Howards End is one of those books, like Lolita for entirely different reasons, where I can appreciate the execution and ingenuity after the fact, but the experience of reading isn’t the most pleasant. While reading, I felt like most of the aspects weren’t really working for me. Upon reflection, I better understand how and why Forster wove these elements together, but I think that the story was to some extent sacrificed to the idea, and humanity occasionally driven out for the sake of expounding ideology, and that’s where this book failed for me. I think I would have liked this book if it was severely edited and trimmed.
The main tension of the novel is the British class system at the time—the boundaries between the classes and how they interconnect. It’s represented through three families: the Wilcoxes, who represent the conservative higher class; the Schlegel sisters, who represent the liberal middle class; and the Basts, who represent the struggling lower class, who can’t easily afford to have an ideology: “independent thoughts are in nine cases out of ten the result of independent means.” Forster connects them all through charity, love, sex, and scandal. I hate to say that the social commentary didn’t feel relevant to me, as discussions around class are always relevant, and even if it’s a different class structure than the one I’m living in now, I usually enjoy historical context. I loved A Room With A View by Forster for a lot of those reasons, where I thought the social commentary was humorously done. But perhaps it was more subtle there. This novel, on the other hand, can often be ranty. And when Forster got going, I wasn’t particularly in the mood to listen so I tuned him out and passed over the sentences that seemed to go over my flighty head.
While there is light plot throughout the book, the majority of the book felt expository, setting up the characters, mostly through them having ideological conversations, and the wildest parts of the plot only happened quite suddenly in the last quarter of the novel. Since there’s relatively little plot throughout the book, the strength of the novel has to hinge on the characters. I do think the characters were well-developed and had a lot of depth, but too much time was devoted to social discussion rather than the characters themselves and their actions. And as I said, those discussions could be long-winded and ranty.
I didn’t really feel the spirit or magic of the home of Howards End. It felt like a random character that would pop in occasionally and had unearned significance. However, it was intended as an extended metaphor for England. Property was an important theme of the novel, and the property of Howards End ultimately was owned by all three of our central families by the end of the novel, indirectly in some cases, but it was supposed to symbolize how England belonged to all of the social classes. I just wish this integration felt more realistic and was executed more smoothly.
Something I did appreciate was how Forster was most generous to all castes rather than directly condemning the Wilcoxes of the world, though his sympathies I thought were obviously aligned with the Schlegels. But he recognized how all classes contribute to society: “How dare Schlegels despise Wilcoxes, when it takes all sorts to make a world?” while also condemning the repercussions of the superimposed boundaries. This generosity paved the way for a rather nuanced, and unexpected, relationship between Margaret Schlegel and Mr. Wilcox, which was one of the most interesting aspects of the novel.
Probably the thing I liked most was the strong sisterly bond between Margaret and Helen: “However piteous her sister’s state, she knew that she must be on her side. They would be mad together if the world chose to consider them so.” The period of a gulf between them was a moment of palpable pain: “Something had come between them. Perhaps it was Society, which henceforward would exclude Helen. Perhaps it was a third life, already potent as a spirit. They could find no meeting-place. Both suffered acutely, and were not comforted by the knowledge that affection survived.” However, their close relationship was often defined within the scope of their shared political ideology and how their differing personalities managed this ideology. I wish some more time was spent exploring their relationship outside of that.
Looking back and rereading the passages I highlighted is quite enjoyable, which makes me realize the strength of the bones of this novel. It’s just that so much of it was a slog to get through for me, which is very unfortunate. Like A Room With A View, I think this novel lends itself well to a book club or class setting, as I believe it can prompt a lot of discussion.
