The Magicians and Mrs. Quent [Paperback]

I love the work of Jane Austen; the Bronte sisters not so much. I was well warned by the cover that this was an Austen pastiche, so I could hardly be disappointed to find that it does, indeed, echo motifs from all of Austen's books. (Falling ill in someone else's house; fetching the mother; intense concentration on marriage proposals; the entailed house; couples avoiding the "inappropriate" marriage.)

And let's not forget the echoes of Dickens in the story of the young man of good family fallen on hard times and working as a scrivener in a counting house while trying to protect his sister ...

The middle of the book is an epistolary - the main character, Ivy, is off to be a governess in an ancient, half-unused mansion with a locked room, an aloof, mysterious master, and a hostile housekeeper (Rebecca and Mrs Danvers? Not quite; not even The Sound of Music <grin>). Ivy has charge of children who see ghosts (The Turn of the Screw!), and seemingly hostile villagers are suspicious of all green-eyed women. The letters about the ensuing events are written to Ivy's father, who has been driven mad by some magical thing he did years before. It could not be more gothic.

All along, however, this is also a fascinating magical-18th-century fantasy. The world is as richly invented as any fantasy should be, with soul-eating aliens from a wandering planet poised to invade even as the ancient forests are staging a perilous uprising and magicians are few at a time when they are much needed.

Taking on Austen is a very hard thing to do, but most of the time Galen Beckett gets the language and the manners right. Most especially, the wit, while not up to Oscar Wilde (nothing is), is certainly credible for an Austenesque society.

For diehard fantasy fans, perhaps too much time is taken with the early portions of the book before the fantasy really shows itself and takes over the storyline. But since I'm a fan of both fantasy AND Austen's comedies of manners, for me the combination worked very well. I stayed up all night to finish it and am giving it away to friends and family.

And for those who care, I must say it's nice to see, once again, proof that a story can be sexually charged and full of danger and violence without ever having to resort to foul language or scenes I'd be embarrassed to read aloud to my mother.

- Orson Scott Card

From the back flap: "What if there were a fantastical cause underlying the social constraints and limited choices confronting a heroine in a novel by Jane Austen or Charlotte Brontė? Galen Beckett, ... began The Magicians and Mrs. Quent to answer that question ...."

I was excited to receive a copy of The Magicians and Mrs. Quent, Galen Beckett's "debut" novel. There's something exciting about a new author -- they're fresh, and when you hold one of their books in your hands (especially a beautiful one like The Magicians and Mrs. Quent), you hope that maybe you're about to discover a brand new talent.

Imagine my disappointment when I turned over the title page and read that the copyright to The Magicians and Mrs. Quent belongs to Mark Anthony. I immediately went to both authors' websites. Galen Beckett's talked about his debut novel. Mark Anthony's said (and still says as of 9/22/08):

"So what is the new book? Well, not to be too cagey, but that's something I can't answer quite yet. I can tell you that it's not another book in The Last Rune series--that tale, wonderful as it was for me, has come to a close. I can also tell you that the new book is a fantasy. However, it's fairly different than my previous books. So different, in fact, that my publisher has decided to launch the book under a new pen name.

And that's where all the cloak-and-dagger stuff comes in. I've been asked by my publisher not to publicly reveal my alter ego just yet, so as not to spoil the secret. The good news is that I will be able to talk more freely about the new book once it's out. So keep checking back. As soon as I'm at liberty to reveal my other writing identity, you'll see the news right here."

(So, I guess I've just outed Galen Beckett and Mark Anthony.) Despite my disappointment, I still began TMAMQ with anticipation -- Todd really enjoyed the first of The Last Rune novels (though not the second), and I enjoy a 19th century style English novel, so I knew there was potential here. I won't summarize the plot for you, since the publisher's blurb (above) does that nicely.

The first third of the book is almost a re-telling of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, in both style, plot, and character stereotypes. There are three sisters living with their batty mother in a low but genteel house which will transfer to their relative Mr Wyble when the mother dies. Ivy, the eldest, is bookish, intelligent, and rational. Rose is dreamy and strange. Lily is boy crazy and silly. Mr Wyble is a lawyer who is constantly trying to ingratiate himself with people who he thinks are better than him. He says things such as:

"While my schedule would have permitted me to pay you a visit around the middle of the month, another opportunity was presented to me, which, I am sure once the particulars are heard, you must judge was the wisest investment of my time. Recently I had the good fortune to be of service to Lady Marsdel, a most noble personage of the highest degree. In her extreme -- dare I say, almost overpowering -- generosity, she invited me to an affair at her house in the New Quarter. There I was happy to make the acquaintance of many remarkable and important persons."

I've read that before -- it's Mr Collins. There are also character analogues to Jane Austen's Mr Wickham, Mr Darcy, Mr Bennett, and Lady Catherine De Bourgh. And In addition to these character and style similarities, there are plot borrowings, too: Ivy gets ill while visiting Lady Marsdel's (Lady Catherine De Bourgh's) house and has to stay for days to recover, Dashton Rafferdy (Mr Darcy) struggles with his feelings for Ivy (Elizabeth Bennett) but knows he can't marry her because of their difference in social status.

Much of the second part of TMAMQ comes from Jane Eyre and the style abruptly changes from light social sarcasm to gothic romance. Ivy goes to be governess to Mr Rochester's -- I mean Mr Quent's -- wards at Heathcrest Hall. A local man accuses her of being a witch. There are strange things happening at the manor and Mr Quent and his housekeeper are keeping secrets (and a secret room). I won't tell you the rest of it so that I won't spoil the plot in case you haven't read Jane Eyre (or in case you missed the title of Mr Beckett's book). Beckett's best drawn character, Eldyn Garritt, and his plot come from Charles Dickens.

Beckett's writing style is not on par with his influencers, but it's very pleasant nonetheless. But much of his plot and his characters, though interesting, were not impressive because I've seen them all before. I understand that his purpose is to write pastiche, but I was hoping for something fresh. There are some engaging elements here, though: ancient patches of forest threaten to rise up and overtake Altania (fantasy England), a group of men plot to overthrow the government and let in a new ruler (it's not clear which side we should be on), the "Ashen" are some sort of aliens who want to suck out everyone's souls, unknown planets are appearing and aligning, Eldyn can wrap himself in shadows, and a mysterious stranger occasionally shows up to give Ivy a clue or encouragement (but I never figured out why he didn't just give her the answers). Perhaps most interesting is that in Ivy's world, days and nights vary in length so that she must consult an almanac if she wants to know how long the night will last (alas, we're given no scientific explanation for that). But none of these fantastical elements seem to fit together -- it feels like they are some random interesting ideas that were thrown in in order to present a fantasy novel in a 19th century style. The ending was wrapped up too quickly and conveniently without much explanation of how these pieces fit. Perhaps they'll all come together in the sequel, but for now I'm left confused.

Mr Beckett can certainly write, and he's got this style down, but I'd like to see him do something original and meaningful -- something that doesn't leave me scratching my head. The back flap of the novel suggests that we're going to learn the "fantastical cause underlying the social constraints and limited choices confronting a heroine in a novel by Jane Austen or Charlotte Brontė," but Beckett never answers the question -- he doesn't give us anything new. The "social constraints" that Ivy faces seem to be the same constraints that Jane Bennett and Jane Eyre faced: pride and prejudice.

I have to start off this review by saying that I've never read anything by Bronte or Austen, so I can't speak to the comparisons between Galen Beckett's "The Magicians and Mrs. Quent" and those classic works. I suppose if I was really familiar with Bronte and Austen, I might be more critical, but as it is, I went in just expecting a fun historical fantasy novel.

And overall "Mrs. Quent" doesn't disappoint. This rather lengthy novel follows the adventures of Ivy Lockwell, the eldest of three teenage sisters, as she discovers the role magic has played in her family and how it will affect her future. It's a race against time as she works to solve a riddle, left by her now mentally ill father, that will ultimately save the world.

Most of today's authors tend to paint their characters outside of the societal norm, even in a historical setting, but Ivy is firmly entrenched as a woman of the time period (Victorian/Regency). The only character that shows any tendency to be untraditional is the youngest sister, Lily. Everyone else follows the strict social code of the era. This includes a failed romance between Ivy and the dashing Mr. Rafferdy, whose station in life is a little too high for Ivy's family. I thought it would bother me, but it was kind of refreshing to have the main characters actually behave the way people normally would within a certain time period.

But there were also a lot of holes the author left in the story, as well as a weird middle section that made you feel like you were reading two books, and not one. When Ivy goes to the country to take care of Mr. Quent's wards, the narrative suddenly switches to first person and we ignore the rest of the characters we met in the first part of the novel. In fact, only a handful of them remain important by the last part of the book, and Ivy's sisters are relegated to being background information instead of having any relevance to the plot by the end of the book. I also found it hard to believe that Ivy would pour her heart out in letters to her father and not share those same feelings with her sisters, when it seemed that the three siblings were really close. If the middle section was a diary of some sort, it might have been easier to take.

The author also had a tendency to introduce a character or situation, and then once that character was unnecessary, just randomly taking them out forcefully. For instance, in the first section, we meet Mrs. Lockwell, the girls' mother. We learn, repeatedly, that Mrs. Lockwell is quite a bit younger than her mentally ill husband and is in great health. When Mrs. Lockwell suddenly dies, that's it. There's no scene where the doctor pronounces her cause of death. There's no musings from Ivy out in the country about what happened and how it's changed the family. It's obvious from the way the author harps on the fact that Mrs. Lockwell is so young and so healthy what will happen - but then there's no explanation or closure about it.

Another example of this is with the housekeeper Mrs. Darendel in the country. She's surly and doesn't like Ivy; but when the highwayman Westin appears at the estate, she's suddenly helping Ivy. Why the change of heart? We'll never know, because she gets taken out abruptly too. Which I find hard to swallow, given it's her son leading the charge. Why would he allow his own mother to die? We never find out. Apparently those connections just aren't important enough for the author to finish. So I'm not sure why they were introduced at all.

Societal strictures also don't seem to make sense. Ivy and Mr. Rafferdy can't be friends when single, but once she's married, it's totally okay for them to be close friends? I would think it would be the other way around. And Ivy is apparently madly in love with her husband, Mr. Quent, but since we barely get to know him in the book (he's always away on business, and when he does appear he's kind of gruff and quiet), we're not sure what she sees in him.

Crazy holes aside, it is overall a fun book and I'm hoping that the sequel will tie up some loose ends, answer questions, or at least flesh out some of the other characters more.