I'm not the sort of person who reviews a book I haven't read. Still, I'm typing these words to fulfill a technical obligation to review a "book" that I received through the LibraryThing Early Reviewer program. So, here's the thing. What I received in the mail wasn't a book. It was a bound typescript, not formatted for publication. As such, it idled among my papers, while I read other books. I work as an editor, and to "win" a rough-looking typescript struck me as rather a busman's holiday.

As I saw the lackluster reviews from other early reviewers come across my screen, I got even less interested. Now, having moved apartments in the interim, I can't even say where the damned thing has got to. If I wanted to read the book, I'd go check it out of the public library. But the experience soured me, and I don't.

Postscript: These remarks should not be taken as any sort of indictment of the LT Early Reviewer program, which is great.

I read some other reviews where people complained that the ending was too far out in fantasy land...but I have to disagree. Actually, I can't disagree with that precisely, instead it's more about highlighting the ending as too fantastic. The whole novel was way out there. But that's not a bad thing. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and maybe it's just the fact that I read [The Good Thief] and [Fragile Things] recently, but I felt there were close similarities with those works. For the first, Gibson's and Tinti's character choices and development were both well-done, but oddly similar. Gibson also echoes Gaiman's dark gothic atmosphere well in this novel.

In all, if you've read and enjoyed Tinti or Gaiman, you'll probably enjoy this book. ( )

The story of magician/detective Edward Moon and his nearly indestructible companion, the Somnabulist. They are hired to investigate a bizarre murder and in the course of that investigation find a plot to bring down the entire city of London. The whole books is pretty odd. It seems as if the reader has picked up the book in the middle (or near the end) of a series. Frequent references are made to Moon's previous cases and characters are brought in that there is an unexplained background with. In spite of that, I really enjoyed the book. It is full of eccentric characters and rich atmosphere. I recommend it! ( )

The narrator of this tale is as amusing and enigmatic as he is self-effacing. He tells us the tale of one Edward Moon, a magician and detective, and his assistant, The Somnambulist, who can be run through with swords yet does not bleed. We never learn why The Somnambulist is called this and the narrator doesn't seem to care. This is just one of many "implausible" things that we are expected to accept in this bizarre tale. Moon is bored and so agrees to join a murder investigation after he is approached by Inspector Merryweather of Scotland Yard. Strangely, he is propositioned at the same time by a secret government agency, The Directorate, and is asked to figure out the origins of a mysterious plot against all of London. It turns out that the murder is the tip of the iceberg in a wholly bizarre scheme to bring down the city.

This book succeeds because of the light way in which it was written. It's true that most of it is strange and unbelievable but it doesn't attempt to be serious and dark. It was written as entertainment and it is, in fact, highly entertaining. It's one of those books that you start casting for the movie in your head while you are reading it.

http://webereading.com/2009/09/be-war... ( )

I snagged this book through the LibraryThing Early Reviews Program, and I was terribly excited to be receiving a copy. The ER blurb compaired the style of The Somnambulist to the style found in Neil Gaiman's books. I'm a big fan of Gaiman, and I did not see a great deal of similarity upon reading the book.

I have found Gaiman's books to be rich and lush, with incredibly multifaceted characters that make me wish to keep reading about them long after the plot of the book has concluded. The Somnambulist was nowhere near like this. The main characters were irritating (Edward Moon) and underused (the Somnambulist). Secondary characters would be introduced for a few chapters, then disappear for two-thirds of the book, only to be brought back briefly as the tail-end of the plot wrapped. I didn't find the plot to be interesting-enough on its own merit to carry the book along, and I also found the writing style to be too melodramatic for my tastes.

The author, Jonathan Barnes, has a gift for imagery, but he doesn't seem able to yet use this talent to his best advantage. Certain scenes in this book (specifically regarding the odd folk and carnivale members) were delightful and vivid, but they failed at supporting the entire book. This is a first novel for Barnes, and I'm hoping his story-telling skills will improve with some polishing. I'd be interested in reading a second book of his, but not one that would sequel The Somnambulist. ( )

http://thebookwormslibrary.com/?p=34 ( )

Jonathan Barnes shows a quirky sensibility in this novel. His grasp of dialogue, description, and plot are sound, and the plethora of unusual details he uses conveys a good grasp of Victorian-era history. The character of Edward Moon is certainly distinctive, and much different from the usual plague of werewolf cops, vampire lords, and wizard P.I.s in the urban fantasies I've been reading lately. I enjoyed this novel so much that I ended up buying the sequel to it, "The Domino Men", last week. ( )

Let me make it perfectly clear, this is not a book you should approach lightly. It is a puzzling mixture of mystery, suspense, and a touch of Victorian horror story mixed in a jumble of parts. At first it seems that all these qualities might make an exceedingly good tale, but alas it does not. The author tells the story of Edward Moon, magician and part time detective and his companion, the Somnambulist, who together are called upon to solve a series of murders and in so doing save London from destruction. The author tries to pay homage to past writers and their creations ranging from Sherlock Holmes to Frankenstein. I felt the author was being a bit too cute with the reader, going so far as to tell us that he would at times lie and mislead the reader, which he does. ( )

Here is my review from early January, 2008. I don't see it here so I am posting it again:

I have just finished The Somnambulist by Jonathan Barnes. Will someone please explain it to me?

It starts off simply enough as a Sherlock Holmes pastiche set in London shortly after the death of Queen Victoria – there are still hansom cabs, fortunately. There are references within the text to Conan Doyle and Poe, so the proprieties are being observed. Not for long.

We soon meet some disagreeable people with distasteful habits who are murdered horrifically for no apparent reason. There is a conjuror and amateur detective and a mute giant who, if you prick him, does not bleed. There are many odd individuals who have too many or too few body parts. There is a taciturn gentlemen who seems to swim upstream in Time, but is not Merlin. There are several sinister conspiracies, one of which is determined to 'liberate' London whether the Londoners wish it or not. Even the Okhrana is there. I expected the Spanish Inquisition or the Bavarian Illuminati.

The author seems to have prepared for writing this book by gazing long into the Aleph, the sphere which contains the entire world. He has delved deep into the pleroma and tried to fit all he found into the Great Chain of Being. The book seems a mess but it is artfully contrived and it all fits together.

What is bewildering about the book is all the loose ends. The amoral fiend named Barabbas does not seem to be needed. And what of the Survivor's Club? What do they do apart from the one member who survives but must resign from the club?

I am an old-fashioned reader. Fiction needs more resolution and coherence than this. One tolerates incompleteness in 'reality' because there is no choice – who killed the Princes in the Tower (an agent of Richard III?); who was The Man in the Iron Mask (someone who resembled the King too well?); who killed JFK (space aliens escaped from Roswell?). There is a resolution to the narrative which is half-satisfactory (except to the hundreds of dead victims) but one wishes to know why some of the characters have supernatural powers.

The sound and fury of The Somnambulist are great fun, but what does it signify? ( )

When a author starts a book with the sentences "Be warned. This book has no literary merit whatsoever. It is a lurid piece of nonsense, convoluted, implausible, peopled by unconvincing characters, written in drearily pedestrian prose, frequently ridiculous and willfully bizarre." You should believe them. You disregard such comments at your own risk. I did and now the time I spent reading "The Somnambulist" is gone. I was left wonder if the sleep walker was a character in the book, the author or me!
There was so much in this book that was un-answered. It seems like this book was an elaborate set up for another book. Domino Men perhaps? Well I'll never know. ( )

This was an odd book, but I found myself liking it despite some of the off-beat turns and bizarre characters. The story takes place in an alternative Victorian London as mysterious forces are gathering in an attempt to throw out all of the government and financial leaders and to replace them with their own chaotic system. A conjurer and sometime-detective sets out to uncover the individuals at the heart of the conspiracy by tracing the killers of two very different men. The Somnambulist is an odd giant-like mute, his assistant, who appears as much part of the mystery as part of the solution. The characters here were colorful and the story unpredictable, but I'm not entirely certain that the resolution was as satisfying as I would like, given the creativity of the plot as a whole. Still, I would definitely read this author's next book. ( )

While quite readable this felt a bit of a cheat. You could almost see the laundry list of victorian era cliches. Most of the characters just didn't work for me and the entire thing wasn't really me. This is a book where you're either enchanted from the first
"Be warned. This book has no literary merit whatsoever. It is a lurid piece of nonsense, convoluted, implausible, peopled by unconvincing characters, written in drearily pedestrian prose, frequently ridiculous and wilfully bizarre." or roll your eyes. If you roll your eyes at it that will probably be the theme of your reading, or at least it was of mine.

It's pretty difficult to place in time but I'd put it into Edwardian because of a throwaway remark by the time-travelling Cribb about the king dying in x number of years and Moon not questioning the King issue. Whenever it is it's late Victorian at the earliest.

If you're a fan of this era and a fan of the entire semi-steam punk / underbelly of Victorian/Edwardian era stuff then it's for you but it divides it's readers quite strongly. Me, I liked parts but the whole was a little meh. ( )

Convoluted plot,
degenerate characters:
Not much to like here.

This unusual and intriguing story has as a main character Edward Moon, magician and crime-solving genius, a little past his prime. His partner in the magic show is the Somnambulist, seemingly impervious to pain and injury. They live above a theatre in London, and word reaches them of an unusual murder...and that is just the beginning of odd events, including prophecies of the destruction of London.

The book has bizarre characters, fantastical elements, bizarre events...and it all works, and makes for a truly interesting read. Not, perhaps, for those with weak stomachs. ( )

I'm not a big fan of Victorian stuff. So as soon as the narrator started off with "Be warned. This book has no literary merit whatsoever. Needless to say, I doubt you'll believe a word of it," I cringed. I really don't like getting a good talking to from a narrator. And I heard his silly voice for the whole book.

Now, Edward Moon and the Somnabulist, I liked. Moon is a conjurer past his prime who still gives magic shows in the seedy part of town. The Somnabulist is a mute who can be stabbed with swords and not bleed or hurt. The two of them form quite a friendship and set off to solve a mystery. Add in a secret government society, tons of societies of freaks, and London, and it's a book. I loved the setting and the details, but just didn't find myself getting into the book. I did have to read to find out what happened at the end, but I wasn't impressed. But, again, this just isn't my type of book. ( )

Homage/parody of the Victorian penny dreadful including occult thriller, horror, and detective novel elements. A sinister cult centered on a church dedicated to Coleridge plans to overthrow London and bring about a new Eden. It is up to a conjuror, his silent, gigantic partner, and various British secret service agents to prevent or unwittingly enable this from happening. Profanity, graphic violence, non-explicit sex, and drug use.

In Victorian-era London, Edward Moon is a famous conjuror, performing miraculous feats of magic with the aid of his mysterious partner, the Somnambulist…a mute giant of a man with a peculiar fondness for milk. Edward Moon is also a famous detective, solving mysteries using highly developed reasoning skills not unlike those of Sherlock Holmes. After a disastrous case, the details of which are never fully revealed, Moon has fallen somewhat out of favor, and is determined to regain his standing and his dignity. When two men are murdered in a bizarre fashion, Moon sees his chance and he and the Somnambulist spring into action.

What Moon uncovers, however, is not a simple crazed murdered, but a nightmarish and far-reaching conspiracy that will draw in, not only Moon and the Somnambulist, but all of Moon’s closest companions…including a strange man named Cribb who claims to live backward, a beggar, an albino operative from a secret government agency called the Directorate, and Moon’s own sister. Throw in a pair of near-legendary assassins, a bizarre cult bent on taking over London by force, and the poet Samuel Coleridge, and you have the ingredients for one long, strange trip!

Fast-paced; intriguing; and strange; mixing the best elements of historical fiction, mystery, melodrama, horror, and comedy, “The Somnambulist” defies categorization. The somewhat unreliable narrator of this rollicking novel warns the reader from the book’s first line that “This book has no literary merit whatsoever.” Now, the truth of that statement is definitely debatable, but what’s certain is that this genre-bending book is a whole lot of fun! ( )

Interesting book. A has-been sleuth-cum-magician and his calcium-deficient, mute giant set about to solve a mystery and end up saving London. ( )

Well, I have to say I did enjoy this book, and for some of the same reasons that others didn't. Most of the characters are a bit off; for most of the book, you have a sense that there's a shadow just out of the corner of your eye that disappears just before you can identify it; there's a bit of science fiction mixed with the supernatural; and Barnes takes his time to paint an admittedly strange picture of the London, it's inhabitants, and the characters in this story. I enjoy all of this, and, given that I'm not a fan of mystery novels, all of these attributes makes "The Somnambulist" stand out as a good read.

My main complaint is that Barnes doesn't feel impelled to explain all of the wierdness/otherworldliness that he writes into his characters and events. I can't tell if this is because he feels it adds to the atmosphere of the book, or because there isn't a good explanation. But if you think that reading this book will reveal who and what the Somnambulist is, think again. ( )

I hate to stop reading a book even if it is not everything I thought it would be. Unfortunately, that is exactly what I did with this book. I just had too many problems with this novel. To me, it took a very long time just to get to the point of what the main character was supposed to do. The flow of the book was just so slow, it felt like nothing was getting resolved. Another big problem with this book, was that none of the characters were likable....on any level. I don't mind when one or two of the characters are unlikable, but when the whole cast is? It got to the point where I began to dread reading pages involving the main character. I read 2/3rds of the book and just couldn't make myself read another sentence. Very disappointing. ( )

While this book is undeniably well-written, I ultimately did not enjoy it. I spent the first half wondering what the frick was going on, and when the answers were finally revealed, I thought the plot dissolved into silliness and violence. ( )

A mystery set in Victorian England, with gothic and steampunk elements. This was a good story but I also found it frustrating. Barnes uses some wonderful descriptions and can set the mood but at times it seems overdone as the words start contradicting themselves.

Barnes populates his London with many intriguing characters but they were mainly left in the background. I would have liked to learn more about the Archivist, Madame Innocenti, Mina... I think the problem was that they exist in the story's now but have no backhistory and this made them seem rather two dimensional. I was left without much understanding even of those secondary characters we do see more of, like the Somnambulist and Cribb.

Of the two main characters, Moon is not very likeable and the Narrator not very reliable. At one point we are even told by the narrator that everything he had just told us in the last few pages were lies. I found that rather exasperating. It's one thing to be told right from the beginning that he will not tell the complete truth; we can have fun wondering what is suppossed to be real and what not. But I thought the narrator having fun at our expense like that was unnecessary. It didn't move the story along.

But, though choppy, this was also easy to read and I sped through the last half, wanting to find out what the heck was going on in Barne's London. ( )

Not a bad book, but the ending was REALLY weird!!!! Not in a bad way, for certain, but really really strange nonetheless! Fun book if you like the turn-of-the-century London fog mysteries. ( )

Reminds me of "A Series of Unfortunate Events". With more gore. And less plot. It's nice that your characters are "cool", but it would be a lot better if they advanced the plot. I'm sorry I bothered finishing it, since "what happens next" has nothing to do with making sense or explaining things, just cramming more bad fantasy tropes in. ( )

Delighfully creepy, humorously sinister,and full of n'er-do-wells, this first novel by Jonathan Barnes is an entertaining read. Mr. Barnes greatest strength may perhaps be character building/character descriptions, many of which left my skin crawling. His London is subversively under attack by multiple factions, led by men eager for power, any kind of power. This was a rip-roaring ride of a read. ( )