I’m pleased to announce that the next selection for the The Magician and the Fool by Barth Anderson. Here’s a synopsis:

For hundreds of years, men have sought their futures in the legendary images of the tarot—but what secrets of the past are harbored by the priestess, the magician, the hanged man and the fool? Years ago, fallen scholar Jeremiah Rosemont left the bitter rivalries of academia behind for a simple nomadic life in South America. But he can’t escape his past or the dangerous truth that lurks beneath his abandoned studies. Following an enigmatic summons to Rome, Rosemont finds himself at the center of a mystery that dates back to the fall of Troy and the legendary “first” tarot deck.

Nominated for a Lambda Literary Award for Best LGBT SF/Fantasy/Horror, The Magician and the Fool is a lyrical, dreamlike thriller. Publishers Weekly says, “Anderson doesn’t make it easy on the reader, preferring to reveal his swirling, complex story bit by enigmatic bit. Those willing to surrender themselves to this talented author’s compelling vision will find a fevered dream universe where understanding in the normal sense is probably not possible, nor even necessary.”

How It Works
Discussion of the book will begin on Wednesday, March 3 in this thread. That means you have a whole month to get and read the book. I’ll be posting weekly reminders to help keep you on track. But once you start reading The Magician and the Fool, I doubt you’ll be able to put it down.

You can purchase The Magician and the Fool at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Borders or wherever fevered dream universes are sold.

Happy reading!

Welcome to the discussion of our latest FBOTU Book Club selection: The Magician and the Fool by Barth Anderson. Feel free to jump right in and let us know your thoughts, reactions and insights. Here are a few questions to get us started:

On page 149, as Boy King is unpacking the Watts deck, a voice says, “Your consciousness can march only one thought at a time through the luminous doorway of your mind. To live, you assume that you must eliminate some thoughts or make a smear of them all into one manageable thought. One person with a single file of thoughts. One arch. That’s the way of the human mind. But it’s not our way.”

Do you think the book, with its many planes of reality, magic, identity and time exemplifies the tyros’ non-linear way of thinking?

Identity is a major theme throughout the book: discovering it, losing it, sharing it. To what extent do you think people lose or create a new identity when they enter a relationship? When you entwine your identity with someone else’s, what do you lose or gain? What did Rosemont and Miles lose or gain?

The author, Barth Anderson, is apparently a heterosexual man. What is the value of making Rosemont and Miles gay? Do you believe Miles was ever gay? Or just under the control of Rosemont? Was it ultimately “safer” or more believable to tell this story about gay men, instead of two straight men?

I have many more thoughts and questions, but that should get us started! Thanks for reading the book for joining in the discussion!

On non-linear thinking:
The book never would have worked in a linear fashion.  It would have lost a lot of its mystery.  As it was, I had to re-read the final “battle” and then go back and read all the Boy King sections in order so I could gain a better understand of BK himself and the book as a whole.  I think Anderson did a good job not only of replicating the slipstream consciousness of a tyro, but also evoking the fragmented and disorienting memories associated with emotional trauma.  I view the book in a similar manner as I do “Kill Bill”, which also would have lost its impact as a linear story.  In both cases, you’re forced to re-analyze information since you’re kind of forced to take things at face value right away.  Like the tarot, you’re forced to figure out the information on your own because Anderson isn’t providing easy answers for you.

On identity:
When you enter into a relationship of any kind, you have to keep a hold of your own identity while also forming a communal identity with the other party.  Both Miles and Rosemont were reluctant to give up anything of themselves and form this communal identity since they feared losing themselves in it.  This may explain why they constantly argued while remaining best friends.  Miles seemed more willing to form the communal identity and tried to convince Rosemont to look at things differently so that they might get the process started.  Rosemont saw Miles’ admittedly clumsy attempts at this as personal attacks on sense of control (no matter how conscious or subconscious that sense was) and responded with indifference.

It doesn’t help that both men respond to the world in completely opposite ways.  Miles tends to react to situations by attacking the problem, while Rosemont reacts to the world by defending against it.  Miles’ constant jibes at Rosemont’s expense, although really Miles’ own way of bringing Rosemont out of his shell and awaken his understanding of the world, only caused Rosemont to raise his shields up higher.  This is one of the clearest metaphors to the cosmic struggle of Khnum (power) over the Etruscan Discipline (defense).

When both men are “stitched together” after Miles takes Rosemont’s place in the torture chair, they’re forced to do exactly the thing they feared.  They’re not only forced into a communal bond, they’re forced to live almost entirely inside of it and define themselves within it.  Even then, there are signs that they fight to maintain their own identities, even if they don’t truly remember who they are anymore.  The experience has changed both of them, however.  Both of them are now more open to the world and looking at things beyond their own needs, with Miles learning the power of subtlety and Rosemont learning the grace that comes with submission and acceptance.

On the gay stuff:
I think Anderson didn’t HAVE to make both men gay, but I think that in doing so he made the relationship much more believable, much more organic.  There’s a very strong love/hate bond between the men, and I think that making them both straight would have made that seemed forced and strained.  Anderson could have made them brothers, but that would have been far too obvious and would have given up the game immediately.  After all, Miles is supposed to be Romulus asking for forgiveness for what he’s done to his more powerful-but-forgotten brother Remus/Rosemont after building the new “city” of their gestalt identity.

Do I think Miles was gay?  Possibly.  He may have been bi.  He may simply felt a very strong attraction to Rosemont.  Anderson isn’t trying to make any kind of commentary about what it means to be gay in the world (aside from a few references to bashing).  Rosemont and Miles are two men who happen to have had an intense love affair in the past.

The final scene of the book, when Boy King merges with his reflection, would have had none of the emotional impact if the two had not been lovers.  I don’t remember the final pages of a book haunting me the way that the last words in this work did.  It’s an amazingly resonant act of redemption and forgiveness and love.

General thoughts:
Whoever wrote the summary on the back of the book did a hell of a job.  The summary really tries to sell the book as a “Da Vinci Code” style thriller, and while the Rosemont narrative DOES have elements of that, that isn’t the focus of the book at all.  The REAL story of the book is the Boy King narrative, with the Rosemont narrative being an extended flashback of sorts.  The plot isn’t a quest to stop the Watts deck from falling into Visconti’s hands.  The real plot is Miles seeking forgiveness for his sins against Rosemont, not just his body-swapping act in the warehouse but for bringing distance between them during their times together.

The Watts deck is just a big, giant MacGuffin.  It’s even said that Rosemont doesn’t need the deck to use his abilities, and in the end it’s destroyed by throwing it into the deep fryer of a greasy spoon bar.  After all, Boy King (who is Rosemont and Miles in one) is told he “is the Grail.” The deck itself is just a series of paintings: it’s the user that invests all the meaning and power into them since they have none on their own, which is honestly exactly how I’ve always believed tarot should work.  The cards are a tool to hone your own intuition and focus your connection to the universe, not a series of magic 8-balls.

That’s not to say the Rosemont narrative isn’t worth reading, because it’s exciting in and of itself.  Anderson has a wonderful style and he lightens up his occasionally heavy atmospherics with pieces of sly humor.  I personally love the meeting at a Chi-Chi’s in the middle of Rome and the fact that one of Visconti’s henchmen is just called Kermit for his resemblance to the frog.  The more I think about the book, the more it’s allowed to digest in my brain, the more fascinated by it I become.

Cliche book review start: I really enjoyed this book… but...wow, the ending.

First I have to agree with Johnny M about the non-linear story telling really making the story. It wouldn’t have had been nearly as interesting. Starting the story at Point A and going to Point B really would have made for an unreadable story as there wouldn’t have been any real suspense since the switching back and forth kept the action and suspense going. With that said, I’m not sure that the plot is all that strong or cohesive since without the switching back and forth the story would have been quite flat. Many authors employ this technique (Margaret Atwood, Audrey Niffenegger, Stephen King - just to name a few), but for it to be pulled off successfully there has to be a very well developed story and plot behind the scenes.

While I enjoyed the intertwining stories told in the book overall, I kind of felt like there were holes that were never quite filled in or explained by the end. Or rather they were supposed to be taken care of during the ending, but it was so poorly organized that I was left thinking, “What the hell is going on?” rather than, “Oh, that makes sense now.” The biggest WTF momen was when the BoyKing was getting trapped in the diner and rather than just slip through time/space as he’d done previously he destroys the cards - which supposedly he didn’t need anymore anyway - and is captured. But oh, yeah, it’s the BoyKing aka Miles in Rosemont’s body and Rosemont was the one who didn’t need the cards anymore but somehow Miles was still able to yoke Rosemont during the torture scene even though he’d never seen the deck. So some powers are dependent on the deck and some aren’t? Nearing the end he didn’t want to use the deck because then They (the Duke et al) would then be able to find him, but they had already found him anyway and he still didn’t use the deck.

It was just very bungled and confusing. If the BoyKing was so smart to have stayed hidden - or at least un-captured since apparently everyone from the CIA/FBI to a freakin’ Mall Cop (exaggerating a little) - knew his whereabouts in MN why wouldn’t he have used the cards and hidden himself again? His capture wasn’t the mechanism for saving Rosemont since apparently he was beyond help (besides the old woman who helped him return to some semblance of himself even though that was supposedly impossible since once broken by being yoked someone was supposed to remain a nutter) I don’t understand why he didn’t make an actual attempt at escape. Except, oh! that’s how he’s redeemed for his mistake by being saved by the very person he broke.

Using the Magician/Fool cards as a way to describe the relationship between Rosemont & Miles was an interesting device, but I’m not sure it was used to its full potential. The two characters’ personalities were definitely very similar with a few key differences but other than them bickering like an old married couple - because they were so similar - was really the only evidence of their duality.

Quite frankly I didn’t pick up on any gay subtext at all until the end when there was a flashback to the carnival tent of their youth.

So my take on the book overall: interesting story, good use of a literary device to further the story/plot, completely confusing ending sequence, somewhat trite (and cliche) redemption.

I think I sound a little more negative about the book than how I feel about it. I actually really, really enjoyed reading it. I sat down and opened the cover and read it all in one sitting. Even during the mish-mash of plot lines at the end I was still turning pages with lightening speed to see what happened next.  It was an enjoyable read but not anything that I’m in a rush to revisit. I might check out some of the author’s others books, but will definitely crack the cover to read a bit before buying.

Re: The deck.

It’s established in the book that there are people with special abilities who have never seen the deck.  Visconti, Priscilla, Marni, and Miles all seemed to have some degree of ability and none of them had ever handled the deck.  But all of them invested a tremendous amount of energy into the belief that the deck HAD powers on its own.  The deck helped awaken Rosemont to his inborn abilities, but that’s all.  He had all the abilities of a tyro previously, but he needed a catalyst to bring them out.  The deck itself didn’t do it, however: it was his understanding of the images behind tarot.  The deck was a tool to help a tyro focus his power, but it would be of no use to anyone who wasn’t a tyro.  Boy King destroyed the deck to remove its power from the world. 

So the deck has no power in and of itself.  It can’t be used like a gun or a magic wand.  It can only be used to help a tyro expand their already existing abilities.

When Miles yoked Rosemont, Rosemont was still new to his tyro abilities, and Miles was more experienced.  It was easy for him to do, and there are many instances of a tyro yoking someone absent any presence of the deck.  Rosemont, however, had never experienced the sensation, and coupled with the stress of his situation, his mind broke.  The idea was for Miles to switch bodies with Rosemont, Rosemont-in-Miles rescues Miles-in-Rosemont and they switch back.  But something went wrong, and Rosemont wasn’t strong enough to make it back.  Both consciousnesses ended up in Rosemont’s body with Miles being dominant but severely damaged.  As the years past, Rosemont started to reappear, most notably when Boy King has flashes into Rosemont’s childhood and believes it’s his (Miles’) own.

Rosemont appeared to have had the potential to possess massive amounts of magical power.  Everyone seemed to believe that was so.  But that didn’t mean he had full access to his powers when Visconti had him trapped in the torture chair. 

As for Boy King not escaping, it’s often said in his narrative that Boy King disliked using those powers if he didn’t have to.  He blamed them for what happened to Rosemont (or at least what he believed he had to do to save Rosemont’s life).  It was clear that a good portion of the authorities were either working for Visconti or were yoked by him (the ram’s head of Khnum was all over their uniforms), so he may have believed that no matter where he went, he would be found.  In desperation, he destroyed the deck so even if Visconti captured him, he would never be able to use the deck to increase his power. 

At least this is how I see it.  It is a very dense and confusing book that takes a lot to untangle.  Personally, I think there are a wide variety of interpretations of it.  I think Anderson may have tried to replicate the arcane images of a tarot deck itself, which mean different things to different people.

I wanted to enjoy this book, but I was unable to finish reading it. I was seven chapters in when I decided to put it down and not continue. No offense to the author it just wasn’t something I wanted to read after all. I received this book for free so I’d like to return the favor and offer it up to whomever wants it. Message me and I’ll mail it to you.

After finishing the book, I immediately started reading it again. I was surprised how carefully Anderson constructs the story, layering in symbols, foreshadowing and rich character details from the start. Upon finishing again, I’m curious what you all think of the issue of the missing children.

One of the strange occurrences that happens when Rosemont is around is what he describes (on page 32) as “The disappearances and reappearances of children.” Then a tyro, probably Visconti, yokes the Ellings and sends them to Boy King to test him. Later, as Boy King’s world begins to crumble and memories begin to come back, there’s a mention of a 2-year-old cousin, a girl, who may have died or disappeared in his presence. This, we can assume, is what causes the “vicious hole that had been torn in him,” as Rosemont observes. Then, when his memory is wiped after the yoking of Rosemont, the “tide took away Miles’s name, his face. It inhaled his two-year-old cousin, his aunt and uncle. It took the tragedy, the sorrow, the blame, the fuming acrimony, his epic instinct to flee, and the harrowing encounter in Sarajevo when he saw her again.”

Did Rosemont help him find her again, I wonder? More than just adding sort of a creepy layer to the mix, I think the missing children thread contributes to the overwhelming feeling of loss in the book. The loss of memory, the loss of self, the loss of identity. In the Ellings’ case, and possibly Miles’s cousin’s case, the loss is because of neglect. It’s a punishment.

It all left me wanting to know more about Miles, about his childhood and how he came to the Circus of Infinite Wow. Still, it’s enough for me to know that Rosemont filled that “vicious hole” in some way.

What do you all think?

I honestly didn’t pick up on the children.  I was too engaged in the story of the relationship between Miles, Rosemont, and Boy King.  I think there’s a whole lot of both Miles and Rosemont’s past that we’re not told.  Rosemont especially seemed to have a hard time as a child, and I would surmise that Miles’ childhood was no picnic, either.  I might have to read it a third time now because the children connection never connected in my head.  The only thing about children that clicked in my head was the triplet god-being that Rosemont meets in Rome, but that I saw more as a foreshadowing of Boy King’s fate. 

I saw the Ellings as more of Anderson’s commentary on how people are willing to exploit children for personal gain.  Tanya Elling was being used by her parents for publicity, for money, for status and fame.  Even if they truly loved her, they were using the tragedy of her disappearance to further themselves in society.  Rosemont, in a way, was used by his mother and Priscilla and the others as a child who all knew of his potential and sought to one day use his abilities for their own ends.  In both cases, the child broke free of those who would use them and formed a new life, Tanya Elling by becoming a new person in a new town and Rosemont by going through a complete spiritual transformation.

The Ellings made me think of the Wetterlings, who are well known up in Minnesota.  Their son Jacob went missing about 20 years ago and has never been found.  Patty Wetterling has become a well-known missing-child advocate and has twice unsuccessfully run for the U. S. House.  She was last defeated in 2006 by Michelle “Minnesota’s Official State Loon” Bachmann.  I don’t know if Anderson was consciously making a comparison or not, but I couldn’t help but make the connection.

I’ve just got the book yesterday from the library and unfortunately it was not for me. Interesting, no question about it, on that time i was finding the mcse book. but the style just did not work out for me. It reminded me of One King, One Soldier by A. Irvine, another similar, short book - though with the Grail not Tarot - that I found interesting but did not really enjoy due to style.