They were all enamoured with the idea of progress and believed that whatever was new must be superior to what was old. As it merit was a function of chronology!

This booked flirted with DNF territory multiple times. The first third felt tedious and repetitive. I can embrace the unfamiliar and unknown but I prefer to have a reason to keep reading. With Piranesi I kept reading because it had to get better, right?

After a conversation The Other had with Piranesi the story began to take shape, my interest was piqued and I pushed through.

This book may have only been a few hundred pages but it felt like it kept going like one of the hundred Halls in the House. Had the book been longer it would have been easier to stop reading, but sunk cost fallacy got me and I justified a few more hours of time to reach the end.

I didn't formally log the activity in Goodreads but I did start Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell and DNF'd at some point. Because of this I had some doubt how I would fare with another Susanna Clarke novel and it's not looking good for future books. There are some loved authors that just aren't for me (Gaiman) and maybe Clarke joins those ranks of Statues in forgotten Halls that I tuck away.

Piranesi is creative, ambitious and not like any other book I read but that doesn't mean it was enjoyable. Perhaps the story is a metaphor for victims and how they deal with emotional trauma? Or maybe there is no deeper meaning and the book is what it is.

Not all books are for everyone but it's obvious I'm not the target audience here.