The Amulet of Samarkand (The Bartimaeus Sequence)

Product Information

Nathaniel is a boy magician-in-training, sold to the government by his birth parents at the age of five and sent to live as an apprentice to a master. Powerful magicians rule Britain, and its empire, and Nathaniel is told his is the "ultimate sacrifice" for a "noble destiny." Nathaniel is still sort of unpleasant in an arrogant elitist sort of way, but he has some personality now, and isn't just a generic kid protagonist. He's a career-focused dandy now, which is an intriguing shift. Character For me, they were pretty much 1-dimensional. The magicians are power-hungry, self-obsessed, egoistic, with really nothing to brag about except they could control the Spirits. Most of the time, they come off very easy to manipulate. As what Bartimaeus once said, they are all driven by power and greed. Or you know, something like that. The series is set in London during the late 1900s or possibly the early 2000s in a parallel universe where trained people can summon demons to do their bidding. Throughout history, various individuals and empires have harnessed these magical forces to obtain great power in the world. The most recent nation to do this is the British Empire (of which London is the capital) that has dominated Europe since the mid-19th century and continues to do so at the time of the story. The UK is a magical oligarchy where a ruling elite of magicians hold almost all the political, economic and cultural power. I don't know who or what recommended this to me, but I loved it. It is hilarious, adventurous, fast-paced, and creative.

Best Books for Young Adults Top Ten List". Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA). 30 July 2007 . Retrieved 18 July 2021. In Stroud's world, magicians have no power of their own - their power lies in the knowledge of how to summon (and enslave) spirits, like the djinni Bartimaeus, to do their will. These magicians are the proud, arrogant, entitled upperclass that pretty much oppress the commoners who work the city's factories and low-life jobs. They are bred for government, are not allowed to themselves breed, and thus take on apprentices instead to further the magical profession.

The Amulet of Samarkand cannot be activated or used consciously by its owner, it can only be borne.

This is a hilarious, fast-paced book about a world where many state governments are ruled by magicians. Great Britain, for example, is governed by an elite group of magicians--many of whom are greedy, ambitious, and uncaring for other people. Magicians themselves have limited powers; most of their strength stems from their ability to summon powerful demons who are obligated to do their bidding. The Amulet is only mentioned during the events of The Golem's Eye once when John Mandrake (Nathaniel) attempts to use the fact that he saved the Prime Minister and gave him the amulet to evade being imprisoned in the Tower of London. Por estos motivos no me siento conforme en puntuar al libro con 5 estrellas (y ojo, aún así podría merecerlas) PERO ha conseguido no solo que quiera terminar esta fantástica trilogía sino que quiera leer más del autor.

Nathaniel is eleven-years-old and a magician's apprentice, learning the traditional art of magic. All is well until he has a life-changing encounter with Simon Lovelace, a magician of unrivaled ruthlessness and ambition. When Lovelace brutally humiliates Nathaniel in public, Nathaniel decides to speed up his education, teaching himself spells far beyond his years. With revenge on his mind, he masters one of the toughest spells of all and summons Bartimaeus, a five-thousand-year-old djinni, to assist him. But summoning Bartimaeus and controlling him are two different things entirely, and when Nathaniel sends the djinni out to steal Lovelace's greatest treasure, the Amulet of Samarkand, he finds himself caught up in a whirlwind of magical espionage, murder and rebellion. After Nathaniel dismissed Ramuthra from the room, he returned the amulet to the hands of the Prime Minister, Rupert Devereaux. urn:lcp:amuletofsamarkan00stro:lcpdf:ba910a4e-9008-4f1b-9d99-40635be14489 Extramarc UCLA Voyager Foldoutcount 0 Identifier amuletofsamarkan00stro Identifier-ark ark:/13960/t4gm8vh2h Isbn 078681859X Lccn 2003049904 Ocr tesseract 5.3.0-3-g9920 Ocr_detected_lang en Ocr_detected_lang_conf 1.0000 Ocr_detected_script Latin Ocr_detected_script_conf 0.9943 Ocr_module_version 0.0.21 Ocr_parameters -l eng Openlibrary_edition I know they were trying to keep it to one book, but I feel like too much was left out, too much was rushed. All the major, important events were kept, but most of Nathanial's story, and a lot of the fun, minor details got left out. For the sake of brevity, I suppose. It was, however, a fine enough book, more like a good overview of the original than an equal to it. Pero... el personaje "nuevo" que coge protagonismo... lo siento demasiado plano comparándolo incluso con Nathaniel. Aunque se nota que el autor lo intenta, para mí no brilla en absoluto de ninguna manera y siento que es un engranaje que ha cobrado un poco más de importancia pero solo sirve para que la trama continúe. No lo he sentido "vivo" como pasa con el dúo Nathaniel y Bartimeo.

Story-wise, this first installment in The Bartimaeus Trilogy is respectably good. However, the writing failed to appeal to me in many ways that, were they not already in my possession, I might not even bother with the next two books. Jonathan Stroud somehow manages to write with so much distance between the narrator(s) and the readers — even when he’s telling the story in first person through Bartimaeus. This is partly because Bartimaeus is vain and patronizing, but mostly because even the first-person narrative sounds like a third-person omniscient storyteller is telling it, only with “I’s”. The other narrative is told in first person and it is, not surprisingly, more personal. It is Bartimaeus who gets to tell his story in his own words and that was a great call on part of a writer. He is a thousand-year-old jinni (let’s not call him a demon, he doesn’t like being called that). Bartimaeus makes us access the world of magic more easily. If the story wasn’t told from his point of view, it would demand a lot more explanations. You see, if it was told from a magician point of view, then all those explanations would seem tedious because they’re understood- and had it been told from a commoner point of view, there wouldn’t have been any story in this place for commoners have no idea what is going on in the world of magicians. With Bartimaeus storytelling, all the details and explanations are naturally woven into the story. Bartimaeus is very critical of the world of magicians. In this world, magicians don’t have power of their own, they bound demons (spirits) do work their magic for them. Naturally, such spirits don’t do it willing and they detest their masters. Had the story been told only from the third narrative, it would not be as nearly as fun and enjoyable.In May 1999, Stroud published his first children's novel, Buri Jonathan Anthony Stroud is an author of fantasy books, mainly for children and youths. It's tempting to compare the book to the Harry Potter series. Young boy. Magic. Sneaking around. Breaking the rules. Stern teachers. But the similarities really end there. The Ring of Solomon revisits the universe created in the Bartimaeus Trilogy, although the setting shifts from modern London to Jerusalem, 950 BC. It follows the djinni's adventures during the reign of King Solomon, who was frequently referenced in the footnotes during the trilogy. It was released in the United Kingdom on 14 October 2010 and in the U.S. on November 2, 2010. The story revolves around the troubles Bartimaeus faces while enslaved to Solomon's magicians, as he gets caught between the plots of his master to overthrow Solomon, and the schemes of Asmira, captain of the guard of the Queen of Sheba, who was sent by her to assassinate Solomon.

I am so disappointed in Nathaniel. I really am. I just miss the little boy from the first book so much. I have a feeling that he's the necessary collateral damage from the society that he lives in, and I guess that I can understand that not all of the good guys stay good and vice versa, but I really am sad that it had to end in this way. Just please tell me what is better than a morally grey 13 year old boy with a djinni as a servant? You can't can you? Despite this rather more gothic approach to the story than its predecessor, readers need not worry that Stroud has lost his flair for comedy. Footnotes, while not quite as plentiful as in the first novel, are still a veritable fountain of wit. One scene in particular in which Bartimaeus destroys an incredibly valuable artifact in the British Museum thinking it to be merely a sign with a set of written rules for the museum patrons is laugh out loud hilarious. Tropes show how literature is conceptualized and created and which mixture of elements makes works and genres unique: So, Nathaniel is a young magician in training. The world he lives in, an alternate history Britain, is cruel and brutal. People with magical gifts are taken from their parents as children, fostered with strangers, and made to forget their own names. Once grown, these magicians are power-seekers. They rule the British Empire and subjugate practically anyone within reach. This includes “demons” like Bartimaeus. The real secret of magic is that humans only have magic by knowing how to capture and bind what they call “demons” (magical creatures like jinni, in reality) into magical slavery, and use those demons to perform magic.Thank you to my Patrons: Filipe, Dave, Katrin, Frank, Sonja, Staci, Kat, Melissa, Derek, Tonya, Betsy, Mike, and Jen! <3 One thing The Amulet of Samarkand does not do is take itself too seriously. That was a relief. I had approached this with trepidation. I'd heard good things, but I wasn't in the mood for some heavy going in a kiddies' fantasy world with evil baddies, precocious sprites, etc. No, instead what you get with this book is a relaxed tone, a great sense of humor and a worthwhile adventure. And the age makes all the difference too, if it's a younger character I sympathize more but if the character is of a certain age I really have a hard time seeing how certain events can lead them to be the way they become. Especially when they blame others for what happened to them, this always felt so childish to me. This book is very cleverly written, with two alternating strands of narration. One in the third person, tells the story mainly from the point of view of Nathaniel. The other strand gives us a different perspective on the characters and events but it is in the first person, from the point of view of the devious, superior and sarcastic otherworldly being Bartimaeus.