন্টিন তখনও বিরক্তিকর, কিন্তু জুলিয়ার অতীতে গল্প আমাকে বইয়ের মধ্যে টেনে রাখে। যাই হোক, এই বইয়ের মাঝখান থেকে শেষ পর্যন্ত গল্প নিজস্বতা পাওয়া শুরু করে। আবার বই শেষ হয় ক্লিফহ্যাংগার দিয়ে, তাই পরের বইয়ে যাওয়া। সিরিজের তৃতীয় ও শেষ বই “দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ানস ল্যান্ড” এ শেষ পর্যন্ত গল্পতে মজা পাওয়া শুরু করি, আর কুইন্টিনকে বুঝতে শুরু করি। ফিলোরি থেকে বিতাড়িত হয়ে, আবার মানুষের জগতে কুইন্টিনের মানিয়ে নেয়ার যুদ্ধ ভাল লেগেছে, আর ভাল লেগেছে হারিয়ে যাওয়া এলিসের জন্য তার কাতরতা। আমার মতে, শেষ বইটার জন্যই সিরিজটা জমেছে, আর নাইলে প্রথম বইটা হ্যারি পটার আর নারনিয়ার প্লট থেকে এত বেশি উপাদান নেয়া হয়েছে যে, গল্প নিজস্বতাই হারিয়ে গিয়েছিল এইটায়। কিন্তু যদি কষ্ট করে দ্বিতীয় বইয়ের মাঝামাঝি যাওয়া যায়, তাইলে মজা পাওয়া যাবে। কিন্তু কয়জনেরই বা এত ধৈয্য থাকে।
শেষকথাঃ
যারা হ্যারি পটার আর নারনিয়ার হ্যাংওভারে ভুগছেন, আর এই গল্পে অ্যাডাল্ট উপাদান চান, তারা পড়ে দেখতে পারেন, কিন্তু আমি তেমন উপভোগ করি নি এই সিরিজটি, একমাত্র শেষ বইটা ছাড়া।
প্লটঃ
কুইন্টিন ক্লিয়ারওয়াটার সবার থেকে অন্যরকম, হাইস্কুলে তেমন বন্ধুও নেই। সে পছন্দ করে সহপাঠী জুলিয়াকে, কিন্তু জুলিয়া ভালবাসে তারই বন্ধু জেমসকে। তার পারিবারিক জীবনও তেমন সুখের নয়। এর মধ্যে এক বিষণ্ণ বিকেলে সে হঠাতই নিজেকে আবিস্কার করে এক পরীক্ষাকেন্দ্রে, জাদুর কলেজ ব্রেকবিলসএ ভর্তির প্রতিযোগিতায়। জুলিয়াও ছিল সেখানে, কিন্তু কুইন্টিন ভর্তির যোগ্যতা অর্জন করে। ব্রেকবিলসএ তার সাথে বন্ধুত্ব হয় ইলিয়ট আর এলিসের সাথে। গ্রাজুয়েশন শেষে অলস সময় কাটায় কুইন্টিন, আর সেই সময় খোঁজ পায় জাদুর দেশ ফিলোরির, যার অস্তিত্ব কিনা এতদিন কেবল ছোটদের রূপকথার বইয়েই ছিল।
রিভিউঃ
হ্যারি পটারের বই গুলির শুরুতে যদি হ্যারির বয়স ১৬-১৭ হত, তাইলে যেমন হত, এই সিরিজের শুরুটা তেমনই। সিরিজের প্রথম বই ““দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ানস” এর প্রথম দিকে কুইন্টিন শুরু করে জাদুর কলেজে যাওয়া, যেখানে কিছুটা হগওয়ারটসের স্বাদ পাওয়া যায়। অবশ্য সিরিজের প্রথম বইয়ের মাঝখান থেকেই প্রধান চরিত্র কুইন্টিনের গ্রাজুয়েশন শেষ হয়ে যায় এবং আমরা পুরোপুরি অ্যাডাল্ট জগতে প্রবেশ করি। জাদুর কলেজ ব্রেকবিলসএ সময় অল্পই কাটে আমাদের। এখানে প্রেম, সেক্স, ড্রাগ, বেকারত্ব সবকিছুই লেখক কুইন্টিনের জীবনে দেখিয়েছেন। আর আছে জুলিয়া, যে কিনা ব্রেকবিলসএ ���র্তির প্রতিযোগিতায় ফেল করে অন্য উপায়ে জাদু শেখে। এই বইয়ের শেষ ভাগে আমরা কুইন্টিনের সাথে যাই ফিলোরিতে, যাকে কিনা ডার্ক নারনিয়া বলা যেতে পারে। প্রথম বইটা আমার তেমন ভাল লাগে নি, মনে হয়েছে লেখক নারনিয়া আর হগওয়ারটসের অদ্ভুত মিশ্রণ করতে চেয়েছেন, কিন্তু উপাদানগুলি ঠিক মতো মিশেনি। আর কুইন্টিন বেশ বিরক্তিকর এক চরিত্র। একমাত্র আমার ভাল লেগেছে ইলিয়টকে। আর এলিস তো হারমাইনিকে নকল করে যেন লেখা। আমি সিরিজটা ছেড়ে দিব ভাবছিলাম, আর ভাবছিলাম কেন এই সিরিজটা এত জনপ্রিয়, কিন্তু এই বইয়ের শেষটা এমন এক জায়গায় শেষ হল যে, পরের বইটা পড়ার কিছুটা আগ্রহ পেলাম। সিরিজের দ্বিতীয় বই “দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ান কিং” শুরু হয় আগের বইয়ের কয়েক মাস পরে, ফিলোরিতে, যেখানে কুইন্টিন এখন রাজা, কিন্ত সে খুঁজে ফেরে এলিসকে। গুরুটা ছিল মোটামুটি নারনিয়ার রিপ অফ, এবং কুইন্টিন তখনও বিরক্তিকর, কিন্তু জুলিয়ার অতীতে গল্প আমাকে বইয়ের মধ্যে টেনে রাখে। যাই হোক, এই বইয়ের মাঝখান থেকে শেষ পর্যন্ত গল্প নিজস্বতা পাওয়া শুরু করে। আবার বই শেষ হয় ক্লিফহ্যাংগার দিয়ে, তাই পরের বইয়ে যাওয়া। সিরিজের তৃতীয় ও শেষ বই “দ্যা ম্যাজিশিয়ানস ল্যান্ড” এ শেষ পর্যন্ত গল্পতে মজা পাওয়া শুরু করি, আর কুইন্টিনকে বুঝতে শুরু করি। ফিলোরি থেকে বিতাড়িত হয়ে, আবার মানুষের জগতে কুইন্টিনের মানিয়ে নেয়ার যুদ্ধ ভাল লেগেছে, আর ভাল লেগেছে হারিয়ে যাওয়া এলিসের জন্য তার কাতরতা। আমার মতে, শেষ বইটার জন্যই সিরিজটা জমেছে, আর নাইলে প্রথম বইটা হ্যারি পটার আর নারনিয়ার প্লট থেকে এত বেশি উপাদান নেয়া হয়েছে যে, গল্প নিজস্বতাই হারিয়ে গিয়েছিল এইটায়। কিন্তু যদি কষ্ট করে দ্বিতীয় বইয়ের মাঝামাঝি যাওয়া যায়, তাইলে মজা পাওয়া যাবে। কিন্তু কয়জনেরই বা এত ধৈয্য থাকে।
শেষকথাঃ
যারা হ্যারি পটার আর নারনিয়ার হ্যাংওভারে ভুগছেন, আর এই গল্পে অ্যাডাল্ট উপাদান চান, তারা পড়ে দেখতে পারেন, কিন্তু আমি তেমন উপভোগ করি নি এই সিরিজটি, একমাত্র শেষ বইটা ছাড়া।
April 18, 2021
Watch me rave about how much I love this series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0nZ5...
July 20, 2021
I could never stop reading this
June 24, 2024
3,5/5
rare occurrence where I say the adaptation is better than the source material
rare occurrence where I say the adaptation is better than the source material
March 15, 2019
World building: 10/10
Writing: 3/10
Character development: 2/10
I started reading this series because I was enjoying the SyFy show, and only finished it because I kept hoping it would eventually live up to that experience. Turns out, this is one of the few cases where the screen adaptation is substantially better than the original books.
Starting with the most positive point: the worlds created in this series are beautiful, yet imperfect. The kind of fantasy worlds that actually seem believable and interesting.
Unfortunately, the books read like a cross between the Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter, but with the main character replaced by Holden Caulfield and written by your standard issue basement dweller. I was honestly surprised when I looked up Lev Grossman and learned he had any formal literature training at all, I was so sure this series had been written by a teenager based on their Tumblr fanfics.
The characters are simultaneously two-dimensional and insufferable, and while Lev continuously tells the reader how much they've changed over time, this character development never seems to be substantiated by their thoughts and actions. Phrases like "for the lulz" and "FTW" are peppered throughout the books, presumably to relate to the youths of today. Unfortunately, the miss the mark and make the writing feel awkward and insincere.
Quentin is self-absorbed and dull, a completely flat depiction of what depression might be like if it were described by someone who's never been depressed. He has absolutely no development throughout the series, though he's continuously handed everything he ever wants via a series of fortunate plot twists. Some reviews suggest that this is the point of the series, that it's intended to be a sort of parody or commentary on the fantasy genre, but for that kind of commentary to work, the writing has to be distinguishable from that which it wishes to parody
Additionally, there are several female characters throughout the books who have so much potential to be interesting, full characters, but it's obvious Lev has some pent up issues with women, because instead they're disposable characters who only exist so that their suffering and sacrifices can drive Quentin's story. Every female character is described excessively by her attractive appearance, while all the male characters have some sort of physical flaw (except, what do you know, Quentin is incredibly attractive and just can't see it for himself). Almost every female character seems to be placed into the story either so that within can fuck her or so that he can whine about her not wanting to fuck him.
-spoilers start here-
Julia and Alice both seem to forgive Quentin almost immediately for things he did that caused them serious trauma. Quentin refused to help Julia learn magic, almost certainly because he's afraid she'll outshine him at Brakebills, like she has outshined him their whole lives. Or maybe it's because he can't stand that despite the fact he's been pathetically pining after her for a decade, she simply isn't interested. Either way, as a result of his lack of help, she spends years suffering from extreme depression and hunting down traces of magic from back alley sources like an addict, culminating in an event where a god kills most of her friends and rapes her. But no big deal, after that she gets to be a demi-god, so really she should be thankful to Quentin for not helping her. When she meets Quentin again, she seemingly has no hard feelings at all, and they continue their friendship like nothing happened.
Then there's Alice, who treats Quentin well and tries to drive him to grow as both a person and a magician, but instead he cheats on her and then gets upset when this is a deal breaker for her. After the big boss fight in book 1, she becomes a niffin and drops out of the series until book 3. When she returns to the story 8ish years later, she's mad at Quentin for being a self-absorbed asshole.....for about five minutes, then she gets over it and they have sex.
The Chatwin story is mostly interesting, except that we're supposed to forgive Martin's tyranny in Fillory after Jane tells us, as a sort of after-thought, that, oh yeah, he was being molested by our neighbor who wrote the Fillory books. Rupert also references this in book 3. Despite the fact several of the Chatwins seemed to suspect or know about the molestation AND they lived to be adults, it seems none of them thought to share that information with anyway except for Quentin and his friends.
Overall this story had so much potential and failed to live up to that potential at every turn. I'm thankful that the SyFy writers were able to take this universe and adapt it into something halfway decent, which seems to be the least Fillory deserves.
Writing: 3/10
Character development: 2/10
I started reading this series because I was enjoying the SyFy show, and only finished it because I kept hoping it would eventually live up to that experience. Turns out, this is one of the few cases where the screen adaptation is substantially better than the original books.
Starting with the most positive point: the worlds created in this series are beautiful, yet imperfect. The kind of fantasy worlds that actually seem believable and interesting.
Unfortunately, the books read like a cross between the Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter, but with the main character replaced by Holden Caulfield and written by your standard issue basement dweller. I was honestly surprised when I looked up Lev Grossman and learned he had any formal literature training at all, I was so sure this series had been written by a teenager based on their Tumblr fanfics.
The characters are simultaneously two-dimensional and insufferable, and while Lev continuously tells the reader how much they've changed over time, this character development never seems to be substantiated by their thoughts and actions. Phrases like "for the lulz" and "FTW" are peppered throughout the books, presumably to relate to the youths of today. Unfortunately, the miss the mark and make the writing feel awkward and insincere.
Quentin is self-absorbed and dull, a completely flat depiction of what depression might be like if it were described by someone who's never been depressed. He has absolutely no development throughout the series, though he's continuously handed everything he ever wants via a series of fortunate plot twists. Some reviews suggest that this is the point of the series, that it's intended to be a sort of parody or commentary on the fantasy genre, but for that kind of commentary to work, the writing has to be distinguishable from that which it wishes to parody
Additionally, there are several female characters throughout the books who have so much potential to be interesting, full characters, but it's obvious Lev has some pent up issues with women, because instead they're disposable characters who only exist so that their suffering and sacrifices can drive Quentin's story. Every female character is described excessively by her attractive appearance, while all the male characters have some sort of physical flaw (except, what do you know, Quentin is incredibly attractive and just can't see it for himself). Almost every female character seems to be placed into the story either so that within can fuck her or so that he can whine about her not wanting to fuck him.
-spoilers start here-
Julia and Alice both seem to forgive Quentin almost immediately for things he did that caused them serious trauma. Quentin refused to help Julia learn magic, almost certainly because he's afraid she'll outshine him at Brakebills, like she has outshined him their whole lives. Or maybe it's because he can't stand that despite the fact he's been pathetically pining after her for a decade, she simply isn't interested. Either way, as a result of his lack of help, she spends years suffering from extreme depression and hunting down traces of magic from back alley sources like an addict, culminating in an event where a god kills most of her friends and rapes her. But no big deal, after that she gets to be a demi-god, so really she should be thankful to Quentin for not helping her. When she meets Quentin again, she seemingly has no hard feelings at all, and they continue their friendship like nothing happened.
Then there's Alice, who treats Quentin well and tries to drive him to grow as both a person and a magician, but instead he cheats on her and then gets upset when this is a deal breaker for her. After the big boss fight in book 1, she becomes a niffin and drops out of the series until book 3. When she returns to the story 8ish years later, she's mad at Quentin for being a self-absorbed asshole.....for about five minutes, then she gets over it and they have sex.
The Chatwin story is mostly interesting, except that we're supposed to forgive Martin's tyranny in Fillory after Jane tells us, as a sort of after-thought, that, oh yeah, he was being molested by our neighbor who wrote the Fillory books. Rupert also references this in book 3. Despite the fact several of the Chatwins seemed to suspect or know about the molestation AND they lived to be adults, it seems none of them thought to share that information with anyway except for Quentin and his friends.
Overall this story had so much potential and failed to live up to that potential at every turn. I'm thankful that the SyFy writers were able to take this universe and adapt it into something halfway decent, which seems to be the least Fillory deserves.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 28, 2020
“You don’t just go on fun adventures for good causes and have happy endings. You’re not going to be a character in a story, there’s nobody arranging everything for you. The real world just doesn’t work like that.”
“Sure, you can live out your dreams, but it’ll only turn you into a monster.”
Lev Grossman’s The Magicians trilogy is the source material for the TV show of the same name, which has been one of my favourite shows during the last five years. I’d never read the books before the it started, and since I loved the show and had heard from a couple of readers that the books were not as good, I resisted reading them until the show ended earlier this year. Now that I’ve finished the trilogy, I can happily say that I actually really liked it! Because of the way I came to this book, I’ll spend an unnecessarily large portion of this review describing how it diverges from a show that was adapted from it, but which will always be the “original” in my mind. (This review is also ridiculously long. Sorry about that).
The first season of the show adhered pretty closely to the first book (plus part of book two), but the show diverged from there. The main plot of book two formed the basis for season three, while book three was the basis for much of seasons two and five. The way this material corresponded to the show, but in a different order, was odd but pretty cool – I never knew when a plotline I recognised would show up in a different context. Similarly, while most of the main characters were similar in both the books and show (with one important general difference), Kady has no book equivalent. I found this last fact eye-opening: while I liked Kady, I always thought she was out of place in the show, like she’d accidentally walked over from a more realistic and serious show, maybe a crime drama lacking any magical element. I thought this was entirely due to the way Jade Tailor played the character (it’s a good performance but doesn’t quite match the others), and now realise it’s also due to the showrunners creating her without Grossman’s input.
I said above there was one general difference between the book characters and show characters, and this difference is also the reason many fans of the show don’t particularly like the books: the book characters are significantly less likeable. They have more or less the same flaws in both versions, but in the books these flaws are amplified, and more resistant to personal growth. Penny in particular is a massive dickhead in the books, and only gets worse as his powers grow, until he isolates himself from the rest of the cast; in the show, his abrasive personality is tempered through his relationships with first Kady and then Julia.
Professor Fogg speculates that the characters’ flaws are the source of their power: “I think you're magicians because you're unhappy. A magician is strong because he feels pain. He feels the difference between what the world is and what he would make of it. […] A magician is strong because he hurts more than others. His wound is his strength […] You have learned to break the world that has tried to break you.”
Quentin, who is much more the main protagonist of the books than he is in the show, is mopey in both versions, and frequently makes things worse by trying to use magic to make things better. But Quentin’s depression is a much bigger factor in the books than in the show. In fact, Grossman’s purpose in writing the trilogy may well have been to demonstrate the truth of the following proposition: It's a terrible idea to try to be a hero when you're depressed. The characters are all sorry for themselves in their own ways, even though they are all gifted, and their self-pity frequently gets in the way of their repeated quests to save the world.
As Ember, God of Fillory (a twisted version of Narnia) puts it, after Quentin’s heroic intentions caused a disaster: “Children of Earth, no-one asked you to come. I am sorry that our world is not the paradise you were looking for, but it was not created for your entertainment. Fillory […] is not a theme park for you and your friends to play dress-up in, with swords and crowns […] You came here to save us. You came here to be our king. But tell me something, Quentin. How could you hope to save us when you cannot even save yourself?”
When we meet Quentin, he is an exceptionally gifted student at an elite New York high school, on the path to an Ivy League college of his choosing, but he is unsatisfied with everything and sorry for himself; the girl he lusts over just thinks of him as a friend, his parents are distant, and all his intellectual achievements make him numb. He daydreams of escaping into a magical land. Once he does actually escape into a magical land, he is briefly happy, but then realises magic is too much like reality and starts to feel restless and sorry for himself again.
“Here he was, a freshly licensed and bonded and accredited magician. He had learned to cast spells, seen the Beast and lived, flown to Antarctica on his own two wings, and returned naked by the sheer force of his magical will. He had an iron demon in his back. Who would ever have thought he could do and have and be all those things and still feel nothing at all? What was he missing? Or was it him? If he wasn’t happy even here, even now, did the flaw lie in him? As soon as he seized happiness it dispersed and reappeared somewhere else. Like Fillory, like everything good, it never lasted. What a terrible thing to know. I got my heart’s desire, he thought, and there my troubles began.”
Many readers say they can't stand Quentin’s privileged moping, but the thing is, this is an accurate portrayal of depression: the inability to feel good even when things are, to all appearances, going well for you - and then feeling worse because of your guilt that you should feel better. It makes sense that so many readers don't like Quentin, since depressed people are not fun to be around and usually come across as self-involved. But I can't help relating his state of mind to how I often used to feel, and I appreciated having a fantasy-novel protagonist whose pain I'd shared.
Readers also frequently hold against Quentin his horny observations about any attractive woman he meets, particularly in the first book. While this doesn’t endear him to me, his obsession with sex is an accurate portrayal of most of the nerdy straight teenaged boys I’ve known. I don’t think the books would have been improved by idealising his character. The TV show toned down how self-centred he was in regard to women: for example [MILD SPOILER], in the books he cheats on Alice quite intentionally when he is very drunk, yet still in control of his actions; in the show, he was under the effects of a magic spell he’d cast on himself in order to help solve a serious problem. [END SPOILER] I certainly like TV-Quentin more than book-Quentin, but the original, less likable Quentin’s portrayal is more valuable as a reflection on the behaviour of young men in our world.
Along with these substantial flaws, Quentin (in both the books and show) has one under-riding, consistent strength: he has never lost his childhood love of wonder, of magic, and his desire to do something heroic. This latter desire does often make things worse, and he frequently makes exactly the wrong decision – in the second book, Eliot remarks “Statistically, historically, and however else you want to look at it, you are almost never right. A monkey making life decisions based on its horoscope in USA Today would be right more often than you.” But this love of wonder and dream of doing good compels him to continue fighting for his friends, and for the magic land they discover. In one of the signature moments of book one, Alice tells him:
“That’s what makes you different from the rest of us, Quentin. You actually still believe in magic. You do realize, right, that nobody else does? I mean, we all know magic is real. But you really believe in it, don’t you?”
He felt flustered. “Is that wrong?”
She nodded and smiled even more brightly. “Yes, Quentin. It’s wrong.”
Wrong as it may be, this belief makes Quentin who he is. And one of my favourite developments in the trilogy is when [SPOILER], in the second book, he realises that the key to solving the vital, world-saving quest he is on is not to do something physically brave (which he eventually concedes he’s incapable of anyway) or grand, but simply to care about others: “After all that, he hadn’t had to kill a monster or solve a riddle. He just had to come down here, to see how Benedict was doing.” [END SPOILER]
While Quentin and his friends are not the most instantly loveable fantasy heroes, Lev Grossman’s work is not intended as escapism – it’s an examination of the tragedies escapism can create, of the fact that magic will not save you from failing to love yourself. Loving and caring for others, however, might help.
“Sure, you can live out your dreams, but it’ll only turn you into a monster.”
Lev Grossman’s The Magicians trilogy is the source material for the TV show of the same name, which has been one of my favourite shows during the last five years. I’d never read the books before the it started, and since I loved the show and had heard from a couple of readers that the books were not as good, I resisted reading them until the show ended earlier this year. Now that I’ve finished the trilogy, I can happily say that I actually really liked it! Because of the way I came to this book, I’ll spend an unnecessarily large portion of this review describing how it diverges from a show that was adapted from it, but which will always be the “original” in my mind. (This review is also ridiculously long. Sorry about that).
The first season of the show adhered pretty closely to the first book (plus part of book two), but the show diverged from there. The main plot of book two formed the basis for season three, while book three was the basis for much of seasons two and five. The way this material corresponded to the show, but in a different order, was odd but pretty cool – I never knew when a plotline I recognised would show up in a different context. Similarly, while most of the main characters were similar in both the books and show (with one important general difference), Kady has no book equivalent. I found this last fact eye-opening: while I liked Kady, I always thought she was out of place in the show, like she’d accidentally walked over from a more realistic and serious show, maybe a crime drama lacking any magical element. I thought this was entirely due to the way Jade Tailor played the character (it’s a good performance but doesn’t quite match the others), and now realise it’s also due to the showrunners creating her without Grossman’s input.
I said above there was one general difference between the book characters and show characters, and this difference is also the reason many fans of the show don’t particularly like the books: the book characters are significantly less likeable. They have more or less the same flaws in both versions, but in the books these flaws are amplified, and more resistant to personal growth. Penny in particular is a massive dickhead in the books, and only gets worse as his powers grow, until he isolates himself from the rest of the cast; in the show, his abrasive personality is tempered through his relationships with first Kady and then Julia.
Professor Fogg speculates that the characters’ flaws are the source of their power: “I think you're magicians because you're unhappy. A magician is strong because he feels pain. He feels the difference between what the world is and what he would make of it. […] A magician is strong because he hurts more than others. His wound is his strength […] You have learned to break the world that has tried to break you.”
Quentin, who is much more the main protagonist of the books than he is in the show, is mopey in both versions, and frequently makes things worse by trying to use magic to make things better. But Quentin’s depression is a much bigger factor in the books than in the show. In fact, Grossman’s purpose in writing the trilogy may well have been to demonstrate the truth of the following proposition: It's a terrible idea to try to be a hero when you're depressed. The characters are all sorry for themselves in their own ways, even though they are all gifted, and their self-pity frequently gets in the way of their repeated quests to save the world.
As Ember, God of Fillory (a twisted version of Narnia) puts it, after Quentin’s heroic intentions caused a disaster: “Children of Earth, no-one asked you to come. I am sorry that our world is not the paradise you were looking for, but it was not created for your entertainment. Fillory […] is not a theme park for you and your friends to play dress-up in, with swords and crowns […] You came here to save us. You came here to be our king. But tell me something, Quentin. How could you hope to save us when you cannot even save yourself?”
When we meet Quentin, he is an exceptionally gifted student at an elite New York high school, on the path to an Ivy League college of his choosing, but he is unsatisfied with everything and sorry for himself; the girl he lusts over just thinks of him as a friend, his parents are distant, and all his intellectual achievements make him numb. He daydreams of escaping into a magical land. Once he does actually escape into a magical land, he is briefly happy, but then realises magic is too much like reality and starts to feel restless and sorry for himself again.
“Here he was, a freshly licensed and bonded and accredited magician. He had learned to cast spells, seen the Beast and lived, flown to Antarctica on his own two wings, and returned naked by the sheer force of his magical will. He had an iron demon in his back. Who would ever have thought he could do and have and be all those things and still feel nothing at all? What was he missing? Or was it him? If he wasn’t happy even here, even now, did the flaw lie in him? As soon as he seized happiness it dispersed and reappeared somewhere else. Like Fillory, like everything good, it never lasted. What a terrible thing to know. I got my heart’s desire, he thought, and there my troubles began.”
Many readers say they can't stand Quentin’s privileged moping, but the thing is, this is an accurate portrayal of depression: the inability to feel good even when things are, to all appearances, going well for you - and then feeling worse because of your guilt that you should feel better. It makes sense that so many readers don't like Quentin, since depressed people are not fun to be around and usually come across as self-involved. But I can't help relating his state of mind to how I often used to feel, and I appreciated having a fantasy-novel protagonist whose pain I'd shared.
Readers also frequently hold against Quentin his horny observations about any attractive woman he meets, particularly in the first book. While this doesn’t endear him to me, his obsession with sex is an accurate portrayal of most of the nerdy straight teenaged boys I’ve known. I don’t think the books would have been improved by idealising his character. The TV show toned down how self-centred he was in regard to women: for example [MILD SPOILER], in the books he cheats on Alice quite intentionally when he is very drunk, yet still in control of his actions; in the show, he was under the effects of a magic spell he’d cast on himself in order to help solve a serious problem. [END SPOILER] I certainly like TV-Quentin more than book-Quentin, but the original, less likable Quentin’s portrayal is more valuable as a reflection on the behaviour of young men in our world.
Along with these substantial flaws, Quentin (in both the books and show) has one under-riding, consistent strength: he has never lost his childhood love of wonder, of magic, and his desire to do something heroic. This latter desire does often make things worse, and he frequently makes exactly the wrong decision – in the second book, Eliot remarks “Statistically, historically, and however else you want to look at it, you are almost never right. A monkey making life decisions based on its horoscope in USA Today would be right more often than you.” But this love of wonder and dream of doing good compels him to continue fighting for his friends, and for the magic land they discover. In one of the signature moments of book one, Alice tells him:
“That’s what makes you different from the rest of us, Quentin. You actually still believe in magic. You do realize, right, that nobody else does? I mean, we all know magic is real. But you really believe in it, don’t you?”
He felt flustered. “Is that wrong?”
She nodded and smiled even more brightly. “Yes, Quentin. It’s wrong.”
Wrong as it may be, this belief makes Quentin who he is. And one of my favourite developments in the trilogy is when [SPOILER], in the second book, he realises that the key to solving the vital, world-saving quest he is on is not to do something physically brave (which he eventually concedes he’s incapable of anyway) or grand, but simply to care about others: “After all that, he hadn’t had to kill a monster or solve a riddle. He just had to come down here, to see how Benedict was doing.” [END SPOILER]
While Quentin and his friends are not the most instantly loveable fantasy heroes, Lev Grossman’s work is not intended as escapism – it’s an examination of the tragedies escapism can create, of the fact that magic will not save you from failing to love yourself. Loving and caring for others, however, might help.
Read
December 8, 2016I'VE DISCOVERED THAT I'LL PUT UP WITH A LOT OF NONSENSE IN A BOOK IF IT'S GOT A MAGIC SYSTEM OR SOME WORLDBUILDING THAT INTRIGUES ME. I EVEN ENJOYED THE MAGICIANS JUST BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE MAGIC WAS SO INTERESTING.
IMFL THOSE SHITTY BOOKS.
I WOULDN'T SAY IL THEM, BUT I DEFINITELY LIKED THEM MOAR THAN MOAST OF MEME. ESPECIALLY THE FIRST ONE.
I LOVED THEM. I THOUGHT I WOULD HATE HOW CONTEMPORARY AND BRO-Y THEY WERE BUT I DIDN'T. I WAS PRETTY INVESTED IN ELIOT AND JANET IN THE LAST BOOK.
I LIKED THE MAGICIANS TOO, I JUST WASN'T ABLE TO GAF ABOUT ANY OF THE CHARACTERS.
I WAS FOOLED INTO BUYING THE MAGICIANS BECAUSE PEOPLE TOLD ME IT WAS GRATE. MY ONLY CONSOLATION IS THAT I GOT IT AT THE THRIFT STORE SO NO MONEY WENT INTO HIS DISGUSTING POCKETS.
HONESTLY THE MOAST FRUSTRATING THING ABOUT THEM IS THAT EACH BOOK HAS A RLY INTERESTING FEMALE CHARACTER WHO WOULD BE A GRATE PROTAGONIST IN SOMETHING ELSE, BUT THEN HE HAS HER LIFE REVOLVE AROUND HIS SAD SACK DUMBASS MALE PROTAGONIST WHO NOBODY CARES ABOUT AND SOMETHING HORRIBLE ENDS UP HAPPENING TO THE WOMAN. HE OUGHT TO WRITE DOWN HIS IDEAS AND GIVE THEM TO A FEMALE NOVELIST WHO CAN EXTRACT THE NON-SHITTY PARTS.
IMFNORITE? THERE'S THAT GIRL IN THE MAGICIANS WHO LITERALLY LEARNS MAGIC THROUGH SHEER WILLPOWER BECAUSE SHE GOT NEVER GOT ADMITTED INTO MAGIC SCHOOL OR WHATEVER IT WAS. I WANT A BOOK ABOUT HER, NOT FUCKING QUENTIN AND HIS RICH BOY ENNUI.
FUCKING QUENTIN COULD BE NOMINATED FOR CHARACTER MOST LIKELY TO URINE ANY BOOK HE'S IN.
I'M ENJOYING THE MAGICIANS SO FAR BUT THE AUTHOR HAS A TERRIBLY GRRM-ESQUE HABIT OF GRATUITOUSLY DESCRIBING EVERYONE'S BOOBS, IT'S HAPPENED LIKE TWICE A CHAPTER SO FAR. LOL STRAIGHT DUDES.
IT'S KIND OF LIKE A HP/NARNIA MASHUP GONE RLY SOUR.
IMFL THE WORLDBUILDING AND THE MAGIC SYSTEM IN THAT SERIES, BUT I SPENT THE ENTIRE TIME WANTING TO PUNCH THE PROTAGIONIST RIGHT IN THE DICK.
DD DICK PUNCHING CRIMES
HE'S AN ANGSTY ASSHOLE WHO IS PERMA-DISAPPOINTED THAT NEITHER THE MUNDANE, MAGICAL, OR OTHER-DIMENSIONAL WORLDS ARE SHOWERING HIM IN MEANING AND HAPPINESS AT EVERY MOMENT. ALSO HE CHEATS ON HIS GF AND THEN GETS MAD WHEN SHE DUMPS HIM AND REVENGE-SLEEPS WITH SOMEONE ELSE.
YYY, ALTHOUGH I DEFINITELY DON'T THINK HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE SYMPATHETIC IN THE LEAST. THE AUTHOR IS PRETTY BRUTALLY CLEAR IN DESCRIBING HIS FLAWS.
HE'S STILL A SELF-OBSESSED ASSHOLE BY THE END OF THE THIRD BOOK, THOUGH.
LOL THAT DOES NOT SURPRISE ME IN THE LEAST, HE SEEMS LIKE THE KIND OF GUY WHO TAKES HIS OWN LITTLE PERSONAL RAINCLOUD WITH HIM EVERYWHERE HE GOES.
IAWTEC, AND ALSO THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE EXTENT OF MY FEELINGS FOR THE CHARACTERS. I DIDN'T GAF BEYOND WANTING QUENTIN TO DIAF.
IT'S BECAUSE THE MAIN CHARACTER IS A DOUCHEBAG. IH QUENTIN BUT IT'S IN CHARACTER FOR HIM, WHEREAS GRRM HAS LADIES THINK IN STUPID WAYS ABOUT THEIR OWN BOOBS.
TRUFAX, IT IS IN CHARACTER. I GUESS IT'S JUST THAT IMFH THE CHARACTER.
I MFING HATED THE MAGICIANS LIKE ANY SANE MEMER, BUT ONE THING I LIKED WAS HOW DIFFICULT IT WAS TO MASTER MAGIC. I'D LIKE TO READ AN ACTUAL GOOD BOOK LIKE THAT. LIKE A BOOTCAMP HP WHERE MOAST STUDENTS DROP OUT.
IMFL THOSE SHITTY BOOKS.
I WOULDN'T SAY IL THEM, BUT I DEFINITELY LIKED THEM MOAR THAN MOAST OF MEME. ESPECIALLY THE FIRST ONE.
I LOVED THEM. I THOUGHT I WOULD HATE HOW CONTEMPORARY AND BRO-Y THEY WERE BUT I DIDN'T. I WAS PRETTY INVESTED IN ELIOT AND JANET IN THE LAST BOOK.
I LIKED THE MAGICIANS TOO, I JUST WASN'T ABLE TO GAF ABOUT ANY OF THE CHARACTERS.
I WAS FOOLED INTO BUYING THE MAGICIANS BECAUSE PEOPLE TOLD ME IT WAS GRATE. MY ONLY CONSOLATION IS THAT I GOT IT AT THE THRIFT STORE SO NO MONEY WENT INTO HIS DISGUSTING POCKETS.
HONESTLY THE MOAST FRUSTRATING THING ABOUT THEM IS THAT EACH BOOK HAS A RLY INTERESTING FEMALE CHARACTER WHO WOULD BE A GRATE PROTAGONIST IN SOMETHING ELSE, BUT THEN HE HAS HER LIFE REVOLVE AROUND HIS SAD SACK DUMBASS MALE PROTAGONIST WHO NOBODY CARES ABOUT AND SOMETHING HORRIBLE ENDS UP HAPPENING TO THE WOMAN. HE OUGHT TO WRITE DOWN HIS IDEAS AND GIVE THEM TO A FEMALE NOVELIST WHO CAN EXTRACT THE NON-SHITTY PARTS.
IMFNORITE? THERE'S THAT GIRL IN THE MAGICIANS WHO LITERALLY LEARNS MAGIC THROUGH SHEER WILLPOWER BECAUSE SHE GOT NEVER GOT ADMITTED INTO MAGIC SCHOOL OR WHATEVER IT WAS. I WANT A BOOK ABOUT HER, NOT FUCKING QUENTIN AND HIS RICH BOY ENNUI.
FUCKING QUENTIN COULD BE NOMINATED FOR CHARACTER MOST LIKELY TO URINE ANY BOOK HE'S IN.
I'M ENJOYING THE MAGICIANS SO FAR BUT THE AUTHOR HAS A TERRIBLY GRRM-ESQUE HABIT OF GRATUITOUSLY DESCRIBING EVERYONE'S BOOBS, IT'S HAPPENED LIKE TWICE A CHAPTER SO FAR. LOL STRAIGHT DUDES.
IT'S KIND OF LIKE A HP/NARNIA MASHUP GONE RLY SOUR.
IMFL THE WORLDBUILDING AND THE MAGIC SYSTEM IN THAT SERIES, BUT I SPENT THE ENTIRE TIME WANTING TO PUNCH THE PROTAGIONIST RIGHT IN THE DICK.
DD DICK PUNCHING CRIMES
HE'S AN ANGSTY ASSHOLE WHO IS PERMA-DISAPPOINTED THAT NEITHER THE MUNDANE, MAGICAL, OR OTHER-DIMENSIONAL WORLDS ARE SHOWERING HIM IN MEANING AND HAPPINESS AT EVERY MOMENT. ALSO HE CHEATS ON HIS GF AND THEN GETS MAD WHEN SHE DUMPS HIM AND REVENGE-SLEEPS WITH SOMEONE ELSE.
YYY, ALTHOUGH I DEFINITELY DON'T THINK HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE SYMPATHETIC IN THE LEAST. THE AUTHOR IS PRETTY BRUTALLY CLEAR IN DESCRIBING HIS FLAWS.
HE'S STILL A SELF-OBSESSED ASSHOLE BY THE END OF THE THIRD BOOK, THOUGH.
LOL THAT DOES NOT SURPRISE ME IN THE LEAST, HE SEEMS LIKE THE KIND OF GUY WHO TAKES HIS OWN LITTLE PERSONAL RAINCLOUD WITH HIM EVERYWHERE HE GOES.
IAWTEC, AND ALSO THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE EXTENT OF MY FEELINGS FOR THE CHARACTERS. I DIDN'T GAF BEYOND WANTING QUENTIN TO DIAF.
IT'S BECAUSE THE MAIN CHARACTER IS A DOUCHEBAG. IH QUENTIN BUT IT'S IN CHARACTER FOR HIM, WHEREAS GRRM HAS LADIES THINK IN STUPID WAYS ABOUT THEIR OWN BOOBS.
TRUFAX, IT IS IN CHARACTER. I GUESS IT'S JUST THAT IMFH THE CHARACTER.
I MFING HATED THE MAGICIANS LIKE ANY SANE MEMER, BUT ONE THING I LIKED WAS HOW DIFFICULT IT WAS TO MASTER MAGIC. I'D LIKE TO READ AN ACTUAL GOOD BOOK LIKE THAT. LIKE A BOOTCAMP HP WHERE MOAST STUDENTS DROP OUT.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 24, 2019
I will be reviewing all three books in The Magicians trilogy, by Lev Grossman, as they are one complete story with a beginning and an end, as well as an overarching moral. My review of the first book only, from the perspective of someone who enjoys the (very different!!) TV show, stands.
To understand The Magicians you need to understand who Lev Grossman is: a book critic for Time magazine. As such, he must have had a very strange experience trying to write after probably demolishing a lot of other writers for their lack of skill or overuse of tropes. Therefore some sort of alarm bells must sound when he undertakes to writing a "trilogy of fantasy books", a concept that is a meta-trope in itself. I believe he attempted to break the mould of the genre by using flawed every day characters on a journey that is less heroic as closer to real life: random things happening to you, bad things which you can't avoid, defeat or change, even if you try, which sometimes you don't, because you are scared or bored or selfish. At the end of said journey you are altered, but is it a better you, or just an old damaged version of the dreamer kid you started out as?
For this belief alone, I say that the books were decent because they achieved their purpose. The topics approached are more adult, the characters different from the plethora of fantasy heroes, the elements that seem to randomly appear get resolved somewhere in the far future rather than in the confined timeframe of an "episode". I loved the concept and therefore I liked the books.
However, that doesn't mean everything is rosy in Fillory. The characters are barely built up, the reader starves for some understanding of why people do the things they do or even think or feel in a certain way. Important influences such as home, childhood, parents, siblings, good friends are being ignored and abandoned, while the action of the people in the books are more often described than explained. Satirical references to well known works in the fantasy and science fiction genres pepper the books, but those stories at least attempted some consistency, while The Magicians, especially the Fillory part, feels like an LSD trip of an autistic dork.
The worst sin the books commit, and that is in direct conflict with what I think their goal was, is to make the characters almost impossible to empathize with. All of them move through the story like pieces on a board, almost indifferent to their surroundings and the people that accompany them and mostly annoyed. Whatever deep feelings they do have come out as quirky and obsessive, rather than real. It was with great dissatisfaction that I realized that the character I most identified with and believed real was The Beast, which is a terrible villain for most of the first half of the story. People died, were hurt, tortured and violated, resurrected and I couldn't care less. Mythological monsters and weird random creations were epically battling at the end of the world, and I was just bored, waiting for something interesting to happen.
Bottom line: good idea, bad implementation. Interesting to read, but hardly something that I would recommend as good writing.
To understand The Magicians you need to understand who Lev Grossman is: a book critic for Time magazine. As such, he must have had a very strange experience trying to write after probably demolishing a lot of other writers for their lack of skill or overuse of tropes. Therefore some sort of alarm bells must sound when he undertakes to writing a "trilogy of fantasy books", a concept that is a meta-trope in itself. I believe he attempted to break the mould of the genre by using flawed every day characters on a journey that is less heroic as closer to real life: random things happening to you, bad things which you can't avoid, defeat or change, even if you try, which sometimes you don't, because you are scared or bored or selfish. At the end of said journey you are altered, but is it a better you, or just an old damaged version of the dreamer kid you started out as?
For this belief alone, I say that the books were decent because they achieved their purpose. The topics approached are more adult, the characters different from the plethora of fantasy heroes, the elements that seem to randomly appear get resolved somewhere in the far future rather than in the confined timeframe of an "episode". I loved the concept and therefore I liked the books.
However, that doesn't mean everything is rosy in Fillory. The characters are barely built up, the reader starves for some understanding of why people do the things they do or even think or feel in a certain way. Important influences such as home, childhood, parents, siblings, good friends are being ignored and abandoned, while the action of the people in the books are more often described than explained. Satirical references to well known works in the fantasy and science fiction genres pepper the books, but those stories at least attempted some consistency, while The Magicians, especially the Fillory part, feels like an LSD trip of an autistic dork.
The worst sin the books commit, and that is in direct conflict with what I think their goal was, is to make the characters almost impossible to empathize with. All of them move through the story like pieces on a board, almost indifferent to their surroundings and the people that accompany them and mostly annoyed. Whatever deep feelings they do have come out as quirky and obsessive, rather than real. It was with great dissatisfaction that I realized that the character I most identified with and believed real was The Beast, which is a terrible villain for most of the first half of the story. People died, were hurt, tortured and violated, resurrected and I couldn't care less. Mythological monsters and weird random creations were epically battling at the end of the world, and I was just bored, waiting for something interesting to happen.
Bottom line: good idea, bad implementation. Interesting to read, but hardly something that I would recommend as good writing.
February 7, 2022
Wonderful
As much as I am certain that not everyone will feel the same, I am even more certain this will be an everlasting favorite of mine, to be reread no matter how long I am lucky enough to live.
It is difficult to pick what I loved best - the richly drawn characters, the full bodied worlds without tediously long descriptions, the thoughtful ideas woven into the interesting stories, just everything. The prose is rich without being overbearing. I love running into a new word (to me) here and there that blends in so smoothly.
This is just an amazing book that really made me feel.
As much as I am certain that not everyone will feel the same, I am even more certain this will be an everlasting favorite of mine, to be reread no matter how long I am lucky enough to live.
It is difficult to pick what I loved best - the richly drawn characters, the full bodied worlds without tediously long descriptions, the thoughtful ideas woven into the interesting stories, just everything. The prose is rich without being overbearing. I love running into a new word (to me) here and there that blends in so smoothly.
This is just an amazing book that really made me feel.
September 26, 2015
I dare say these are officially now my all-time favourite books. I think the New York Times reviewer said it best when he wrote "If the Narnia books were like catnip for a certain kind of kid, these are like crack for a certain kind of adult." I fear the withdrawal symptoms will kick in soon...
May 13, 2017
Sort of enjoyed the first book. Really enjoyed the second. Really had to drag myself through the third.
September 17, 2023
I seriously disliked this series, and I’m going to say something I don’t think I’ve ever actually said before: the screen adaptation was far better.
This trilogy was about as boring as watching paint dry. Nothing reminded me of The Narnia Chronicles, or the Harry Potter series, or any of the many other comparisons I’ve heard made. And that’s fine, a book shouldn’t have to remind you of anything else. It took a nihilistic approach to writing about magic, which to me, just isn’t possible. Whimsy and wonder don’t play or even exist well near nihilism. I’ve heard a ton of people talk about how it’s supposed to be about how even the greatest thing you could ever imagine can’t truly make depression go away, and that it was a “great take on mental illness.” Quentin wasn’t depressed. He was just a dick.
Nearly every single one of the characters was hate-able and incorrigible, which is usually something I like — when it’s done well. But I honestly just think that Grossman really missed the mark. Characters need to have *some* redeemable qualities, even if they are tiny. This wasn’t the case. The only remotely likeable character was Eliot, and he was much better in the screen adaptation.
The word building was sub-par to say the least (and yes, I know, it wasn’t supposed to be high fantasy), but I did like the “magical subway portal” that the hedge-witches created; I wish they’d used it in the adaptation. The only other thing that I liked about the book was that Quentin didn’t sleep with Emily Greenstreet like he did in adaptation. Quentin’s death in the adaptation might have been disappointing and sad, but had he died in the book, I couldn’t have cared less.
The books crammed things together and spread them apart as it pleased, there was no cohesion, it was silly at best, and sloppy in general. Things *happened* in the book, but they didn’t mean anything. The adaption gave it feeling and emotion, and actually made it make sense. The books were whitewashed, where the adaptation was refreshingly diverse. They took the best character by far, Eliot, and made him exponentially better. Julia was could be a pain in the ass in the adaptation, but at least she had a more realistic reason from the start other that just jealousy, full stop. And when she is assaulted and raped by Reynard in the adaptation, you care. The books don’t give you enough about this event to really even have a *chance* to care, it’s essentially just discarded, (which is a whole different conversation to have). She’s just consistently a truly terrible person. But when the adaptation gave us more, we cared, we empathised (some may even have sympathised), and she heals. She gets a full and true redemption arc. In the books, she just gets taller? Like, eight feet tall?
The complete makeover on Penny? Utterly necessary and appreciated. Penny was absolutely awful (and almost didn’t even matter — I mean he mattered, but only in the vaguest and most convoluted way. Also, why in the hell would Penny, of all the characters in the books, be the one who is the first to figure out that Filory is real?) in the books, but I adored him in addition to Eliot in the adaptation. Even Ember and Umber were terrible and useless characters in the text. I didn’t really hate any of the characters in the adaptation, though it would have been okay if I had. However, they took the time to make each character a person rather than an annoying and miserable paper-doll. They also tied together all of the many loose ends and random strings that Grossman just didn’t seem to care about. It wasn’t all happy, there were still sad moments and excruciating pain, but it actually meant something, showed depth to love and companionship, and acceptance of different genders, identities and sexual orientation. There was a level of sensitivity, where the books had none. Overall, it was something worth watching; it was far more interesting and introspective than what the books had to offer.
Nihilism and magic simply can’t exist in the same book the way the Grossman tried to do. I loved ‘White Noise,’ but Don DeLillo wasn’t trying to capture the essence of magic, he was making a statement. If Grossman had any statement to make, it got lost in the muck.
I do want to mention that I read the books first, in 2016, before I’d heard about the show. My feelings about the books almost kept me from watching the adaptation, but I’m glad I didn’t. This year, I decided to read them again to see if my opinion of them had changed; if I could see the books and the TV series as two separate things that I liked, but for different reasons (this right here is a fairly common thing for me). But alas, no. It hasn’t. I don’t. I would still rather stare at a wall I just repainted than read this trilogy again. The adaptation, however, I could see myself watching several more times without it losing it’s appeal.
This trilogy was about as boring as watching paint dry. Nothing reminded me of The Narnia Chronicles, or the Harry Potter series, or any of the many other comparisons I’ve heard made. And that’s fine, a book shouldn’t have to remind you of anything else. It took a nihilistic approach to writing about magic, which to me, just isn’t possible. Whimsy and wonder don’t play or even exist well near nihilism. I’ve heard a ton of people talk about how it’s supposed to be about how even the greatest thing you could ever imagine can’t truly make depression go away, and that it was a “great take on mental illness.” Quentin wasn’t depressed. He was just a dick.
Nearly every single one of the characters was hate-able and incorrigible, which is usually something I like — when it’s done well. But I honestly just think that Grossman really missed the mark. Characters need to have *some* redeemable qualities, even if they are tiny. This wasn’t the case. The only remotely likeable character was Eliot, and he was much better in the screen adaptation.
The word building was sub-par to say the least (and yes, I know, it wasn’t supposed to be high fantasy), but I did like the “magical subway portal” that the hedge-witches created; I wish they’d used it in the adaptation. The only other thing that I liked about the book was that Quentin didn’t sleep with Emily Greenstreet like he did in adaptation. Quentin’s death in the adaptation might have been disappointing and sad, but had he died in the book, I couldn’t have cared less.
The books crammed things together and spread them apart as it pleased, there was no cohesion, it was silly at best, and sloppy in general. Things *happened* in the book, but they didn’t mean anything. The adaption gave it feeling and emotion, and actually made it make sense. The books were whitewashed, where the adaptation was refreshingly diverse. They took the best character by far, Eliot, and made him exponentially better. Julia was could be a pain in the ass in the adaptation, but at least she had a more realistic reason from the start other that just jealousy, full stop. And when she is assaulted and raped by Reynard in the adaptation, you care. The books don’t give you enough about this event to really even have a *chance* to care, it’s essentially just discarded, (which is a whole different conversation to have). She’s just consistently a truly terrible person. But when the adaptation gave us more, we cared, we empathised (some may even have sympathised), and she heals. She gets a full and true redemption arc. In the books, she just gets taller? Like, eight feet tall?
The complete makeover on Penny? Utterly necessary and appreciated. Penny was absolutely awful (and almost didn’t even matter — I mean he mattered, but only in the vaguest and most convoluted way. Also, why in the hell would Penny, of all the characters in the books, be the one who is the first to figure out that Filory is real?) in the books, but I adored him in addition to Eliot in the adaptation. Even Ember and Umber were terrible and useless characters in the text. I didn’t really hate any of the characters in the adaptation, though it would have been okay if I had. However, they took the time to make each character a person rather than an annoying and miserable paper-doll. They also tied together all of the many loose ends and random strings that Grossman just didn’t seem to care about. It wasn’t all happy, there were still sad moments and excruciating pain, but it actually meant something, showed depth to love and companionship, and acceptance of different genders, identities and sexual orientation. There was a level of sensitivity, where the books had none. Overall, it was something worth watching; it was far more interesting and introspective than what the books had to offer.
Nihilism and magic simply can’t exist in the same book the way the Grossman tried to do. I loved ‘White Noise,’ but Don DeLillo wasn’t trying to capture the essence of magic, he was making a statement. If Grossman had any statement to make, it got lost in the muck.
I do want to mention that I read the books first, in 2016, before I’d heard about the show. My feelings about the books almost kept me from watching the adaptation, but I’m glad I didn’t. This year, I decided to read them again to see if my opinion of them had changed; if I could see the books and the TV series as two separate things that I liked, but for different reasons (this right here is a fairly common thing for me). But alas, no. It hasn’t. I don’t. I would still rather stare at a wall I just repainted than read this trilogy again. The adaptation, however, I could see myself watching several more times without it losing it’s appeal.
May 29, 2023
I’ll start with the perfomance (of the audiobooks) : it was like honey to my ears (although I do not advise to pour honey into ears, yours or others'). I thank the performer for not having given whining overtones to the female voices, which is unfortunately often the case with male narrators.
Warning : light spoilers.
This is a trilogy I have read and listened to several times, because I enjoy it so much. I find the story so rich in adventures, thoughts, finds, details, and so powerfully evocative ! I think I like it so much because it is an answer, Lev Grossman’s answer, to two other tales I like equally : The Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter.
And because it is an answer to them, Lev Grossman refers to them continually. In fact, his story grows out of the other two (and a few more, but these two are preponderant, they are the spine of the story). C. S. Lewis brings his protagonists, as children, out of our world into a world of talking beasts and lovely nature, where they are kings and queens, under the benevolent and loving rule of a god ; Lev Grossman brings them as young adults, having lost the innocence, but not the naive longings of children, into this other world, which is not as simple and as gentle as Narnia, but in fact, dangerous. C.S. Lewis kills his protagonists in order to bring them into a new world, Lev Grossman makes his protagonists kill in order to live, and they always choose life. Lev Grossman asks : what is a god ? Do we need a god ? What is magic ? Where does it come from ? What are its uses ? His champions go to a magic school, like HP, but again, they are not at the treshold of their teenage years but at the end of them ; Brakebills starts when Hogwarts ends. C.S. Lewis and J.K. Rowlings avoided sex, but Lev Grossman brings it into his story. His main characters have to grow out of their unfinished state into a full acceptation of their fallible humanity, as adults. They have to give up on their childhood dreams, but they get to keep the essence of these dreams, they get to live in a magic world !
Lev Grossman’s writing style is, to me, very well crafted. He manages to convey very efficiently not only atmospheres, but also what he does not directly tell. Here is an example, Quentin talks to Plum : « On the train, he told her the whole story of his life there, from beginning to end, as bridges and stations and other trains flashed by in the window, and lots full of idle municipal snowplows, and backyards full of overturned play structures. » The background, moving past, is a total parallel to the feelings Quentin experiences about his life. I like also the nods he sprinkles his text with, allusions to other stories, opposite stances (the gods are not one and only, the mean invaders come from the north and are fair haired and white, the summer finally ends and snow begins to fall, to the great relief of the heroes, are all examples).
In conclusion, I strongly believe that having read and appreciated The Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter increases vastly the enjoyment and appreciation of The Magicians.
Warning : light spoilers.
This is a trilogy I have read and listened to several times, because I enjoy it so much. I find the story so rich in adventures, thoughts, finds, details, and so powerfully evocative ! I think I like it so much because it is an answer, Lev Grossman’s answer, to two other tales I like equally : The Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter.
And because it is an answer to them, Lev Grossman refers to them continually. In fact, his story grows out of the other two (and a few more, but these two are preponderant, they are the spine of the story). C. S. Lewis brings his protagonists, as children, out of our world into a world of talking beasts and lovely nature, where they are kings and queens, under the benevolent and loving rule of a god ; Lev Grossman brings them as young adults, having lost the innocence, but not the naive longings of children, into this other world, which is not as simple and as gentle as Narnia, but in fact, dangerous. C.S. Lewis kills his protagonists in order to bring them into a new world, Lev Grossman makes his protagonists kill in order to live, and they always choose life. Lev Grossman asks : what is a god ? Do we need a god ? What is magic ? Where does it come from ? What are its uses ? His champions go to a magic school, like HP, but again, they are not at the treshold of their teenage years but at the end of them ; Brakebills starts when Hogwarts ends. C.S. Lewis and J.K. Rowlings avoided sex, but Lev Grossman brings it into his story. His main characters have to grow out of their unfinished state into a full acceptation of their fallible humanity, as adults. They have to give up on their childhood dreams, but they get to keep the essence of these dreams, they get to live in a magic world !
Lev Grossman’s writing style is, to me, very well crafted. He manages to convey very efficiently not only atmospheres, but also what he does not directly tell. Here is an example, Quentin talks to Plum : « On the train, he told her the whole story of his life there, from beginning to end, as bridges and stations and other trains flashed by in the window, and lots full of idle municipal snowplows, and backyards full of overturned play structures. » The background, moving past, is a total parallel to the feelings Quentin experiences about his life. I like also the nods he sprinkles his text with, allusions to other stories, opposite stances (the gods are not one and only, the mean invaders come from the north and are fair haired and white, the summer finally ends and snow begins to fall, to the great relief of the heroes, are all examples).
In conclusion, I strongly believe that having read and appreciated The Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter increases vastly the enjoyment and appreciation of The Magicians.
July 15, 2019
First book: Well written and suspenseful. The story has some tropes but never at the forefront, which makes it feel original. For a lot of the book nothing much happens except daily life, it's only in the last quarter there's some action, but the slower more mundane developments are still enough to keep your attention. My main problem with the book is that it's all so bleak. The main character more or less drifts through life being dissatisfied with everything and occasionally being an asshole. He does realize it at some point but doesn't seem to be doing anything about it. I found the character a bit hard to relate to, and the bleak tone of the book isn't helping.
Second book: I liked that we got to know Julia more, and learned more about how people discover magic and what magic actually is about. The tone of the book keeps being pretty bleak. It's not like the characters are completely emotionless, and Quentin is less mopey than in the first book, but the way it's written is just very detatched and anticlimactic. And many things that happen or that the characters do are pointless or do not seem to affect the characters. This all means I find it hard to care about them. Which is a shame because I mostly enjoyed the story and the world. I did like this book more than the previous though, mainly because of Julia and the way her story was woven into it.
There is rape in the second book. I don't think this is something a writer should put in their book lightly. I'm thinking that in this book it might be though, as I see no reason why that scene needed to be about rape. The scene directly preceding it is shocking enough on its own, so the rape is probably not there for shock value. While I think it's great that the scene is not super sexualized, nothing in the book really is, so that's not really notable. Personally I think there were probably many other ways to write the scene and have the same outcome without it being about rape. The whole "rape injects power" bit is super icky.
Third book: Quentin finally grows up a bit, about time when he's hitting 30. It's nice that he's not so bitter anymore, it makes him much more relatable. I like a how a certain character returns and how they deal with that. I liked that it had a tiny bit more Asmo. But still I felt the book as a whole was written in a very detached way. While reading it's somewhat hard to put down, but it is always hard to start reading, almost feeling like a chore at times. The books just aren't very overtly emotional, and I didn't really feel much about it. It is what it is what it is. And that's what the whole trilogy was like.
Overall: I don't regret reading it, as I think some parts of the story were interesting and unique, and it was overall fairly well written. I don't think it's a book that I will reread much though. The book is dark and vivid and complex but I felt it just doesn't really look to elicit a bunch of emotions from the reader. But emotions is why I read books! So something was missing for me here.
Second book: I liked that we got to know Julia more, and learned more about how people discover magic and what magic actually is about. The tone of the book keeps being pretty bleak. It's not like the characters are completely emotionless, and Quentin is less mopey than in the first book, but the way it's written is just very detatched and anticlimactic. And many things that happen or that the characters do are pointless or do not seem to affect the characters. This all means I find it hard to care about them. Which is a shame because I mostly enjoyed the story and the world. I did like this book more than the previous though, mainly because of Julia and the way her story was woven into it.
There is rape in the second book. I don't think this is something a writer should put in their book lightly. I'm thinking that in this book it might be though, as I see no reason why that scene needed to be about rape. The scene directly preceding it is shocking enough on its own, so the rape is probably not there for shock value. While I think it's great that the scene is not super sexualized, nothing in the book really is, so that's not really notable. Personally I think there were probably many other ways to write the scene and have the same outcome without it being about rape. The whole "rape injects power" bit is super icky.
Third book: Quentin finally grows up a bit, about time when he's hitting 30. It's nice that he's not so bitter anymore, it makes him much more relatable. I like a how a certain character returns and how they deal with that. I liked that it had a tiny bit more Asmo. But still I felt the book as a whole was written in a very detached way. While reading it's somewhat hard to put down, but it is always hard to start reading, almost feeling like a chore at times. The books just aren't very overtly emotional, and I didn't really feel much about it. It is what it is what it is. And that's what the whole trilogy was like.
Overall: I don't regret reading it, as I think some parts of the story were interesting and unique, and it was overall fairly well written. I don't think it's a book that I will reread much though. The book is dark and vivid and complex but I felt it just doesn't really look to elicit a bunch of emotions from the reader. But emotions is why I read books! So something was missing for me here.
May 19, 2020
This is one of my favorite magic-based/fantasy series. My favorite thing about it is how blatantly flawed the characters all are, especially Quentin. I know many people never made it past book 1 because of him, but honestly, his development is one of the best parts. Each book gets subsequently better, which is exceedingly rare in a series.
Things don't magically work out in this series, which is also something I love. While it has a "we won/defeated the evil" sort of ending, it's not without significant struggle and loss. It doesn't have the childish feel of a fairy tale ending, which again, I found to be incredibly refreshing. The heavy dose of reality in the series is what makes it so good, in my opinion.
A lot of people compare these books to Harry Potter and the Chronicles of Narnia, which I think is unjust on both ends. Those are children's books in which magic is the tool of the Good to triumph over the totalitarian Evil. The Magicians is not the Harry Potter/Narnia for adults. It's an adult, modern world in which magic is interwoven into very adult problems. The fantasy worlds of Brakebills and Fillory are not glossed over and shown to be better than reality, as Hogwarts and Narnia often are. It's gritty and ugly and magic comes at a difficult and often deadly cost. I don't think the Magicians is comparable, and if you're looking for the childish fantasy of do-gooders and straightforward good and evil, you will be sorely disappointed. Do yourself a favor and don't try to read it through those lenses. You won't find what you're looking for.
The underlying theme of this series is summed up, basically, as "Is magic worth the cost?" And despite being an avid lover of magic, I would honestly say no, thanks. It's played out over and over in different ways, largely through Quentin, Julia, and Martin Chatwin--though to some degree through Alice (and even Charlie) Quinn as well. It can also be seen as a coming of age story but in the harsh lighting of reality where growing up is not shiny and polished and as great as you thought it'd be.
Personally, I love the darker edges of these books and I think that's what makes them so appealing. They're some of the few books I will absolutely be reading again (I don't re-read books terribly often) and some that will forever hold a special place on my shelf.
Things don't magically work out in this series, which is also something I love. While it has a "we won/defeated the evil" sort of ending, it's not without significant struggle and loss. It doesn't have the childish feel of a fairy tale ending, which again, I found to be incredibly refreshing. The heavy dose of reality in the series is what makes it so good, in my opinion.
A lot of people compare these books to Harry Potter and the Chronicles of Narnia, which I think is unjust on both ends. Those are children's books in which magic is the tool of the Good to triumph over the totalitarian Evil. The Magicians is not the Harry Potter/Narnia for adults. It's an adult, modern world in which magic is interwoven into very adult problems. The fantasy worlds of Brakebills and Fillory are not glossed over and shown to be better than reality, as Hogwarts and Narnia often are. It's gritty and ugly and magic comes at a difficult and often deadly cost. I don't think the Magicians is comparable, and if you're looking for the childish fantasy of do-gooders and straightforward good and evil, you will be sorely disappointed. Do yourself a favor and don't try to read it through those lenses. You won't find what you're looking for.
The underlying theme of this series is summed up, basically, as "Is magic worth the cost?" And despite being an avid lover of magic, I would honestly say no, thanks. It's played out over and over in different ways, largely through Quentin, Julia, and Martin Chatwin--though to some degree through Alice (and even Charlie) Quinn as well. It can also be seen as a coming of age story but in the harsh lighting of reality where growing up is not shiny and polished and as great as you thought it'd be.
Personally, I love the darker edges of these books and I think that's what makes them so appealing. They're some of the few books I will absolutely be reading again (I don't re-read books terribly often) and some that will forever hold a special place on my shelf.
May 20, 2019
Quentin Coldwater, 17 Jahre, ist brillant, aber unglücklich. Sein Alltag langweilt ihn. Stattdessen träumt er sich in die magische Welt Fillory aus einer sehr kitschigen Kinderbuchserie. Da erhält er einen Brief, der fliegt ihm davon und führt ihn durch eine Hecke hindurch in eine magische Universität.
Man wird ihm das Zaubern beibringen. Zusammen mit anderen, die ihn an Intelligenz, Missmutigkeit und sozialer Inkompetenz in nichts nachstehen. Aber wird er dadurch irgendetwas lernen?
Über die Ziellosigkeit einer ganzen Generation
The Magicians handelt von einem Gefühl, das viele meiner Generation umtreibt. Nämlich dem, dass das eigene bequeme Leben möglicherweise total sinnlos ist. Magie, das bedeutet doch, dass etwas wie von allein kommt. Aber wie von allein bekommen wir doch schon alles. Und es ist fad.
Die Trilogie erzählt von diesem Mangel an Sinn. Es ist eine Zauberlehrling-auf-Zauberschule-Geschichte, aber öffnet sich zur Geschichte eines ganzen Lebens. Magie in The Magicians ist eine Arbeit wie jede andere – und fühlt sich auch so an.
Eine raffinierte Nerdfundgrube
The Magicians handelt von Quentins Leben, das er um die Kindergeschichten der fiktiven Fillory-Bücher herum webt. Doch diese wiederum haben einen Kern. So entwickelt sich letztlich eine Geschichte um eine Geschichte um eine Geschichte. Leben, Fühlen und Sehnen habe ich selten so raffiniert verpackt gesehen. Dazu ist The Magicians ein psychologisches Kaleidoskop unserer Zeit, denn die drei Bücher platzen vor schrägen Vergleichen und Referenzen zu Popkultur sowie Wissenschaft – eine Nerdfundgrube.
Im englischen Sprachraum gibt es das Subgenre der Literary Fantasy. Es adelt Bücher, die auf ungewöhnliche und nennenswerte Art mit phantastischen Themen oder Konventionen spielen. Peter S Beagles Das letzte Einhorn ist so eine Geschichte und Lev Grossmans The Magicians ist es auch.
Man wird ihm das Zaubern beibringen. Zusammen mit anderen, die ihn an Intelligenz, Missmutigkeit und sozialer Inkompetenz in nichts nachstehen. Aber wird er dadurch irgendetwas lernen?
Über die Ziellosigkeit einer ganzen Generation
The Magicians handelt von einem Gefühl, das viele meiner Generation umtreibt. Nämlich dem, dass das eigene bequeme Leben möglicherweise total sinnlos ist. Magie, das bedeutet doch, dass etwas wie von allein kommt. Aber wie von allein bekommen wir doch schon alles. Und es ist fad.
Die Trilogie erzählt von diesem Mangel an Sinn. Es ist eine Zauberlehrling-auf-Zauberschule-Geschichte, aber öffnet sich zur Geschichte eines ganzen Lebens. Magie in The Magicians ist eine Arbeit wie jede andere – und fühlt sich auch so an.
Eine raffinierte Nerdfundgrube
The Magicians handelt von Quentins Leben, das er um die Kindergeschichten der fiktiven Fillory-Bücher herum webt. Doch diese wiederum haben einen Kern. So entwickelt sich letztlich eine Geschichte um eine Geschichte um eine Geschichte. Leben, Fühlen und Sehnen habe ich selten so raffiniert verpackt gesehen. Dazu ist The Magicians ein psychologisches Kaleidoskop unserer Zeit, denn die drei Bücher platzen vor schrägen Vergleichen und Referenzen zu Popkultur sowie Wissenschaft – eine Nerdfundgrube.
Im englischen Sprachraum gibt es das Subgenre der Literary Fantasy. Es adelt Bücher, die auf ungewöhnliche und nennenswerte Art mit phantastischen Themen oder Konventionen spielen. Peter S Beagles Das letzte Einhorn ist so eine Geschichte und Lev Grossmans The Magicians ist es auch.
September 16, 2019
One of the other reviewers summed up this series best - "It's Narnia meets Hogwarts but in grad school, so with profanity, sex, and drugs.".
I would add to that - with a profound sense of depression, grimness, and dystopia. While there is levity in some moments and fantasy in others to bring the wonder, there's a lot more death, despair, and nihilism to suffer through as well.
I read this before watching the tv series, and I'm glad I did. While they do share the same name and some of the characters in common, they are very different from one another. View them with a different perspective, and don't judge them against one another - the book and the tv series are like two different worlds (maybe different timelines LOL). I often want to slap TV Quentin in the face, but Book Quentin isn't always so annoying. Yes, he can be a bit of a Holden Caulfield sometimes, but he has more brilliant and less annoying moments.
I wouldn't recommend starting this series without a bottle of wine at hand, and a way to bring yourself back up to a positive attitude afterward, but its something I think should be on everyone's to-read list. Not every book has to be likeable, and Lev Grossman writes them well here - not likeable, but strong enough that you can often respect the characters and their actions, which is something to achieve when you're not rooting for anyone in the books.
I would add to that - with a profound sense of depression, grimness, and dystopia. While there is levity in some moments and fantasy in others to bring the wonder, there's a lot more death, despair, and nihilism to suffer through as well.
I read this before watching the tv series, and I'm glad I did. While they do share the same name and some of the characters in common, they are very different from one another. View them with a different perspective, and don't judge them against one another - the book and the tv series are like two different worlds (maybe different timelines LOL). I often want to slap TV Quentin in the face, but Book Quentin isn't always so annoying. Yes, he can be a bit of a Holden Caulfield sometimes, but he has more brilliant and less annoying moments.
I wouldn't recommend starting this series without a bottle of wine at hand, and a way to bring yourself back up to a positive attitude afterward, but its something I think should be on everyone's to-read list. Not every book has to be likeable, and Lev Grossman writes them well here - not likeable, but strong enough that you can often respect the characters and their actions, which is something to achieve when you're not rooting for anyone in the books.
June 12, 2019
just keep going!
I really like the show, but I'd always heard Quentin was a bit of a douche in the books so it took me a while to get around to reading them. I agree that he goes through a pretty narcissistic arc, but if you can make it through that, there's plenty here to love. I found the author's meandering style almost refreshing, like you're hearing a story told at a gathering versus reading a book.. though I could see how readers who need clear, linear story lines and displays of technical writing skills could end up getting really frustrated. Not to say that the writing isn't good- this is just a different beast than most books, and if you find yourself being particularly judgy about writing, you're going to have a rough go of it. The thing Grossman really brings to the table is an intense love of this world that he's created, Fillory. Typically, characters journey through a moderately fleshed out world and go through their hero cycle based on their trials and tribulations within that world. Grossman has managed to create a world that is somehow also a character- that actively helps our heroes achieve their apotheosis. This is his true triumph, and what will keep readers hungry until the end.
I really like the show, but I'd always heard Quentin was a bit of a douche in the books so it took me a while to get around to reading them. I agree that he goes through a pretty narcissistic arc, but if you can make it through that, there's plenty here to love. I found the author's meandering style almost refreshing, like you're hearing a story told at a gathering versus reading a book.. though I could see how readers who need clear, linear story lines and displays of technical writing skills could end up getting really frustrated. Not to say that the writing isn't good- this is just a different beast than most books, and if you find yourself being particularly judgy about writing, you're going to have a rough go of it. The thing Grossman really brings to the table is an intense love of this world that he's created, Fillory. Typically, characters journey through a moderately fleshed out world and go through their hero cycle based on their trials and tribulations within that world. Grossman has managed to create a world that is somehow also a character- that actively helps our heroes achieve their apotheosis. This is his true triumph, and what will keep readers hungry until the end.
March 2, 2018
I started reading the books because I love the show. Every one of these characters was constructed and created in a very detailed way which makes it easy to connect with them and find yourself somewhere in there. Something else this book gave me which most fantasy books lack (in my opinion) is the diversity and background story every person gets here. Whilst i.e. Harry Potter is focusing more on the popular kids, The Magicians is ruled by the misfits, outcasts and nerds.
I couldn't even choose a favourite character though I thought that Dean Fogg was outstanding in the way that he is more humane than Dumbledore and Gandalf for example. He curses and he is serious but still has a dry sense of humour. It takes very serious issues like rape, drugs and depression and shows it how it is without leaving anything out.
Grossman's take on friendship is truly unique because the friendships portrayed in most other books are pretty similar. He shows different kinds of friendship and thus makes it more realistic.
Overall The Magicians trilogy has become to me what the Fillory and Further books were to Quentin.
I couldn't even choose a favourite character though I thought that Dean Fogg was outstanding in the way that he is more humane than Dumbledore and Gandalf for example. He curses and he is serious but still has a dry sense of humour. It takes very serious issues like rape, drugs and depression and shows it how it is without leaving anything out.
Grossman's take on friendship is truly unique because the friendships portrayed in most other books are pretty similar. He shows different kinds of friendship and thus makes it more realistic.
Overall The Magicians trilogy has become to me what the Fillory and Further books were to Quentin.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 117 reviews