A review by berenikeasteria
Mary, Called Magdalene by Margaret George

3.0

Margaret George is well-known for her chunkster epics in historical fiction, each focusing on the life tale of one historical figure. Thus far she’s told the stories of the lives of Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Mary Queen of Scots, Kleopatra VII, and Helen of Troy. I’ve only read her works on Henry VIII and Helen of Troy thus far, and thought they were very good and well worth reading. So on the strength of George’s previous books and her skill as an historical fiction author, I decided to read Mary Called Magdalene. I knew the subject matter would be about Mary Magdalene, not a topic I had much interest in, however on the strength of George as the author I hoped she would be able to place the story in historical context and tell a compelling, interesting story that would come to life on the pages.

Having read it, I didn’t hate Mary Called Magdalene, but I didn’t love it either. It’s another one of those books that just didn’t engage me – for a whole variety of reasons, which shifted as the book progressed. The book is divided into three eras of Mary’s life: her life before she met an adult Jesus, her life as Jesus’ disciple, and her life as an apostle after Jesus’ death. In the first of the three sections I was really drawn in at the beginning. George begins in Mary’s early years, fleshing out a believable background for her, giving her a chance to grow and become established as a personality before she meets Jesus, filling out the setting with wonderful historical detail and creating an immersive experience that felt authentic to the times and explained the times and Mary’s position in it. This had me really turning the pages for the first one hundred pages. Unfortunately, this section begins to go on and on and on, starting to drag over the 282 pages that it takes up. I felt like it went on too long and a hundred or so pages should have been enough to tell us all we need to know before the main story kicks in, when Mary meets Jesus.

Just under the next five hundred pages are spent on Mary’s time as a disciple of Jesus. Having checked the stats, that sounds like a lot, and it’s obvious that this section really is the heart of the novel. But it feels so short. Mary and some others wander back to their homes so everyone can announce their intention of joining Jesus, then meet up again, the disciples and Jesus all wander about the remote countryside for a while, occasionally preaching and answering questions from crowds, and then suddenly bam, it feels like Jesus’ mission has barely begun when he decides to go to Jerusalem, and then it felt like a tumbling rush of preaching in the temple, Judas’ betrayal, the crucifixion, and it’s all over. Phew. What gives? I felt like Jesus’s mission had only just begun, and I know some of the anecdotes in the Bible were left out. Some of these left out anecdotes are later mentioned in the novel when Mary, as an apostle, notes certain stories like turning water into wine and calls them parlour tricks and claims they never happened. Okay. But other anecdotes are left out by Mary and not mentioned later. And then some episodes are included that seem like they would fall under Mary’s disdainful definition of a parlour trick, such as the multiplication of the bread and fish. My point is this doesn’t feel consistent and I don’t understand why some episodes are left in and some are left out, there doesn’t seem to be a particular pattern or reasoning at work.

In addition, the character of Jesus didn't feel how I would expect - he didn't come across as compelling, or enlightened, or kind. He starts off obviously very knowledgeable and intelligent, and seems kind of mysterious and like he knows more than everyone else. This drew me, and the disciples in the story, in initially. But the initial impression never dissipates or evolves into something more. This character never becomes compelling, he seems nice enough at times but he never seems especially kind, and he seems more quick witted and always with an answer ready on his tongue, prepared beforehand, rather than enlightened as such. I expected to be bowled over by the wisdom of this character, to experience real moments in the book of awe and revelation alongside the disciple characters. But that never happened. And sometimes he seemed strangely out-of-character, such as momentarily spiteful over a petty issue that really should be beneath his dignity, and not very peaceable or love-your-enemy at all. Even the character of Mary is astonished that he should disregard his own teachings and react with such anger and fury. So, for me the core of the story kind of lacked heart. The inconsistency of the miracles mentioned above was confusing, but even more importantly I think the crucial part of any retelling of Jesus is capturing the story of a compelling personage and his radical ideas - more so than the miracles - and George failed to capture that character. There doesn't seem to be much point in a retelling of the Jesus story without that heart.

After the core of the book, which covers Mary’s life as a disciple, we reach the final section of the book, Mary’s life as an apostle after Jesus. Astoundingly, this section of the novel covers less than one hundred pages, and Mary skims over events in a series of letters to her daughter. I was left thinking, “is that it”? I would imagine that the early years of the church following Jesus would be some of the most crucial years of all. This was a time after all when this small group was still on shaky ground. Its establishment and growth during this time were crucial events that affected much of the succeeding two thousand years, and there was a strong element of risk that it would fade away and not survive as an established religion. Mary Magdalene’s role and involvement in this early church would have been key, and fascinating. But it’s skimmed over and summarised. I would have thought that this part of Mary’s life would have dual importance alongside her time with Jesus, or at the very least, the unnecessary time spent on the beginning of the story should have been transferred into this part of the tale. The beginning of Mary Called Magdalene really should only have been about 100 pages, whilst the final section of Mary’s life should have been given the full 282 pages. In this section, Mary even refers briefly to some huge events that occur – but in passing only, and the novel really would have been the better for it had these events been given more page space.

I haven’t really talked about the writing in the novel because it’s unnecessary, and not an issue. It’s as good and solidly consistent as Margaret George’s other novels. George writes well, though somehow she always misses out on writing of true genius by a hair’s breadth – the writing not imaginative enough, the characters not human enough, the plot just missing that extra something. That said, George is probably my favourite author not inside my inner circle of sheer unadulterated literary perfection – she always writes well, produces decent plots and interesting subject matter, with good attention to historical detail and long enough epics to really get into the subject. Mary Called Magdalene is below the standards of her other works however – usually solid 8 out of 10, or at least a 7 – for other reasons. There are odd pacing issues which make sections of the book feel completely out of sync with their actual length, and which shift the focus onto the wrong parts of the story, to the book’s detriment I feel. The characterisation of Jesus is as good as George’s other characterisations in her other novels, I would say, but it’s so crucial here with such an incredibly famous figure and for me she doesn’t get it right. At the end of the day I think this one is well-written but the story isn’t well told.

6 out of 10.