On rereading Part I, I realized it does matter that the narrator is male. He comments that when he found the skeleton of the folded-up child, he thinks that the house meant for her to be his wife because unless there is a new generation, there will be no one to inhabit the house after he and The Other are gone.
I was wondering, do you think that unsettling books are good to read? And if so, how often? Personally, I find Piranesi a rather unsettling book, as do others that I am reading it alongside with, so I was just curious about your opinion.
Hello! I am a first-time reader of Piranesi and am still in part 2. I very much appreciated the podcast, but to me, Piranesi's house is much closer to Borges' House of Asterion than the Library of Babel. Borges: "The house is the size of the world; better said, it is the world.”
My current working thesis, which the podcast seemed to confirm (?) was that the house was a house of memory, and I think the levels must be Clark being a Freudian: the lower level symbolizes the Id, the instinctual base of the self; the middle level is the Ego, where Piranesis predominantly lives and is structured and rational; the upper level is the Superego, elevated ideals, celestial, filled with light and birds. So I think he will need to reintegrate over the course of the book.
What intrigued me from the get-go was I that I didn't know what to think of Piranesi. His reaction to the house made no sense—it's a scary house, right? With skeletons. Why is he revelling in its kindness? But by the end, once all becomes clear, my amazement at him remained but was transformed into sheer admiration.
I feel a little bit like I did when we read Trust, because you have no point of reference really for what is truth, or is this person a reliable narrator?
At some point as I was thinking about this book, I also started thinking about the tv show Alone, and I think that could be a really interesting separate conversation.
As someone who lost my sight 10 years ago, this book is so so so intense. The disorientation and loss of memory of things and being trapped a but yet still knowing what things are… I am really glad to learn that. It has similar effects on other people. this is either going to be extremely helpful and cathartic or I might end up crying in the fetal position. If anyone thinks it’s going to be the latter based on previously reading this book, feel free to prepare me
Elizabeth, I know your loss and disorientation is different to mine and these things are going to hit us all differently but I didn’t find the book too upsetting. Watching Piranesi go through that process of loss did bring up feelings of grief for me but ultimately I found the book hopeful. I really hope it will be the same for you too!
When I first read Piranesi a few years ago I was didn’t know Susanna Clarke’s story but I thought it was remarkable how she described this world of solitude & isolation that so closely echoed my own experience of being housebound. It was less surprising when I read that she has the same illness as me (ME/CFS) and has also been housebound for many years. I can see so many ways in which her experience has informed this book, without the book being in any way about illness. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say that the exploration of what it is to loose one’s identity and become lost or unmoored is a huge part of it for me. I loved what Heidi said about being able to notice the feelings of grief and loss in the house as well as the beauty and wonder.
I always enjoy it that when one of the hosts is discovering a book for the first time. It will be interesting to hear David’s thoughts as we go on!
I have found your insight into Susanna's illness so helpful in reading this book. I'm not great at reading highly imaginative literature. But I can relate to the book as reflecting the tension of someone housebound and both in a way loving the isolation (as most introverts do) and fearful of losing hold of their identity and story and thus driven to keep a journal to remind themselves of who they are.
When a trusted friend recommended Piranesi to me in 2020 she said it was the most restful book she'd ever read and that she felt she was a gentler person while reading it. Probably that review strongly influenced how I read the novel.
It's not that I don't see the elements that are scary that Heidi notices and how they are in tension with how much the narrator loves the House. But to me the House is never, ever a scary place. I implicitly trust the narrator's judgment that "the Beauty of the House is immeasurable, it's the Kindness infinite." Even when things get tense and there are clearly threats to his safety, even when he suffers, even when it's clear he's had some kind of trauma and mental breakdown... I still trust that judgement. I can't tell you why, but I find the House enchanting and magical in a good way. I want to linger in its halls. I think one of the things that marks the Other as a suspicious character is his distrust of the House.
I don't know what that says about me as a reader, but my experience of the House is just fundamentally the opposite of Heidi's. I trust the House and I love its beauty and its goodness. And I've never thought of the House as an analog of the self but always as a place out there, an alternate world, a world between the worlds maybe. I can see where that reading of house as self comes from, but I'm not sure I find the House as inner world to be a very compelling reading. I am very resistant to that interpretation, as resistant as I am to the idea of allegory.
I think one of my favorite things things about the way Susanna Clarke wrote this book is how the narrator *sounds* like an unreliable narrator, but *feels* like a reliable one. It’s such a fascinating tension to be in while reading. Very intriguing, especially on the first read through.
I agree. There is so much that is unreliable, so many discrepancies in his account. And yet.... I somehow trust his point of view. I trust his goodness and his ability to see beauty and kindness and something about the way he sees the world feels vital and important and true. He is a person who wants to see the best in everything. he's a person who wants everything to MEAN more.
I also think the epistolary form works so well in establishing both of those... do you call them tones? I hope they will talk about that a bit more... about the form of the novel.
I am a first time reader of Piranesi and I am glad to read it with all of you. I like to read books with no prior information (I don’t even read the back of the book), so this was fun to read and figure things out as I went along. For that reason, I have a response of Josh Gibb’s statement about the protagonist/narrator. I thought the narrator was a woman until the book said otherwise (which it did in Part 1). I was slightly taken aback and felt like I had to recalibrate. That being said, the disconnect was nothing like I have experienced in some stories and I don’t usually try to guess if an author is a man or woman when initials are used. In some books how well female or male characters are written takes me out of the story, not so with this one so far. I look forward to experiencing this book as an adventure.
Heidi and Shawn, I’m so sad that you guys indulged David’s questions! I know you all had to fill up an hours worth of podcast, but I’m still super sad he’s not ultimately experiencing the pure disorientation that is diving into this book with no (or as little as possible) information on the first read through. It’s not an experience that can ever be recaptured and it is SO worth it.
Anytime I recommend this book to a friend and they ask me what it’s about, I refuse to tell them. I just ask them to trust what they know about me and my reading habits and take my word that it is worth the read. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. The initial disorientation is key. It lets you viscerally experience the book, groping for points of reference to orient yourself amidst the chaos, much like the protagonist.
Also, since there are already so many spoilers, the flooded labyrinthian, statue-filled world makes me think it’s Charn.
Edited to say, now that I’ve finished the whole episode I considered deleting my comment, but it already had its own sub-comment. You guys did basically come to these conclusions yourselves at the end and I appreciate it! Sorry I got so intense so soon! 😬🫢🙃.
I’m so glad to be lurking on this conversation. I’m loving the allusions I’m recognizing so far, but was stressing out a little about what I must be missing if I’m already seeing so much. I’m feeling well and truly disoriented after reading just the first part, so it’s validating to know that reaction is not uncommon and, indeed, enhances the experience for so many of you. Now, after reading this, I’m going to go ahead and read through it this weekend, and then I’ll read each part again as the episodes drop. Thanks for sharing!
Yes, in my opinion. I had the luxury of reading through the entire book in two days a few summers back simply based on the blind recommendation of someone whose book sense I trust. As soon as I finished it, I started a re-read. I think this book is much better simply being *experienced* the first time through. Most people I’ve talked with about it enjoy the book because there’s so much to ponder and discuss. You can only experience the true disorientation of the book one time though. I’ve read so many books in my lifetime and I’ve never experienced a first read through like I did with this one. There’s plenty of time to enjoy the neuance after. Again, my opinion, thanks for asking! (I consider myself a thinker and and a voracious reader, and it’s the rare book that I can’t predict plot points to some extent and am forced to read “in the moment” only. Maybe that’s why I enjoyed this one so much. It was a novelty for sure.)
I’ve been looking forward to reading this for awhile - David, I’m glad there’s at least one of you who hasn’t read it yet, to offer that take, just surprised you hadn’t :)
I’m also curious to hear how the second read, five years post-COVID hits Sean and Heidi.
I like the advice Heidi/Sean offered of “just experiencing” the book (which will be easy for me since I’m not educated enough to overcomplicate the allusions!). That made me think of Simone Weil’s essay on attention I just read for our school’s book club. Funnily enough someone there brought up Ursula K. Le Guin’s Earthsea, which I had never heard of. Forever adding to the TBR…
Oh, and I switched over to substack to peak at what kind of Ortho-pedic shoes Heidi got bc I’m 40 now and my back is still recovering from an inquirer’s Lent/Pascha experience - but there was no video 😂
On rereading Part I, I realized it does matter that the narrator is male. He comments that when he found the skeleton of the folded-up child, he thinks that the house meant for her to be his wife because unless there is a new generation, there will be no one to inhabit the house after he and The Other are gone.
Ms. Heidi,
I was wondering, do you think that unsettling books are good to read? And if so, how often? Personally, I find Piranesi a rather unsettling book, as do others that I am reading it alongside with, so I was just curious about your opinion.
Hello! I am a first-time reader of Piranesi and am still in part 2. I very much appreciated the podcast, but to me, Piranesi's house is much closer to Borges' House of Asterion than the Library of Babel. Borges: "The house is the size of the world; better said, it is the world.”
My current working thesis, which the podcast seemed to confirm (?) was that the house was a house of memory, and I think the levels must be Clark being a Freudian: the lower level symbolizes the Id, the instinctual base of the self; the middle level is the Ego, where Piranesis predominantly lives and is structured and rational; the upper level is the Superego, elevated ideals, celestial, filled with light and birds. So I think he will need to reintegrate over the course of the book.
What intrigued me from the get-go was I that I didn't know what to think of Piranesi. His reaction to the house made no sense—it's a scary house, right? With skeletons. Why is he revelling in its kindness? But by the end, once all becomes clear, my amazement at him remained but was transformed into sheer admiration.
I feel a little bit like I did when we read Trust, because you have no point of reference really for what is truth, or is this person a reliable narrator?
This book (I’m half way through) has similar vibes to the reading experience of ‘Trust’.
Is there a difference between ‘Easter eggs’ and ‘allusions’? They seem the same to me, but sometimes I gotta have it spelled out.
At some point as I was thinking about this book, I also started thinking about the tv show Alone, and I think that could be a really interesting separate conversation.
Just started reading Ezekiel today….giving me Piranesi feels!🤯
As someone who lost my sight 10 years ago, this book is so so so intense. The disorientation and loss of memory of things and being trapped a but yet still knowing what things are… I am really glad to learn that. It has similar effects on other people. this is either going to be extremely helpful and cathartic or I might end up crying in the fetal position. If anyone thinks it’s going to be the latter based on previously reading this book, feel free to prepare me
Elizabeth, I know your loss and disorientation is different to mine and these things are going to hit us all differently but I didn’t find the book too upsetting. Watching Piranesi go through that process of loss did bring up feelings of grief for me but ultimately I found the book hopeful. I really hope it will be the same for you too!
Thank you!!😌
When I first read Piranesi a few years ago I was didn’t know Susanna Clarke’s story but I thought it was remarkable how she described this world of solitude & isolation that so closely echoed my own experience of being housebound. It was less surprising when I read that she has the same illness as me (ME/CFS) and has also been housebound for many years. I can see so many ways in which her experience has informed this book, without the book being in any way about illness. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say that the exploration of what it is to loose one’s identity and become lost or unmoored is a huge part of it for me. I loved what Heidi said about being able to notice the feelings of grief and loss in the house as well as the beauty and wonder.
I always enjoy it that when one of the hosts is discovering a book for the first time. It will be interesting to hear David’s thoughts as we go on!
I have found your insight into Susanna's illness so helpful in reading this book. I'm not great at reading highly imaginative literature. But I can relate to the book as reflecting the tension of someone housebound and both in a way loving the isolation (as most introverts do) and fearful of losing hold of their identity and story and thus driven to keep a journal to remind themselves of who they are.
I assume the Borges allusions are purposeful. Anyone else’s mind go there almost immediately?
What was the title of the story Sean mentioned by Borges? One of my students recommended the author to me last semester.
The Library of Babel came to mind with Piranesi but Borges is always worth a read
Sean got there later in the episode, so I was not the only one
When a trusted friend recommended Piranesi to me in 2020 she said it was the most restful book she'd ever read and that she felt she was a gentler person while reading it. Probably that review strongly influenced how I read the novel.
It's not that I don't see the elements that are scary that Heidi notices and how they are in tension with how much the narrator loves the House. But to me the House is never, ever a scary place. I implicitly trust the narrator's judgment that "the Beauty of the House is immeasurable, it's the Kindness infinite." Even when things get tense and there are clearly threats to his safety, even when he suffers, even when it's clear he's had some kind of trauma and mental breakdown... I still trust that judgement. I can't tell you why, but I find the House enchanting and magical in a good way. I want to linger in its halls. I think one of the things that marks the Other as a suspicious character is his distrust of the House.
I don't know what that says about me as a reader, but my experience of the House is just fundamentally the opposite of Heidi's. I trust the House and I love its beauty and its goodness. And I've never thought of the House as an analog of the self but always as a place out there, an alternate world, a world between the worlds maybe. I can see where that reading of house as self comes from, but I'm not sure I find the House as inner world to be a very compelling reading. I am very resistant to that interpretation, as resistant as I am to the idea of allegory.
I think one of my favorite things things about the way Susanna Clarke wrote this book is how the narrator *sounds* like an unreliable narrator, but *feels* like a reliable one. It’s such a fascinating tension to be in while reading. Very intriguing, especially on the first read through.
I agree. There is so much that is unreliable, so many discrepancies in his account. And yet.... I somehow trust his point of view. I trust his goodness and his ability to see beauty and kindness and something about the way he sees the world feels vital and important and true. He is a person who wants to see the best in everything. he's a person who wants everything to MEAN more.
I also think the epistolary form works so well in establishing both of those... do you call them tones? I hope they will talk about that a bit more... about the form of the novel.
Exactly 💝
I am a first time reader of Piranesi and I am glad to read it with all of you. I like to read books with no prior information (I don’t even read the back of the book), so this was fun to read and figure things out as I went along. For that reason, I have a response of Josh Gibb’s statement about the protagonist/narrator. I thought the narrator was a woman until the book said otherwise (which it did in Part 1). I was slightly taken aback and felt like I had to recalibrate. That being said, the disconnect was nothing like I have experienced in some stories and I don’t usually try to guess if an author is a man or woman when initials are used. In some books how well female or male characters are written takes me out of the story, not so with this one so far. I look forward to experiencing this book as an adventure.
Me too! I thought the narrator was a woman until he says he’s male.
😳🫢🤫🫠
Heidi and Shawn, I’m so sad that you guys indulged David’s questions! I know you all had to fill up an hours worth of podcast, but I’m still super sad he’s not ultimately experiencing the pure disorientation that is diving into this book with no (or as little as possible) information on the first read through. It’s not an experience that can ever be recaptured and it is SO worth it.
Anytime I recommend this book to a friend and they ask me what it’s about, I refuse to tell them. I just ask them to trust what they know about me and my reading habits and take my word that it is worth the read. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. The initial disorientation is key. It lets you viscerally experience the book, groping for points of reference to orient yourself amidst the chaos, much like the protagonist.
Also, since there are already so many spoilers, the flooded labyrinthian, statue-filled world makes me think it’s Charn.
Edited to say, now that I’ve finished the whole episode I considered deleting my comment, but it already had its own sub-comment. You guys did basically come to these conclusions yourselves at the end and I appreciate it! Sorry I got so intense so soon! 😬🫢🙃.
I'm about to start the book. Are you saying it would be best to read the whole thing before listening to this episode?
I’m so glad to be lurking on this conversation. I’m loving the allusions I’m recognizing so far, but was stressing out a little about what I must be missing if I’m already seeing so much. I’m feeling well and truly disoriented after reading just the first part, so it’s validating to know that reaction is not uncommon and, indeed, enhances the experience for so many of you. Now, after reading this, I’m going to go ahead and read through it this weekend, and then I’ll read each part again as the episodes drop. Thanks for sharing!
Yes, in my opinion. I had the luxury of reading through the entire book in two days a few summers back simply based on the blind recommendation of someone whose book sense I trust. As soon as I finished it, I started a re-read. I think this book is much better simply being *experienced* the first time through. Most people I’ve talked with about it enjoy the book because there’s so much to ponder and discuss. You can only experience the true disorientation of the book one time though. I’ve read so many books in my lifetime and I’ve never experienced a first read through like I did with this one. There’s plenty of time to enjoy the neuance after. Again, my opinion, thanks for asking! (I consider myself a thinker and and a voracious reader, and it’s the rare book that I can’t predict plot points to some extent and am forced to read “in the moment” only. Maybe that’s why I enjoyed this one so much. It was a novelty for sure.)
I’ve been looking forward to reading this for awhile - David, I’m glad there’s at least one of you who hasn’t read it yet, to offer that take, just surprised you hadn’t :)
I’m also curious to hear how the second read, five years post-COVID hits Sean and Heidi.
I like the advice Heidi/Sean offered of “just experiencing” the book (which will be easy for me since I’m not educated enough to overcomplicate the allusions!). That made me think of Simone Weil’s essay on attention I just read for our school’s book club. Funnily enough someone there brought up Ursula K. Le Guin’s Earthsea, which I had never heard of. Forever adding to the TBR…
Oh, and I switched over to substack to peak at what kind of Ortho-pedic shoes Heidi got bc I’m 40 now and my back is still recovering from an inquirer’s Lent/Pascha experience - but there was no video 😂
Blessed feast! Christ is risen!
🍖 🥩 🧀 🍷🍷🍷
Truly he is risen!
Hope you find a catechu-te pair to wear next year.
Ahh nice. I hope so too. Maybe even chrismatastic 🙂
I just read through all of the Earthsea novels in March and I wrote about them on my substack if you're interested. They're very good.