You know how sometimes you go to a museum and you see a painting by a not-so-famous artist, and you think, "Oh that's pretty," and then you see one by a master, and you're not sure if it's pretty but you know it's glorious? Well, Burning Bright is sitting next to Daniel Defoe on my bookshelf, and it's a similar situation. The cover is pretty, Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience are accessible but thought provoking, the characters are in general decent and developed, and the writing seems both effortless and well edited. Yet the plot set up in the book--that of a young boy and girl losing their innocence amid their experiences in 1790s London--is a bit too thinly spread (it has to show multiple losses of innocence, the mysterious side of William Blake, the political tensions caused by the French Revolution, and more) to provoke as much thought as a masterwork would. I finished the book and thought, "Pretty writing; experience, innocence, hmm."

There should be a lot more to say about the transition between innocence and experience, but the book never seemed to get there and some aspects of the story distract me from properly considering any deeper message. For example, why did Tracy Chevalier set the story when she did, rather than in the years after William Blake went somewhat crazy and believed himself a prophet? If the point is to link transitioning between binaries to Blake's life, shouldn't there be a greater parallel in the plot to Blake's own discovery of the theme? Does it make sense to write a book inspired by Blake, and then use Blake alternately as a mystery-man or superhero who guards young girls' innocence and bestows books unto barely literate urchins? And aside from concerns about Blake's poor role in the book, there is a disturbing feel of an overly convenient resolution to the book, and such an ending would only be forgivable if it were unpacked a bit in a sequel. (Especially if the theoretical sequel featured prophet-man Blake.)

Erst einmal deutliche Kritik am Verlag, der nur um an Chevaliers Erfolgsroman Das Mädchen mit dem Perlenohrring anzuknüpfen, diesen extrem kitschigen Titel wählte, der nichts mit dem Original (Burning Bright) zu tun hat.

Warum nun diesen Roman lesen, der sicher nicht gerade ein literarisches Meisterwerk ist? Weil ich seit einiger Zeit um William Blake herumeiere, von dem ich einige Illustrationen und Bilder kenne, aber keines seiner literarischen Werke. Weil mich die zwar einerseits interessieren, aber andererseits abschrecken: Zu religiös inspiriert, zu komplex, zu sehr in einem Jahrhundert verhaftet, das so weit entfernt ist, zu wenig weiß ich, welcher Übersetzung ich vertrauen soll (und dem Original bin ich hier wirklich nicht gewachsen).

Andererseits begegnet er mir gerade ständig. In Olga Tokarczuks Der Gesang der Fledermäuse übersetzt die Hauptfigur zusammen mit einem ehemaligen Schüler seine Texte. Gerade habe ich Philip Pullmans ersten beiden Bände der Trilogie His Dark Materials gelesen und beim Recherchieren stößt man immer wieder darauf, dass Pullman von Blake und seinen Kommentaren zu Miltons Paradise Lost beeinflusst war. Als ich jetzt den Chevalier-Roman las, kam die Sprache auf den Friedhof Bunhill Fields. Ich erinnerte mich, dass ich dort vor Jahren das Grab Blakes sah. Aber ach nein, wie ich jetzt herausfand, handelt es sich gar nicht um den Originalplatz des Grabes, wenn auch um den richtigen Friedhof. Erst vor ganz kurzer Zeit hat sich jemand bemüht, den historischen Ort des Grabes zu ermitteln. Und wer wohl? Philip Pullman, Präsident der Blake Society (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunhill...). So schließt sich wieder ein Kreis.

Gerade eben läuft so nebenbei eine der Dokus auf ZDFNeo. Es geht um Berge und Reinhold Messmer spricht darüber, dass es kein Freude ist, die ihn mit Bergsteigen verbindet, sondern dass es um die Begegnung mit sich selbst geht, wenn man einen Berg besteigt. Und er zitiert Blake, der einmal davon sprach, das Großes passieren kann, wenn sich Mensch und Berg begegnen.
Blake ist gerade überall!

Und nun das Buch von Chevalier. Kein Meisterwerk, aber sehr lesbar, sehr gut recherchiert. Es enthält ein bisschen weniger Blake als erhofft, auch wenn ein paar seiner Verse angenehm eingestreut sind, wir ihn erleben, wie er mit Kindern fast besser klarkommt als mit Erwachsenen, dass er mit der Französischen Revolution sympathisiert.

Das ist alles nett, für mich wurde aber ein anderer Aspekt bedeutsamer: Der Roman beschreibt das London des späten 18. Jahrhunderts sehr gut. Das trifft vor allem auf Astleys Theatre (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astley%...) zu, in dem der moderne Zirkus, mit runder Manege und Clowns, quasi erfunden wurde. Wie die Menschen wohnten, wie die Kneipen funktionierten, welche Berufe es gab, welche Vergnügungen, welche Armut. Das alles gefällt mir sehr, auch wenn ich an mancher Stelle fast das Gefühl hatte, Chevalier versucht zu viel Historisches reinzupacken (dass die Kinder einmal auch noch an Bedlam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlem...) vorbeikommen, schien mir z.B. zu viel, aber Bedlam als Kulisse ist natürlich auch arg verlockend). Mir gefiel auch, wie die Arbeit ds Knöpfemachens beschrieben wird – ein Handwerk, das wir uns alle kaum noch vorstellen können. Diese Details machen den Roman lesenswert.

Wer also etwas über das London dieser Zeit erfahren möchte, wird hier auf jeden Fall fündig. Wer wirklich etwas über Blake wissen möchte, sollte nicht (wie ich) weiter um ihn herumeiern, sondern anfangen seine Bücher zu lesen.

This was a reread for me.
I flew through this book in two days.
I enjoyed this book however the ending was unsatisfactory.
I needed to know what happened to the characters and I didn't find this out.
Was the inclusion of William Blake necessary? It reminded me of "The Household" by Stacey Halls in which Charles Dickens is mentioned but does not really have any role in the story.

Quite good but not so good as other book I’ve read if hers. 7/10

Innocence and experience - opposites, or are we all in the middle of the river...

2.5 stars. This book overall and unfortunately, fell flat for me. It was just an okay read.

What was of interest and kept me reading, was that there was a circus element in the story and the family of which the book was about, got sucked into the magic and promise of the circus boss and the atmosphere. If it were not for the circus thread running throughout the entire book, I might not have forced myself to finish the book; I have a thing for the circus. Anything circus related and I’m in.

As it was, there were some other engaging parts of the story, but not enough to propel a higher rating.

I like this authors writing but feel that this particular one fell short of expectations. I’ve got another one of her books in my TBR stack and am hoping it will elicit a more pleasurable reading experience than this one.

Tracy Chevalier gives us an image of William Blake as he might have been viewed by his neighbors and friends in London of 1792. Three young people discover Blake's London through their encounter of him as their neighbor and his poems, London, and his collection: Songs of Innocence and Songs of Experience. A brother and sister, Jem and Maizie Kelleway come with their parents to London. They are invited by the great Phillip Atley, circus manager, because their father is a furniture maker. They live next door to William Blake and his wife, Kate. Living close, as well, is Maggie, a worldly wise youngster whose parents scrabble for a living. All three are mentored by William Blake who allows them to satisfy their curiosity about his home, and printing press. He introduces them to London through his eyes and his poetry. He is a mild mannered super hero who helps them when they need it most. This is a charming book, that seems especially suitable for young audiences, and for those of us who enjoy another view of William Blake.

William Blake was an unusual man, most say. This lovely little novel would seem to reinforce that view. Set in 1792-1793 during “The Terror” times of the anti-Jacobite period in England, it focuses on two adolescents, Maggie and Jem, and through them paints a picture of Blake and the times they all lived in.
In tenor, the book feels quite Dickensian, but written more lightheartedly and with a current day sensibility. One absorbs each of the characters and understands them as real, becomes invested in them and their experiences, and is sure one would like them.
A quiet, simply told tale, and one I will recall with pleasure.

It can't be easy to be Tracy Chevalier - everyone expects a home run when her next book comes up, and ten billion critics all judge whether or not her effort succeeded. Few of her critics are willing to research the setting, the subject, or the historical context before espousing their opinions. Not so for Ms. Chevalier: the time and care she took in her research shows throughout this book and is invisible to most of the readers. (What I really want to say is 'what a bunch of whiners!' Here is a great book, well written, interesting subject, great characters, excellent context, and you want to complain that it failed to meet the amorphous anticipations even you can't articulate? Puleese!)

With this book I have completed the Chevalier canon, and I can assure everyone that she is a gifted writer, a conscientious researcher, an imaginative storyteller, and has a wonderful sense of compassion. Any of her books will have you thinking about their characters for a long time after you put the book away. Considering her body of work as a whole there is an interesting consistency of characters from book to book - you could almost lift them from one timeline and place them in another, change the name, and have the same person. There is a graduate student thesis here, in connecting the characters from work to work and what that would indicate about the creative process...

While the inclusion of Wm Blake as the historical figure anchors Burning Bright, the main plot line of the book is the growing relationship between Jem and Maggie. By the time the book ended I wanted to know how their story ended, and while we have an idea where they're headed we don't really know (a tribute to their unpredictable natures, perhaps). It is true that Blake figures less directly in this book, which only reflects what we know, or more accurately don't know, about the man. We can only know him at a distance. What we can do, and what Chevalier did, was to illuminate the moment in which he lived and worked. Standing in Blake's shoes, his poetry suddenly reads differently and I am enriched in my understanding. Who could ask for more? Thank you Ms. Chevalier. Well done.

I really, really wanted to like this book due to a long standing love for anything Blake related, so far though it seems very heavy handed, especially in regards to symbolism and plodding language.

The center of the story William Blake is viewed at a distance through the eyes of an experienced city girl and an innocent country boy, both in their early teens; this provides the obvious vehicle for discussion of Blake’s character and work (songs of innocence and experience). Already halfway through, I have decided to stick with it until the end, engrossing it is not! (So far)....

For the most part, reading this book felt like reading a YA-novel. That's perfectly fine, don't get me wrong, just not at all what I expected.
Nevertheless I enjoyed it immensely, mostly the descriptions of 18-century London, the way people lived, treated each other, a touch of politics.

The end was quite sudden, it was like the threads needed to be woven into the carpet, no time to waste. A sudden change of pace (and scenery) that for me took away some of the charm of the book.

Am citit cartea acum ce vreme și îmi amintesc că o împrumutasem de la bibliotecă. Nu m-am uitat la autor și sincer nici când am făcut-o nu mi-am amintit că autoarea este cea care a scris Fata cu cercel de perlă, o carte care mie mi-a plăcut foarte mult. Cred că asta m-a făcut să îi dau cinci stele fiindcă dacă mi-aș fi amintit de Fata cu cercel de perlă aș fi avut multe așteptări, prea mari pentru această carte. Ca de obicei autoarea se inspiră din fapte reale și surprinde mentalitatea britanică în timpul revoluției franceze, având în centru o familie și o copilă londoneză. Narațiunea curge ușor, frumos, în stilul caracteristic al autoarei. La un moment dat, totul este oarecum previzibil, dar mie cel puțin, mi-a plăcut așa de mult cartea încât am trecut peste. Nu este acel gen de previzibil care să adă în clișeu, cu siguranță nu. Când tragi linia îți dai seama că ai citit o carte bună. În cazul meu așa s-a întâmplat.