Reply to comment

one of the biggest differences between "on beauty" and "howard's end" is the treatment of intellectuals and practicals. forster, through the character margaret, identifies with the intellectuals but believes that "it takes all kinds" and he shows that despite his many shortcomings, practicals like mr wilcox have good qualities, too, and are needed in shaping a world in which intellectuals and practicals should come together. mr wilcox does worse things, especially at teh end of the novel, than margaret does, and margaret is able to forgive him, so forster seems to be saying that people need to accept others for who they are. people can change, as wilcox seems to soften at the end, but only up to a point. mrs wilcox is definitely the noblest practical in the novel, and she does have a powerful reserve and admirable selflessness, but i think that her taciturn behavior at the schlegels' party shows her limitations intellectually and socially, not any kind of power on her part as members of grobstein's discussion group were arguing. helen is mrs wilcox's foil, as she is too impetuous and mrs wilcox lacks spontaneity. but helen is the only one who truly understands how unjust they have been to leonard bast. forster is very diplomatic. he gives each character credit and criticizes each one as well. i think an appreciation of the merits of each character manifests in his writing.

i have finished "on beauty" so i am not going to give anything away, but one of my many, many issues with this novel is the way it unfairly skewers intellectuals. the only characters who are not caricatures, for whom smith shows some sympathy, are the practicals, kiki in particular, also mrs kipps, and levi. she mocks levi quite a bit, but he becomes a deeper character by the end and she sympathizes with his concerns. however, you'll see many parts where she makes fun of universities, professors, meetings, poetry readings. she hates howard belsey because he does not agree with her on beauty. this is a crime to her, so basically this novel is howard's end, and we watch his gradual decline. a good word to describe smith may be rootless because she is a writer, and on the intellectual side of the spectrum (she graduated from cambridge if that makes any differences, though plenty of non-intellectuals graduate from such institutions, and i don't mean to say that negatively) but her novel is all about skewering intellectuals. none of them is a realistic character, none of their merits is appreciated. joan didion's novels show more love for humanity than "on beauty." (i'm a big fan of diddie, don't get me wrong. but this smith woman, grrr....)