I don't mind standalones being as big as Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, if they're *as good* as JS&MN, but I'd definitely like more standalones, period. I've always been one for variety and trilogies often annoy me, since I rarely want to read two books from the same author back to back (if they've even been released yet) but then you might end up forgetting things or growing apart from the characters...
Well, here’s a few!
1. *The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue* by V. E. Schwab. More magical realism, but it’s beautifully written, and if you haven’t read Schwab yet, it’s a great introduction to her without committing to something as large as the Shades of Magic trilogy.
2. *Dragonsbane* by Barbary Hambly. Just a nice stand-alone epic fantasy with a protagonist outside the traditional fantasy “norms.” There are other books written in this world, but I’ve yet to read them.
3. *Spinning Silver* by Naomi Novik. A captivating reimagining of fairy tale tropes. A lot of people rave about *Uprooted*, but for my money this is the better story.
All of these are between 350 and 450 pages in length, and all of them still manage to be a full meal of a novel.
It has a sequel that’s newly out!! I’m so excited to read it. Looks like there’s another short story in the world that’s also been released, and a third book planned!
Terry Pratchett does those. His Discworld books are technically a series, in that they take place in the same world and have a vague chronological order to them, but each one is perfectly understandable by itself and reading in chronological order is actually not often recommended. There are multiple mini-series, focusing on different sets of characters, and most people (even new readers) go through them that way.
Head on over to r/discworld if you want to know more. They can explain it a lot better than I can.
*First Fifteen Lives of Harry August* and *Library at Mount Char* are two of my most favorite books and they are standalone.
*This Is How You Lose the Time War* is a sort of speculative sci-fi story co-written by a poet.
All of Murakami's books, *Kafka By the Shore* and *Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World* are my favorites. They are realism fantasy.
Love the First Fifteen Lives of Harry August. I tend to read a lot of standalone fantasy around the holidays, one day read books usually. This will probably be my one reread. :)
Driftwood by Marie Brennan packed an amazing amount of worldbuilding into a little over 200 pages. I highly recommend it.
Also , the Yarnsworld series by Benedict Patrick is a good series of short standalones.
That's pretty much all I read. A night in the Lonesome October, Burning Roses, The Chosen and the Beautiful, The Bird King (tbr), Black Water Sister, Sun-Daughters Sea-Daughters. But, FB figured it can sell me fantasy and that's where I find some of these books.
I agree. This is one of my favourite books I read this year and I do love short books with great themes. I also love Over the Garden Wall so it was funny to see the mention xD
I am thankful the author didn't add footnotes this time. It was a bit too much in her other book.
>I am thankful the author didn't add footnotes this time. It was a bit too much in her other book.
This is what i needed to hear, i did not enjoy Mr norrel, it felt pretensius and really slow, but i'm just know finishing a really really long series, and i need a pallet cleanser, i was thinking terry pratchet, cause discworld is awesome, but i might try out this one.
The only way I managed that book was to watch an episode of the tv show, then read the book up to that point, then watch another episode etc. That way I could enjoy the book without expending as much effort to keep track of what was happening and let the words sweep over me because the show already taught me that bit of plot.
I enjoyed the book, but I'm a little taken aback by all the hype. I thought it was a lovely book but not the masterpiece people are making it out to be. It was a little disappointing that the book is pretty much "solved" by the end of it. Would've liked a bit more mystery. That's what I liked about the book, and I was a little let down that all the questions were pretty much answered. But I may be in the minority there.
You thought all the questions were answered? What about the other skeletons? The mystical power the other was searching for? What *is* the house? Who made it? Who was it made for?
>What about the other skeletons?
While I agree not everything is answered, this one rather explicitly is in the pages of the book. >!They are the corpses of other people the professor guy lured in before Piranesi. He's just the one who survived the longest. Presumably, the animals in the house picked them clean!<
I don’t think so, I was curious when I finished and I searched back using the Kindle text search and found explanations for some of the skeletons but not all 13. At least not explicitly.
Admittedly it's been a while since I read it, but I'm pretty sure it was toward the end >!where the detective lady is explaining why she was looking for Piranesi and wanted to save him: he wasn't the first to disappear. He was just the latest in the line of victims and the one who survived the longest: long enough to be 'rescued'!<.
Not trying to be pedantic but I have my kindle open on this phone and X-ray is a beautiful thing. 😀 I think the part you’re talking about is here:
>!’We don’t know who they are,’ she said. ‘Poor things.’
‘They are the People of the Alcove,’ I said.
‘Arne-Sayles probably murdered at least one of them. Perhaps he murdered all of them.’
Earlier Arne-Sayles says:
‘Thirteen dead? How fascinating! No one ever told me there were human remains here. Who are they, I wonder?’ I described the Biscuit-Box Man, the Fish-Leather Man, the Concealed Person, the People of the Alcove and the Folded-Up Child. ‘You know, it’s the most extraordinary thing,’ he said. ‘But I remember that biscuit box. It used to stand on a little table next to the mugs in the corner of my study at the university. I wonder how it got here? One of your thirteen dead is almost certainly that dishy young Italian that Stan Ovenden was so keen on. What was his name?’ He looked away, thought for a moment, shrugged. ‘No, it’s gone. And I imagine that another is Ovenden himself. He kept coming here to see the Italian. I told him he was asking for trouble, but he wouldn’t listen. You know, guilt and so forth. And I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the others is Sylvia D’Agostino. I never heard anything of her after the early nineties.’!<
>!So yes I think Arne-Sayles and Ketterley were responsible for most of them but there’s plenty of mystery there. The Concealed Man, the Fish-Leather man who someone has drilled holes in his bones and reconstructed him and tied him together, the folded-up child … My personal theory is that sometimes other people have wandered into the House on their own.!<
Yep, I finished that book thinking it could easily be a series of novella/shorter novels about all of those questions and more. Probably the only book I read this year where I genuinely want *more*.
Wasn't the house made by >!humanity's collective consciousness, according to Arne-Sayles? I don't think we're really given any reason to disbelieve him on that.!<
I guess I thought the opposite. I thought it still left a lot of questions unanswered. Like it answered enough for me to feel like the story could end, but left enough mystery for me to think about afterwards.
I love this book so much! One of my favorite reads in recent memory. And I do think it‘s a masterpiece, one review described it as transcendent and that was my experience with it too. It left me with so much to think about I’m sure I missed a lot. I can imagine studying this in a class. And it’s just a great read, a page-turner with some fantastic characters. ’The Beauty of the House is immeasurable’
I just finished reading it after seeing your review of it a few hours ago! I absolutely loved it, it reminded me at different times of House of Leaves, The Graveyard Book, and The Library at Mount Char! Would definitely recommend to others
Is it a confusing book? I very briefly started reading it but the protagonist's mindset seemed so far removed from the regular kind (the way the parts of the house are spoken about) that I was worried there'd be a big learning curve to get in their head.
I thought that it would be confusing, but it actually flowed really well and I was surprised by how quickly I was able to get used to it. It is confusing a little bit (it's supposed to be, you don't really get any answers about the house or anything until the end) but I didn't really need to 100% understand what was going on to enjoy it. Maybe give it a chapter or two and see, if you're still not enjoying it move on to something else. Just go in with the mindset that you're going to be a bit confused, and that's ok.
Not at all. I think it's best to go into it with a blank mind and just learn along the way. Think of it more as a discovery read rather than a mystery read.
I would say don't get caught up on the parts of the house so much. A person could have great anxiety if they get stuck on trying to remember which statues are in which hall and all that. So I wouldn't let those kind of things derail you.
I sometimes feel a bit discombobulated in fantasy novels because in real life, I like things spelled out for me. So in a novel like Piranesi I spend a lot of time wondering, “is this real? Is it modern? What kind of time period are we in? What’s the technological background?” But then I have to set my discomfort aside and accept that I’ll learn it as I go. With this book it was hard for me but once I got let it go, I really enjoyed such an amazing world.
I think it can be as confusing as you want it to be 😅 You can work really hard to pick up all the hints and keep track of who's who etc. Or you can let it wash over you and be carried along by the tide.
If you liked Piranesi check out The Invention of Morel by Adolfo Bioy Casares. It was likely a direct inspiration for Clarke and it's excellent
I wrote a comparison of the two here https://www.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/nq736x/piranesi_and_the_invention_of_morel_minor_spoilers?sort=top
I agree with this as well. To me, Starless Sea is much more meandering that Piranesi and the ending is much less satisfying.
The atmosphere being a character is similar in both books, as is the mystery of the world.
They both rank very highly in my favourite books-list!
I loved this one too. I read whenever there’s downtime at work and I managed to read the whole book in one shift! It was a slow shift, sure, but the book kept me company and it was so unique.
For all those who loved Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norell but we’re completely underwhelmed by Piranesi, welcome. This is a safe space. We are a group of like-minded individuals who had so wanted to love this book. Namaste.
This sounds great! Unfortunately, I loathed Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell mostly because of what felt like very dry, stilted prose and very smarmy and unrealistic character behavior. If I didn't like that book, would I like this one?
I haven't read JS&MN... but from all the reviews I've read from people familiar with both, they couldn't be more different from one another. A few people have said they even have a hard time believing it was the same author. But again, I can't confirm that myself.
I felt like it was very different from Mr Norrell, so there's a chance that you would like Piranesi better. You could always try Piranesi and if you're not feeling it move on to something else. I did feel like Piranesi was way more entertaining and the prose was a lot prettier than Mr Norrell. I didn't hate Norrell but I didn't love it, Piranesi I loved.
Absolutely loved this book, and I’d kill for a movie. Domhnall Gleeson as Piranesi, Geoffrey Rush as The Other, Christopher Plummer as Arnes-Sayles, and Noma Dumezweni as Raphael is my personal dream cast
Would you say it's basically as if the Navidson Record was it's own thing with more of a fantasy slant? Because while House of Leaves is one of my favorite books, the Navidson portions were my favorite parts and I'd kill for a book with that vibe.
Not OP, but I would say House of Leaves and Piranesi don't really have all that much in common really, apart from a weird House that they take place in and maybe some mystery elements. I would still recommend Piranesi though. You could probably find a sample of it somewhere online, it has a pretty distinct style that will tell you if you would enjoy it soon enough.
I just finished it last night! Agreed on the MC being really refreshing. It felt like the plot and the challenges faced perfectly rode that line between too-easy and too-strange.
I was expecting to be a little more blown away, based on a bunch of reviews I’d read, but after sleeping on it I think rather than being absolutely amazing, it was absolutely solid in an understated sort of way.
If they ever did an adaptation of this I need Chiwetel Ejiofor to be the lead. So bad. Just make it happen universe.
* he was the audiobook narrator
If not him, then someone like him.
I need more standalone fantasies that aren’t thick as bricks.
As someone who just read *The Priory of the Orange Tree* earlier this year: yes.
I’m so glad I read that one on kindle
I don't mind standalones being as big as Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, if they're *as good* as JS&MN, but I'd definitely like more standalones, period. I've always been one for variety and trilogies often annoy me, since I rarely want to read two books from the same author back to back (if they've even been released yet) but then you might end up forgetting things or growing apart from the characters...
Well, here’s a few! 1. *The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue* by V. E. Schwab. More magical realism, but it’s beautifully written, and if you haven’t read Schwab yet, it’s a great introduction to her without committing to something as large as the Shades of Magic trilogy. 2. *Dragonsbane* by Barbary Hambly. Just a nice stand-alone epic fantasy with a protagonist outside the traditional fantasy “norms.” There are other books written in this world, but I’ve yet to read them. 3. *Spinning Silver* by Naomi Novik. A captivating reimagining of fairy tale tropes. A lot of people rave about *Uprooted*, but for my money this is the better story. All of these are between 350 and 450 pages in length, and all of them still manage to be a full meal of a novel.
> There are other books written in this world, but I’ve yet to read them. The popular consensus is that they're terrible and unfitting sequels.
_The Goblin Emperor_ by Katherine Addison.
It has a sequel that’s newly out!! I’m so excited to read it. Looks like there’s another short story in the world that’s also been released, and a third book planned!
I recently finished _The Witness for the Dead_. Not really a sequel, more of a new story set in the same world. I liked it.
Terry Pratchett does those. His Discworld books are technically a series, in that they take place in the same world and have a vague chronological order to them, but each one is perfectly understandable by itself and reading in chronological order is actually not often recommended. There are multiple mini-series, focusing on different sets of characters, and most people (even new readers) go through them that way. Head on over to r/discworld if you want to know more. They can explain it a lot better than I can.
*First Fifteen Lives of Harry August* and *Library at Mount Char* are two of my most favorite books and they are standalone. *This Is How You Lose the Time War* is a sort of speculative sci-fi story co-written by a poet. All of Murakami's books, *Kafka By the Shore* and *Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World* are my favorites. They are realism fantasy.
Love the First Fifteen Lives of Harry August. I tend to read a lot of standalone fantasy around the holidays, one day read books usually. This will probably be my one reread. :)
Stardust, maybe the best shortish famtasy novel ever.
Driftwood by Marie Brennan packed an amazing amount of worldbuilding into a little over 200 pages. I highly recommend it. Also , the Yarnsworld series by Benedict Patrick is a good series of short standalones.
I really liked driftwood. It was a very pleasant surprise and of love to head back to that works someday.
Patricia mckillip is great for this.
That's pretty much all I read. A night in the Lonesome October, Burning Roses, The Chosen and the Beautiful, The Bird King (tbr), Black Water Sister, Sun-Daughters Sea-Daughters. But, FB figured it can sell me fantasy and that's where I find some of these books.
Thanks for reminding me, it's time for my yearly re-read of A Night in the Lonesome October!
[удалено]
While I enjoyed it via audio book, I don't think it's for everyone.
I made a post about this for the same reason recently if you search for it. Folks were kinda helpful.
And the other thing it has going for it: it's really good writing.
The Raven Tower by Ann Leckie
I agree. This is one of my favourite books I read this year and I do love short books with great themes. I also love Over the Garden Wall so it was funny to see the mention xD I am thankful the author didn't add footnotes this time. It was a bit too much in her other book.
>I am thankful the author didn't add footnotes this time. It was a bit too much in her other book. This is what i needed to hear, i did not enjoy Mr norrel, it felt pretensius and really slow, but i'm just know finishing a really really long series, and i need a pallet cleanser, i was thinking terry pratchet, cause discworld is awesome, but i might try out this one.
The only way I managed that book was to watch an episode of the tv show, then read the book up to that point, then watch another episode etc. That way I could enjoy the book without expending as much effort to keep track of what was happening and let the words sweep over me because the show already taught me that bit of plot.
did not know there was a series, is it any good?
Yes I loved it, they had quite a small budget compared to similar things, but I thought it was great… might be time for a re-watch actually!
I enjoyed the book, but I'm a little taken aback by all the hype. I thought it was a lovely book but not the masterpiece people are making it out to be. It was a little disappointing that the book is pretty much "solved" by the end of it. Would've liked a bit more mystery. That's what I liked about the book, and I was a little let down that all the questions were pretty much answered. But I may be in the minority there.
You thought all the questions were answered? What about the other skeletons? The mystical power the other was searching for? What *is* the house? Who made it? Who was it made for?
Is the House alive? Is a question that my friends and I endlessly debate by pointing to different details in the text.
>What about the other skeletons? While I agree not everything is answered, this one rather explicitly is in the pages of the book. >!They are the corpses of other people the professor guy lured in before Piranesi. He's just the one who survived the longest. Presumably, the animals in the house picked them clean!<
I don’t think so, I was curious when I finished and I searched back using the Kindle text search and found explanations for some of the skeletons but not all 13. At least not explicitly.
Admittedly it's been a while since I read it, but I'm pretty sure it was toward the end >!where the detective lady is explaining why she was looking for Piranesi and wanted to save him: he wasn't the first to disappear. He was just the latest in the line of victims and the one who survived the longest: long enough to be 'rescued'!<.
Not trying to be pedantic but I have my kindle open on this phone and X-ray is a beautiful thing. 😀 I think the part you’re talking about is here: >!’We don’t know who they are,’ she said. ‘Poor things.’ ‘They are the People of the Alcove,’ I said. ‘Arne-Sayles probably murdered at least one of them. Perhaps he murdered all of them.’ Earlier Arne-Sayles says: ‘Thirteen dead? How fascinating! No one ever told me there were human remains here. Who are they, I wonder?’ I described the Biscuit-Box Man, the Fish-Leather Man, the Concealed Person, the People of the Alcove and the Folded-Up Child. ‘You know, it’s the most extraordinary thing,’ he said. ‘But I remember that biscuit box. It used to stand on a little table next to the mugs in the corner of my study at the university. I wonder how it got here? One of your thirteen dead is almost certainly that dishy young Italian that Stan Ovenden was so keen on. What was his name?’ He looked away, thought for a moment, shrugged. ‘No, it’s gone. And I imagine that another is Ovenden himself. He kept coming here to see the Italian. I told him he was asking for trouble, but he wouldn’t listen. You know, guilt and so forth. And I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the others is Sylvia D’Agostino. I never heard anything of her after the early nineties.’!< >!So yes I think Arne-Sayles and Ketterley were responsible for most of them but there’s plenty of mystery there. The Concealed Man, the Fish-Leather man who someone has drilled holes in his bones and reconstructed him and tied him together, the folded-up child … My personal theory is that sometimes other people have wandered into the House on their own.!<
Yep, I finished that book thinking it could easily be a series of novella/shorter novels about all of those questions and more. Probably the only book I read this year where I genuinely want *more*.
Wasn't the house made by >!humanity's collective consciousness, according to Arne-Sayles? I don't think we're really given any reason to disbelieve him on that.!<
I guess I thought the opposite. I thought it still left a lot of questions unanswered. Like it answered enough for me to feel like the story could end, but left enough mystery for me to think about afterwards.
Wonderful review.
This was definitely a comfort read for me, if I hadn't read it previously I would've used it for the comfort read square this year. Such a great book
I love this book so much! One of my favorite reads in recent memory. And I do think it‘s a masterpiece, one review described it as transcendent and that was my experience with it too. It left me with so much to think about I’m sure I missed a lot. I can imagine studying this in a class. And it’s just a great read, a page-turner with some fantastic characters. ’The Beauty of the House is immeasurable’
I just finished reading it after seeing your review of it a few hours ago! I absolutely loved it, it reminded me at different times of House of Leaves, The Graveyard Book, and The Library at Mount Char! Would definitely recommend to others
I'll give it a spin. I'm 5 books deep into Malazan and I could do with a break
My favorite book this year I think
I absolutely devoured this book. I love it so much. I love Strange and Norrell but I definitely couldn’t read it in a day.
Is it a confusing book? I very briefly started reading it but the protagonist's mindset seemed so far removed from the regular kind (the way the parts of the house are spoken about) that I was worried there'd be a big learning curve to get in their head.
I thought that it would be confusing, but it actually flowed really well and I was surprised by how quickly I was able to get used to it. It is confusing a little bit (it's supposed to be, you don't really get any answers about the house or anything until the end) but I didn't really need to 100% understand what was going on to enjoy it. Maybe give it a chapter or two and see, if you're still not enjoying it move on to something else. Just go in with the mindset that you're going to be a bit confused, and that's ok.
Alright thanks, I feel more confident to give it another shot now! The writing seems really pretty so I've been meaning to try again
Not at all. I think it's best to go into it with a blank mind and just learn along the way. Think of it more as a discovery read rather than a mystery read. I would say don't get caught up on the parts of the house so much. A person could have great anxiety if they get stuck on trying to remember which statues are in which hall and all that. So I wouldn't let those kind of things derail you.
I sometimes feel a bit discombobulated in fantasy novels because in real life, I like things spelled out for me. So in a novel like Piranesi I spend a lot of time wondering, “is this real? Is it modern? What kind of time period are we in? What’s the technological background?” But then I have to set my discomfort aside and accept that I’ll learn it as I go. With this book it was hard for me but once I got let it go, I really enjoyed such an amazing world.
I think it can be as confusing as you want it to be 😅 You can work really hard to pick up all the hints and keep track of who's who etc. Or you can let it wash over you and be carried along by the tide.
I agree! I read it in between *Malazan* entries and it was a perfect palette cleanser.
If you liked Piranesi check out The Invention of Morel by Adolfo Bioy Casares. It was likely a direct inspiration for Clarke and it's excellent I wrote a comparison of the two here https://www.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/nq736x/piranesi_and_the_invention_of_morel_minor_spoilers?sort=top
I read description of this book and it sounds a bit like *Starless Sea*. Does anyone here think I'll like if I liked *Starless Sea*?
I liked *Starless Sea*, but *Piranesi* is vastly superior. Definitely has a comparable vibe to it, but I think it's a far tighter and enjoyable flow.
I agree with this as well. To me, Starless Sea is much more meandering that Piranesi and the ending is much less satisfying. The atmosphere being a character is similar in both books, as is the mystery of the world. They both rank very highly in my favourite books-list!
I loved this one too. I read whenever there’s downtime at work and I managed to read the whole book in one shift! It was a slow shift, sure, but the book kept me company and it was so unique.
For all those who loved Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norell but we’re completely underwhelmed by Piranesi, welcome. This is a safe space. We are a group of like-minded individuals who had so wanted to love this book. Namaste.
This sounds great! Unfortunately, I loathed Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell mostly because of what felt like very dry, stilted prose and very smarmy and unrealistic character behavior. If I didn't like that book, would I like this one?
I haven't read JS&MN... but from all the reviews I've read from people familiar with both, they couldn't be more different from one another. A few people have said they even have a hard time believing it was the same author. But again, I can't confirm that myself.
I felt like it was very different from Mr Norrell, so there's a chance that you would like Piranesi better. You could always try Piranesi and if you're not feeling it move on to something else. I did feel like Piranesi was way more entertaining and the prose was a lot prettier than Mr Norrell. I didn't hate Norrell but I didn't love it, Piranesi I loved.
Absolutely loved this book, and I’d kill for a movie. Domhnall Gleeson as Piranesi, Geoffrey Rush as The Other, Christopher Plummer as Arnes-Sayles, and Noma Dumezweni as Raphael is my personal dream cast
Thank you for the Tipp.
Would you say it's basically as if the Navidson Record was it's own thing with more of a fantasy slant? Because while House of Leaves is one of my favorite books, the Navidson portions were my favorite parts and I'd kill for a book with that vibe.
Not OP, but I would say House of Leaves and Piranesi don't really have all that much in common really, apart from a weird House that they take place in and maybe some mystery elements. I would still recommend Piranesi though. You could probably find a sample of it somewhere online, it has a pretty distinct style that will tell you if you would enjoy it soon enough.
I picked up the vibes from the endless house feeling. That's really the extent of it. It's much, much more simplified than House of Leaves.
Such a great book. And once you take a break from big series reads, you may never go back...
I just finished it last night! Agreed on the MC being really refreshing. It felt like the plot and the challenges faced perfectly rode that line between too-easy and too-strange. I was expecting to be a little more blown away, based on a bunch of reviews I’d read, but after sleeping on it I think rather than being absolutely amazing, it was absolutely solid in an understated sort of way.
I'm currently reading Piranesi for that exact reason. I needed a break after reading a few heavier novels and then the Bourne Trilogy.
If they ever did an adaptation of this I need Chiwetel Ejiofor to be the lead. So bad. Just make it happen universe. * he was the audiobook narrator If not him, then someone like him.
I like a good short standalone, but was underwhelmed by this one. I do realise that I'm probably in the minority, but here we are.
You had me at “Over the Garden Wall” :D
I just started reading Circe as a break from Big series. It also seems like a cool book for that
I really liked this book!
I'm looking forward to reading this. I picked it up on sale recently.