My feelings about HOWARDS END are complicated. On the one hand, the prose is gorgeous. I read A ROOM WITH A VIEW ages and ages ago, and I'd since forgot how brilliant a writer Forester is. His spot on and fantastical descriptions of the English countryside captivated me and made me miss being there. I thought the characters, especially the Schlegals, were feminist, engaging, and well-developed. Forester set up the characters to embody his debate of "who shall inherit England?" and they did that very well.

Maaaaaaaaaayyyybbe a little too well, though. After the first 50 pages or so, Forester's personal debate about problems of class took precedence over all plot. There were little spurts of action, but only after at least 20 pages of characters arguing and philosophizing about class. Seriously, I felt like I was in a debate club about the early 20th century UK class system, or reading one of those Renaissance books where there's a frame story to set up the author's academic essays. Then, when there was an actual plot conflict, all the characters were too busy talking to deal with it, and they all ended up looking silly. Especially Mr. Wilcox. If he's supposed to be the backbone of England, then the backbone of England is made of fools.

There were also some very strange lesbian implications between Helen and Meg, despite them being sisters. Proclamations of devotion, kissing, constant refusals to marriage proposals, moping and anger when one of them does get married, being dispassionate about real life "romances," but very passionate about each other.... It was weird.

So, yeah, I wanted to give HOWARDS END more stars, and perhaps some of my criticisms can be explained. I haven't read any classics in awhile, so maybe I'm just unused to the slower pace. If ya'll ever want to learn about early 20th c. class philosophy, this is your book.