On Apr 1, 9:38 am, sharkmaw <shark...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> A MAGGOT by John Fowles. Reviewed by Mark Shaw. March 31, 2008
>
> I was prompted to seek out this novel because of a remark the late UFO
> researcher Jacques Vallee made in an interview. He described it as the
> most fascinating example in literature of humans interacting with a
> completely non-human intelligence. I tried to read it several years
ago,
> but its antiquated dialogues (written in 18th Century English literary
> style, ala Daniel DeFoe), and enigmatic, offbeat storyline defeated me.
> Recently, I tried again with better success, and discovered why Vallee
> found it so fascinating. He should; this novel's climax revolves around
> a close encounter with an object (described by the main witness as
> resembling a huge maggot) and its occupants, who may or may not be; a.)
> devils, b.) angels, c.) aliens, d.) time travelers, e.) occultist
> hoaxers, or f.) The Holy Trinity --take your pick. That we never
> discover conclusively what really occurred, much less solve the novel's
> pur****ted mystery is purely intentional, but leads to frustration for
> many readers. Vallee would've found it very true-to-life.
>
> Basically, A MAGGOT follows an in-depth investigation, told mainly in
the
> form of letters and depositions by witnesses, into the mysterious
> disappearance of a man known only as "his lord****p," or "Bartholemew"(a
> non-de plume), and the apparent suicide of his servant in Devon, England
> in 1736. The statements are elicited by an irascible, bullying lawyer
> and related mostly in "question and answer" sessions that read like
trial
> transcripts. Each person's deposition describes the event, or the
events
> leading to it, from completely different perspectives. This gives the
> novel a profound resonance, especially for a researcher with Vallee's
> credentials,
All UFO researchers have the same credentials. They are frauds and/or
lunatics.
since it ostensibly describes a UFO encounter, as well as
> the investigation afterwards, complete with conflicting accounts by the
> eyewitnesses, in-the-field research, analyzing of soil samples found at
> the landing site, and the traumatic account of an 'abductee'--all from
> 18th Century perspectives. The main witness at first relates the event
> as an encounter with the Devil, but eventually interprets it as a
> profoundly positive, divine experience, and it directly results in the
> foundation of a religion (Shakerism, which is a real, though now
defunct,
> offshoot of Quakerism).
No, it's not. It isn't an offshoot of Quakerism. And it is possible
that it isn't defunct, although it probably is.
>
> Some have accused Fowles of attempting to shoehorn a blase Science
> Fiction concept into a pastiche of Literary Romanticism. On the
surface,
> this seems like a valid complaint, but in the richness of the material
> and its open-ended ambiguity, A MAGGOT transcends so cut-and-dried an
> interpretation. What begins as obscure mystery eventually becomes
social
> parable, and the idea of using a staple of modern tabloids as the basis
> of a historical enigma (the founding of a real "cult") gives this novel
> an edge like few others. History tells us actual religions were
> apparently inspired or affected by encounters with unexplainable objects
> and beings (Fatima and The Mormons come most readily to mind), and here,
> the similarity to Christ's immaculate conception is explicit.
Christ was supposedly born of a virgin, which is not what Immaculate
Conception is about at all. IC is about the idea that Mary was born
without sin.
Well, anyway, thanks for allowing me to strike one more book off of my
"maybe I will read this some day" list. It was too long.
--
Will in New Haven
So there's
> not only Biblical but historical precedence for this idea, and Fowles
> exploits it masterfully.
>
> Obviously, the author is familiar with the literature of UFOs and the
> mind altering effect they seem to have on the witnesses, for he has the
> methodology of the phenomenon down pat. The novel's main protagonist,
> London prostitute Rebecca Lee, experiences the same confusion, trauma
and
> spiritual awakening many modern UFO contactees describe, and her
attempts
> to make sense of the outre event leads to a striking personality change,
> culminating in an unshakable (no pun intended) faith in the divine
nature
> of her encounter. Or does it?
>
> In Fowles' novels, things are never quite what they seem; people even
> less so. Ultimately, the implication is that the event really happened,
> for two of the witnesses observe identical imagery, albeit from
different
> perspectives, and seem to confirm each other. But Fowles complicates
> things by casting doubt on Lee's testimonies, and we must rely totally
on
> her observations beyond a certain point, for she is the only surviving
> eyewitness to the actual close encounter with the "maggot." He paints
> her as a complex, unusually perceptive woman whose thinking is decidedly
> ahead of her time. She is determined to escape her former life as
> prostitute, and agrees to accompany his "lord****p" solely to gain her
own
> ends. Fowles describes Lee's talent for deception and moreover, it is
> her ability to act, to play a part, that compels the enigmatic
> "lord****p" to include her in the initial charade he perpetrates, and
> which directly leads to the ultimate encounter. In Lee's testimonies,
we
> are never sure if she might not still be fabricating and deceiving for
> purely selfish motives --after all, she gives two completely different
> accounts of the event to different people. Additionally, Fowles
> describes Rebecca's oddly sly reactions when the novel steps out of
> "question and answer" mode, and her demeanor throughout is overtly
> enigmatic, which arouses suspicion, to say the least.
>
> So is it a lie? A hallucination? An elaborate hoax perpetrated on an
> innocent Lee, to create a new religion (and perhaps, alter history)? If
> so, it's never clear who is responsible, or why. Many interpretations
> are suggested, including time travelers, Satanists, and the implication
> that his lord****p himself is perhaps not human. Even Freemasonry is
> hinted at briefly. Then there's Lee's unbending (or is it?) belief that
> she was chosen by God--and her innate knowledge that her child will be a
> spiritual leader (which comes true, after the novel's events, in real
> life). Yet these explanations seem either too pat or too fantastic to
be
> the truth. Apparently, the only truth is that someone or something has
> staged this elaborate event for unknown reasons.
>
> Rebecca's second account, image-wise, is a textbook example of a UFO
> encounter of the "contactee" variety. Her visual description begs that
> the experience is real, even if her interpretation isn't, for she
> describes watching what are obviously films and being programmed by the
> images shown to her. The details have no relation to anything in the
> early 1700s, so it's flatly impossible she could have fabricated them.
> Later, the religious interpretation espoused by the reborn Rebecca rings
> false, for Fowles presents her single-minded rants as so aggressively
> fanatical that the reader often sympathizes with the lawyer who has to
> endure them. Some of these sequences are so blatantly dogmatic, they're
> funny. Especially if Rebecca is still acting--but is she? In the end,
> the reader is left to make what sense of it they may, but no absolute
> answer is offered.
>
> This is by no means an easy book to read. It's stylistically archaic
and
> intentionally ambiguous. It indulges in lengthy philosophical
> digressions and annoying religious rants, and deceives the reader as to
> its characters' actual motives and personalities--if it provides them at
> all. Yet its rewards are tremendous; a successful evocation of not just
> the period, but its people; a compelling revelation of mysteries within
> mysteries and charades within charades. And a resolution layered with
> multiple interpretations that truly challenges--and provokes ideas and
> reinterpretation long after reading. In other words--a great John
Fowles
> novel, maybe his greatest. A MAGGOT is haunting, powerful and
> DIFFICULT--and easily the most brilliant book I've read in some time.
|
