Maurice

14757842 E.M. Forster’s novel Maurice is an intriguing read, largely because of the time period it was written in and the way it treats its subject matter, homosexual love. Forster wrote it in 1913 and 1914, but he resisted publishing it, and it didn’t appear in print until 1971 after he died. He was worried that people would have a hard time accepting what turns out to be a vexed but positive portrayal of homosexuality.

I’ve also read Forster’s Howards End and Passage to India, and if I’m remembering correctly what those novels were like, this one is more psychological and emotional in its focus. The other novels are psychological as well, but this one emphasizes interior worlds even more than the others, capturing the mind and emotions of a young man as he struggles to figure out the world and his place in it. Maurice is more abstract, taking less time with context and setting, and spending more time describing emotional states.

It tells the story of Maurice Hall, a schoolboy at the beginning of the novel, whose teacher introduces him to sex by drawing pictures in the sand during their last conversation together before Maurice heads off to public school. He dreams two highly symbolic dreams, and finds himself unexpectedly emotional when he learns one of their servants, a young man named George, has left their service. These early experiences haunt him as he moves through public school and then university, trying to understand his complex reactions to his classmates. His most significant relationship at university is with Clive, a young man much more worldly and more intelligent than he is, but one who returns his interest and, soon enough, his love. The novel charts their relationship as the two make their way through Cambridge and then move out into the larger world. The Cambridge scenes are particularly enjoyable to read, as campus life is endlessly interesting, for me at least. Once the characters leave university, their lives become broader, but also much more uncertain, and Maurice is finally made to take stock of who he is and to act upon that knowledge.

I was interested in the way the novel keeps a certain amount of critical distance from Maurice. He is largely a sympathetic character, but at the same time, we see the limits of his intelligence; Clive can talk circles around him, and Maurice is not the best abstract thinker out there. He is also unpleasantly obsessed with class and uncertain about his own status. Here is Forster’s description of him:

In Maurice I tried to create a character who was completely unlike myself or what I supposed myself to be: someone handsome, healthy, bodily attractive, mentally torpid, not a bad businessman and rather a snob. Into this mixture I dropped an ingredient that puzzles him, wakes him up, and finally saves him.

I like the fact that Forster makes his protagonist so obviously flawed, while at the same time showing so much compassion and understanding. It would be easy in a book that explores such a vexed and complicated subject as sexuality, particularly homosexuality in the early part of the twentieth century, to make the protagonist more admirable and heroic and pioneering than this one is. Instead, Maurice is just an average person, flawed in perfectly normal ways and no more heroic than most of us are.

9 Comments

Filed under Books, Fiction

9 responses to “Maurice

  1. I read ‘Maurice’ when it was first published and remember feeling at the time how very daring I was being. Thank goodness things have changed. Your post reminded me of how much I enjoy Forster, both as a writer of and a writer about, fiction. Have you read his essays on writing? I can really recommend them.

  2. I read this book a long time ago when I was about the same age as Maurice and I thought it was a very uncomfortable book to read. Yes, the author keeps Maurice at a distance. He creates a character very unlike himself in many respects except the single most important one: his sexuality. It’s understandable that he would want to do this and never want to publish the result; but I wished for a different book — a book that I think he would never have been able to write.

  3. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of this one. Thanks for the review! It sounds good!

    Lezlie

  4. I’ve seen the movie of Passage to India and Howard’s End and always mean to read Forster especially since he was a friend of Virginia Woolf’s but I have not yet gotten around to him. This one sounds really interesting and I can see why he wouldn’t want to publish it during his life given all the issues surrounding homosexuality at the time he was a live. The fact t hat he wrote it, even if he didn’t publish it, seems pretty amazing to me.

  5. I’ve been wanting to read this for a while now. I’ve read several of Forster’s other books (including Howards End–twice), though it’s been a while. I don’t know much about Forster, but it must have been very difficult writing about this subject (wasn’t it illegal at the time)–it’s not surprising he would have wanted to wait to publish it–I’m glad they eventually did.

  6. I’ve been curious about this novel for some time; thanks for the thoughtful review.

  7. I think your review of this book is as compassionate and well-written as the book!

  8. I love Forster and Maurice. You’ve really hit the nail on the head here – lovely review.

  9. Table Talk — no, I haven’t read any of Forster’s essays, but I would definitely like to, and I’m very glad to get a recommendation from you! And yes, thank goodness things have changed from when Forster wrote Maurice. He’s a wonderful writer, I think.

    Joseph — it’s interesting to think of the way the book is a product of its time — if Forster were living today he surely wouldn’t have written on the subject in the same way.

    Lezlie — I don’t think it’s has widely read as some of his others, so it’s not as well known, but it’s definitely worth checking out.

    Stefanie — oh, Forster is great! I had to read Passage to India for a class, and I read Howards End not too long ago. I think you might like him. I don’t know much about his friendship with Woolf — interesting.

    Danielle — I’m glad it was published too. I wonder what the story behind the eventual publication is — who decided to do it and what Forster might have thought of it. I didn’t surprise me that his style was a bit different for this one than for his other books, giving the subject matter and the unlikelihood of publication.

    Emily — very glad to help out! :)

    Courtney — thank you very much!

    Juxtabook — thank you! I’m glad you like the book so much, and that you enjoyed the review.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s