This two volume set is essential for the Forster scholar. Edited by Mary Lago, one of the foremost Forster scholars, it contains some of the highlights of his voluminous correspondence. Up until his death in 1970, Forster wrote up to twelve letters (!) a day, many of which are stored in the Forster archives at Kings College in Cambridge, England. Dr. Lago painstakingly sifted through those massive archival files and translated Forster's unique penmanship and wonderful letter writing style into a lovely, insightful, and entertaining two-volume set of correspondence.

The poetic begining of the book was the best part. I especially liked the way Forrestor used the displays to describe human nature. Foresstor has tremendous insight into human nature; maybe only the pessimistic side. I thoughthe was long winded when he got into his own views. But then again that is my own opion.

I couldn't care less about the political essays -- but what he has to say about creativity and criticism is better than anything I've read in modern "how to write" books.

Skip the politics if you want (I did); if you want insight into art, specifically writing, buy this book and his ASPECTS OF THE NOVEL.

E.M. Forster is better known as a writer than as a great thinker.
This volume contains most of his nonfiction writings and thus introduces us to a different side of Forster. Some of the pieces, it is true, are on writing, but most relevant for today is probably his political thought.

Forster provides us with a window into the world of the nineteen thirties where democracy was perceived as a fragile and precious object in danger of being blown away by the forces of fascism and communism. Still, in "What I believe" and "Three Anti-Nazi broadcasts" Forster reaffirms his belief in this form of government.

Democracy is important, he argues, because it allows criticism. He argues that "parliament is often sneered at because it is a Talking Shop. I believe in it because it is a talking shop. I believe in the Private Member who makes himself a nuisance. He gets snubbed and is told that he is cranky or ill- informed, but he does expose abuses which would otherwise never have been mentioned".

Forster argues forcefully against hero worship and against the cult of "great men". Although rooted in a bygone era, much of his thinking retains some relevance today.

EM Forster wrote this book in 1913-14 but declined to allow it to be published till after his death. It tells of Maurice Hall (which immediately made me think of Radclyffe Hall's classic 'The Well of Loneliness) growing up with an awareness and horror of his homosexuality. As I struggled to develop a 'oneness' with characters who were so alien to my own natural preference an amazing thing happened in the story. One of the two main 'gay' (Forster does not use this word) characters suddenly decides he likes women. Does this happen, I wondered? Or was it an excuse used by one 'gay' (or bisexual) person to disengage from a partner they no longer enjoyed? For me, of course, it drove another knife between the remaining 'gay' character and myself. It seemed that homosexuals could be changed/change - they could all be like me! Was this a literary device of Forster that aims to modify the responses of readers - making the job harder for heterosexual readers to identify with Maurice, making homosexual readers even more keenly feel the alienation of society (especially when the book was written)?

In an afterword Forster explains that his book had to have a happy ending (despite great trauma suicide is mentioned only once throughout the book). This made me think again of Radclyffe Hall's 'Well of Loneliness' with its remorseless and, for me, unsatisfyingly negative ending. Hall wrote her novel about lesbians in 1928 and it created a furore in its time. That Forster was sitting on his novel at the time is an intersting thing to me. Was he tempted to publish? Perhaps he felt he could not join the same storm. Perhaps he originally had the miserable ending Hall wrote, and changed to distinguish his novel. In the end, these can be little more than speculations.

When I read Richard Fortey's book 'Trilobite' I complained in my review that I never really got to like trilobites as Mr Fortey obviosly does, despite enjoying the book immensely. The case is the same here. Forster's writing is inventive and rich, but I am left feeling just as alienated from homosexuals - I am simply not one of them. Am I more sympathetic? Perhaps. But the best that I can hope for is probably to be more tolerant.

The film of "Maurice" produced by Merchant Ivory a number of years ago is one my favorite films. I was curious, having never read E.M. Forster before, to see how much of the issue of homosexuality was a product of the book and how much was played-up for the film. The book did not dissapoint. An honest, self-aware writer, E.M. Forster tells a beautiful story of a fairly unremarkable young man who is forced to (by virtue of being gay) become remarkable. Problems of English repugnance at homosexuality (a feeling he shares himself at first) and of class make him into a grownup, into a real man. In the book this becomes a wonderful liberation--that does not come through as well in the film. A marvelous read. Not published until after his death in 1970. Only a few read it when he actually wrote it in the teens. Too dangerous. A shame. Far ahead of it's time.

I think I'm setting myself up to be abused for an imperfect understanding of Forster's work, but I love Maurice, and I only like everything else he wrote. Forster's plots to me are so controlled that his novels become more like chess games than stories--his characters move entirely according to their classist/symbolic value; their minds are types, their types interact. Sometimes this interaction is delightful, as in Room with a View. Sometimes it is genuinely touching, as in Where Angels Fear to Tread. But it is always highly regimented. This criticism extends for me to his prose, which I find to be too rule-bound--he always leaves the same words out; his style is symbolic of delicate subtlety without necessarily being so.

But in Maurice, Forster lets go some of this reserve. His prose, which I find formulaic in his later stuff, is here undeveloped enough to be idiosyncratic, un-stylized, and gorgeous. Maurice as a character is wonderfully, wonderfully real, and I appreciate the detailed development of the plot because Forster brings home with such ability the hazards of Maurice's struggle, the ever-present possibility of failure, the balance between lesser and more important goals, and the way in which Forster makes clear that these goals, as Maurice knows when he "listens beneath" words, are not the ends that he is really achieving as he achieves them. Maurice himself is drawn with Jane Austen-ian precision: Forster mixes the divine heroism--beauty and brutality--in Maurice's essential, private life with his utterly mundane non-essentials--politics, understanding, relationships with family, opinions, way of talking, appearance, job.

This is a heroic book. It moves me to tears every time I read it.

The Schlegel sisters are interested in the arts and in the more idealistic liberal social movements of their early 20th century world. The Wilcoxes are practical and materialistic. There seems to be little in common between the two families, but not even a highly embarrassing early amorous encounter can keep them apart. Poor Leonard Bast is as idealistic as the Schlegels, but encumbered by an unloved wife with a shady past, he has not their financial means to avoid dealing with the practicalities of life. Caught between the two factions, he eventually is crushed. Only Margaret Schlegel is finally strong enough to bridge the gap between the practical and the ideal by exerting her benevolent humanity, her passionate and yet controlled determination that people must "connect."HOWARDS END is a minor masterpiece, capturing perfectly the conflict between rigid Victorian values and the more free and open changes in the turbulent years before World War I. Forster handles his characters with great sensitivity and sympathy, yet with a subtle and skillful irony. The novel is not intended for rapid reading, but there is a felicity of expression that is an ample reward for careful perusal. Less fastidious than Henry James, not quite the equal of Trollope in characterization, a more subtle stylist than William Dean Howells, Forster combines some of the best elements of all three of these social chroniclers in an important work that is both highly personal and universal in scope.

On reading the book reviews already on-line, I just had to reply. I have recently read Howard's End for the second time and I have watched the film numerously. It is absolutely fabulous! I have read other novels by E.M. Forster but for me Howard's End is simply the best. Forster's characterization is second to none, describing the Schlegels, Wilcoxes and the Basts with such heart-breaking realism and affinity with human nature. The British countryside is described lovingly yet realistically by highlighting the creeping industrialization. I do not think it is 'dull and cold' or that the characters are 'unlikeable and irritating.'In my opinion they are realistic and likeable if you accept them to be human beings, having both their good and bad points, but I would hope that the good points shine through. Yes, Charles Wilcox is incredibly arrogant and irritating, but these characters all combine to make an excellent plot and a heart -renchingly sad but not a 'happy' ending. Ofcourse we all have our favourites and Margaret Schlegel is mine. Rather predictibly so, but I admire her strength, ability to compromise, tenderness, spiritual connectedness, clear sightedness and individuality. Over-all I think Howard's End is a wonderful read every time!

More than a piece of England, Howards End -- the place-- can be seen as a metaphor of the world, and all the people who somehow are related to it, are examples of real human beings. Even though the novel was written almost a hundred years ago, it is still very suitable for this XXI Century. It seems to me that the story is all about the different moral and background that every class of the society had by that time, and the consequences of it during their lives.

The main characters are the two Schlegel Sisters, Margaret and Helen, who are keen on arts, books, philosophy, feminism and other things that have a relation with the soul and the thought. After a misfortunated love affair between Helen and the Paul Wilcox, whose parents they met in a trip to German, their lives change forever. Magaret becomes a close friend to Mrs Wilcox, and her sister starts to despise the family. When Ruth Wilcox dies, she leaves Howads End to her friend, but the Wilcoxes feel betrayed and don't follow up the lady's last will. Years later, Mr Wilcox marries Margaret, and in the very end of the book, after a serie of extremely unpleasant events he tells her that Howards End belongs to her.

This brief summary I've just done misses a lot in details and the feeling that anyone only gets reading the novel. There are so many brilliant and subtle nuances in Forster's work. His works bounces from comedy to tragedy in a turn of page. I burst out laughing the first time Helen meets Mrs Bast -- a.k.a.Mrs Lanoline. Sometimes, many things are just left between the lines. For instance, I doubt whether Henry Wilcox feels anything for Margaret but guilt for not telling her about his wife's last will. Personaly speaking, I think he likes and respects her but does not love her until when Charles is arrested, that is when he falls apart, and she is there helping him.

As I was saying, I see the whole story as clash between the different cultures that each character have . The Schlegels may feel very confortable in the XX Century. They are very open minded, enjoy discussing, and were not afraid of showing what they think or fell. On the other hand, the Wilcoxes are very worried about social position and not used to letting women express themselves. And to represent the lowest classes are the Bast : Leonard and Jackie. He likes arts and books, but his older wife prefers the joys of the world - and Mr Wilcox used to know it years ago.

The prose is so alive that sometimes I felt extremely agry with some characters, mainly Charles- the oldes Wilcox boy. He is so snobbish, self-centred and xenophibic. For instance, he doesn't face up the fact to that he's killed Mr Bast and after telling the event to his father , they both go and have coffe, as if nothing had happened. Mr Wilcox is the character who goes though the most drastic transformantion, and in the end he is a vey different man, in many senses.

Finally, I love the film version of this book. I only regret I hadn't read the book before watching the movie. I think I would have had much more surprises. But, anyway, both book and film are worth reading or/and watching.

Reading Forster's short story "The Machice Stops" made me understand and think a lot about computer use in our everyday life. His writings are like a prediction of what may come if people remain as arrogant and selfish as they already are. The book also made me think about the existance of God and the reason of our creation. I strongly recommend that you read this book having of course under consideration that it was written in 1909.

This is an excellent book, well ahead of it's time.
It was required reading for us in prep school, and I am now purchasing a copy for my (9 year old) son.

Wonderful book, wonderful movie, wonderful book-on-tape.
This classic by E. M. Forster is full of wicked humor that punctures the 19th century English class system. Superb cameo pieces. The character development is subtle and sure, beginning with our heroine traveling to Italy with her maiden aunt as chaperone. There, in a pensione, she meets an iconoclastic father and son, honest, rough-hewn, plain-spoken, who insist upon trading rooms when they overhear the prim aunt complaining that she booked a room with a view. It, of course, becomes a metaphor for room to view life as a whole, without prejudice, in all its wonderful complexity.
Don't miss this excellent book by this excellent author. Then read all his others, if you haven't already done so.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough. Best of all, this is one of the very very few books to be made into a movie and come out unscathed, perhaps even improved in certain aspects. If you can't stand to take a chance and read it, see the film at least.

Yes, the premise is somewhat similar to Madame Bovary. However, I found the difference between them to be that I hated Mme. Bovary and adored A Room With a View. To clarify, there is a part in the latter where Forster, discussing some sonatas of Bethoveen writes, "they can triumph or despair as the player decides, and Lucy had decided that they should triumph." Flaubert plays on the side of despair, while Forster, like his character, "loved to play on the side of Victory."

All of the characters are vividly drawn. They speak as real people speak and act as real people act, or once did. The language and mores have changed since the Victorian era, but they are motivated by similar things to those that motivate people today and they are fully-developed.

Forster has the knack of describing his characters in a few well-turned sentences that tell you all you need to know to picture them. They get themselves into situations you can believe, and they do not always act in their own best interests, just like real life.

I have re-read this book several times over the past 10 years, and what strikes me is how much detail Forster managed to sneak in with out making the book feel weighted or heavy. It is a light read, and yet every time I pick it up to reread it I find some new passage I had overlooked previously, each lovlier than the one before. He also makes some very interesting philosophical statements, without bogging down plot or pacing. Forster was obviously influenced by the Transcendentalists (Emerson, Thoreau), one of the main characters is even named Emerson, so if they are of interest to you, this may be as well.

The romance of this book was beautiful...you can't really describe it. Young Emerson being unexperienced falling in love with Lucy was hinted a bit with every chapter, it was never really bluntly spoke of that he loved her...Forster didn't take the easy road, but beated around the bush which made Lucy and George's relationship much more interesting and fascinating to look at.

From the scene where Lucy wakes up and finds herself in the arms of George is probably the biggest hint of his love for her...even though all he really did was hold her. In the end their struggles to get ignore their parents and society itself gives them the reins to control their own lives.

I'm not sure but there was just something about this book that makes me just aghasted...I can't describe it...I feel so overcomed with emotions, just like when I read Tess of the Durbervilles. But in this case, there's a happy ending

"The Celestial Omnibus" by E.M. Forster tells of a boy's belief in a celestial omnibus, a future state or heaven. In the story, his belief and curiosity is ridiculed by his parents. This action shows the idea of secularism, by discouraging the boy against the idea of an after-life. Instead of leading him toward Christian morality, his parents direct him to memorizing poetry, showing their belief in the morality and well being of man in this life. Sneakily, the boy discovers that the omnibus is not a joke, as his parents told him, but that is was real. The boy is made to be a liar when he returns, but soon convinces Mr. Bons to go back to the omnibus with him. The boy is able to enter the "heaven," but, because of Mr. Bons' disbelief, he dies on the earth

Quite possibly the best collection of short stories published in the Twentieth Century, so minimalist that they're metaphysical. Each demonstrates that the meaning of meaning is the creation of meaning, that people exist to create meaning, whether they know it or not, and what it means to create meaning, or fail. Images become symbols, symbols become allegories. High bourgeois culture, at its best, accessible at many levels to anyone.

The other reviewer of this book completely missed the point of the story. THE CELESTIAL OMNIBUS is about the liberation of the Soul through Art, and is not meant to be a religious text at all. A young boy in a prosaic middle class suburb catches a glimpse of something otherworldly in an alley--an omnibus that travels 'To Heaven'. This is not the religious Heaven but the infinite world of the imagination. Great literature literally provides an escape for the boy, who has a poet's soul and is ridiculed for it by his family and their friends. In their view, Literature and Poetry exist only on library shelves, bound in red leather. It is the neighbor, who only concentrates on the physical manifestation of the writings, who 'dies on the earth' since he confuses the end with the means. It is more important to feel the spirit of a great writer than to worry about the binding on their books, while never understanding their meaning. The other stories in this collection are also memorable and deal with living the quiet life and leaving the rat race--in one case, literally. This is one of the most inspirational collections of short stories ever written and it is a shame that it is out of print.

I wasn't particularly looking forward to reading A Passage to India. Forster, in my mind, seemed to suggest implausible romance, pretty scenery, and Helena Bonham Carter, and I'd never actually bothered to read one of his books.
Now I can hardly wait to read another. I absolutely loved this book, without quite knowing why it was so magical. I do know that I found the first chapter absolutely perfect, as it allows the reader to go into a "descriptive section" daze, and then jerks are attention suddenly back to the Marabar caves. And with the exception of one or two patches that dragged a little but were soon over, I found the rest of the book equally magnetic.
I enjoyed Fortster's deftness in portraying all the characters, not so much as individuals, but in terms of how they felt about each other. In particular I loved the relationship between Fielding and Aziz, while understanding completely the dislike each had for aspects of the others character.
The ending is marvelous. So often books that hold your interest like this just peter out, but it's refreshing to find an author like Forster who understands that what makes for an ideal conclusion is to give the readers a taste of what they want, and then hold back the last little bit.

Forster writes about the ruling British and their tentative relationship with India in the early part of the 20th Century. While Kipling wrote of an India of intrigue and adventure, Forster's India is one of mistrust and racism between the British and the natives.

The main charcter is a Moslem Indian, Dr. Aziz,who is abused by his British superior and learns to mistrust all British. Aziz meets Mrs. Moore , a new arrival, by chance at a mosque. After first ridiculing her, Aziz develops a deep respect for Mrs. Moore who he believes possesses more Oriental qualities than European qualities. Through Mrs. Moore, Aziz develops a frienship with Fielding, an educator, very interested in discovering what India is all about.

Mrs. Moore's is accompanied to India by her future daughter-in-law, Adela Quested. Although extremely naive, Adela has the same inquisitiveness as does Fielding. Aziz desperately wants to impress his new British friends and he invites Adela, Mrs. Moore, and Fielding to be his guest as he shows them the Marbar caves, a local landmark.

On the fateful day all parties realize that the tour is not a good idea but each is reluctant to cancel the event. The mystery of what occurred within the caves and the aftermath is the crux of the story.

The incident at the cave does irrevocable harm to each of the main characters but particularly Mrs. Moore whose spirit totally disintegrates and Adeala who is rediculed and villified by the British.

Finally at the end, Aziz and Fielding repair their friendship as best they can, each realizing that Indians and Brits will enjoy a suspicious friendship at best.

What makes A Passage to India so different from other Orientalist works (and Orientalist it is) is that Forster, being a homosexual, understood the oppression that the colonized Indians had to live with. This understanding permeates throughout the book. From his piercing insights into the nature of Anglo-Indian women (why were they more racist? They were threatened to be replaced by Indian men in the minds of the colonizers). The relationship between Fielding and Aziz is startlingly sharp; people from the time must have been delusional not to see the homoerotic message that Forster was trying to portray. It's such a shame that the politics of the book (which Forster really wanted to downplay -- notice that neither Aziz nor Fielding care about them) so often overshadow the message of male-male relationships that Forster cared so much about. It's sad though that he still fell into the trap of thinking that no Englishman or woman could completely remove themselves from the racism that dominated the culture. What does he do the one's who try? Adela has an nervous breakdown, Mrs. Moore dies after realizes the futlity of love, and Fielding is not only a repressed homosexual, and therefore a social outcast, but sacrifices his ideals in the end to marry an English country woman. The ending perfectly sums up how Forster himself must have felt -- remember that when you want to cry at the unfairness of it all.

I don't think it's really necessary for me to comment on the brilliance of the prose, or the entertaining primary narrative since I'm sure that's been done to the upteenth time. However, the book holds so much that I couldn't not share some of my thoughts. Please read A Passage to India as soon as you can.

The novel Lord of the Flies by William Golding, published by The Berkley Publishing Group (1954) is an action filled book about some schoolboys' struggle for survival after their plane went down on a deserted island.
After the boys are stranded on the island it becomes evident that surviving will be like no other task they have ever undertaken. They learn to fend for themselves by trapping and killing animals, building shelters with branches and by learning how to use their surroundings in the quest for survival. From the very beginning there is tension over who is the leader. It comes down to which candidate has more appealing priorities, playing and hunting all-day or trying to get rescued by keeping a fire alive. While in the hunt for food the boys become total savages, to the extent where they even wage war against each other.
In my eyes the message is that there is a savage in all of us and it comes out the minute we are faced with extreme hardships. The author does not only use the actions of the boys to show the changes that have occurred, but he also uses visual imagery to show their physical changes. For example, in the beginning of the book the boys are well-dressed clean-cut shorthaired boys; however, by the end of the book they are dirty, longhaired animals. Also, to add to their already dirty look, the boys paint their faces to camouflage themselves when they go hunting. The way the boys changed in appearance reflects how they're losing their civilized upbringing.
In my opinion the novel Lord of the Flies was a great book especially for children around my age because it is easy for us to identify with what the kids in the book are going through. Even though I found this novel very exciting and engaging, I would never hope to be put in such a position as the boys in the story were.

Don't buy the Cliff's Notes: read this book for yourself - you will enjoy it and remember it for the rest of your life. And if you watch a movie version, read the book first. The old black and white film version cast with British kids is a million times better than the more recent color version with American kids -- probably because American kids are *already* savage...they have no civilized habits to lose! :-)

There is an incredible scene in the book where some older boys toss rocks at a younger boy who is playing in the water. The author notes the the older boys are careful not to throw the rocks too close to the younger boy: I believe he calls the protective perimeter thus formed the circle of civilization or something. Anyway, it's a great and important passage; look for it. It foreshadows all the madness to follow.

Here's a suggestion for a term paper (it worked for me): The character named "Piggy" wears spectacles that he fastidiously cares for when the boys are first marrooned; however, the spectacles are slowly demolished step by step as the boys descend into savagery. By examining the condition of Piggy's spectacles, you can judge how bad things have gotten on the island.

In this book from the astounding mind known as William Golding, a bitter struggle between man and beast lurks in the dense, dark jungles of an uninhabited island in the Pacific Ocean. During World War II, a plane transporting some British children (between the ages 6-14) crashes over an island in which only the children survive to inhabit. In the beginning, all is well until two of the main characters, Ralph and Jack, endure a terrifying power struggle between them. Jack, the villian, wants to rule the other children with tyranny and alongside him are his hunters. Ralph, the chosen chief, believes that keeping a fire ready for rescue is the main and most important thing for their survival. These two boys' ideas soon clash and the many boys are split up into two tribes. This book was so exciting that some of the reading made my heart beat with intensity. It is no wonder that this novel is calssic, and I reccomend this book to anyone willing to read it.

This is a novel about character development. At the same time, the author enlightens the world of a few people. There is not so much story in this book; its strength lies elsewhere. However, having read Forster before, this novel made me a little bit disappointed. To me, the development of Philip is not thoroughly enough described. It does not seem so likely that such a development would occur, either. Philip goes from "blind" to "seeing". He does not take the world as is anymore, but thinks for himself. There is a chain of events that makes him develop, but the events in themselves are not so important. The other characters do not develop at all in my opinion. That is not to say that they are not complex; some are indeed, but they do not develop. Philip is naturally a complex character, too.

England is used to illustrate the world we already know, whereas Italy is used to illustrate "the foreign". This concept works today, still, although "the foreign" would probably have been moved further away. Irony is a big part of Forster's writing: anyone who "loves everything Italian" should laugh. Forster is very subtle here, too subtle in my opinion.

This is not to say that this is not a good book, but not as good as, for instance, A room with a view.

An English family's widowed daughter-in-law marries unexpectedly while on vacation in Italy much to the discontent of the family. The story mostly revolves around the attempts to recover they love child of the deceased child of the daughter-in-law from the assumed rougheon Italian husband so that the child may receive "proper" care and education. The story is detailed but rambles at times. The plot is understood, but not exciting.

"Fools rush in," apparently, to Monteriano in Italy, where beauty triumphs over cold calculation, and-- to paraphrase the end of Johnny Mercer's couplet, not the original of Pope!-- where the heart rules above the head. This novel may not be as subtly polished as _A Room With A View_ nor as deeply serious as _Howards End_ but it does show a great deal of polish and seriousness, and is also a more entertaining story. In fact, I will do my best not to give anything away. While the plot moves forward organically, Forster shapes it with an Austen-like classical symmetry, as well as the conversations, characters, and (above all) the settings: Italy versus England, Monteriano versus Sawston. There are plenty of "juicy" Johnsonian sentences (get out your notebook), but Forster impresses most with his plain, easy style. He is also very funny-- I trust you'll pick up on the many little jokes. But also don't forget that Forster is a satirist with plenty of bite. His attacks are just as effective as Thackeray's, only Forster cares more about people and is remarkably sympathetic to human suffering in all its forms. A few nasty words about Germans wouldn't please the Schlegel sisters very much, but other than that, Forster avoids black-and-white generalizations and veers toward "moral relativism," for lack of a better term. Forster does a good job creating female characters who are unique and complex, who do not come across as manipulated symbols but as living flesh with thinking heads and-- yes-- loving (and hating) hearts. Once in a while Forster falls into his habit of grand poetic statements all flowery and abstract, but somehow he is forgivable (more so here than in _Howards End_). Otherwise, this is a great little story, with a message that hits home and language that ranks among the best of all English novelists. I would say more, but the best part is discovering this for yourself. Still, don't let the crowded opening paragraph get you down! Practically every character is jammed into the first sentence and at first I wondered if I could ever keep them straight. But Forster has a point in doing this: They are seeds in his hands which, tossed randomly, will sprout up as the story goes on. The humor in those opening sentences is also very subtle-- you either find Lilia's own amusement funny or you don't. But some jokes are so clear, as in Irma saying "me three" after an adult says "me too," they are literally infantile. So, this is a fun book, but also very serious-- quite sad when we see how people mistreat each other, and either purposely or accidentally bring misery on family, friends and even strangers (as well as themselves), mainly on account of social conventions. It's also interesting to see Forster's own gay sensibility show through throughout the novel. While _A Room With A View_ remains my favorite book by E.M. Forster, _Where Angels Fear To Tread_ has left me stunned and warmed, thoroughly satisfied from start to finish.