Cu ocazia unei ocazii care n-a mai avut loc. Nov. '05. Gasita la curatenia generala prin computer.Nu mai tin minte exact cine mi-a recomandat “Magicianul”. Dar tin minte exact parerile unora, pe care i-am intrebat ce impresie le-a facut cartea. Unii mi-au zis ca e ciudata, stufoasa si imbirligata si ca le-a pierit cheful undeva spre jumatate. Altii mi-au spus ca e geniala sau ca nu s-au putut dezlipi de ea si au citit-o in 2 zile intr-o sesiune, in loc sa invete pentru examen. Mi-am inceput lectura entuziasmata, intr-o zi care se anunta a fi lunga si plicticoasa. Prima parte e foarte pe gustul meu. Naratiune la persoana intii, perspectiva eroului principal, Londra la inceputul anilor 50, idila promitatoare. Sperantele imi sunt insa spulberate curind, intrucit Nicholas Urfe, tinarul erou al romanului, englez pur singe educat la Oxford, se plictiseste destul de repede de viata, de slujba de profesor si in cele din urma de Alison, frumoasa australianca. Cam atit cu idila, imi zic.Amator de noi experiente si trairi, Nicholas accepta postul de profesor de engleza la un colegiu din insula Phraxos, in Grecia. Dupa cum constiincios am citit in prefata, Fowles insusi a avut o experienta similara de profesor la un asemenea colegiu. Prima parte a sederii pe insula poate fi rezumata in cele doua cuvinte pe care autorul le-a folosit referindu-se la propria experienta, Aegean blues, starea de greata si plictis provocata de monotonia vietii pe insula. Lipsa de chef de viata, momentul in care realizeaza ca incercarile lui literare nu vor avea nici un viitor, greutatea cu care trece totusi peste esecul relatiei cu Alison si, bonus, contactarea unei boli venerice de la o prostituata, il imping pe Urfe aproape de sinucidere. Acesta e si momentul in care am simtit ca voi lasa cartea deoparte. Eh, probabil ca Fowles e mai istet decit pare la prima vedere si ma gindesc acum ca momentul asta are menirea de a-l pregati pe cititor, de a-l aduce in acea stare in care sa se intrebe daca intr-adevar se va intimpla ceva demn de remarcat in roman, pentru ca sintem totusi in primele 100 de pagini.Odata dezinteresul stirnit, continuu fara prea mare tragere de inima. Mi-l si inchipui pe autor zimbind pe sub mustata. [Da, are. Pardon, avea, pina acum cateva zile, cand ne-a parasit:]. Cum ziceam, probabil ca starea asta de plictis si greata indusa de Fowles e una programata, pentru a nu-i da posibilitatea cititorului sa ghiceasca ce urmeaza sa se intimple. Fowles insusi pare un magician, daca ma gindesc bine, dupa felul in care jongleaza cu cuvinte si situatii.Ei bine, si pentru ca toate au un sfirsit, gata si cu plictisul lui Urfe, gata si cu ultima umbra de intelgere si logica in sirul evenimentelor. Tot ceea ce se deruleaza in continuare exclude din calcul ratiunea si orice incercare de a gasi un fir logic in labirintul de intimplari haotice la care ia parte personajul principal, se va incheia cu un esec din partea cititorului. Intilnirea cu Maurice Conchis, milionarul excentric / magicianul / cel care se joaca de-a Dumnezeu / Prospero, si toate intimplarile care decurg din aceasta ciudata intilnire au ca scop, descopar in final, maturizarea lui Nicholas, regasirea lui. Acesta e unul din motivele pentru care “Magicianul” a fost numit, pe buna dreptate, bildungsroman, avind asemanari evidente cu “Marile Sperante”, unul din romanele care l-au inspirat pe Fowles in scrierea sa.Cine e si ce doreste acest domn Conchis, personaj invaluit de mister, aproape necunoscut chiar si locuitorilor insulei, aflam si nu prea. Pentru ca, intr-un joc inteligent al manipularii psihice si sentimentale, dezvaluie din trecutul si prezentul sau doar atat cat considera de cuviinta. Insuficient, evident. Poate ca e momentul sa spun ca nu mi-a placut Maurice Conchis. Aroganta si superioritatea pe care le afiseaza, atotstiinta si intelectul de geniu, felul in care isi asuma rolul de Dumnezeu in viata lui Nicholas, toate astea provoaca o usoara repulsie. Ma regasesc iar prinsa in magia lui Fowles si imi dau seama ca si-a atins probabil scopul in ce priveste sentimentele cititorului fata de personajul, sa-i spunem negativ, al romanului.Odata cu magicianul isi fac aparitia diverse personaje, actori in marea punere in scena a lui Conchis. Ceea ce-l atrage pe Nicholas e frumusetea si farmecul uneia dintre fete, numita cand Lily cind Julie, in functie de placerea minuitorului de papusi. Ceea ce face aceasta parte captivanta e neprevazutul care se ascunde in fiecare pagina. Si, probabil, senzatia eroului principal ca a dezlegat in sfirsit misterul evenimentelor haotice la care ia parte, ca o poate lua pe Lily/Julie cu el si sa paraseasca insula. Insa fiecare noua posibila reusita de a scapa din labirintul lui Conchis, aduce dupa sine alte si alte intimplari stranii. Evenimentele haotice la care eroul participa iau diverse forme, de la puneri in scena ale diverselor mituri grecesti, scene de inceput de secol XX si experiente erotice, pina la participarea efectiva intr-un episod din al doilea razboi mondial.Punctul culminant imi pare asa numitul “proces” la care Nicholas ia parte. Atit momentul de dinainte cit si cel de dupa proces ii sunt straine eroului, pe care ajung sa il compar cu un cobai in laboratorul unui cercetator. Cum spuneam, punctul maxim de dramatism si forta al romanului, migalos si detaliat descris, il surprinde pe Nicholas martor la o desfasurare impresionanta de forte, cu profunde implicatii simbolice. 13 personaje mitologice isi fac “intrarea in scena”, pentru a lua apoi chipul unor ilustri profesori si cercetatori contemporani in domeniul pshiologiei. Acesta e momentul de maxima frustrare, dar si neputinta, al lui Nicholas, care se vede captiv si in imposibilitatea de a face ceva pentru a scapa.Ultima parte a romanului, cind Nicholas este eliberat de sub “vraja” magicianului, il gaseste pe acesta la Londra, intr-o incercare disperata de a gasi totusi un inteles celor intamplate. Reintilnirea cu Alison, devenita ea insasi personaj in jocul lui Conchis, il determina sa accepte si poate chiar sa aprecieze tot ceea ce i s-a intamplat, chiar daca romanul se termina intr-un punct in care relatia celor doi ramane incerta.“Magicianul” nu e cartea mea preferata, dar daca ma gandesc la jocul enigmelor, la capacitatea de a jongla cu situatii, cuvinte si sentimente, la usurinta cu care transforma certitudinea in iluzie, atunci da, John Fowles e magicianul meu preferat, intr-o lume condusa de Harry Potter.
John Fowles started writing the Magus in the mid-1950s, and struggled with it off and on for the next twelve years. After his first novel, The Collector, became a best-seller, he finally finished the book and published it in 1966. But then, eleven years later, he issued a revised edition, reworking a number of critical scenes. All books reflect the times in which they were written, and this one is no exception. The early scenes are very much a meditation on breaking away from 1950s conformity and the stultifying regime of the post-war British upper class. The long middle passage, set on a mysterious island in Greece, tackles those big 1960s questions- personal identity, sexual freedom, and higher consciousness. And the end of the book, which peaks with a freakout frenzy and ends on a distinctly melancholy and uncertain note- it's not a stretch to see that as a mirror of the burned out decade that was the 1970s.When classifying Fowles, a lot of critics place him on the line between modernism and post-modernism. Certainly there is ample evidence of both schools of writing in The Magus. Much of the book is a bildungsroman with shades of early 20th century novels (like DH Lawrence's Sons and Lovers, and Joyce's Portrait of the Artist- both featuring smart but emotionally unstable young men, groping towards maturity.) But as the mysterious events on the island gear up, and the narrator finds himself falling head-over-heels through a series of bizarre scenes of sex and violence and lies and half-truths, The Magus comes to resemble a later generation of novels. The closest parallel might be Eco's Foucault's Pendulum. Both books are paced as erudite literary mysteries with frequent references to other authors- Shakespeare, Dickens, etc. Both have settings that span Europe- Fowles moves the action from London to Greece to France, with stops in Norway, Rome, and Germany. And like Eco, Fowles has a playful way of letting the reader in on the fun- allowing the narrator to express disbelief about the events he's witnessing, just as we, the readers, might feel disbelief at times about the plot of the book:'Is this how they teach you at Oxford now? One reads the last chapters first?" And I had to smile and look down. If his answer had not quenched my curiosity at all it had at least jumped another pretense, and moved us on. In some obscure way, one I was to become very familiar with, it flattered me: I was too intelligent not to be already grasping the rules of the game we played. It was no good my knowing that old men have conned young ones like that ever since time began. I still fell for it, and one still falls for the oldest literary devices in the right hands and contexts.Or'This experience. It's like being halfway through a book. I can't just throw it in the dustbin.'Where The Magus fails, it fails because Fowles allows the narrator to descend into a kind of post-college mawkishness, where everything is so serious and life is never a joke. Even though the situation, as presented, is often cosmically funny, the narrator never seems to joke or smile about it- and in that he seems to miss some of the point. But that's a small complaint and one that doesn't really mar this compulsively readable novel.PS: if you liked TV's Lost, you'll doubly enjoy this book. Much of the plot of that show seems to be ripped from Fowles- including the mysterious island setting and the idea that the whole place might be a grand psychology experiment or be possessed of a kind of black magic. It also features a Jacob-like master-manipulator, several characters that shed identities like snake-skin, and even a Hatch! There's more, but I'll let you discover it for yourself.
What do You think about The Magus (2001)?
I find myself caught between rant and rave. More rave, which is why I rated it so high, but enough wish to rant to withhold that fifth star. This is a strange book. In the Foreword to the 1978 Revised edition, Fowles said one title he considered was "The Godgame." A young Englishman, Nicholas Urfe, comes in 1953 to the isolated Greek island of Phraxos (modeled on the real island of Spetsai) to teach at an elite boarding school. He's our narrator, our focus through 656 pages, and he's callow, a cad, and more than a bit of a snob. He encounters a mysterious man calling himself Maurice Conchis living in a villa who takes on God-like qualities. Not the God of Christians or Jews or Muslims mind you. More of the Pagan kind that enjoys playing with mortals like toys. Half-way through the novel I was completely enraptured by the plot's twists and turns. By two-thirds in though, not unlike Nicholas himself, I was more than a bit exasperated by the intricacies, reversals and cruelties of the game, with the sense that not only Nicholas but I the reader was being toyed with. Fowles in the Foreward admitted reviews of the book had "justified criticisms of excess, over-complexity, artificiality" and I agree the novel is guilty on all fronts. I both liked and was repelled by how Fowles played with the connections between life and fiction--how he never let you forget you were reading fiction--in many senses of the word. With this novel the "truth" keeps shifting under your feet, and I wasn't left feeling satisfied at the end--and suspect Fowles didn't want me to be.Yet I was never tempted to bail--and this read incredibly fast. The book is beautifully, compellingly written. I couldn't put it down with the mystery of Conchis and what he was up to unresolved. In a BBC interview included in the back of my edition, Fowles said he loved "pure narrative" and he felt very few writers can make up for a lack of storytelling ability in other ways--that he valued "readability." And you can see that in the novel--it's shamelessly plot-filled--in good and bad ways. Engrossing, eventful, but sometimes stagey--yet despite its literary sensibility definitely accessible. About the only thing I could complain about is Fowles' habit of sprinkling bits of Latin, Greek and French untranslated. The Magus is both on the "1001 Books to Read Before You Die" list and Playboy's list of "The 25 Sexiest Novels Ever Written." This isn't pornography, there's not much sexual content in terms of number of pages--but it's not only present, it's well-written (rather than, as is almost always the case even in so-called literature, embarrassingly awful.) So many lines were quotable and resonant and there's enough that's twisty in it I could see it repaying more readings. So, interesting writer, interesting book--but rather unsettling.
—Lisa (Harmonybites)
This book is on the list of the Modern Library of the World's Best Books. I must disagree with this assessment. Although the plot is initially quite intriguing, none of the characters--not the protagonist Nicholas Urfe, not his two love interests (Alison and Lily), and not the antagonist (Maurice Conchis)--is even likable or really even psychologically interesting, and the plot becomes simply unbelievable as the novel advances. Fowles never really gives any reason for the trials and tribulations through which Nicholas suffers, and the "lesson" he learns seems all too obvious, something most people learn rather easily and without all the drama that Nicholas is forced to undergo by Conchis and his cohorts; moreover, the expense and extremes to which Conchis resorts in order to "educate" Nicholas seem utterly ridiculous. Additionally, the erotic scenes are atrocious: they appear to have been written by a second-rate romance novelist. [*****SPOILER ALERT*****:] Finally, the ending, intentionally left open and vague by Fowles is quite frustrating; his refusal to bring the novel to a definitive conclusion leaves the reader feeling quite unfulfilled, especially after trudging through over 700 pages (in the hardback version).
—Vegantrav
Strangely Disturbing Novel, Many Possible InterpretationsThis novel is particularly tough to review. It's even tough to rate. I'm very ambivalent about this book. It was interesting, but also frustrating.The Magus certainly won't be suitable for people who have Twitter-induced Attention Deficit Disorder and must have quick action and a fast pace.The book's pace is majestically slow, and it takes quite awhile for anything to happen. It's wordy, too.In short, it's an old-fashioned novel and it's a bit dated.It's also subject to multiple interpretations. John Fowles seems to have deliberately left a lot of things (including the ending) ambiguous.It's also tough to discuss the story without giving away spoilers.I think a lot of the book is about young men's inability to love.Nicholas Urfe is a handsome, confused, and directionless young Brit in 1953 post-war England. He's a bit of an intellectual and dabbles in poetry. He seduces lots of women for his amusement and then drops them. He's a bit of a cad. After quitting a teaching job in England, he accepts another job teaching at a school for boys on the remote Greek island of Phraxos.Before he leaves for Phraxos, he meets an Australian girl, Alison Kelly. They begin a relationship. When Nicholas leaves for Phraxos, Alison starts a job as an "air hostess" (airline stewardess). They leave things uncommital and open-ended.On Phraxos, Nicholas becomes infatuated with the beautiful Lily Montgomery (a.k.a. Julie). He also meets Maurice Conchis, the cultivated and very rich owner of a villa called Bourani.Strange things happen on Phraxos. I can't say much more about those happenings without spoiling the story, except that they involve weird rituals and mind games. (view spoiler)[Conchis is "The Magus" of the title, and he presides over some bizarre ceremonies, some of which seem almost Satanic. Nicholas goes through a mock "trial" and it's not clear whether the purpose of that trial is simply to humiliate him or to educate him. In either case, Nicholas is abducted, coerced, and abused. (hide spoiler)]
—Mona Temchin
