The magus

It's very hard to rate this book.

This damn book. It took me forever to read this. There were times I loved it. There were times I hated it and thought "who cares". There were times I thought it was profound. There were times I thought it was boring and meaningless. After finishing it I still feel all those things. I still wonder what was the message? What was the point? Why do this terrible thing to this unremarkable young man? Why single him out? Why why why?

And yet, there is something that nags at the back of your mind... almost like you yourself have been hypnotized or a victim of the masque. All the world's indeed a stage and we are merely players I guess. We are sometimes playing the star role, sometimes a bit part in someone else's saga. Sometimes we merely observe from a distance. Some of the time we are oblivious. Sometimes we feel like a puppet controlled by unseen forces. Sometimes it feels like there is a deeper meaning and purpose, sometimes it seems random or coincidental.

IDK this one is a slow burner. Not for the faint of heart. Not because it is difficult reading. But mostly because it is either deeply philosophical, a microcosm of what it means to be human, or it's empty, just a bunch of words on the page that goes on and on and on. Preposterous or profound? You decide.

Last night was a slightly late one for me, since I needed to finally finish my second reading of The Magus, by John Fowles. It really is a fascinating read about a very unusual social experiment and its subject, Nicholas Urfe. There are more twists and turns in this novel's plot than any other I've ever read.

One thought I did not have the first time through was how much of this experiment was voluntary. Just as in the real-life obedience experiments which were carried out by Stanley Milgram in the 1950's, Nicholas becomes so attached to this experiment that he never even thinks about quitting, no matter how troublesome, or even traumatic, things get.

We are visiting a few other people to discuss this book this weekend, and I have no idea where the conversation will start or end, since there is so much to talk about.


Some ideas--

The ethics of the experiment, who were the conspirators, what was the motivation behind it, how were certain effects accomplished?

And of course, the ending. Both times, I found the ending unsatisfying, but this time, it's more obvious that the end of the book is not the end of the story, nor is it the point--it's the mental journey and transformation of Nicholas Urfe.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is from Amazon:

A novel which explores the complexities of the human mind. On a remote Greek island, Nicholas Urfe finds himself embroiled in the deceptions of a master trickster. Surreal threads weave ever tighter as reality and illusion intertwine in a bizarre psychological game.

Oh, but this is the most brief summary I've ever seen, if you can call it that. It's more like a precis. I lifted it off a link that I got from John Fowles's web page:

An Englishman takes a job at a private school on a Greek island. Local millionaire stages elaborate, almost hallucinogenic, mind games.
```````````````
Now, that's vague. This Englishman is Nicholas Urfe, and he's been involved with a young woman named Alison, from whom he has just heartlessly semi-broken-up with. In other words, he's stringing her along, just in case he doesn't find anything else out there on the fictional island of Phraxos. Meanwhile, she takes a job as a stewardess, and though she meets lots of people, she remains in love with Nicholas. While Alison is suffering from heartache, however, Nicholas meets a fascinating older gentleman who lives on the island named Maurice Conchis, and becomes involved in a sort of mind altering experiment. Conchis is able to observe much about Nicholas, particularly his treatment of Alison during a weekend visit. It is the way Nicholas views and treats others, especially women, and his selfishness that excite the interest of Conchis, and he and his co-conspirators are able to give Nicholas a real mind-lashing.

This novel was chosen for our small reading discussion group--

I was afraid that no one else in the group would like it at all, but the discussion was actually a very interesting one, even though I'm sure we're very split about our overall opinions.

We all agreed that what Conchis did was completely unethical, and also that the ending was unsatisfying. We talked a little bit about all the historical and literary allusions in the book. The Tempest was alluded to very often, for instance. Also, there is a nod to Great Expectations, which Fowles expanded only after a student of his pointed it out to him.

No one could fathom how Conchis achieved all these illusions--maybe he really was Prospero. And there was general agreement that it seemed most unusual for a man to go to so much expense and trouble for one subject, at a time--there were others before Nicholas. We all wondered if the previous subject had been drawn into Monkhood because of what had happened to him, and there are many other small mysteries. What was true, what was lie?

The conundrum was that even though Nicholas was able to affect the events of the experiment, he was never in control of the events. It was free will verses hazard. Or was it? At one point, Conchis does hypnotize Nicholas. Has there been a post-hypnotic suggestion?

And, of course, the big question is, what does the ending mean? Yes, it's in Latin, but even after looking up the translation, it can be interpreted in different ways.

Overall, in this group of three women and four men, I'd say that four people definitely liked it, and the others were ambivalent about it. The hostess said, "I don't hate it." I find that admirably vague.