Scan barcode
paola_mobileread's review against another edition
4.0
Though as a non native speaker I found the prose at time very challenging, it was really a beautiful read.
In terms of the plot, for me it lost some steam (and coherence) after
As for the characters, rhe women here felt often more like a narration device than proper character - perhaps I am exagerating, but
On Aziz, though, the aspect that struck me most is not his being emotional or his propensity to act on instinct - but his relationship with facts and reality. For instance, how Aziz "fills in the details" of Adela's departure from the caves in his conversation with Fielding as if this was a statement of fact reminded so much of my dad that it made me smile: not because there was any intention to deceive, or any hidden agenda, but this was simply a reasoning that made sense, sounded plausible and appeared harmless. It provided a coherent way of filling the uncomfortable gaps in Adela's sudden and rude disappearance, and in the end this became reality in Aziz's mind. And in normal circumstances I am sure Aziz would have accepted an alternative if this had been provided later e.g. by Adela, not thinking for another second about having provided Fielding with a load of made up rubbish!
It was my first Forster, now I now it won't be the last.
(edited version of my own posts in the Mobiler Read Literary Book Club discussion)
In terms of the plot, for me it lost some steam (and coherence) after
Spoiler
the climax of the trial's collapse, but in a sense the plot was really secondary to the arguments on colonialism, and I really enjoied this book!As for the characters, rhe women here felt often more like a narration device than proper character - perhaps I am exagerating, but
Spoiler
Adela is almost forgotten of after the trial, and both the change of personality in Mrs Moore as well as her death are rather sudden. These women needed to fade in the background, and in the background they disappear fast.On Aziz, though, the aspect that struck me most is not his being emotional or his propensity to act on instinct - but his relationship with facts and reality. For instance, how Aziz "fills in the details" of Adela's departure from the caves in his conversation with Fielding as if this was a statement of fact reminded so much of my dad that it made me smile: not because there was any intention to deceive, or any hidden agenda, but this was simply a reasoning that made sense, sounded plausible and appeared harmless. It provided a coherent way of filling the uncomfortable gaps in Adela's sudden and rude disappearance, and in the end this became reality in Aziz's mind. And in normal circumstances I am sure Aziz would have accepted an alternative if this had been provided later e.g. by Adela, not thinking for another second about having provided Fielding with a load of made up rubbish!
It was my first Forster, now I now it won't be the last.
(edited version of my own posts in the Mobiler Read Literary Book Club discussion)
sidharthvardhan's review against another edition
4.0
Edward Said has observed how oriental this book is. A lot of people here seem to have similar objections to the book or how it doesn't represent India. I don't think this book tries to represent India or any book can do so. Forster even says somewhere in the book that no single person can represent India, so I think he would know no single book can do so either.
As for orientalism. I don't think a book (or a piece of art) can be considered bad just because it imagines an oriental country - otherwise, Salman Rushdi's Midnight Children could be considered oriental too. If such novels create prejudices (which was Said's main objection) then the fault lies with the readers who want to learn about a country from a work of fiction. As for Forster, if he is guilty of generalizing, he is guilty of generalizing both Indians and Britishers. Otherwise, he has built some complex characters and not the caricatures that result from the pen of those writing with prejudices.
Forster's interest is the challenges faced by the two communities in holding a conversation. Colonialism was one problem, and prejudices were another. Fielding was one character who went further than others in making a connection with an Indian and that was only because he was individualistic. Forster represents the whole Anglo-Indian society as forming a sort of single invisible institution representing to Indians their foreign rulers. Most Britishers who stayed in India accepted these dictates, but Fielding didn't accept his rules and that's why his and Aziz's friendship is at the core of the book (and not the lawsuit that most summaries seem to suggest). Aziz could make the Indian half of that friendship just because he too was unprejudiced at least in the beginning of the book. They knew that they won't meet again when Fielding gets marries (and thus loses his individuality) and Aziz develops a hatred of British in general (and thus loses his unprejudiced nature.
One thing I do agree with critics on is that Forster wrote way more than he had to. He seems obsessed with the Indian climate. It was as if he decided to make the novel his kitchen sink and threw in all eloquent descriptions of climate he didn't get the chance to use.
As for orientalism. I don't think a book (or a piece of art) can be considered bad just because it imagines an oriental country - otherwise, Salman Rushdi's Midnight Children could be considered oriental too. If such novels create prejudices (which was Said's main objection) then the fault lies with the readers who want to learn about a country from a work of fiction. As for Forster, if he is guilty of generalizing, he is guilty of generalizing both Indians and Britishers. Otherwise, he has built some complex characters and not the caricatures that result from the pen of those writing with prejudices.
Forster's interest is the challenges faced by the two communities in holding a conversation. Colonialism was one problem, and prejudices were another. Fielding was one character who went further than others in making a connection with an Indian and that was only because he was individualistic. Forster represents the whole Anglo-Indian society as forming a sort of single invisible institution representing to Indians their foreign rulers. Most Britishers who stayed in India accepted these dictates, but Fielding didn't accept his rules and that's why his and Aziz's friendship is at the core of the book (and not the lawsuit that most summaries seem to suggest). Aziz could make the Indian half of that friendship just because he too was unprejudiced at least in the beginning of the book. They knew that they won't meet again when Fielding gets marries (and thus loses his individuality) and Aziz develops a hatred of British in general (and thus loses his unprejudiced nature.
One thing I do agree with critics on is that Forster wrote way more than he had to. He seems obsessed with the Indian climate. It was as if he decided to make the novel his kitchen sink and threw in all eloquent descriptions of climate he didn't get the chance to use.
dmfw's review against another edition
dark
emotional
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
kbkittyb's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
I am sorry to say I didn't really enjoy this one. I had high hopes and they just weren't met.
Firstly, it was really really boring in places. The ending in particular. Which is very frustrating after reading 300 pages of an only 'okay'book.
Secondly, it was difficult to read. I admit I am not very well versed in Indian culture and I think that without that knowledge this book falls short. Nothing is explained. I swapped to my kindle for quicker access to word definitions. But not only this, although well written in some places, in others it made me doubt my knowledge of the English language as well as the narrative faltered and jumped around will.
Thirdly, the characters kinda suck. All of them. Not only are they one-dimensional, they are unlikeable. We know the English suck (myself being one), but I think this book would have made more impact if the Indian characters were more likable. Unless the point is we all suck, let's be friends.
Finally, the plot and pacing was...odd. Like the narrative, it was all over the place with very little warning. Although I will say that the middle bit with the 'incident' was good. Its just a shame the rest of the novel suffered so much. There was very little that actually added to the plot - what was Mrs Moore's purpose?!!! What happened in the cave???!! We are left with so many questions. I dislike unsatisfying endings.
I will say that I thoroughly enjoyed the British bashing, I found it witty and factual. (Again, I say this as a brit) I also enjoyed learning more about the other side of history and more about India - I just wish it was in a more interesting manner.
I didn't much enjoy a room with a view either, so maybe this author isn't for me...
But I wouldn't recommend this one. It is like a boring version of To Kill a Mockingbird but in India.
Firstly, it was really really boring in places. The ending in particular. Which is very frustrating after reading 300 pages of an only 'okay'book.
Secondly, it was difficult to read. I admit I am not very well versed in Indian culture and I think that without that knowledge this book falls short. Nothing is explained. I swapped to my kindle for quicker access to word definitions. But not only this, although well written in some places, in others it made me doubt my knowledge of the English language as well as the narrative faltered and jumped around will.
Thirdly, the characters kinda suck. All of them. Not only are they one-dimensional, they are unlikeable. We know the English suck (myself being one), but I think this book would have made more impact if the Indian characters were more likable. Unless the point is we all suck, let's be friends.
Finally, the plot and pacing was...odd. Like the narrative, it was all over the place with very little warning. Although I will say that the middle bit with the 'incident' was good. Its just a shame the rest of the novel suffered so much. There was very little that actually added to the plot - what was Mrs Moore's purpose?!!! What happened in the cave???!! We are left with so many questions. I dislike unsatisfying endings.
I will say that I thoroughly enjoyed the British bashing, I found it witty and factual. (Again, I say this as a brit) I also enjoyed learning more about the other side of history and more about India - I just wish it was in a more interesting manner.
I didn't much enjoy a room with a view either, so maybe this author isn't for me...
But I wouldn't recommend this one. It is like a boring version of To Kill a Mockingbird but in India.
samble's review against another edition
slow-paced
2.75
prose was cool in parts, otherwise i was very bored and confused
jenhurst's review against another edition
2.0
Unpopular opinion but I don’t think this is that good… this is constantly on best books ever written but compared to Maurice, Howard’s end and A room with a view this just isn’t anywhere near as good. For a 300pg book it felt so slow because of the pacing. A white man discussing colonialism of India, wasn’t what I was looking for either. We get it the British suck. I think he did a lot better with Howard’s end/a room with a view on women’s roles at that time and Maurice with a gay man at that time. I recommend reaching for that one before this!
nichecase's review against another edition
4.0
Spoiler
'temples' (apart from the very ending) is such a let downhh78's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
heather_g's review against another edition
slow-paced
2.0
Not sure what to say. The first half was very slow and confusing. Then it got exciting with the cave visit and the trial. Then confusing again. Perhaps I’m just ignorant of Indian culture but regardless of that, the wording of sentences sometimes made me wonder if I understood English. Ugh. Painful but glad I read it.
maferencak's review against another edition
adventurous
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
3.5