Negative Positive
Title: Wonderful 18th Century story coupled with bad Sci-Fi chaps.
Review: *A Maggot* contains the first bad writing I've seen from John Fowles. I hadn't thought he was capable of it. But he responds to the apparently irresistible temptation of British general fiction writers of the past 20-30 years -- he's just got to write SF. If you skip the SFnal parts (the Stonehenge "flyby" and Rebecca Lee's Ming-the-Merciless-esque testimony about the "June Eternal" people) it's a tremendous book, as unified a work as any of Fowles' others, very rich and thought-provoking. Readers not familiar with good SF may not object to Rebecca Lee's testimony. It is, however, hackneyed and illogical, not due to the 18th century filter, but due to the original vision which is being portrayed. Thomas More did somewhat better in 1516. The poor man is not even credited, which is so unlike John Fowles. I'm joking here - I can't understand the "Ancient Astronauts" inclusion in this book - otherwise, it is so good.
Is the review positive or negative? 