Page 1

Martin Vicen

The Notion of Freedom in John Fowles' Novels


Contents References..............................................6 Preface.................................................7 1.0 Introduction to John Fowles........................10 1.1 Biography of John Fowles...........................11 1.2 The Fiction of John Fowles.........................14 2.0 Existence Precedes Essence.........................19 2.1 Atheism............................................20 2.2 Free Will..........................................24 2.2.1 Iron Necessity...................................25 2.2.2 Freedom..........................................27 2.3 Responsibility.....................................29 3.0 The States of Being................................32 3.1 Being-in-Itself....................................32 3.2 Being-for-Itself...................................36 3.2.1 The Boundary Situation...........................37 3.2.1.1 Miranda Grey...................................37 3.2.1.2 Nicholas Urfe..................................40 3.3 The Few and The Many...............................46 3.4 The Nemo...........................................49 4.0 Conclusion.........................................52 Bibliography...........................................55


References AS............................................The Aristos CR..........................................The Collector FF.................John Fowles and The Fiction of Freedom FW..........................The French Lieutenant's Woman MG..............................................The Magus NI................The Novelist as Impresario: John Fowles WH..............................................Wormholes


Preface

John Fowles, a remarkably innovative writer of the second the

20th

century,

distinguished

for

his

half

of

is

known

accurate

as

a

formulation

novelist of

of

ideas

thoughts,

for

creating the right atmosphere and eminent characters. His novels are masterpieces of author's personal philosophy of life and art as he remarked "Just as I wish I could have been an excellent poet, I also perhaps secretly wish I had been, like my father, a sort of philosopher." (WH, p. 455) John

Fowles

spent

four

years

(1947

-

1950)

at

New

College in Oxford, where he discovered the writings of French existentialists. In particular he admired Albert Camus and JeanPaul

Sartre,

whose

writings

have

corresponded

with

his

own

ideas about conformity and the will of the individual. In the essay I Write Therefore I Am he noticed "Writing is part of my existentialist view of life. It's an attempt to make myself wholly authentic. I think the serious writer has to have his view of purpose of literature absolutely clear. I don't see that you can write seriously without having a philosophy of both life and literature back to you." (WH, p. 9) The theme of freedom is closely related to the philosophy of existentialism - the existence of a person does not define


the individual, the individual is defined by his or her actions and thoughts, which the individual should take responsibility for, because he or she is totally free to decide. It is not easy to live with this fact and therefore many people try getting rid of their freedom. It is the same with the characters of Fowles' novels - some of them are trying to win and some to get rid of their freedom (existential or artistic). Fowles

treats

the

problem

of

freedom

from

countless

viewpoints, but freedom in the existentialist sense seems to play a central role in his fiction, just as in his non-fiction. Therefore the following study takes aim at investigating various aspects of the philosophy of existentialism in connection to freedom and its influence upon Fowles' works. Namely, his chronologically first two novels The Collector (1963) and The Magus (1965), which can be considered to possess the are,

greatest according

existentialist to

John

background.

Butler,

more

His

about

later

freedom

novels in

the

poststructuralist sense than in the existentialist one. (FF, p. 63) The

following

analysis

will

also

take

the

advantage

of

Fowles' non-fiction The Aristos: A Self-Portrait in Ideas (1964) and his last published book of

30

essays,

Wormholes

introductions,

reviews

(1998) - a collection and

interviews

from


the

last

four

decades.

Their

role

in

decoding

the

Fowles'

fictional connotations is obvious from the An Unholy Inquisition interview: "Dianne Vipond: [...] Could The Aristos be regarded as something of an intellectual/philosophical blueprint for the concerns of your fiction? John

Fowles:

[...]

Yes,

certainly

The

Aristos

was

an

early

attempt to explain both this and myself. [...]" (WH, p. 446)

The core of the following study is divided into two main parts. The first one dealing with the existence-precedes-essence idea and related terms as free will, responsibility or atheism. The second part is devoted to the states of being and their contribution to the development of society.

1.0 Introduction to John Fowles

English novel of the first half of the 1960s and during the 1970s undergoes some important changes. These modifications are evident mainly in the work of John Fowles, Angus Wilson and


J. G. Farrell. Their novels differ from each other's both in subject and form, but we can observe some features, which can be marked as common. The most productive of them seem to be those, which combine the realistic tradition with experimental methods. Another common feature includes historical dimension of their novels. History and its picture in literature is not treated as the subject, but rather than a problem of relation between reality and fiction. The authors of this era value the present reality by means of a historical novel. The most important common aspect is the fact that the novels of

the

above-mentioned

writers

possess

profound

intellectual

background. 1.1 Biography of John Fowles John

Fowles

is

known

for

his

capability

to

put

together

pretentious thoughts and high readability. He has declared his attitude towards the importance of ideas in creative writing in his essay I Write Therefore I Am: "I don't know which is worse, having the words and lacking the ideas, or the reverse. I think the former, not just because the latter happens to be my case but because I believe that if it comes to crunch - in great novels it never does - good ideas are more important than good words." (WH, p. 8)


John was

Fowles, born

on

the

son

of

31st

March

Robert 1926

at

and

Gladys

Richards

Leigh-on-Sea,

a

Fowles,

small

town

located about 40 miles from London, in the country of Essex. He describes the English suburban culture of the 1930s as strongly conformist and his family life as conventional. His growing up in these conformist and petit bourgeois conditions, which he disliked, has certainly caused his lifelong fascination for the philosophy of existentialism. He was educated at Alleyn Court School (1934 - 1939) and Bedford School (1939 - 1944). Then he attended the Edinburg University (1944 - 1945) and subsequently began his compulsory military service in the Royal Marines lasting for two years. Fowles was promoted

to

lieutenant,

however

the

Second

World

War

ended

before he could 'practise' his theoretical knowledge in it. In and

1947,

he

German

discovered

entered

language and

was

New and

much

College

of

literature. influenced

Oxford While

by

to

at

French

study

French

Oxford,

Fowles

existentialism,

which was the most fashionable philosophical movement at that time. After receiving his B.A. degree in French, Fowles worked as a lecturer in English at the University of Poitiers in France, where

he

continued

to

strengthen

his

knowledge

in

French

literature and philosophy. Then he went to Greece to teach at a


boys' school at the Anargyros College on the island of Spetsai, where also his cult, partially autobiographical novel, The Magus is set. This island has left deep influence upon his life and work for he met here his future wife Elizabeth Whitton. Her impact on Fowles' fiction writing is evident from his own words: "I've often said that I've written about only one woman in my life. I often feel when writing that the heroine of one novel is the same woman as the heroine of another. They may be different enough in outward characteristics, but they are for me a family - just one woman, basically. In my life that woman has been my wife, Elizabeth, who died in 1990. I've thought about trying to do an account of her but so far haven't, knowing she lies so close behind many of my characters." (WH, p. 452) Fowles returned to England and settled in London in 1954. He continued teaching English at St. Godric's College, where he ultimately served as the department head. In 1966 Fowles together with his wife moved to Dorset. They lived first at Unerhill Farm and then settled in a town called Lyme Regis (the setting of his The French Lieutenant's Woman) From 1979 to 1988, he was a honorary curator of the Lyme Regis Museum.

1.2 The Fiction of John Fowles


Between 1952 and 1960 Fowles devoted much time to writing and wrote several novels but offer none of them to a publisher, because he considered them incomplete in some way. In late 1960 he

completed

the

first

draft

of

The

Collector

in

just

four

weeks. He was revising it until the summer of 1962, when he sent it to a publisher. As it appeared in 1963, The Collector became a bestseller and the commercial success of the book allowed Fowles to give up teaching jobs and devote all his time to writing.

The

Collector

(1963)

is

the

story

of

the

abduction

and

imprisonment of Miranda Grey by Frederick Clegg, told first from his point of view and then from hers by means of a diary she kept. It

is

the

story

about

young

man

Frederick,

a

collector

of butterflies from the lower middle class, who falls in love with Miranda, an intelligent art student. He knows there is no chance to win her heart until he wins a huge amount of money. The strength he gained so is transferred into a scare plan to kidnap her. Frederick keeps her captive in the basement of his Sussex

house

and

looks

after

her.

The

strong-willed

Miranda

keeps a diary, records their conversations and plans her escape. Miranda's

diary

reveals

Fowles'

personal

philosophy

and

his


commentary on the stagnation of the British society. At

the

end,

Miranda

becomes

seriously

sick

and

dies.

Frederick persuades himself that he is not responsible for her death and plays with the idea of repeating his performance.

Then in 1965, The Magus was published. Fowles wrote about it: "The story appeared in 1965, after two other books, but in every way except that of mere publishing date, it is a first novel. I began writing it in the early 1950s, and both narrative and mood went though countless transformations." (Foreword to MG, p. 5) The Magus is a traditional quest story about Nicholas Urfe, who escapes from his common life in London on the Greek island of Phraxos. There he meets the mysterious millionaire Conchis, who overwhelms him with mysteries, which lead Nicholas to deeper self-knowledge. Twelve years later, Fowles published the revised version of The Magus.

The

third

Fowles'

novel

The

French

Lieutenant's

Woman

(1969) represents a qualitatively new level of his philosophy: Fowles' previous theoretical approach to the problem of freedom gets practical shape - the story resembles a Victorian novel in structure and detail, but it is actually written from both a Victorian and a modern viewpoint as we can see in the shocking


chapter 13 starting with lines: "I do not know. This story I am telling is all imagination. These characters I create never existed outside my own mind. If I have pretended until now to know my characters' minds and innermost thoughts, it is because I am writing in (just as I have assumed some of the vocabulary and 'voice' of) a convention universally accepted at the time of my story: that the novelist stands next to God. He may not know all, yet he tries to pretend that he does. But I live in the age of Alain Robbe-Grillet and Roland Barthes; if this is a novel, it cannot be a novel in the modern sense of the word." (FW, p. 97) Fowles sets himself free by taking the role of God: "But novelists write for countless different reasons: for money, for fame, for reviewers [...] Only one same reason is shared by all of us: we wish to create worlds as real as, but other than the world that is. Or was. [...] In other words, to be free myself, I must give him, and Tina, and Sarah, even the abominable Mrs Poulteney,

their

freedoms

as

well.

There

is

only

one

good

definition of God: the freedom that allows other freedoms to exist. And I must conform to that definition. The novelist is still a god, since he creates (and not even the most aleatory avant-garde modern novel has managed to extirpate its author completely); what has changed is that we are no longer the gods


of the Victorian image, omniscient and decreeing; but in the new theological image, with freedom our first principle, not authority." (FW, p. 98)

In

the

story

a

wealthy

amateur

palaeontologist

Charles

Smithson falls in love with Sarah Woodruff, a passionate and imaginative governess who is believed to have been deserted by a French lieutenant. This affair has excluded her from society. Another

experimental

feature

of

this

novel

lies

in

three

different endings.

In the 1970s Fowles worked on a variety of literary projects. In 1973, he published a collection of poetry, Poems. He also worked on translations from the French, including adaptations of Cinderella and the novella Ourika. His translation of Marie de Frace's 12th Century story Eliduc served as an inspiration for the collection of short stories The Ebony Tower, which appeared in 1974. His

next

novel

Daniel

Martin

(1977)

is

partially

autobiographical story of an English screenwriter's search for himself in his past.


Daniel Martin is followed by Mantissa (1982) that is very close to The French Lieutenant's Woman in its structure. Erato, the central character and author's muse, fights for her autonomy, while in The French Lieutenant's Woman it is the problem of John Fowles that the characters refuse to listen to him: "When Charles left Sarah on her cliff-edge, I ordered him to walk straight back to Lyme Regis. But he did not; he gratuitously turned and went down to the Dairy" (FW, p. 98), in Mantissa the above-mentioned muse Erato is trying to win her freedom from another character Miles Green, a writer. She lectures him on how she has no freedom to be herself as long as she depends on him to create her as a character. Mantissa is the most experimental novel of John Fowles and many critics treat it as the apex of his work.

In A Maggot (1985) Fowles returned to layered structure of The Magus. A group of five people travels in Devon in 1736 and disappear. An investigation starts, three members of the group are found, but their witnesses lead to a miracle - a vision of a contact with travellers form the future.

2.0 Existence Precedes Essence


Existentialism maintains that in man, and in man alone, existence precedes essence (l'existence prÊcède l'essence). This simply means that man first is, and only subsequently is this or that - man must create his own essence: it is in throwing himself into the world as into the future, and so gradually define himself. The

atheistic

existentialism

states

there

is

no

God,

and

therefore there must be, at least, one creature that exists before it is given meaning, before it has its essence, which is defined through actions. With our ability to think, grow and change, mankind is in the unique position of defining itself. We are each in charge of defining our own lives. The above-mentioned definition must always be regarded as open-ended: we cannot say what this man is before he dies, or what mankind is before it has disappeared. The typical feature of Fowles' novels, the open-ended conclusion, can be viewed as a parallel to the open-ended self-definition. At the end of both novels, the central characters (Clegg and Urfe) are still alive - their definitions are not finished, just as the novels are not.

John Fowles has described the definition of his own life in the essay I Write Therefore I Am:


"A publisher accepted The Collector in July 1962. I chose ten years ago to be a writer - chose in the existentialist sense of the act of choosing; that is I have constantly had to renew the choice and to live in anguish because I so often doubted whether it was the right one. So I have turned down better jobs; I have staked everything on this one choice. Partially it had been a conscious existentialism choice, partially something in my blood, in the Cornish quarter of me, perhaps. I think, now, that even if the book had not been accepted, even if I should never have had any book accepted, I was right to live by such a choice. Because I am surrounded by people who have not chosen themselves, in this sense, but who have let themselves be chosen - by money, by status symbol, by jobs - and I don't know which are sadder, those who know this or those who don't." (AS, p. 6)

2.1 Atheism The

absence

predefined

human

of

a

Creator

nature,

which

(God) brings

reveals about

a

rejection

of

non-existence

of

objective values. There is not a priori goodness, nor eternal and perfect conscience. This situation makes individuals feel abandoned,

because

all

their

alibis

are

unacceptable:

no

Gods are responsible for their condition, no heredity and no


environment. There is no determinism, man is free will, man is freedom. Fowles explains his attitude towards religion in his essay The Nature of Nature: "Some reference books have me down as an atheist;

and

certainly,

as

regards

any

established

deity

or

religious figure, I am so, and all the more resolutely when some god or goddess is presented with purely human qualities such as being kind or merciful, and possessing listening and intervenient power. Such fairy-tale figures are for children;" (WH, p. 412)

In

both

The

Collector

and

The

Magus

we

can

find

an

allegorical layer providing several allusions to Shakespeare's The Tempest. For Fowles, there is a God substitution in the present world: Shakespeare's Prospero - an authentic individual (see 3.0 States of Being). In The Tempest Prospero, the Duke of Milan, trusting in his brother's loyalty and ability to govern Milan, leaves Antonio to

reign

the

state.

Prospero,

blinded

by

the

intensity

of

his 'Faust-like' quest, fails to see how the power has corrupted Antonio - made him greedy for ultimate power and primacy in Milan.

Finally

Antonio's

desire

to

rule

becomes

a

reality.

Prospero and his daughter Miranda are set adrift upon the sea


in

a

small

boat

and

would

die

unless

the

noble

Neapolitan

Gonzalo supplied them with food. Later, they inhabit a lonely island and Prospero, by the aid of his great magic, calls a tempest that shipwrecks Antonio and his companion. So, as the play opens, all of Prospero's enemies have been brought to the shore of his lonely island. Prospero has the means and the power to

revenge

himself.

There

are

the

"demi-devil"

Caliban

and

Ariel, a powerful spirit who represents the powers of nature in Prospero's service, both controlled by his will. But just when he has his enemies totally under control, Prospero's desire for vengeance vanishes. He realizes his obsession is evil.

The reality in The Collector is that there is no Prospero to save Miranda from Glegg/Caliban as it is in The Tempest.

So

there is no God. The character closest to Prospero is the artist George Paston (G. P.), whom Miranda comes to regard as a symbol of hope for humankind - to her he is what men should strive to become. George Paston represents an authentic way of being, the Fowles' substitution of a God in the modern age, as Miranda manifests:

"I've

been

lying

on

the

bed

with

G.P.'s

picture

beside me. Holding the frame in one hand. Like a crucifix." (CR, p. 273)


Miranda describes G. P. as the sort of mind. She lists various ways he has changed her thinking, most of which involved instructions

about

how

to

live

an

authentic

life,

which

is

exactly the same kind of action Fowles attempts for: "My first ambition has always been to alter the society I live in; that is, to affect other lives." (WH, p. 5).

In The Magus the character akin to Prospero, as to a God, is mysterious Maurice Conchis making an effort "to put Nicholas Urfe though his existentialist paces". (FF, p. 64) Even Nicholas Urfe refers to Conchis as Prospero (and even more times as to a God): "[Nicholas] 'You make a rotten Caliban.' [Lily] 'Then perhaps you shall take the part.' [Nicholas] 'I was rather hoping for Ferdinand.' [...] [Lily] 'Are you sure you have the skill for it?' [Nicholas] 'What I lack in skill I'll try to make up for in feeling.' [...] [Lily] 'Forbidden.' [Nicholas] 'By Prospero?'" (MG, p. 204)


Fowles

comments

on

Conchis:

"If

there

was

some

central

scheme beneath the (more Irish than Greek) stew of intuition about the nature of human existence - and of fiction - it lies perhaps

in

the

alternative

title,

whose

rejection

I

still

sometimes regret: The Godgame. I did intend Conchis to exhibit a series of masks representing human notions of God, from the supernatural to the jargon-ridden scientific; that is, a series of human illusions about something that does not exist in fact, absolute knowledge and absolute power. The destruction of such illusions seems to me still an eminently humanist aim; and I wish there were some super-Conchis who could put the Arabs and the Israelis, or the Ulster Catholic and Protestants, through the same heuristic mill as Nicholas. [...] God and freedom are totally antipathetic concepts; and men believe in their imaginary gods most often because they are afraid to believe in other thing. I am old enough to realize now that they do so sometimes with good reason." (Foreword to MG, p. 10)

In the character of Conchis we again see a wise-man opening minds of others and so proving them freedom. Malcolm Bradbury says about Conchis: "Conchis is Prospero, magician, psychopomp the mysterious creator of mysteries, the symbolist of the world


of the unseen, the agent of the supernatural, the psychic force that can lead us though to a new version of reality." (NI, p. 185)

2.2 Free Will Jean-Paul Sartre based his existentialism on human free will. According to him, if you can think, you have free will. As mentioned above, the absence of a Creator leaves man without a predefined nature. Without a nature, individuals are nothingness. It means the essence of man is a complete lack of everything.

Sartre

contended

that

nothingness

is

freedom

and

free will - so not only the individual is free, but the essence of mankind is freedom. As a result of this freedom, individuals are responsible for all their actions and thoughts. The

existentialists

believe

freedom

means

absolute

free

will - freedom of choice that is not limited by any condition. Fowles does not adopt this idea: "Physically and mentally we individuals bounce, carom, and ricochet like pin-table balls. I call [...] these beliefs or views among which we collide by classical

Greek

names:

sideros,

keraunos,

eleutheria.

necessity, lighting hazard, freedom." (WH, p. 413)

Iron


2.2.1 Iron Necessity "All our 'free' choices may be finally attributable to some conditioning over which we have no control. Even if we could establish the contrary - total free will - we are still limited, since to be completely free we should need an absolutely free field of choice as well as the freedom to choose in it. We are in fact confined to the courses of action available, perceivable and feasible to us. [...] Yet there remains the fact that we all have experience of situations when we feel [...] we choose freely. We perhaps, are almost certainly, machines; but we are machines so complex that they developed a relative freedom to choose. We are in a prison cell, but it is, or can be made to become,

a

comparatively

spacious

one;

and

inside

it

we

can

become relatively free." (AS, p. 68) The conditioning, Fowles noticed, is called necessity in philosophy. human

Necessity

activity

and

can

be

objective

described

as

rules

nature

of

relation and

between society.

According to Fowles, necessity "projects all those inevitable facts, only too real, that curtail or limit our freedom." (WH, p. 413) The most evident of these is death. Another cell we have to inhabit is formed "by eachness and ego, our difficult individuality" (WH, p. 413) causing we can dedicate our life to become "distinguishable and - we hope - distinguished." (WH, p.


413) This feeling of being nobody and desire to become somebody distinguished is in Fowles' terminology named the nemo (see 3.4 The Nemo). Clegg,

the

central

character

in

The

Collector,

reveals

his

dreams, in which we can observe his need to be distinguished: "[...] working together in a beautiful modern house in a big room with one of those huge glass windows; meeting there of the Bug Section, where instead of saying almost nothing in case I made mistakes we were the popular host and hostess." (CR, p. 10)

Fowles recognizes two ways how to free ourselves from the later mentioned necessity: asceticism and existentialism.

2.2.2 Freedom "Freedom springs from our instinct to revolt against iron necessity and from our perpetual doubt as to whether we can possess any verifiable freedom of will, or whether everything is not, finally determined for us." (WH , p. 413) Freedom is everything

in

progress.

It

destroys

all

values and its effects may be good or bad.

stasis

-

objective


Conchis defines freedom through his own experiences with the Germans on the island during the Second World War. The Germans ordered him to club the guerrilla leader to death telling him that if he disobeys the order, they would execute him and eighty hostages. Conchis refuses to act in a vision of freedom, that certainly is existential freedom, which also Fowles believes in: "He [the guerrilla leader] spoke out of a world the very opposite of mine. In mine life had no price. It was so valuable that it was literally priceless. In his, only one thing had that quality of pricelessness. It was eleutheria: freedom. He was the immalleable, the essence, the beyond reason, beyond logic, beyond civilization, beyond history. He was not God, because there is no God we can know. But he was a proof that there is a God that we can never know. He was the final right to deny. To be free to choose. He, or what manifested itself through him, even

included

the

insane

Wimmel,

the

despicable

Germans

and

Austrian troops. He was every freedom, from the very worst to the very best. The freedom to desert on the battlefield of Neuve Chapelle. The freedom to confront a primitive God at Seidevarre. The freedom to disembowel peasant girls and castrate with wirecutters. out

of

He the

was

something

very

essence

passed of

beyond

things

-

morality

that

but

sprang

comprehended

all,

the freedom to do all, and stood against only one thing - the


prohibition not to do all. [...] All I saw I saw in a matter of seconds, perhaps not in the time at all. Saw that I was the only person left in that square who had the freedom left to choose, and that the annunciation and defence of that freedom was more important than common sense, self-preservation, yes, than my own life, than the lives of the eighty hostages." (MG, p. 434) Conchis

sacrifices

his

own

and

hostages'

lives

for

the

freedom of whole humankind, because the most important choices are those affecting the free will of other individuals. Some of them may be affected negativelly (hostages), but decisions must promote freedom among the greatest number of beings (humankind).

2.3 Responsibility The feel

absence

of

anguish.

responsibility

Creator

The for

source all

together of his

that

with

free

anguish

actions

and

is

will in

makes man's

thoughts,

man deep

because,

according to Sartre, man is condemned to freedom. It means man is what he done in the past and what he is doing at the moment. Freedom and responsibility are an inseparable couple.


The

feeling

of

anguish

lead

to

a

tendency

to

embrace

what

Sartre calls Bad Faith. Bad Faith represents a self-deception in

which

without

person

free

views

will

is

himself also

without

without

free

will.

responsibility.

A

person

According

to Sartre, religion is a form of Bad Faith. If God does not exit, everything is permitted and if everything is permitted, nothing

is

forbidden

-

man

is

responsible

for

his

actions,

because there is no fate that will be fulfilled whatever we do. Conchis realizes this fact and mediates it to Nicholas in his recollections of war: "I saw that this cataclysm must be an

expiation

for

some

barbarous

crime

of

civilization,

some

terrible human lie. What the lie was, I had too little knowledge of history or science to know then. I know now it was our believing that we were fulfilling some end, serving some plan - that all would come out well in the end, because there was some great plan over all. Instead of the reality. There is no plan. All is hazard. And the only thing that will preserve us is ourselves." (MG, pp. 128 - 129) Fowles

believes

man

should

not

to

belong

to

any

political

party, nor 'any block, organization, group, clique, or school whatever.',

because

it

threatens

individual

freedom.

In

The

Aristos he claims that "Existentialism is inherently hostile to all organization of society and belief that does not permit the


individual to choose, so often as he likes, to belong to it." (AS, p. 122) He also adds that "to most people it is pleasure to conform and a pleasure to belong." (AS, p. 123) It is rooted in their desire to get rid of social responsibility. For when man is responsible for his choices, he is not only responsible for his self, but he is responsible for all men. This is evident, when Fowles - via Conchis - is explaining the reason why World War Two took its place: "[Conchis] 'The human race is unimportant. It is the self that must not be betrayed.' [Nicholas] 'I suppose one could say that Hitler didn't betray his self.' He turned. [Conchis] ' You are right. He did not. But millions of Germans did betray their selves. That was the tragedy. Not that one man had the courage to be evil. But that millions had not the courage to be good.'" (MG, p. 132)

Much more simpler escape from responsibility can be found in Frederick her:

Clegg's

"Suddenly

I

excuse

for

kidnapping

saw

way

out.

a

I

Miranda,

said,

I'm

he only

provides obeying

orders." (CR, p. 32) When Miranda asks 'whose orders?', Clegg denies his freedom of choice: "I said, I have to. I stole some


money from the bank, I'd go to prison if they found out, he holds it over me, you see." (CR, p. 34) Existentialism would object to him that all decisions are individual and so each being is responsible for his or her choices.

3.0 The States of Being Jean-Paul Sartre distinguishes , in his novel Being and Nothingness, two states of being: a life in Bad Faith (Beingin-Itself) and an authentic life (Being-for-Itself). Similarly, Fowles maintains the idea of mankind divided into two groups the Few and the Many.

3.1 Being-in-Itself Sartre uses the French en-soi, which means in-itself, to describe the state of being of objects. The essence of objects precedes their existence. It means, for instance, a rock is a rock and it cannot change what it is. It possesses no freedom and therefore no responsibility. Existentialists demand that a human life must be authentic i.e. everybody should define themselves though actions and must take the ultimate responsibility for those actions - but not


everybody is able to achieve the authenticity. Fowles labels these inauthentic people the Many. The best example of such a person is the central character in The Collector - Frederick Clegg. Clegg is a twenty-five-year-old orphaned son of lower-middleclass

parents

suffers

from

working

as

a

clerk

in

feelings

of

inferiority

a

town-hall

and

office.

personal

He

inadequacy

with constant fear of criticism and failure. Clegg,

as

an

inauthentic

character,

sees

himself

and

also

another human beings to have the status of an object. He states: "I think we are just insects, we live a bit and then die and that's the lot. There's no mercy in things. There's not even a Great Beyond. There's nothing." (CR, 277) This decrease of human being is obvious from the very beginning, when he, as a

collector

of

butterflies,

observes

Miranda

as

he

would

a

butterfly and keeps an 'observation diary' about her. "Seeing her always made me feel like I was catching a rarity, going up to it very careful, heart-in-mouth as they say. A Pale Clouded Yellow, for instance." (CR, 9)

John Fowles reveals deeper meaning of the theme of collecting in his essay The Blinded Eye: "First of all, I was a collector. One of the reasons I wrote and named - my novel The Collector was to


express my hatred of this lethal perversion. All natural-history collectors in the end collect the same thing: the death of the living. [...] collecting animate objects such as birds' eggs or insects for pleasure must be evil. No moral choice of our time is clearer." (WH, pp. 309-310)

According to Martin HilskĂ˝, the collecting of butterflies represents a consumer manner of life - a bourgeois' desire to have,

instead

of

to

be

often

described

by

existentialists.

Miranda says about him: "He doesn't care what I say or how I feel - my feelings are meaningless to him - it's fact that he's got me. [...] It's me he wants, my look, my outside; not my emotions or my mind or my soul or even my body. Not anything human. He is a collector. That's the great dead thing in him." (CR, p. 161) The idea

of

story

is

full

of

existentialism.

In

symbols this

that terms

correspond Frederick

with

the

represents

the consumer part of society, that Miranda called New People (the

Many,

Calibans).

They

are

an

enemy

of

intellectuals

-

of authentic human beings: "The Rape of Intelligence. By the moneyed

masses,

the

New

People"

(CR,

p.

251).

People

like

Frederick are 'swallowed' by the world, they become members of a crowd instead of being strong authentic individuals as Clegg


expresses: "I was a private in the army. You can't tell me. My lot just do what they're told and better loot out if they don't." (CR, p. 134) Miranda describes them as "People who would never see, feel, dance, draw, cry at music, feel the world, the west wind. Never be in any real sense." (CR, p. 188) Clegg's The

Tempest,

nickname represents

Caliban, evil.

taken Miranda

from thinks

Shakespearean about

their

relationship as "It's a battle between Caliban and myself. He is the New People and I am the Few." (CR, p. 231). But it is also impossible to overlook connection between Caliban and a cannibal. Cannibals are any eaters of the flesh of their own species, but on the social level of existence they eat liberty, a possibility to express oneself - in a word, they eat goodness. There is very strong position of sexual intercourse as a symbol of creating new values, which is really exciting. As mentioned above G. P. stands for an authentic being in The Collector. We come to know he is promiscuous, which Miranda comments: "His promiscuity is creative. Vital. Even though it hurts. He creates love and life and excitement around him; he lives, the people he loves remember him." (CR, p. 246) She also reveals her intention to became authentic and adds to the previous utterance: "I've always felt like it sometimes. Promiscuous. Anyone I see, even just some boy in the Tube, some man, I think what would he be


like in bed. I look at their mouths and their hands, put on a prim expression and think about them having me in bed." (CR, p. 246) On the other hand, we also come to the knowledge of Clegg's sexual disability - his disability to be creative. Clegg

is

not

able

to

create

art

and

also

not

able

to

understand it, because art is a symbol of a product of the authentic living.

3.2 Being-for-Itself In contrast to being-in-itself being-for-itself.

It

is

the

is Sartre's pour-soi, meaning

state

of

being,

in

which

being

is aware of itself. It is the state where existence precedes essence. It is an authentic life. Sartre believes we always have the ability to choose a new state of being. Being-for-itself means to possess free will and to be responsible for it. Fowles talks about the Few to mark authentic human beings. For him the Few are those intelligent, well-informed people, who are able to 'give, symphatise, understand, but above all to create'.

Speaking about the states of being, we can distinguish three types of characters in Fowles' novels: i. the authentic - proving freedom - George Paston and Maurice Conchis;


ii. the inauthentic - Frederick Clegg; iii.

the

mid-authentic

-

those

in

the

search

for

their

authenticity - Miranda Grey and Nicholas Urfe.

The last mentioned characters are principal for Fowles' fiction. They - rather inauthentic at the very beginning - personally experience the boundary situation (Ger. die Grenz-situation) and become more or less authentic at the end. 3.2.1 The Boundary Situation Existentialism is based upon the principle of irrationalism. It means our existence cannot be understood by our consciousness, our logic. We need to meet the boundary situation - i.e. death, divorce,

sickness,

failure,

guilt,

addiction

etc.

-

to

see

that we are existence, to understand the real values of this existence. Such a hitting of boundary situation can change our thoughts and actions. What we had previously lived for may now appear as a fantasy - a live in Bad Faith. This is the way how the boundary situation can lead us to authentic being. In the Foreword to The Magus, Fowles refers to the boundary situation as 'the heuristic mill'. Both The Collector and The Magus are novels that engage the boundary situation to change characters' view of reality, to make them authentic.


3.2.1.1 Miranda Grey Starting with The Collector, we are going to observe, how Miranda

was

influenced

by

the

imprisonment,

because

when

we

look on imprisoning as on a process of dying, we realize she experienced the boundary situation and so face to face to death she starts to understand the sense of life. Miranda's diary is the result of such experience and she realizes it: "A strange thought: I would not want this not to have happened . Because if

I

escape

I

shall

be

a

completely

different

and

I

think

better person. Because if I don't escape, if something dreadful happened, I shall still know that the person I was and would have stayed if this hadn't happened was not the person I now want to be." (CR, p. 251) Miranda

Grey,

relationship

twenty-one-year-old with

the

painter

art

George

student, Paston.

has

a

complex

At

first

she

refuses him because of their age difference, his history of sexual infidelity and ugly appearance: "He is going bald and he has a nose like a Jew's, though he isn't (not that I'd mind if he was). And the face is too broad." (CR, p. 171) But as she getting more and more authentic, she describes her growing attraction to G. P. She can recognize the true worth of him. Miranda is going towards her mature existence and she realizes she feels some sympathy for Clegg. She struggles with herself to


define this sympathy: "I feel a responsibility towards him that I don't really understand. I so often hate him. I think I ought to forever hate him. Yet I don't always. My pity wins, and I do want to help him. I think of people I could introduce him to. [...] I'd be like Emma and arrange a marriage for him." (CR, p. 229) Miranda, as a member of the Few - comes to feel a certain responsibility for Clegg, she believes she must redeem him.

In her fanatic desire to escape, Miranda decides to use violence against Clegg, which is very alien for her: "But I lay in the bath and thought. I decided it must be done. I had to catch up the axe and hit him with the blunt end, knock him out. I hadn't the least idea where on the head was the best place to hit or how hard it had to be. [...] As we went out through the kitchen door, I dropped my talcum powder and things and stood to one side, towards the window-sill, as if I was looking to see where they'd gone. He did just what I wanted and bent forward to pick them up. I wasn't nervous, I picked the axe up very neatly, I didn't scrape the blade and it was the blunt end. But then... it was like walking up out of a bad dream. I had to hit him and I couldn't but I had to. [...] I did hit him. [...] I suddenly felt I had to kill him or he would kill me. I hit him again, but he had his arm up, at the same time he kicked


out and knocked me off my feet. I

was

too

horrible.

Panting,

straining,

like

animals.

Then

suddenly I knew it - I don't know, undignified." (CR, pp. 226 227) Miranda realizes that by doing violence to Clegg she will only injure herself: "I am ashamed. I let myself down vilely. I've come to a series of decisions. Thoughts. Violence and force are wrong. If I use violence I descent to his level." (CR, p. 228) Her self-confidence of being authentic individuality increases: "I am a moral person. I am not ashamed of being moral. I will not let Caliban make me immoral; even though he deserves all my hatred and bitterness and an axe in his head." (CR, p. 228) Later, she appreciates her doing as an existentialist one, because of importance of every single choice: "[...] killing him was breaking my word to what I believe. Some people would say - you're only a drop, your word-breaking is only a drop, it wouldn't matter. But all the evil in the world's made up of little drops. It's silly talking about the unimportance of the little drops. The little drops and the ocean are the same think." (CR, p. 234)

The reason for Miranda's failure to redeem Clegg springs from

her

belief

that

she

can

persuade

him

to

act

goodness


by

means

of

logical

arguments,

but

our

existence

cannot

be

understood by our consciousness, our logic. We can conceive that the only possible way that would change Clegg is to put him though some boundary situation.

3.2.1.2 Nicholas Urfe In The Magus we are going to deal with Nicholas Urfe and 'his journey of self-discovery'. The novel consists of three parts. Malcolm Bradbury writes about it: "The Magus begins in a world of familiar day-to-day reality; it shifts into a universe of theatrical mysteries; and it finally returns us to the dayto-day

world

conscious

that

the

mysteries

are

not

simply

a

theatrical extravaganza but a species of vision about our own needs and desires." (NI, p. 182) The purpose of this three-part structure is to show how the second part providing the boundary situation changes the reality from the first part into the third part reality. In fact, these two realities are the same, but as Nicholas undergoes the second part boundary situation, he sees it in another way. And this is what existentialists call subjectivism.


Nicholas is a twenty-five-year-old Englishman with a middleclass background. He has studied at Oxford, where he "began to discover I was not the person I wanted to be." (MG, p. 15) And so he decides to take a position as the English teacher at the Lord Byron School on the island of Phraxos in Greece to escape from

'a

spiritually

girlfriend

Alison.

unstimulating' During

his

London

first

six

and

his

months

on

'common' Phraxos

Nicholas realizes he cannot write good poetry. This fact with some other circumstances almost lead him to commit a suicide. The first part of the novel ends at this point. In the second part Nicholas starts to spend lot of time with Conchis, who tells Nicholas his recollections, which starts to be performed around Nicholas. Bourani appears to be a theatre with never-ending performance, where everything is possible and permitted. The Conchis' recollections are something like breakpoints of his life. He tells Nicholas about the boundary situations he has experienced. For example, he speaks about his participation in

the

First

World

War:

"Try

to

imagine

that

one

day

you

discover a sixth, a till then unimagined new sense - something not

comprehended

in

feeling,

seeing,

the

conventional

five.

But a far profounder sense, the source from which all others spring. The world "being" no longer passive and descriptive, but


active... almost imperative. Before the night was ended I knew that I had had what religious people would call a conversion. A light in heaven indeed shone on me, for there were constant star-shells. But I had no sense of God. Only of having leapt a lifetime in one night." (MG, p. 130) Another boundary situation releasing Conchis' sense of freedom is obvious when he refuses to club the guerrilla leader to death and so condemns himself and eighty hostages to death. (see 2.2.2 Freedom) The later mentioned scene seems to be the end of metatheatre, actors

but

the

present

behavioural

novel

climaxes

themselves

experiment

on

as

in

the

'trial',

psychologists

Nicholas.

The

final

when

practising report

the a

reveals

about him: "To sum up, he is behaviourally the victim of a repetition-compulsion

that

he

has

failed

to

understand.

In

every environment he looks for those elements that allow him feel isolated, that allow him to justify his withdrawal from meaningful

social

responsibilities

consequent

regression

into

the

and

relationships

infantile

state

of

and

his

frustrated

self-gratification." (MG, p. 510) Subsequently, Conchis comes to tell Nicholas that Nicholas is

now

elect

and

that

he

has

no

choice.

And

then

Conchis

adds "Learn to smile, Nicholas. Learn to smile." (MG, p. 531) This

is

very

important

point,

because

here

we

can

see

the


keywords disclosing existentialist background of the novel. To be elect means to understand the essence of being - to live authentically; Sartre's being-for-itself. In Fowles' terminology it means to be a member of the Few. The Conchis' intention to make Nicholas live authentically is now evident also at the beginning of the novel, where the following dialog takes place: "[Conchis] 'Are you elect?' [Nicholas] 'Elect?' [Conchis] 'Do you feel chosen by anything?' [Nicholas] 'Chosen?' [Conchis] 'John Leverrier felt chosen by God.' [Nicholas] 'I don't believe in God. And I certainly don't feel chosen.' [Conchis] 'I think you may be.' I smiled dubiously. [Nicholas] 'Thank you.' [Conchis] 'It is not a compliment. Hazard makes you elect. You cannot elect yourself.' [Nicholas] 'And what chooses me?' [Conchis] 'Chance wears many faces.'" (MG, p. 87)


Nicholas is not only elect, but he has also no choice not to be elect: Sartre marks it that 'man is condemned to freedom'. To be free is the only human non-freedom.

The smile represents the physical appearance of the knowledge that one is elect. Nicholas comments on Conchis' smile that "It was above all the smile of dramatic irony, of those who have privileged information." (MG, p. 147) Later, Conchis makes sense of that smile in existentialist context: "It is a manifestation of freedom. It is because there is freedom that there is the smile. Only a totally predetermined universe could be without it. In the end it is only by becoming the victim that one escapes the ultimate joke - which is precisely to discover that by constantly slipping away one has slipped away. One exists no more, one is no longer free. That is what the great majority of our fellow-men have always to discover. And will have always to discover." (MG, pp. 437 - 438) At the beginning Nicholas dislikes this smile. Then he meets the boundary situation in a form of the meta-theatre and finally he discovers the profound meaning of it: "It came to me that he meant something different by 'smile' than I did; that the irony, the humourlessness, the ruthlessness I had always noticed in his smiling was a quality he deliberately inserted; that for him the


smile was something essentially cruel, because freedom is cruel, because the freedom that makes us at least partly responsible for what we are is cruel. So that the smile was not so much an attitude to be taken to life as the nature of the cruelty of life, a cruelty we cannot even choose to avoid, since it is human existence." (MG, p. 531) He also adds: "I had this: being obscurely victorious. Being free again, but in a new freedom... purged in some way." (MG, p. 533)

Some

critics

doubt

whether

there

is

any

development

of

the

hero, especially because of Nicholas' two sentences asking for the purpose of Conchis' meta-theatre: "I'm a born cad, a swine whatever you want. But why the colossal performance just to tell one miserable moral bankrupt what he is?" (MG, p. 626) But as the last chapter opens, Nicholas recognizes that Conchis' game has been beneficial to him: "Whatever it was, something in me changed. I was still the butt, yet in another sense; Conchis's truths [...] matured in me. Slowly I was learning to smile, and in the special sense that Conchis intended." (MG, p. 646)

Finally, we can state that Nicholas Urfe has developed to a real authentic hero. It is evident in his evaluation of his previous life in Bad Faith: "[...]; but all my life I had tried


to turn life into fiction, to hold reality away; always I had acted as if a third person was watching and listening and giving me marks for good or bad behaviour - a god like a novelist, to whom I turned, like a character with the power to please, the sensitivity to feel slighted, the ability to adapt himself to whatever variation

he of

believed the

the

novelist-god

super-ego

I

had

wanted.

created

This

myself,

leechlike fostered

myself, and because of it I had always been incapable of acting freely. It was not my defence, but my despot. And now I saw it." (MG, p. 539) The following Nicholas' statement proves that he has accepted existence in existentialist sense of meaning : "There were no watching eyes. [...] we were alone." (MG, p. 655)

3.3 The Few and The Many John

Fowles

defines

these

two

groups

of

people

in

his

The

Aristos. It is obvious that the Few are in very close relation to being-for-itself and the Many to being-in-itself. What is interesting on this Fowles' division is the relation between the Few and the Many. Fowles comes from a Greek philosopher, Heraclitus, who divided mankind into 'a moral and intellectual ĂŠlite' and an unthinking, conforming mass - 'hoi polloi, the many'.


Fowles claims that most of the achievement, most of the great evolutionary

steps

have

come

from

individuals.

It

does

not

matter, whether it has been in the field of science, art and religion etc. It is clear for him, that the vast mass of mankind are not very intelligent, nor highly moral, nor artistically gifted. This is the reason to divide mankind into two clearly defined

groups:

a

Few

that

is

'excellent'

and

a

Many

that

is 'despicable, is idiotic'. The most important about this theory is that "the dividing line between the Few and the Many must run through each individual, not between individuals." (AS, pp. 9 - 10) It simply indicates that nobody is wholly perfect and nobody wholly imperfect. Society has constantly seen life as a battle between the Few and the Many. Fowles' purpose in The Collector was to analyze some of the results of this battle. He tried to show that Clegg is largely the result of a bad education and environment. For he had no control over these factors, he is 'virtually innocent': "In short, I tried to establish the virtual innocence of the Many." (AS, p. 10) Similarly, Miranda had very little control over

what

she

was.

She

had

good

parents

and

education

and

inherited intelligence, but it does not mean she was perfect, because she was arrogant and snobbish. Fowles conceives about her

that

"[...]

if

she

had

not

died

she

might

have

become


something

better,

the

kind

of

being

humanity

so

desperately

needs." (AS, p. 10) The fundamental difference between the existentialist conception of

division

biological

of

society

determinism

of

and

the

the

Fowles'

latter

one

lies

mentioned.

in

Fowles

the deals

with the terms 'the biological Few' and 'the biological Many'. He states we have to admit that we are not, and will never be, born equal, but we are all born with equal human rights. The Many should be educated out of their feeling of inferiority and the

Few

means

should

to

importance

bear of

be

educated

responsibility good

education

that

having

for

it.

and

Fowles

biological

This

shows

asserts

advantage the

great

that

right

education is the way how to achieve freedom: "If we are only relatively free, then it must be so that we shall evolve a greater relative freedom. This freedom is something that has to be gained: both by the individual in his own lifetime, and by the species during its long history. It is obvious what it is gained by: greater intelligence and greater knowledge, both of self and of life. In practical social terms it requires a higher general standard of education and a different kind of education. Above all it requires social equality. Freedom of will is strictly related to freedom of living condition." (AS, p. 70)


The

fact

in

Fowles'

novels

is,

that

in

search

for

our

authenticity, the education is as important as a hitting of a boundary situation. Both Miranda Grey and Nicholas Urfe have been well educated and therefore they are prepared to make the best use of a boundary situation. The reason for Miranda's failure to redeem Clegg springs not only from her belief that she can persuade him to act goodness by means of logical arguments, or from that she did not put Clegg though some boundary situation. Miranda realizes the fact he

lacks

appropriate

education

and

therefore

she

appeals

to

Clegg: "You can change, you're young, you've got money. You can learn. [...] You have money - as a matter of fact, you aren't stupid, you could become whatever you liked. Only you've got to shake off the past. You've got to kill your aunt and the house you lived in and the people you lived with. You've got to be a new human being." (CR, p. 76)

3.4 The Nemo If we want to more clearly define the difference between the Few and the Many, we should profoundly deal with the concept of the nemo. Fowles defines it in his The Aristos

as the sense that

you are nothing or nobody. According to him, it is, beside the


desires for sexual satisfaction and security, a special psychic force. It is a function of civilization, of communication and of

the

human

ability

to

compare

and

hypothesize.

It

is,

as

mentioned above, necessity limiting our freedom. The concept of the nemo is our desire to become 'somebody'. We have different ideas of what to be 'somebody' means, but there are certain general points. To be 'somebody' means: i. to make one's name known; ii. to have power -it does not matter whether physical, social, intellectual, artistic or political; iii. to be remembered: to extend beyond the body and the body's life.

Fowles

states

that

our

desire

to

become

'somebody'

has

constituted 'the new paradise', which we can access by actions actions good or bad that will be remembered.

There are two principal ways to defeat the nemo: to conform or to conflict. The Many choose to conform to society they live in, they will use 'agreed symbols of success, the status symbols' to prove they are somebody. They are the mass. They are not able to choose and control their lives. They are shaped by surrounding


conditions and lack free will. Fowles provides us introspection inside Clegg's mind: "I think the nemo [...] can drive all of us to violence and unreason. Though all human history it has been the hidden motive - that unbearable desire to prove oneself somebody - behind countless insanities and acts of violence." (WH, p. 444)

On the other hand, the Few counter the nemo by conflicting. They adopt their own special style of life and make a 'unique persona' of themselves. They are creative and so 'nemo-killing'. We can also state that the Few are existentialists in their life philosophy, because "The best existentialism tries to reestablish in the individual a sense of his uniqueness [...], and a realization of the need he has to learn to choose and control his own life. Existentialism is then, among other things, an attempt

to

combat

the

ubiquitous

and

increasingly

dangerous

sense of the nemo in modern man." (AS, p. 121)

4.0 Conclusion We

can

state

that

Fowles'

first

two

novels

are

based

on

existentialist premises. The characters created by him live in the world without God. This fact leaves them free, but also


responsible for their acts.

Unlike

in

the

existentialist

theory,

Fowles'

characters

are

not born free. They must fight for their freedom. They must get

rid

of

social

determinism

by

means

of

good

education

and subsequently hit on a boundary situation (Ger. die Genzsituation) to understand themselves and the nature of freedom.

We can distinguish three types of characters in Fowles' early fiction. Fist, there are authentic characters - the Few, who try to open the minds of others and so to provide them freedom. They perform as a God substitution in the present world and their freedom is guaranteed by their creativity. Second,

the

characters

opposite

to

the

authentic

called

the Many are members of the mass instead of being authentic individuals. Fowles comments on it that "Existentialism is the revolt

of

individual

against

all

those

systems

of

thought,

theories of psychology, and social and political pressures that attempt to rob him of his individuality." (AS, p. 122) These inauthentic personas just conform the society and therefore they will never achieve real freedom. Their main desire is to be distinguished, to prove they are 'somebody', what can lead them


to the usurpation of power and its irresponsible usage in acts of violence. Finally, there are the mid-authentic characters, who search for

their

freedom.

They

constitute

the

fulcrum

of

both

The

Collector and The Magus. At the very beginning, they are rather inauthentic, but as plot moves they hit on the above-mentioned boundary situation and become more or less authentic at the end.

We conclude that the general idea behind Fowles' fiction is

that

of

relativity.

He

also

defines

the

philosophy

of

existentialism in this way: "There traditional

is

an

codes

of

invitation morality

in and

existentialism behaviour,

to

reject

especially

when

these are imposed by authority or society without any clear justification

except

that

of

tradition.

There

is

constant

invitation to examine motives; [...] existentialist has by his belief to judge every situation on its merits, to assess his motives anew before every situation, and only then to choose. [...] Existentialism is not a philosophy, but a way of looking at, and utilizing, other philosophies. It is a theory of relativity among theories of absolute truth." (AS, p. 122)


Bibliography

Baštín, Š. - Olexa, J. - Studená, Z.: Dejiny americkej literatúry. Bratislava, Obzor, 1993.

anglickej

a

Bradbury, M.: The Novelist as Impresario: John Fowles. In. Hazzel, S. (ed.): The English Novel: Developments in Criticism since Henry James. London, The Macmillan Press Ltd., 1998.

Butler, L. St J.: John Fowles and the Fiction of Freedom. In. Acheson, J. (ed.): The British and Irish Novel Since 1960. Chippenham, Anthony Rowe Ltd, 1993, 62-77.

Fowles, J. - Vipond, D.: An Unholy Inquisition. In. Relf, J. (ed.): Wormholes. London, Jonathan Cape Ltd, 1998, 433-456.

Fowles, J.: I Write Therefore I Am. In. Relf, Wormholes. London, Jonathan Cape Ltd, 1998, 5-13.

J.

(ed.):

FOWLES, J.: Larva. Praha, Volvox Globator, 2000.

FOWLES, J.: Mantisa. Praha, Rybka Publishers, 1999.

Fowles, J.: Notes on an Unfinished Novel. In. Relf, J. (ed.): Wormholes. London, Jonathan Cape Ltd, 1998, 14-29.

Fowles, J.: The Aristos. London, Pan Books Ltd, 1993.

Fowles, J.: The Collector. London, Vintage, 1998.

Fowles, J.: The Blinded Eye. In. Relf, J. (ed.): Wormholes. London, Jonathan Cape Ltd, 1998, 308-319.


Fowles, 1996.

J.:

The

French

Lieutenant's

Woman.

London,

Vintage,

Fowles, J.: The Magus: a revised version. London, Vintage, 1997.

Fowles, J.: The Nature of Nature. In. Relf, J. (ed.): Wormholes. London, Jonathan Cape Ltd, 1998, 408-429.

Hilský, M.: Fowlesova studie kalibanství aneb alegorický přiběh jako thriller. In. Fowles, J.: Sběratel. Praha, Odeon, 1988, 281-295

MACHOVEC, M.: Tradicionalista i novátor John Fowles a jeho prozaické miniatury. In. FOWLES, J.: Věž z ebenu. Praha, Nakladatelství Lidové noviny, 1997, 330-339.

OLIVERIUSOVÁ, E. - GRMELA, J. - HILSKÝ, M. - MAREK, J.: Dějiny anglické literatury. Praha, SPN, 1988.

ROZENTAĽ, M. M.: Filozofický slovník. Bratislava, Pravda, 1974.

SARTRE, J. P.: Existencialismus je humanismus. In. ZELENÝ, J.: Úvod do filozofie. Praha, Svoboda, 1969, 280-300.

The Notion of Freedom in John Fowles' Novels  

Fowles treats the problem of freedom from countless viewpoints, but freedom in the existentialist sense seems to play a central role in his...