The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
This topic is about
A Room with a View
E.M. Forster Collection
>
A Room with a View - Chapters 14 thru Conclusion
Deborah wrote: "Cecil refers to Lucy as his Leonardo (chapter 14). Does he see her as a person or a possession? What role does she fill for him?..."Cecil represented a considerable number of men who viewed women as possessions rather than persons. They were nothing but adornments to decorate their great houses/mansions; nicely to be kept in the "drawing rooms".
I do wonder whether women are completely free, even today, from being viewed thus.
Mod
Cecil represented a considerable number of men ..."
I don’t think we are. I’m thinking the modern day trophy wife - much younger attractive woman, much older man. Or even the me too movement here in the states where many women were/are treated as objects.
I've been thinking about the name "Honeychurch." Maybe something wild and delicious vs. something restrictive. I might or might not be reading too much into it.Prime example of Trophy Wife--the POTUS and FLOTUS. (not meant to start a political discussion.) Perfect equality--the previous POTUS and FLOTUS.
I'm a little behind in my reading. Does Week 4 correspond with the last week of the month?
Mod
Prime example of Trophy Wife--the P..."
Week 4 is this week, but we have until the end of the month.
Interesting analysis of honeychurch
Rochelle wrote: "I've been thinking about the name "Honeychurch." Maybe something wild and delicious vs. something restrictive. I might or might not be reading too much into it.Prime example of Trophy Wife--the P..."
A very interesting analysis on the name, Rochelle. Perhaps, the author did think somewhere down that line I feel, when I think of Mrs. Honeychurch, Lucy's mother.
Mod
George and Lucy didn't really know each other very well, but they had attraction and a sense of adventure (Cecil had none!)
Robin wrote: "Lucy showed admirable strength in breaking the engagement, although she didn't want everyone to know it right away. George and Lucy didn't really know each other very well, but they had attractio..."
I find Lucy quiet remarkable. From the beginning Forster established that she would have strength to adjust to each situation (be it exchanging rooms, experiencing a murder and a stolen kiss in a lilac field and fleeing to Rome and facing her admirer back home). She falters and then picks herself up quiet beautifully, she wants to make sense of what is happening around her and happening to her.
From the get go she WANTED to see 'difference' from home and abroad, showing her adventurous spirit. Not for her the similar settings of what she left behind. Then when faced with social taboos, she pulled herself together and fought to have her say but was sensitive to others. At times I wondered if she will be pulled in two different directions and blunder, but no, she was shown as a human who can have conflicting thoughts due to what she feels and how she was brought up, but in the end her sense of self won the day, every time. That to me was a treat to read.
I also like how Forster had her refuse Cecil TWICE. It showed that she was about to succumbed to social pressures of getting married to a man of status, but her spirit is more free than what society would deem as acceptable in a woman.
As you say Robin, although Lucy and George hardly knew each other, they did indeed have a sense of adventure and was attracted to each other.
She did try to not hurt her family and shock society, but she knew who she was, you can hear her thoughts, her battle to say no to Cecil and not allow her feelings for George eclipse her right to reject what she knows in her core as an unsuitable suitor.
I like how Forster allowed the reader to hear her arguments, I felt that was Forster's message to us women there to stand our ground :)
Rochelle wrote: "I've been thinking about the name "Honeychurch." Maybe something wild and delicious vs. something restrictive. I might or might not be reading too much into it.Prime example of Trophy Wife--the P..."
Oh yes, Obamas were fantastic as a couple in a high profile scene and as life partners. I feel they left a legacy on so many aspects when it comes to marriage.
Mod
He can be a bit obscure sometimes, like Henry James, which I find a bit annoying.
Lots of foreshadowing and symbolism, which I find interesting.
There really isn't much action. Especially at the ending, where one would expect a lot of drama (especially a modern reader). Most of the drama and action is internal. This is a no-no, according to most modern writing coaches, but I've always liked it. Many people's inner worlds are more interesting than their outer worlds, and I like when writers show that. I wonder, though, if a modern writer could get away with the same technique, or if we'd have our books judged as "uneventful" or "anticlimactic."
There was a lot of talk here about symbolism which made me realize that I have indeed overlooked many. I need to revisit the book with my mind's eye focused on symbols which Forster had employed to express the untold part of the story. I always had a hunch that I missed something; now I know what! Thanks to all the members who contributed in this discussion and brought my attention to what I have so missed.
Mod
He can be a bit obscure sometimes, like Henry James, which I find a bit annoying.
Lots of foreshadowing and symbolism, which I find interesting.
The..."
While I get frustrated with Henry James, I do enjoy Forester. There’s definitely a different between modern writers and what we read. I think sometimes modern are all too close to the surface so we miss some of the beauty, but that’s just me,
Mod
I’m glad you enjoyed the discussion. There’s truly no right way to read which is a beautiful thing, I tried to have us dig a bit deeper than just what was obvious. I personally think you really saw the depth in this novel.
We've had many different views described in this book. What does A Room with a View symbolize?Oh this is the discussion point I was hoping to come across, Thanks Deborah. I'm not sure about my answer to this but would love to read what others think on this point.
Right from the start Forster has alluded to the title by bringing it to focus though some of the encounters his characters faced. The first 'incident' came up when the ladies found out to their dismay that their Room didn't have a 'nice' view or the desired view or the view they had hoped for. Is that relevant to the title and the message of the book?
I think so. Its their choice that was taken from them, their hope that was dashed right at the start. The freedom of thought and the confinement of society is what that the room with a view encapsulates.... I think.
But then again, when the 'room with a view' is within their grasp, presumably without any attachments from the gentleman, the ladies get tangled in the social norms and etiquette where genteel woman do not take help from strange men, especially 'not so genteel' men like the Emersons. The Emersons broke all rules of social etiquette and that was shocking. Further more, the fear the women had was the Emersons would continue to behave badly.
So getting what one wants tend to be complicated when others are involved.
Also the owner of the pension had let them down regards to the 'room with a view' and that to me was symbolic of life. You don't always get what you want in life (freedom and rights), and if you do, you'd be lucky to get it with no complications of attachments, but that be hardly the case.
When next the phrase is used, it is Cecil describing how Lusy sees him and how he see Lucy. And they differ in their observations and opinions.
Again it is social conventions that is symbolized here isnt'.
Cecil is wholly bound by rules (a room and therefore formed by walls) and would like to in turn bind Lucy in those confines as well, while Lucy is a free spirit with thoughts and ideas that want to soar (a view, not framed by anything BUT the eye of the beholder).
The novel is a symbolism for social confines and the need to break away from them.
I think Forster has beautifully composed the title here. I can't stop gushing about this read.
Thank you Deborah for these very insightful talking points. It really pulled out the key points of the story for me and I think I enjoyed it even more ones we got the discussion going.
I really enjoyed this group discussion :) Thanks
Lori wrote: "As a writer, I'm struck by Forster's style. He can be a bit obscure sometimes, like Henry James, which I find a bit annoying.
Lots of foreshadowing and symbolism, which I find interesting.
The..."
Great to have a writer's take on the writing here.
I too liked Forster's writing style, I like how he kept the inner worlds for us to discern than lay it all out there for us. That is why I think I like classics. It helps with your own thinking and you have to read further, research more, understand language and its nuances, you learn so much. I love that
Mod
Oh this is the discussion point I was hoping to come across, Thanks Deborah. I'm not sure about my an..."
You are very welcome. It was a pleasure to lead the discussion.
Mod
Deborah wrote: "There are several other views mentioned in the book - the view with the violets, the view from home in Britain. And aren’t their other views - views of social norms, views of inner lives, views of ..."Oh, hope you have had a good rest.
Yesssss... there are several other views that symbolizes so much more...hhhmmm
Mod
Robin wrote: "Very good point, Deborah, we all have "views" of the world, and we often assume other people are seeing through the same windows."And you brought out another point there Robin...everyone assuming the other is seeing the world through the same window/lens as themselves...good point!
I found the process of Lucy accepting George very long. She could have realized it much sooner. But perhaps this is a picture of Forster’s own struggle with his choice of men as a homosexual and whether he could make it public.
Mod
Interesting point. Lucy’s restrictions were more stringent than ours, and Cecil kept telling her what she shouldn’t feel. I think your point about it representing Forester’s journey is a good one.
Charlotte wrote: "I found the process of Lucy accepting George very long. She could have realized it much sooner. But perhaps this is a picture of Forster’s own struggle with his choice of men as a homosexual and wh..."There was no question of making it public. It wasn't just frowned upon, but illegal.
Rochelle wrote: "Charlotte wrote: "I found the process of Lucy accepting George very long. She could have realized it much sooner. But perhaps this is a picture of Forster’s own struggle with his choice of men as a..."Yep, and unfortunately still is in many countries :l
Two or more times cousin Charlotte is described as poor or that Mrs. Honeychurch paid for her travel or that she can only afford blouses. In chapter 15 "The Disaster Within" why does she come down "dressed in the height of fashion"? She spends all her money on church clothes...??
Mod
I didn’t catch that. There was a mention that her gloves were threadbare. Good catch
Deborah wrote: "Bonnie wrote: "Two or more times cousin Charlotte is described as poor or that Mrs. Honeychurch paid for her travel or that she can only afford blouses. In chapter 15 "The Disaster Within" why does..."I think this was in the last couple of chapters, she seems to suddenly have changed her fashion tune :D
I thought this was the funniest bit. Chapter 19, Lying to Mr Emerson: Lucy and Mrs. Honeychurch are in the bookstore and get into fight about keeping the Broken engagement a secret, and Lucy moving out and getting a roommate: "And mess with typewriters and latch-keys," exploded Mrs. Honeychurch. "And agitate and scream, and be carried off kicking by the police. And call it a Mission—when no one wants you! And call it Duty—when it means that you can't stand your own home! And call it Work—when thousands of men are starving with the competition as it is! And then to prepare yourself, find two doddering old ladies, and go abroad with them.”
Deborah wrote: "Cecil refers to Lucy as his Leonardo (chapter 14). Does he see her as a person or a possession? What role does she fill for him?"for me Cecil sees Lucy as a Project. His Pet Project to undertake and rescue and improve. Eventually, once he succeeded he would get bored, or if he couldn't mold her satisfactorily he would get frustrated and mean.
What do you make of this, at the end of Chaper 17?“It did not do to think, nor, for the matter of that to feel. She [Lucy] gave up trying to understand herself, and the vast armies of the benighted, who follow neither the heart nor the brain, and march to their destiny by catch-words. The armies are full of pleasant and pious folk. But they have yielded to the only enemy that matters—the enemy within. They have sinned against passion and truth, and vain will be their strife after virtue. As the years pass, they are censured. Their pleasantry and their piety show cracks, their wit becomes cynicism, their unselfishness hypocrisy; they feel and produce discomfort wherever they go. They have sinned against Eros and against Pallas Athene, and not by any heavenly intervention, but by the ordinary course of nature, those allied deities will be avenged.
Lucy entered this army when she pretended to George that she did not love him, and pretended to Cecil that she loved no one. The night received her, as it had received Miss Bartlett thirty years before.”
Bonnie wrote: "What do you make of this, at the end of Chaper 17?“It did not do to think, nor, for the matter of that to feel. She [Lucy] gave up trying to understand herself, and the vast armies of the benight..."
Oh to me this was a good round up of the repercussions of the 'heard mentality'.
This para is a harsh, yet a true observation and criticism of what people (here it can be assumed they as women) who don't reflect or analyse what is happening around them or what is asked of them or listen to their inner-self ("the enemy within"), end up doing, and the perils they fall in to by joining the "armies [full] of pleasant and pious folks".
"Their pleasantry and their piety show cracks, their wit becomes cynicism, their unselfishness hypocrisy; they feel and produce discomfort wherever they go"
...although it sounds harsh on those who followed the norm, I have personally seen how they (people in my own circle who have 'followed dues to family pressure') have unfortunately soured in their perceptions later on.
And by labeling them as an 'army' Forster is signalling the overpowering numbers of those who follow the rules without questioning, and therefore for those who do not want to do so, like Lucy, would indeed feel like she is up against an army.
And I like how he uses 'armies', plural, meaning there are many, not just one set of troops. You have the patriarchy, then family, society, those who followed the norm, those who preach about following the majority, the system that corners you to follow societies rules, etc....armies.
Bonnie wrote: "Deborah wrote: "Cecil refers to Lucy as his Leonardo (chapter 14). Does he see her as a person or a possession? What role does she fill for him?"for me Cecil sees Lucy as a Project. His Pet Proje..."
I agree here too that Cecil would either get bored with his pet project or worse get frustrated which would lead to a more disastrous outcome compared to how Lucy and George ended up with (together but cut off from family and some friends).
Mod
“It did not do to think, nor, for the matter of that to feel. She [Lucy] gave up trying to understand herself, and the vast armies..."
Those armies seem to represent the repressive societies of women around the world
Like Piyumi, I read it as surrendering one’s authentic self to the demands of conventionality, of fitting in. One pays a price, often steep, for being true to oneself, but one surrenders something of much higher value by not being so.
I liked how this book turned out in the end. I can't believe Lucy was in self-denial over her feelings for so long. Deep down she really knew, but she couldn't accept those feelings until George points out her disillusionment and Mr. Emerson begs her to pursue his son . The last chapter really got romantic and poetic. There was a hint that Lucy's cousin was hoping George and Lucy end up together. Why would Lucy's cousin be talking about the kissing incident to her novelist friend? Maybe she is lacks the discretion, "class" and "refinement" that Cecil was talking about. Forster did not flesh out Charlotte as well as the other characters. There is not background information about her that could let us jump to the conclusion. In the end we are only told that Lucy is a lot like Charlotte.
Mod
The ending is lovely. I don’t see similarities between a Lucy and Charlotte. I wonder what he meant
Mod
After Lucy refused Cecil, she denied that she loved another man and resolved not to marry. I interpreted the sentence to mean that she chose to be a wife instead of a spinster like Charlotte.
JJ wrote: "I liked how this book turned out in the end. I can't believe Lucy was in self-denial over her feelings for so long. Deep down she really knew, but she couldn't accept those feelings until George po..."Now that you mention it, yes, Charlotte's character is not fleshed out.
And in the end, almost the last paras of the book, there is George sort of pushing the thought on Lucy and us the reader, to think that Charlotte may have helped with ultimately uniting the lovers, which puts a spin on everyone's idea of Charlotte (as the annoying spinster who pushed Lucy to feel guilty about the Lilac incident and in turn almost spill the beans there), as it does Lucy's at that instant.
I wonder why Forster didn't display her full character??
Deborah wrote: "JJ wrote: "I liked how this book turned out in the end. I can't believe Lucy was in self-denial over her feelings for so long. Deep down she really knew, but she couldn't accept those feelings unti..."On the outset I too don't see the similarities between Charlotte and Lucy, but with the amount of space given to that particular discussion I feel Forster wanted us to discern it ourselves, but for the life of me I can't figure it out.
There is one thing that is not in place and in order for me, after leaving this story: What basis did George have for loving Lucy and is their love and relationship strong and sturdy?George was very quick to kiss Lucy. Did they have much interaction and conversation before that? Did he just love how she looked - does he know her at all?
The reason for Lucy loving George is based on a few incidents. Can they build a marriage on physical attraction and a few moments together?
Charlotte wrote: "There is one thing that is not in place and in order for me, after leaving this story: What basis did George have for loving Lucy and is their love and relationship strong and sturdy?George was v..."<
Yea....I found the following in Wikipedia:
In some editions, an appendix to the novel is given entitled "A View without a Room," written by Forster in 1958 as to what occurred between Lucy and George after the events of the novel. It is Forster's afterthought of the novel, and he quite clearly states that "I cannot think where George and Lucy live." They were quite comfortable up until the end of World War I, with Charlotte Bartlett leaving them all her money in her will, but the war ruined their happiness according to Forster. George became a conscientious objector, lost his government job but was given non-combatant duties to avoid prison, leaving Mrs Honeychurch deeply upset with her son-in-law. Mr Emerson died during the course of the war, shortly after having an argument with the police about Lucy continuing to play Beethoven (a German composer) on the piano during the war. Eventually they had three children, two girls and a boy, and moved to Carshalton from Highgate to find a home. Despite their wanting to move into Windy Corner after the death of Mrs Honeychurch, Freddy sold the house to support his family as he was "an unsuccessful but prolific doctor."
Did anyone have an Appendix in their copy? Did anyone find this bit??
Charlotte wrote: "There is one thing that is not in place and in order for me, after leaving this story: What basis did George have for loving Lucy and is their love and relationship strong and sturdy?George was v..."
But to answer your question, I too felt it was physical attraction
JJ wrote: "I liked how this book turned out in the end. I can't believe Lucy was in self-denial over her feelings for so long. Deep down she really knew, but she couldn't accept those feelings until George po..."If you want to see her fleshed out, watch Maggie Smith in the film :-)
Piyumi wrote: "Charlotte wrote: "There is one thing that is not in place and in order for me, after leaving this story: What basis did George have for loving Lucy and is their love and relationship strong and stu..."Piyumi wrote: "Charlotte wrote: "There is one thing that is not in place and in order for me, after leaving this story: What basis did George have for loving Lucy and is their love and relationship strong and stu..."
I don't have that, but there was a Brit TV version of the book a few years back, and I remember Lucy returning to the boarding house in Florence after the war. I was wondering where it came from.
Rochelle wrote: "JJ wrote: "I liked how this book turned out in the end. I can't believe Lucy was in self-denial over her feelings for so long. Deep down she really knew, but she couldn't accept those feelings unti..."Hhmm :) I watched it ages ago, will check it out again
Charlotte wrote: "There is one thing that is not in place and in order for me, after leaving this story: What basis did George have for loving Lucy and is their love and relationship strong and sturdy?I definitely think Lucy should have stuck with the "Go to Greece" plan. Everything would have cooled off over four months and when she came back, then start dating George publicly.
Just because she cried in the room, Mr. Beebe would not have necessarily caught on, she might have been crying because a little emotional over breakup with Cecil, or because Mr. Emerson was being so weird. All she had to do was play it cool for a few more days and go to Greece as planned! (She and George could have written letters.) That way the only "scandal" would be marrying a working man, not betraying Cecil or appearing to be deceitful.
Piyumi wrote: "Did anyone have an Appendix in their copy? Did anyone find this bit?? "Yes, it is in my edition from the library. I'll look through and report this weekend.
Bonnie wrote: "Piyumi wrote: "Did anyone have an Appendix in their copy? Did anyone find this bit?? "Yes, it is in my edition from the library. I'll look through and report this weekend."
Great :)
And re Go to Greece, I too was rooting for that. I, mistakenly remembered, as if she had gone to Greece and George met here there and then they really started to feel for each other, mistakenly I had thought that was what happened...but it wasn't.
I thing some of us felt that it was a bit of a rush job with the 'connection' between Lucy and George as well. Even with Cecil, the feelings are made to be aloof, desired from afar and no touchy feely kind of sentiments.
But I thought that was Forster's commentary on the Edwardian social norms and that George stealing a kiss or exploding to Lucy about how he felt loved her, the abruptness of those scenes was again Forster's technique in the above commentary.
That is with Edwardian principles, you would be expected to take time to court and get to know the family and if the social stations of both are well matched, then, regardless of how they FELT for each other, they would marry.
But with the Emersons, it was spontaneous, the connection was felt immediately although its not expressed then and there.
I think George may have observed Lucy in Florence and realized she is one of 'them' and therefore kept his feelings to himself.
He says in that scene where Lucy and Charlotte confront him for kissing her the second time, that he kept it to himself but cannot any longer.
Perhaps Forster used the understated observation there to again show the difference of the social classes that is one of the main themes in this novel.
Or....:D it could be Forster himself did't know how to write up a love scene...highly doubtful I know...but even with Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice it's said that she had left the 'conversation' between Darcy and Elizabeth at the end, when they express their true feelings to each other and when they were about to take their closeness to the next phase, Austen just wrote a para describing that they took the convo to the next phases with no dialogues :o. For many fans that is one of the biggest draw backs there. Its one of my favorite books, and every time I get to the end I'm like, oh come on Janey, you could have come up with some dialogues there
;)
Mod
Yes, it is in my edition from the library. I'll look through and report this weekend."
Great :..."
In a book like you mentioned, where the final dialogue is left out, I make up my own!
Robin wrote: "Piyumi wrote: "Bonnie wrote: "Piyumi wrote: "Did anyone have an Appendix in their copy? Did anyone find this bit?? "Yes, it is in my edition from the library. I'll look through and report this wee..."
:D
Yes, I think that is one of the best part of classics..they make you work for it
The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910
Books mentioned in this topic
The Longest Journey (other topics)Howards End (other topics)
This has been a fun book for me. I was attracted to the book when the movie came out in the 80's. If you haven't seen it, its definitely worth seeing - beautifully filmed. I read it after seeing the movie. But this time, I had been to Florence so it brought a whole new dimension for me.
To get us started:
Cecil refers to Lucy as his Leonardo (chapter 14). Does he see her as a person or a possession? What role does she fill for him?
What does the sunlight on the book represent in Chapter 15?
We've had many different views described in this book. What does A Room with a View symbolize?
"... the desire to govern a woman - it lies very deep..." (Chapter 16, pg 192). What creates this desire?
What happens when people deny their feelings? When they refuse to examine themselves?
There's an interesting description of weather change in Chapter 18. What is Forester really saying?