one of the few books i returned to the library without finishing. i was incredibly disappointed at the lacklustre symbolism constantly spurring the plot onwards and even moreso at the condescending tone the book seems to convey. the whole thing felt so absurdly high-brow that it was annoying to get as far as i did.
apparently, fowles wrote the book based on his own experiences in forgotten greece. i found the imagery in the magus quite compelling and it was actually why i kept reading even when i didn't want to. but why he chose to liven it up with a clusterfuck of philosophical wanking is something i might not even understand if i ever care to.
imho, the deptford trilogy by davies is far superior to the magus, both in the plot department, as well as in the jungian elements/symbolism. fowles dove so deep into the philosophy that maybe he forgot he was writing a fiction and completely flopped in creating suspense or sustaining any mystery. davies, on the other hand, came through with a grand slam on all fronts and, thankfully keeping the reader in mind, actually answers questions along the way.
admitedly though, i never finished the magus. i just felt too much like a sucker for being treated as just as much a puppet as the main character. for like, 400 pages. yeah. annoying.
That's a really interesting take on the tone of the book; I hadn't looked at it from that angle, and I respect your freedom to do so and express your dissatisfaction with it. Speaking from my mind only, I enjoy an author who is, by virtue of his own philosophical dominance, a literary 'magician' of sorts, as I enjoyed being as much a puppet as the protagonist is. It's a highly psychological ride, reading the book. Fowles does quite a job of altering your perceptions of each character's integrity slowly, almost hypnotically, so that, all of a sudden, you're 100 pages further into the book with a completely different, newly skeptical and totally fascinating perspective of what's going to happen. This fascination, for me, is coupled with a high level of wonder and I do admit also that I am entranced by the way he describes the physical beauty of Greece - It's wonderful. And the way he writes, the little bits of oddly eccentric descriptors of the situation between spoken sentences. If the goal of any piece of literature is to make the reader feel that he/she is
actually experiencing the story when reading, Fowles achieves that goal with stunning clarity.
We're all entitled to our opinions, though, and I respect your differing perspective of this book. I do not find the book pretentious or condescending - but I've stopped reading far too many books due to that factor and I really did not find Fowles' highly drawn-out plot sequences or set descriptions too long or unnecessary. The Magus is a book that, due to its involvement, allows me to to really bond with it. Like a Daniel Mason or Haruki Murakami novel.
pallidamors said:
if you can explain why i should give this a shot, i totally will!
I would recommend The Magus to anyone, and hopefully this frank attempt at describing my feelings for this book more thoroughly can sway your opinion,
pallidamors, about picking up the book!
The Magus bends my mind; it frustrates me; it challenges and involves me in ways that make this book and this writer total rarities. I feel highly privileged to have been exposed to it. In some ways, Fowles' thoroughness reminds me completely of Borges' descriptions in his writing (whom I also enjoy immensely).
~ vaya
