The Magus by John Fowles (1966) — novel #251

Creepy! Creepy and suspenseful. I couldn’t put it down.

The human race is unimportant. It is the self that must not be betrayed. ~ Maurice Conchis, who is, the magus.

• The Magus by John Fowles
• Postmodern novel, mystery, suspense
• Published: 1966
• Revised version: 1977 with a foreword by the author
• Little, Brown and Company (eBook)
• Setting: England and Greece, 1953
• Also by this author (that I’ve read): The French Lieutenant’s Woman; The Collector

 

 

Novel 21 of 50 of The Classics Club Challenge Round IV and my “spin” book for The Classics Club Spin #43

 

My rating 4/5 stars

 

 

I said it was creepy. At first it is rather pedestrian back story. But that doesn’t last long. When the story moves to Greece, it gets creepy fast. Then maddening, then terrifying, all the while confusing, and when I’d almost given up, perhaps…redeeming?

 

Nicholas Urfe is young, middle class, English: his father is a brigadier, and according to Nicholas… 

my mother was the very model of a would-be major-general’s wife.

Nice! See what he did there?

 

Nicholas is a decent chap, Oxford grad, bit of a cavalier with the ladies, bored and without direction. He doesn’t precisely rebel against his parents or England, but he wants something different, and decides on a position in Greece, teaching English at a boys school on the fictional island Phraxos, (actual island Spetses). In his wandering, he discovers the secluded estate of a wealthy Greek recluse, Maurice Conchis. Colleagues and locals warn Nicholas away, and tell him Conchis is unapproachable, yet the first time Nicholas approaches the estate he is welcomed as if expected. The host, Conchis, is mysterious, charming, and intelligent. According to Nicholas…

He was obviously a man who rarely smiled. There was something mask-like, emotion-purged, about his face.

Conchis is highly intuitive, claims to be psychic, and seems to be playing mind-games with Nicholas. God games actually, and Nicholas’ life begins to spin slowly out of control.

 

It took me right up until the end to decide that I liked this book. Though, I was hooked at Conchis first appearance. I knew he was creepy, perhaps dangerous, but he was fascinating. And then there is a cast of characters: literally characters playing parts for Conchis. Nicholas knows they are, usually acting, but are they willing minions, coerced dupes, hypnotized subjects, paid actors, or maybe even schizophrenic? One of them happens to be a beautiful young woman, Lily, or Julie, or Vanessa. There are actually two beautiful young women, the other being Lily's twin. But Nicholas is only obsessed with the Lily, whatever her name is. Time and again, Nicholas confronts them, the twins particularly, and they seem to come clean. Nicholas, along with the reader, exhales a giant sigh of relief, and then…WHAM! Another bizarre turn.

 

Near the end I was getting a bit fed up with Fowles. I’m OK with a brilliant madman character, even a brilliant evil madman, but I was far from certain Conchis was any of that and as a spectator, I was hooked on the drama, but I couldn’t imagine the author’s point. Very near the end, when the God game is very nearly done, when Nicholas and the reader thinks it IS done, Conchis tells Nicholas...

Learn to smile, Nicholas. Learn to smile.

Nicholas should have punched him.

 

But I didn’t yet understand. I don’t approve of Conchis’ methods. You have to believe that the end justifies the means to approve, and I don’t. But I can accept that Conchis believed that. I’m not certain Fowles does. He called The Magus a “Rorschach test in psychology”. That seems about right. He also said “…there is no given ‘right’ reaction.”

 

I wouldn’t recommend it for young readers. There are a few spots that would definitely be "R" rated. If you like psychological terror or suspense, you might love this. If you dislike ambiguous endings, you may not like it, although…

 

I definitely recommend the 1977 revised version. Fowles responded to complaints about the ambiguous ending. In the foreword to the 1977 version he explains: 

I accept that I might have declared a preferred aftermath less ambiguously…and now have done so.

The ending is still ever so slightly ambiguous. However, I am convinced that what happens next is exactly what the reader is hoping for, and the end that in Conchis’ mind justified his means. It ends with a French saying, that can be translated:

Let those love now who’ve never loved;

Let those who’ve loved, love yet again.

Sort of an aside: Nicholas has three girls that he “loves” in this book: Allison, he carelessly breaks her heart before leaving England; Julie on Phraxos; and Jojo back in Jolly Old England. I doubt Nicholas would say he ever loved Jojo, but I say he did. He never slept with her, though she was willing. He unburdens himself on her, rehearses the recent follies of his life. Nicholas says of Jojo… 

She was the strangest priest to confess before; but not the worst. For she absolved me

I enjoyed this novel very much, more than my other reads of Fowles: The French Lieutenant’s Woman and The Collector. Have you read The Magus? Fowles? What did you think.

 

BTW, I've changed my review format. Feedback is appreciated. 

 

.