PSYCHOLOGIST reads PIRANESI🏛 | Book Review: Fantasy or Mental Illness?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 июл 2024
- In this video I’ll be reviewing Piranesi by Susanna Clarke from a psychologist perspective. This is an in-depth review with loads of spoilers focusing on the psychological aspects of this book. All opinions are my own and diagnoses are based on my theoretical knowledge and work experience. I’m excited to share my theories with you guys 🤓
☞ Want to support me? Head over to my Patreon: : / leandabrooks
☞ Previously: • ONCE UPON A BOOK CLUB ...
☞ Subscribe: / leandabrooks
Follow me on:
Instagram - leandabrook...
Goodreads - / leanda-brooks
If you'd like to contact me, (business only) you can find me at:
Email - leandabrooks@gmail.com
☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞
Piranesi by Susanna Clarke
Piranesi's house is no ordinary building: its rooms are infinite, its corridors endless, its walls are lined with thousands upon thousands of statues, each one different from all the others. Within the labyrinth of halls an ocean is imprisoned; waves thunder up staircases, rooms are flooded in an instant. But Piranesi is not afraid; he understands the tides as he understands the pattern of the labyrinth itself. He lives to explore the house.
There is one other person in the house-a man called The Other, who visits Piranesi twice a week and asks for help with research into A Great and Secret Knowledge. But as Piranesi explores, evidence emerges of another person, and a terrible truth begins to unravel, revealing a world beyond the one Piranesi has always known.
#Piranesi #SusannaClarke #IReadPiranesi #PsychologistReadsPiranesi #PsychologyReview #PiranesiPsychology #PsychologistReads #PsychologyPiranesi #LeandaBrooks
☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞☞
❤︎ The royalty free music I used can be found in the audio library for RUclips creators & Epidemic Sound❤︎
Chapters:
00:00 Summary
03:19 Hypothesis
07:19 Traumatized
11:23 Huxleyan Psychedelic Experience
12:45 DID
14:55 Schizophrenia
18:06 Shutter Island
19:40 Doubts
21:03 Easter Eggs 
Развлечения
I'm so excited to hear your thoughts and theories! What did you think of the therapist versus patient one? Or the diagnosis?
Thanks so much for spending time here💙
OMG! Your theory blew my mind 🤯! can't wait to reread the book with this diagnosis in mind.I was thinking of your second diagnosis prior to listening to your analysis. I really like your theory of Sarah Raphael. Piranesi dreams of the faun standing in a snowy forest and speaking to a female child; a reference to Lucy and Mr.Tumnus from The Lion, the Witch and the wardrobe. And Dorsetshire aka Dorset from Ketterley is from is known for its seaside cliffs reminiscent to the halls, the fish and birds found in the The House.
@@soushiejagadesh5006 haha I'm glad to hear it. This video took some time to prepare but in the end I'm pretty confident about the different theories (especially DID). And I'm also starting to believe more and more in the 'Shutter Island' theory 😅 Yeah I noticed that. The author also quoted C.S. Lewis at the beginning of the book. I didn't know about Dorsetshire. Thanks for leaving your thoughts 🤗
I don't think you can really analyse this book without reference to house of leaves, in my mind the whole story could be taking place in the house on ash tree lane - the endless labyrinth, the minotaur, piranesi even refers to his endless series of halls and vestibules as 'the house'
Susana Clarke, the author, has written a bit about her thinking behind this book. It wasn't begun as a metopher for any one thing (though it is certainly a layered story that contained many metaphors about many things), it began with her longtime interest in the Piranesi drawings and the images of the house of and Piranesi house that came into her mind, and evolved from there.
But Clarke realized part-way through writing that it was a metaphor for her experience of isolation from the world through ten years or so chronic fatigue syndrome so severe that she was frequently bed-bound and could no longer write. (My understanding is that she still has chronic fatigue syndrome, but that she had some significant improvement in symptoms, and started writing Piranesi once she was well enough to write again).
I also have chronic fatigue syndrome, and this book was incredibly relatable to me on this level. This illness and the limitations and isolation it imposes, are a surreal existance, and one that feels almost completely cut off from who you were before you became ill. There's a very real way in which you lose your *self*, and can even forget the fullness and vibrancy with which you used to live life. And it feels like the world forgets you too. And certainly it feels like a prison. I can't remember if she said this or not, but I think that Raphael, the police detective who finds Piranesi, is meant to be her husband: the one person who could break through the veil of illness and see her for who she really was. And I'm pretty sure the researcher who studies Piranesi represents, at least somewhat, doctors, who are extremely unhelpful with chronic fatigue syndrome.
I don't think every single thing in the book is meant to symbolize some aspect of living with chronic fatigue syndrome, I don't think she meant it to be read as such a direct allegory, it is also simply a story that she wanted to tell, and through which she explored many ideas. I would be very surprised if certain that mental illness and cults were on her mind to some degree as she wrote. And, of course, everything I wrote above about chronic fatigue syndrome is true for many people who experience mental illnesses too.
I was very interested to hear your review of one of my all time favorite books (her first book, Jonathan Strange and Mister Norrel is also one of my all time favorites even though it's sooooooo different!). But I'd recommend looking up what Susanna Clark has written and said in interviews about this book, I think you'll find it interesting!
Thanks so much! It’s been over a year that I made this video so it is really interesting to look up the article. I wasn’t aware of it so thank you 😊 and for your elaborate reaction.
I have DID and this book felt so relevant to me. Regardless of the authors intentions I almost started crying at some of the descriptions. Particularly the "hush. I'll take care of us both" passage. This was such an unexpected and validating read. Thanks for your review!
First of all thanks so much for being so open and honest, and leaving this reaction. That means a lot to me. As you regardless if the author had these intentions it does feel like our main character is struggling with some internal conflict/mental health issue. That's the beauty of books. It's subjective and you can receive the message however you want. I'm glad that in your case it made you feel validated. Also I did read somewhere that Susanna Clarke wrote this book with mental health in mind so who knows! Thanks so much for watching 🤗
Brilliant take on this book! I had a tough time with this book as the beginning was so overly descriptive, but am glad I stuck with it. I found the last couple of pages very touching when Matthew said to the old man he was actually a king!
I love this video! As soon as I finished the last page my initial reaction was what the hell did I just read. Then slowly it had my wheels turning and I came to a similar conclusion as you about him actually being held in a cult like place and having been brainwashed. I think maybe the author may ha e left it up to the readers interpretation as well because I could have easily taken it as a fantastical type of thriller as well. I do think it is more on the psychology realm though, but I am not a professional. It would be interesting to hear the authors thoughts on this book at some point...you should interview her!!! I am definitely going to read this book again!
I'm so glad to hear it Jen! This video took a while to make. I needed to make a coherent story from little hints lol and form a hypothesis that would actually fit a diagnosis. It's so interesting to hear you came to the same conclusion. I think she did leave it up to the readers interpretation. Soushie found an article saying that the author did have mental health in mind (being trapped in ones mind) but she didn't want to say more about it. It's such a unique book and yes I would love to interview the author. Just to see how she reacts to my theory (especially the Shutter Island one lol).
Susanna Clarke has written a bit about this book and what it is about for her/the ideas behind writing it. You should check them out! (A google search should bring them up). I don't think it's meant to just be read any one way, but Clarke said that as she was writing it, she realized that a lot of it was a metaphor for her experience of isolation as someone with severe chronic fatigue syndrome for many years.
Thank you for your analysis. I think you're the only RUclipsr that had a similar line of thought.
Please if you didn't read the book, ignore my comment.
I devoured this book in two days. Simply couldn't put it down. When I was through part 3 I started to have hints The World was a manifestation of his consciousness. As the book goes on, I was convinced Piranesi had some sort of multiple personality that he was suppressing and that perhaps The world was his safe place, he created to protect himself from something. In the end, I understood the story as being an allegory to a mental disorder manifested (or maybe preexistent and just nurtured in the cult) because of the captivity. There is just so much to talk about the book and the character... utterly brilliant!
I’m no expert but I don’t think that the universe described was an imaginary element from a mental health issue BUT I do see where you are coming from! Very interesting take on the book so thank you for sharing it with us.
Hi Juliana! Thanks, it's def a subjective reading experience 😊 do you have a theory about the universe?
I'm in congruence with Juliana. When multiple people describe the halls identically, and with the savior character, Rafael, enjoying her time in the house so much that she continues to visit there. Rafael cannot be his therapist because once you understand things like DID, Bipolar, Schizophrenia you would be unlikely to fall into them, she seems to have romanticized the house a bit, what is the metaphor there?
I love your last theory!!!! This fits perfectly!
Thank you for you theories! Very interesting point of view!
I adore your theories, they are so well thought through! The one where Raphael may have been a therapist trying to decipher Piranesi's mind is so fascinating! I re-read the book and definitely saw DID being highly plausible :)
Thanks so much 🤗
I just finished the book and OMG you put words on my thoughts and feelings and I love this book even more ! Great great analysis !
Thanks so much 🙏🏻😊
I enjoyed how the house is given a universal spirit that the character confides in and seeks care and comfort from as a way to anchor his heart to something with purpose 🌹
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and theories! Just finished Piranesi and i absolutely dislike open endings 😩 I was so frustrated because i enjoyed the story but in the end so many questions remained, and your thinking helped me build my own view of Piranesi ❤ actually prefer to believe that the House did exist, Its just much better than to think i read a book about a poor guy alone in someone’s basement… 😂
Haha 😂 that’s so true. My explanation is kind of depressing come to think of it.. glad to hear this video helped you out on some way ☺️
Hi Leanda! I'm a bit late to this video but I loved it. I think Piranesi is one of my favorite reads of this year so far! I really enjoy books that spark debate and so many interpretations depending on who read it. I think your diagnosis align a lot to what I saw in this book myself, especially the multiple personality disorder that piranesi suffered. I think I took it in a more fantastical context, especially because of the whole plotline with Rafael... I think the house really is a different world, but I think entering a different world still acts like trauma for the brain, because in a way its an unnatural experience and one that completely affects your sense of reality. I did consider it was a hallucination up until half the book but then there were too many people involved in the same hallucination and I chose to take it as real fantastical world . A bit like a world of ideas, that as explained in the book, bleed from one world and become part of this new one (which would explain seeing a man who was also a statue). I honestly don't think there is one single explanation to this book and it depends on what you want to see that is what the story will represent! I had something similar with a book called the wicker king (I think you would also like it!) where you kinda think its all about mental health but there is one particular moments that makes you question if there is a link between that mental health/illness and an actual fantastical world. Makes for a very interesting read. Again, loved the video!!
Hi Dina! I'm glad you loved it. It's definitely a subjective read. That's a great way to look at it. I think there is definitely a mental health aspect (Susanna Clarke also mentions this in an interview) but how deep you dive into it is for the reader to decide. I think seeing it as a fantasy world that causes the trauma is also a very plausible explanation. It's also what the artist Piranesi did with his prison paintings.
Oh great, thanks for the tip 🤗 and thanks so much for leaving a comment Dina!
As a psychologist who just read this, I can agree with everything you said. I believe both theories (mental disorder/fantasy as it is) are correct and the ending is open for interpretation. Now, the monkey and the child also confuse me. The fantasy one can explain it in a sense that there was a child who got stuck in this world of Ancient Knowledge (as it is said that children can pass through easily, I believe), could not get out and died there. The monkey too, could be the specimen that was on the very verge of another evolutionary step and therefore communicated with the Acient. However, if this was correct, there would've been more skeletons of either monkeys or children, for this particular child cannot be the only one in the world that got stuck. So maybe it is that all the skeletons are victims, but the victims of the Occultist and not The house. Although, what on earth would he use them for I have no idea. BUT if we stick to the DID theory all the skeletons could actually be fragments of personalities. Basically, only The Other, The occultist and The police officer (therapist) are real, everyone else is a persona inside Piranesi. Yet it doesn't work because other people HAVE written about them as well. NOTHING MAKES SENSE YET IT IS SO BEAUTIFUL. I am also curious about birds. Why the birds and fish and not all the animals? At one point there's a quote about birds having like a hive mind of sorts, but if that's the way to enter, then what about bees? I would also like to preface that the birds were right, with their original prophecy: A message. Obscure writing. Innocence eroded.
Hi Teodora! Thanks so much, that means a lot coming from a fellow psychologist. I love the child theory that you mention and it just being a fantasy. That's the fun thing about this read, it is all so subjective. I agree there would've been more skeletons but its a really big place so maybe they were just in the other halls.
Haha yes absolutely nothing makes sense. As in there is not one theory that ticks all the boxes. I would love to talk to the author and just get a little bit of insight into the book.
So true, just the birds and some fish. Maybe they represent the air and water. They did find him in a little house at the sea. So that kind of makes sense.
@Teodora Roksa The monkey is mentioned by Arnes-Sayles on page 92: "Some animals have the facility. Cats. Birds. And I had a capuchin monkey in the early eighties who could find the way any time."
What a wonderful video. Thank you for your thoughts. Whilst I was reading the book I looked at it from both points of view - that Piranesi was a prisoner of a mental illness and the this was a story in the urban fantasy genre. In the end I was still debating between the two.
I loved the review. I think that the mental health reading of the book is a must yet there is no need to settle to one diagnosis but rather to focus on the essence of Trauma. The reason why the characters don't remember their families (the brainwashed woman also did not remember her past) is probably more metaphorical because Trauma creates a Before and After. This is why multiple conditions can be associated with the events of the story. PTSD is another possibility. The memory loss, I believe, is more metaphorical.
The association with Pan - panic led me to think that Trauma is the center of the story. Unlike Shutter Islan where a realistic crime story unveils a mental breakdown, Piranesi stays in the realm of magical realism where there is no one concrete answer ruthed in reality.
I feel that Piranesi is more of an analogy for a lot of the mental health experiences you talked about, without literally being the case in the book. From the text it seems that it is very apparent that the House is real. It is a physical place where people's actual bodies enter. 16 goes back there even after Piranesi leaves because she likes the quiet. Piranesi even brought his decorations back from it in the "real" world. It is also apparent that the dissociative personality is a result of the House itself, and it is known by both the Other and the Prophet that spending time within the House causes this dissociation. All that being said, the book does seem to clearly approach mental illness from this perspective; that it is a bittersweet place that is Real and is experienced not just a state of mind. That there is a quiet beauty to the solitude and peace of dissociation, that may be a positive experience after too long being scraped raw by the noise of the "real" world. That's why the other captive cries when they return, and it's why 16 goes there on her own after discovering it's existence. The books also implies that there is a clarity to this state, in the last chapter when Piranesi can see the truth of people from their statues rather than the appearance they show the world. Very good book, lots of food for thought.
Yes. Thank you. I was about to type a dissertation, but you said it perfectly.😂
Amazing video! I just finished the book and this is exactly what I needed! Also, Doors of Perception is a classic. Not much deep digging is needed to find it...
I think it depends on where you're from. In my country I had never heard of it and it was def not on the 'read your classic' lists. I'm intrigued by it and how the author took different elements and combined them to write this story.
Did you read Doors of Perception? If so do you think it's worth it? 😊
Loved this reading. I'm not well versed enough in psychology to estimate validity of the theory in any sensible manner, but to me it sounds plausible.
One thing that makes me almost certain the book is allegory for some form of mental (and largely subconscious) struggle, is the naming scheme of the characters. Capitalized 'Other' is an symbolic order concept from Lacanian psychoanalysis. 'Piranesi' refers to an artist, and in this book, more specifically, to art depicting endless imagined prisons (prisons of the mind). The Prophet is someone who delivers a divine message and the name Raphael is formed from the words 'he has healed' and 'God'.
I just love how this book allows for so many readings. I can't form a coherent theory of it at all, but I'm pretty sure with some effort one could easily form a multitude of convincing theories about an inner struggle, but also about the philosophical, cultural and artistic shift from the enlightenment to modernism, and the prevalent contemporary nostalgia for pre-modernist values, art and thinking.
I feel like I'm kind of alone on this, but I feel there's a lot of similarities between Piranesi and Bram Stokers Dracula. Both stories are told in a journal form (albeit the latter with alternating authors), both heavily nod to the more or less scientific attempts to understand the inner workings of the mind (Stoker was obsessed with Freudian psychoanalysis) and both have a surface-level story that is interesting to read, even if one doesn't understand the underlaying story, references and meanings at all. To me Piranesi is far superior, but I did enjoy Dracula too.
Your explanation of the naming scheme is so interesting! How did I not think of that? It sounds so logical. And isn't the cop named Rafael? That's the archangel right? The saviour. Oh wait I was too excited about this lol you also mention Raphael/Rafael.
I agree! I think you can form multiple theories about this book and that is the beauty of it. I have never read something that could be looked at from so many perspectives. It all holds meaning and at the same time none at all. I think I read somewhere that the author did write Piranesi with mental health in the back of her mind. But she doesn't specify what part and yes it is also highly philosophical and artistic (great explanation btw!).
I read Bram Stokers Dracula last November. I mean I can see it. Of course not the writing style but the concept of it being something supernatural/not off this world combined with the psychological elements and the fact that it is a journal. In some way even the relationship of the characters are kind of the same (student versus master turns to more of a hostile relationship).
Clarke didn't begin the book with any specific allegory in mind I don't think (or at least not that she's spoken about), but as she got deep into the writing process she realized that it had become a metaphor for her isolation as a person living with very severe chronic fatigue syndrome for ten years or so (her health improved prior to writing Piranesi, she still has CFS, but much less severe than previously). She was mostly bed bound for many years, a deeply isolationg experience that cuts you off from the person you were before you became ill. And of course there are many parallels here to the experience of mental illness as well, though that tends to be more metaphorically isolating than literally so.
I love your comparison to Dracula, another one of my favorite books!
thank you for that excellent analysis and interesting perspective! I just finished reading the book for the first time and will definitely throw myself into it soon again.
what I wanted to say is that I saw a lot of parallels to Plato's allegory of the cave. did anyone else?
I also found and did research on the artist Giovanni Piranesi! I found it quite interesting and his drawings are amazing.
loved this book
Another easter egg you didn't mention is the allusion to Narnia, when Piranesi recalls his dream of the faun talking to a female child in a snowy forest x)
I had the same thought while reading this book the first time. A couple of years ago I worked with a young person who was diagnosed with DID and it felt so familiar to how she talked about her experiences with her alters. I thought maybe I was reaching or was reading too much into this especially since we don't have any information about his childhood. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and making me not feel crazy for seeing this in the story.
Reading this novel through the lens of contemporary psychology is probably a lot less illuminating than reading it through the longer history of ideas that Clarke explicitly invokes throughout the novel. The novel alludes repeatedly to figures like Owen Barfield and C. S. Lewis who, in books like Saving the Appearances and The Discarded Image, deal with the idea of our having lost an enchanted sense of reality. Interpreting the House as a feature of Piranesi's own inner mental world--or worse, as a mere product of mental delusion--is to fall prey to the modern disenchantment of reality that the novel overtly resists. Check out Charles Taylor's Secular Age and Max Weber as well as Barfield and Lewis to get a much clearer sense of the conversation that Prianesi so brilliantly enters. Viewing Clarke's protagonist as mentally ill or as having been brainwashed is simply to miss all that is most wonderful in the novel.
That’s the beauty of books. It’s a matter of perspective. You can choose one or the other, I’m just here to shed some light on one of those from the knowledge that I have acquired over the years. Thanks for sharing yours!
I just finished the book and came to YT to understand it better. I just want to add that throughout I thought that Piranesi is a very sweet character and the 'house' he's in represents either a bad physical or mental state he's trapped in, so he invents all these exciting rooms, which would appear quite monotonous and boring to a normal person. I thought it was really sweet how he constantly had some work to do, and kept himself occupied, it felt like some trauma response.
I find your analysis on point. I had similar conclusions, too. I come from a psychodynamic/Jungian angle, so I might use different words to describe what you're saying, but I feel that the dissociations that Piranesi experienced were for self-preservation.
The Other mentioned that "this place" causes him to lose his memories while he (Ketterly) had a safeguard against it. I believe that the effects of what is happening to him (be it trauma, a science fiction reality, or some sort of paranormal event) is too much of an enormous force for his mind to comprehend, so to adjust to this setting, he has to dissociate from whatever he's actually feeling so that he can become an entity that can withstand whatever horrors he is experiencing.
I think Piranesi has tremendous difficulty with adapting to his situations and just when he begins to find meaning in his suffering, he finds that there is another place which he has forgotten and he has to bring his meaning with him back to that world or else his "hero's journey" would be for nothing (referencing Joseph Campbell).
It's a very startling, unsettling book and it left me feeling haunted. I also want to go back and re-read it immediately and I probably will either tonight or tomorrow (I've only just now finished it). I agree with the dissosiative experiences. Thanks for looking up that Huxely reference. I had forgotten to do that and it helps in my understanding. I haven't watched to the end of your video - I paused it to type this - but Piranesi, the Italian artist, might be another area to look into if you haven't already. His art, from the 1700s is remarkably surreal and terrifying.
Edit - you also covered the artist - yeah, it was pretty crazy. I love your interpretation of Pan as well.
Thanks so much for leaving such an elaborate reaction! I love how you mention that it is a very startling and unsettling book. I never thought about it like that but it is. It leaves you with a kind of empty feeling. Like something is not right even though the problem seems to be fixed (in the end).
I also love your theory about the dissociation being self preservation for a paranormal event or science fiction reality. I only ever looked at it from a trauma perspective but seeing it in these different ways leaves more open for interpretation and gives it more of a fantasy element. So I could definitely see it being a paranormal event.
Have you reread the book yet? If so any new theories? 😏 I really do hope we get to hear it from the author herself one day.
Actually I did! haha. The second time I listened to it on audible because I wanted to share it with my partner who "doesn't have time to read" (Whatever that means). I approached interpretation the second time based on Hermeneutics (a guide for interpreting literature which I believe was first applied to religious texts). I found that it was able to have meaning on each level: Literal, Allegorical, Moral, and Spiritual. It was very interesting seeing it through that lens.
I also felt much more settled when I reached the conclusion the second time because instead of trying to "figure out", I could sort of sit back and observe more critically. Every single line is so deliberate it just amazes me. : )
I am totally on board with your psychological take on the novel. The idea of Piranesi being captive and under the Other's power was made pretty clear in the book.
As you note - the name Piranesi is stolen from a 18C Italian engraver whose works often portrayed fantastic etchings of prisons much like the one in which the protagonist in the book is nominally held.
I love your reference to Shutter Island and the policewoman/therapist suggestion. Can't really believe that you've never heard of Aldous Huxley though! Brave New World, no?
(To go off at a tangent - in Kenneth Grahame's children's book "Wind in the Willows" Ratty and Mole, a dreamy creature, are enchanted away at dawn and encounter Pan, "The Piper At the Gates of Dawn" in the most beautiful chapter of the book - though as a child I couldn't wait to get back to the colourful exciting adventures of Mr Toad!)
I did guess that the Other was Ketterley, but for a long time I thought that Piranesi was going to be James Ritter and expected his experiences to become more and more grim and painful as Ketterley, or rather Arne-Sayles as I assumed at the time, abused him in the real world.
Other allusions my reading of the novel provoked were with Mark Z. Danielewski's House of Leaves, Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast, Jorge Luis Borges' Labyrinths stories including The Library of Babel, as well as Franz Kafka's The Trial and The Castle.
My question to you is - what do you make of the ending? Is the book hopeful or pessimistic about Matthew. Do you think that it suggests that the psychological damage done to his already fragile psyche by Ketterley's "experimentation" is beyond repair and it is better to leave him existing in some kind of benign realm, rather than restore him to an unbearable reality?
Hi Kevin! Thanks for leaving such a great comment 🙃 and for liking this video!
Sadly I had never heard of Huxley. I honestly had to google Brave New World. It just wasn't part of my education or reading list. I am curious about his work. Is it, in this day and age, still worth a read?
Yeah I had that theory as well! There is just too much background on those relationships to ignore them and think... there's nothing apart from fantasy in this story. There has to be some truth to the cult and abusive relationships.
Oh wow, I had to look those titles up but I totally get what you mean. I wish we could ask the author what inspired her to write this story. Because I just can't see it just being fantasy. There has to be more 🙈
I think the book has a hopeful ending for Matthew. He has been freed and is back in the real world but still has compartmentalized his trauma so he still sees the statues and the halls. I think it means that he is healing but he can't do it all at once. That would be too great of a change without the essential treatment. And yes that could mean that he is 'beyond repair'. Most of the people, even with the heaviest trauma's, treatment is the preferred method (albeit EMDR or IE or other types of treatments). However there are soms patients that we do not touch for fear of driving them towards a psychotic breakdown. They have found a way to live with the trauma and build up walls. If we touch to walls we risk a psychotic breakdown. And in those cases it is better to leave them. So this might be the case for Matthew as well. It is all about the person; does it interfere with daily life and how much do they suffer because of it. If Matthew doesn't, by still seeing statues and halls, then it is a hopeful ending in my opinion 😊
I just recently finished the book, and found the book through book tube. (Hearing about it spoiler free in review videos) it sounded so intriguing so i picked it up. I started the first few chapters and was really enjoying it, and i wanted to watch a RUclips video about the book to give me motivation to keep reading. I looked up piranesi and I saw your thumbnail and was so upset. Your thumbnail gives away everything in the book. I was reading it thinking of all the possibilities and then I saw your thumbnail that gave away major plot points in the book. I didn't even want to finish the book. But I did and I really enjoyed it. Not trying to hate but its like watching a movie and your friend telling you the main character dies before you even finish. :/
Hi Nina. That's an interesting comment because there are just four words (with question marks) on my thumbnail and all of them are really subjective. A lot of people commented that they just thought about the book as being a fantasy. Others think it is about something totally different. That's the fun thing about Piranesi. There's no answer. It's what you make of it. In no way I know if this is how the author meant it. I just reviewed the book from a psychologist perspective and give four different possibilities. It is all in the eye of the beholder 😊
I loved this book. I read it while a very close friend of mine was (and is still) battling with mental health issues so while the story unfolds, Piranesi suffering from mental health issues was the first thing that came to my mind. I'd love to give this book to my friend to read but I don't know what she would make of it...
Oh man, this is a super interesting theory!! I'm basic like I took it mostly at face value and thought the halls were absolutely real lolllll
I think it's a super cool theory, but I'd have to reread to see more how I feel about it. Right now I"m inclined to think that the house was real... but I also always want the most fantasy thing to be real so maybe I'm living in my own world 😂
Some thoughts on some specific points you made:
I think I interpreted as the house/imprisonment giving him amnesia AND his trauma, versus your theory which starts with trauma. I think that's a super interesting difference! And I don't think we can actually say for sure which was the intent. I think they could both equally work. I thought something with the magic of the house makes people forget. And then, because he was imprisoned the longest - because as the Other said he was the one who could survive - this created the separate personality of Piranesi from Matthew. So it was the house that caused that trauma, and that's why he has this issue being in the real world and identifying with Matthew.
And in the end, when he starts seeing the statues in the street, I interpreted it as a way Matthew was dealing with his trauma - dealing with the fact that he became used to this world, and so to comfort himself, he pretended that people in the world were the statues that he had come to know and love.
But like, the multiple personalities is a super interesting concept that I'm going to have to explore on a reread...
And also, I think the Other mentions that he specifically named Piranesi, "Piranesi" and it absolutely is in reference to those famous paintings! I think the Other does that as a joke since Piranesi is so good at finding his way through the House maze.
You've watched it! Thanks so much and thank you for such an elaborate reaction (love this about booktube).
That is really interesting! Which came first the chicken or the egg? I can see that the House gave him the amnesia and the trauma but that doesn't explain the other victim James Ritter hidden behind a wall with pneunomia, dehydration etc. That would suggest that they were held captive somewhere while exploring the house and that there is an actual parallel timeline (in the House and outside the House).
That's a good one. That he saw the people as statues was a way to comfort himself. Getting used to the real world.
One of my patrons found an article with an interview with Susanna Clarke that says the following:
While the author says she had no intention of writing a Lewis-style Christian allegory, Piranesi clearly invites interpretation. Is it a novel about writing a novel? A meditation on art? A metaphor for chronic illness? A cautionary tale of colonisation? Who is the mysterious “Other”? Who is Piranesi? Who are we?
Naturally, Clarke resists explanations, but she will say that with the character of Piranesi she set out to create an alternative to the modern psyche, “where we feel like we are kind of locked in our consciousness, inside our heads and the world is something alien and out there”, she explains. “I wanted to describe someone who is almost in communion with his world all the time.”
Here's the link to the article: www.theguardian.com/books/2021/sep/11/susanna-clarke-id-really-ceased-to-think-of-myself-as-a-writer
She also acknowledges the wink to the artist Piranesi as you say!
I thought the world was real, and Piranesi was actually there, as i got further into the book I realised that maybe he is trapped there against his knowledge. First I thought that an “expedition” of people were trapped there, and Piranesi is the last survivor, along with the Other. Where Other remembers ‘Earth’, Piranesi does not. However, you realise that the Other is not trapped at all, but can easily move back and forth and get things like shoes.
I later started to understand that the Other has trapped Piranesi there and is somehow preventing Piranesi from gaining his memories. There is something to do with memory reset and 18 months (I saw the reference a few times but ill try and catch it on re-read). The Other trapped Piranesi there cause he himself cannot explore this world without losing his mind (maybe the air in the parallel universe is preventing humans from retaining the memories).
But the entire James Rittner story threw me off. Cause if James was also in this world, how was he found in the dark room? Was he always in the dark room or did the captor (Prophet) keep in that dark room for a few days before sending him back to the parallel world.
Were many of these people a group of explorers who found something extraordinary that the humans cannot comprehend and hence everyone on ‘earth’ thinks that they are hallucinating? So I agree with the title, is it Fantasy or Mental illness? Did the trauma and mental illness make him imagine the world, or did the trauma of being trapped in the world give him a mental illness?
I agree with the thought that he is trying to find familiar faces (statues) in the everyday people he sees so that he is now adjusting to this world after being trapped for so long in the other world.
Begs the question that in today’s day and age, if anyone were to discover magic and fantastical worlds, will the society by large believe them or mark them as delusional?
Was it fantasy, and hence no one could find hi, but the police officer did find him cause she took the risk no one else even thought of? That she believed that maybe there is another world out there where he is are trapped, where she must travel to, to bring him back?
@@devanshi2193 I believe your interpretation is the correct one. While the story itself may be an allegory, the text is literal. The house was real and something about it made people forget who they are. That's why Ketterly would not stay for too long or travel too far from the entrance.
Great Review
I really enjoyed your book analysis. Throughout my reading of the book, I kept going back and forth between the idea of the Other being a cult leader that had brainwashed Piranesi or the house and the Other representing mental health (schizophrenia or something of that nature came to mind) and the police officer being a psychologist trying to bring Matthew back from the illusions he was creating in his mind. I was more inclined towards the second theory, but still felt there were holes in both of them based on different elements mentioned in the book. I do like you adding the element of multiple personalities and PTSD to the mental health theory.
Thanks for taking the time to comment 😊. I was told that the author did write the book with mental health in mind. But in the article she didn’t specify.
I'm reading Piranesi now and from the beginning I see that The Other is continuously gaslighting Piranesi.
I'd like to preface this by saying that I found this video to be very insightful and wonderful to watch. As I read the book, I found Matthew/Piranesi to be a very endearing and relatable character, and through this video, I may have learned something about myself! To that I say, thank you
I'm not sure what this says about me, and it might just be because of my preferences in writing, but I'm a bigger fan of the belief that the House, at least in the story, was an actual place. For one, its quite improbable that multiple people can all hallucinate the exact same area with the exact same dimensions and features. And though it is true that Piranesi/Matthew was stuck in there and had to be rescued eventually, the House itself was never malevolent, in fact the protagonist really liked it there.
Even after he was rescued, it is implied that he can and does go back to there whenever he pleases, and he still holds it with reverence, adhering to the thought that it had immeasurable beauty and infinite kindness. He clearly needed to be rescued, not from the house itself, but from someone keeping him and taking advantage of his connection to the house. To me, his reverence and admiration for the house is a sign of his sense of wonder to the world around him, that though the house was infinite and he could never in his lifetime chronicle every hall, vestibule, and statue, the sheer space of the house was enough for him, and that he could witness its beauty. Even at the end of all the conflict, and learning the truth, he believes that he is still "The Beloved Child of the House". When his identity as Matthew was gone, the House provided him with another one, still full of meaning. There is even a conversation that he has with Raphael that the House is in no way inferior to the "Other" world even if it does have "real" mountains rather than statues of them. Even though Piranesi/Matthew is a native of the "other" world, and it would be best to stay there, the house is and always have a place in his heart and will always be a thing worth witnessing to him, even if it is for a little bit every now and then. It would be a great shame if none of that was real.
Of course, this is all fiction, and everything can be a metaphor to something. Whether if it was real or not, it clearly served as an avenue of self-discovery for Piranesi/Matthew. No matter if the House was real or not in a narrative sense, its clear that the impact it had on our dear Protagonist, and us, is very much so.
I'm glad to hear that you found this video insightful and thank you so much for this beautiful and elaborate reaction! I can def see where you are coming from. It would take away from mental health being resolved because then the house would 'disappear' so to speak. As you say it is open to interpretation and that's the best thing about these kind of books. Thanks again!
Amazing thoughts about the book! Besides the references to Narnia, Susanna Clarke was also inspired by some short stories by Jorge Luis Borges: The Library of Babel from the book Fictions. The House of Asterion and Ibn-Hakam al-Bokhari, Murdered in His
Labyrinth from the book The Aleph.
Thanks for adding this!!
Just finished it! I get the impression that it is purposefully ambiguous to promote discussion and intrigue. Multiple personalities is an interesting one I hadn’t considered. There’s also mentions at some point in it about psychedelics. Some of these can appear to create alternate worlds that some people believe might be real places or planes of existence
Hi there! I think so too. Most stories are open to interpretation and promote discussion in my opinion 😊.
True. That’s the cult theory i mention or even the ‘shutter island’ one.
Hi ! (I'm french so forgive me if some of my sentences are weird haha)
I don't know if you read her other novel "Jonathan Strange and Mr Norell", but when I read "Piranesi", it reminded me of a scene in the first book in which one of the characters has to "use madness" to enter another place/realm (I read it a long time ago but as I remember it, one character has to meet with a "crazy old woman" who lives alone in a old and poor flat in Venice, she doesn't really speak to him or anything, but just being at her side makes him get some of this necessary madness to enter - in this case - a kind of a "feary realm". And this real is full of bridges and doors and you can get lost in it, so kind of a maze). For me it's one of the only things that links both books, but it's a very strong link. At the end of Piranesi I thought like "aaaaah ok I see what she did there", it's this kind of "opening the doors of perception" as Huxley says, using drugs or using "madness" as we used to call mental illness. And in "Piranesi", my theory was that the Guru entered some other world using drugs, but maybe his experience didn't last long enough. So he tried this experience of "using" young and mentally ill people to recreate and study this "realm".
However, is this world real or is it just in ones head ? I don't really have an opinion on that, but as you said : keeping someone who's mentally ill emprisonned, badly treated in the dark can make them hallucinate a world that some psycho guru would consider as "another realm", and maybe these young people have also been brainwashed by this guru and the doctor in believing in an other realm too.
Well that was just my thoughts about "Piranesi". I think that's the power of this book = it's very short but has so many layers that we could just talk about it for hours !
Im Dutch so no worries 😉 I appreciate your analysis! Haven’t read the other book so thanks for mentioning the link. Maybe I should read it 🤔 sounds intriguing.
This is exactly what I thought when I finished it.
Jim Morrison from the group The Doors, named his group after the quote The Doors of Perception....
When I read Piranesi, I dismissed DID because it's developed in childhood, and I kept with the idea that the House is a real place. But there was obviously something psychological going on, so I looked into dissociative amnesia. It seems like generalized amnesia (forgetting everything about one's life) gets the closest...but it doesn't totally explain the identity thing, does it? Like, at the end of the book, it seems like there are three identities or memory tracks: 1) Matthew Rose Sorensen (before House), 2) Piranesi (during House), and 3) the new person who has Piranesi's memories but is not entirely Piranesi and possibly has different mannerisms (i.e. not capitalizing nouns). I don't know, can that happen with dissociative amnesia?
Now, because of that, I'm sort of leaning towards your theory of Matthew already having DID, hence his brain is prone to creating new identities, and that's how it creates Piranesi and identity #3 (see above). However, there are two problems with this:
1) Ketterley had no way of knowing that Matthew had DID; Matthew himself probably didn't know he had DID, and DID tends to hide itself. So it would be a pretty lucky coincidence for Ketterley.
2) I'm not sure about this one, but... Like you said in the video, different identities control the body at different times. They switch back and forth. But this never happens in the book. Matthew does not remain when Piranesi is created; instead, he "goes to sleep" and Piranesi considers him as unlikely to wake up as the other dead. But I don't know, maybe that's a thing that happens with DID. And it does seem like Piranesi is still "awake" and coexists with identity #3 at the end of the book. But again, there's no indication of Piranesi taking control of the body from identity #3.
Anyway, that's what I'm thinking! It was great hearing your theories as a real psychologist. I am definitely going to be rereading this book.
And do you (or does anyone else) know if generalized dissociative amnesia (or some other kind) can involve the formation of distinct identities? Or if DID alters (identities) can "fall asleep" like that?
Sourcing note: Unfortunately I don't have a source for any of my claims about DID. I got really interested in it two years ago and consumed a ton of articles, videos, etc on the topic, so now all that info is just melded to the back of brain. I do remember some of the places I got info:
- did-research.org/
- Personal RUclips channels of people with DID: DissociaDID and...I don't remember the other one lol
- Conversations with people online who have DID
As for dissociative amnesia, this is what I read about it: www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/dissociative-amnesia#types
Thanks for leaving such an elaborate comment! I love that you even added source material. At first I also thought about dissociative amnesia stemming from PTSD or a traumatic experience but then it just didn't add up (as you say) with the different identities. As far as I know in the DSM-V dissociative amnesia is very different from having multiple personalities or splitting when experiencing trauma. So my answer would be no it cannot involve the formation of identities.
And you're right about DID. I've treated someone with that during my time at the PTSD centre and it mostly happens when talking about the trauma. A person then just switches into a different personality. I don't know if it cannot happen when sleeping/waking up. Hope other people can give you an answer as well 😊
I've heard some people with the dissociative condition you mentionned talk about this inner world they have in their head. Supposedly it can be anything, a room, a forest whatever, where their other personnalities are staying until they actually get triggered and start to front and be the one talking for the body. Is it possible that piranesi is a new personnality (because we know those people create new ones, or discover new ones from time to time) and that this labyrinth is the place he stays ? And then, somehow Matthew who would be the host of this system i can imagine, is the one that fronts again when the police officer find him ? And we know some traumatic events, like an abduction, can create fusions on certain personnalities, so maybe the fact that by the end he is not really Matthew nor piranesi, would be a sign of that ?
(I'm sorry i hope it makes sense, english isn't my first langage)
You are! I think that’s also (but it’s been a while since i filmed this lol) how i came up with the theory. Especially because of the last scene with the statues blurring into real people and back.
Hope you enjoyed reading the book!
Hi. I think there is 13 skeletons. Piranesi and the 'Other' makes 15 so that's why they talk about 16.
This book gave me the same feeling as the movie Mulholland Drive
I'm currently about halfway through the book but I needed somewhere to talk about it and youtube comments sections will have to do. I am of the belief that that this book is about a psychedelic experience. I think that piranesi is experiencing all of this while being constantly dosed and the other is keeping this up at his detriment. I also think that in this book's universe this psychedelic plane is a physical one where you could be visited by someone.
Wow I haven’t heard this one before! There’s def some references to the psychedelic. I can also see the constantly being dosed.. would explain almost everything hes experiencing. Interesting perspective and thanks for sharing!
I just read the book and one detail that it is so important are the multavitaminics that the other gives to piranesi that really make me imagine piranesi being kidnaping and remaining alive trough this , also makes me think the other world it was more an escape of reality another state of mind but not whit drougs but only perception ?
Where in the book is the "Huxleyan Psychedelic Experience" please?
Hi there! Oof it’s been a while since I read the book and my notes are gone but it is mentioned in a sentence about Laurence I believe. When they try to describe the passage to the other world.
Ok hold on I found it for you! It’s on page 107 😃
@@LeandaBrooks thank you so much for the reply. I realy appreciate it! "Piranesi" is my favorite book of all times and I love to see other reader's interpretations. Happy reading to you!
I'm not a mental health professional, but I was definitely questioning whether the House/Labyrinth was real or if it was all just in the main character's head. He's an unreliable narrator as explained in the book itself, so we know he's not trustworthy. They found Ritter in Arne-Sayers house, rather than in the Labyrinth. I also found it strange that the protagonist starts out (timeline-wise) as just Matthew Rose Sorensen, then becomes Piranesi, then after leaving, he describes himself as yet a third unnamed person including both Sorensen and Piranesi, so I can absolutely buy the multiple personalities diagnosis. Overall I think it's the author's intent to leave us questioning and not to grant us the answers, as it's way more interesting to consider the possibilities rather than to be hit over the head with the answer. Masterfully done by Susanna Clarke.
I thought this was about a Matt Sorenson in an institution and he was a murderer. I thought all the people were part of his personality and Dr K was keeping him from realizing what he did. I thought the dead bodies were his victims. Since all these other characters mostly live in his mind when they visit I figured they weren't real as represented.. idk it's a wild ride
Wow that’s an amazing perspective!! Kind of like shutter island theory I mention but with a twist. I love that this book gives everyone a different experience. Thanks for sharing yours 🤗
I always believed the house/labyrinth was the collective unconscious. You know, created by ideas coming from another world (the conscious), statues of creatures we find in mythology, mythology being influenced by myths and archetypes... Or it could simply be the mind. The lower level is flooded because water usually represents the unconscious, and the unconscious is a scary and unknown place (we don't know what's under all that water, we run when the tides come). The upper lever is the realm of air, of intellect, of higher existence... it's the higher self. So, iin a way, Piranesi is trapped in his own mind.
WoW that’s beautifully explained!
@@LeandaBrooks thank you so much ❤️
Hello, may I ask, does the book have any LGBTQ characters or themes or any hints of those? Is it an appropriate book to read in general?!
Oof it’s been a while since I read the book. There’s not a clear lgbtq theme or characters. I don’t even remember it being hinted at. And yes it is an appropriate book (depending on your definition of that) to read.
This is the only review that makes me want to read this book. I've tried and quit a few times, but your theory intrigues me more so than the idea of Piranesi being just a fantasy.
Hi Mikou! Thanks so much. That means a lot to me!
I just finished this. When I started it i thought this was a spin on creation story. A search for enlightenment, a discussion on religion or an almighty. But as it progressed that became less likely. We get snippets of this actual other world, real life world, and it made me think that maybe he was 1 mentally unstable in some way and 2 maybe in a cult. Like he could leave, but he's manipulated not to. I thought the police office was just that, but your theory she's a therapist also seems plausible. I thought she rescued him from the cult, or from being captive to Ketterley, but that he'd been held so long he had at the very least amnesia and was likely brainwashed, and he made up a fake world to live in to deal with it all. But the idea of yours of DID makes sense.
When I started to read the book a friend asked me about it, and I explained it, and she said "this isn't making sense". Then her fiancé googled the synopsis, read it out loud, and said "she's exactly right. That's it says." LOL I think she'd be even more bewildered by my explanation after completing it.
Hi Katherine! Great analysis. I agree with you that it all feels like something the main character created to cope with the horrors he had to deal with for multiple years. Because Piranesi or Matthew is taking it so far I couldn't think of any other diagnosis that would explain that kind of dissociation. Now that I think about it though it could also be a psychosis driven by trauma. Anyways thanks for dropping a comment 🤗
@@LeandaBrooks and thank you for the review and analysis. You're the only review I've seen that questioned the reality he was living in. Ie real or imagined
The problem is we are given two major wild cards: 1) a very unreliable narrator, 2) a fantastical world or environment in which he lives. That is enough to conclude that all bets are off regarding what anything really is, means, or is caused by. This book begins with a very long, and to me dull, laundry list of fantasy items or elements, the narrator's inventory of his world; overall I think it should have been a short story. What stands out most prominently for me is that it reminded me of two other writings: 1) Plato's cave allegory, and 2) Kafka's The Burrow. The first, of course, deals with peoples' contentment living in a world of mere representations because they lack awareness and understanding of the world of objects. The second deals with a character who has a pre-occupation with maintaining and improving his dwelling with its many many rooms and passages.
This is a more sensible review.
I saw a review of another RUclipsr say it was, effectively, a celebration of life! Weird.
I don't agree with your theory of him having DID. Because he has been brainwashed and led to believe he is Piranesi, somewhere in his subconscious he knows this not to be true
That’s great about this book. Everyone has their own take on it and only the author knows 😊 thanks for sharing!
One important aspect of the book, that would explain some of the inconsistencies with your theories and some occurrences in the book (such as the statement by Raphael that she didn't just see the paths to the House "metaphorically", but literally), is that the book is compiled of Piranesi's/Matthew's diary entries. In other words, everything that the reader learns is through the direct point of view of this single character. If he is delusional in some way due to a mental health disorder, then those delusions can be presented to the reader as factual occurrences when in fact they may just be the character's mind's misinterpretation of the events that occurred quite differently, or even not at all.
Hi Chris, thanks so much for writing this down. This definitely makes sense and would explain those inconsistencies.