Books 2014 - Maurice by E.M. Forster

[byslantedlight]

Sort of a once-upon-a-time book this, but not in the way of the challenge, more in the way it was written in 1913, about a world quite different to ours. It was published in 1971, a year after Forster's death, at his request... oh, oddly enough, flipping through the introduction now (I never do until I've finished a book), there's this:
"...Ozick called it 'a disingenuous book, an infantile book, because, while pretending to be about social injustice, it is really about make-believe, it is about wishing; so it fails even as a tract. Fairy tales, though, are plainly literature; but Maurice fails as literature too.'
I don't know about fails as literature - I've yet to think particularly deeply about the whole what-qualifies-as-literature thing, and I don't really care, because I don't read to be consciously instructed (there - apparently I think that literature is supposed to "teach" us something! I suppose I do, that we're supposed to "get something" from it - but then who tells us we're supposed to, or what the something is, so there's still more to it... it's all very tangled, isn't it). I suppose for Forster it was a kind of fairy tale - that the hero and his beloved might live happily ever after...

So... what do I want to write about it, for a review? It's one of those books it seems a bit presumptuous to "review" - it's a Penguin Classic! But my "reviews" are really more I liked it or not, so... I liked it. *g* Very much, actually. Although Maurice himself isn't a very sympathetic character sometimes - he blusters and bullies on occasion, he's not overly bright, he works in the stockmarket, but... but he is actually, because he's also bravely struggling with something that's unfair, and he doesn't just lie down and let it roll over him - well, he can't, because it's his life we're talking about, but still. There's a thread through the book about how slow he is to catch on to things, how things become such muddles to him (I definitely sympathise there!), but he keeps going anyway, eventually working out what's going on where, and then facing the situation bravely, and I was caught up in it, and desperately, desperately want it all to work out well for him. And perhaps that's another thing - the book was written before 1914, before even the First World War, so I know it's pretty unlikely that things will work out for Maurice in the end, he's just the wrong age, but if only he can have a few years happiness before the world turns to a different kind of hell, then I want him to. Because in the end, and despite everything, I do like him as a character, and as I've said before, that's quite often what makes a book for me.

Comments

[byslantedlight.livejournal.com]

Sorry to take so long to get back! *g*

I do think pure genre fic - very run-of-the-mill crime, romance, etc. is unlikely to be literature by anyone's standards.
Hmmn - but then that sounds to me as if the basis for not being included as literature is the fact that it's run-of-the-mill rather than because it's defined as genre. Comes back to that elusive thing - what's good writing and does that make something "literature" or does the opposite, at least, disqualify it from the possibility of being "literature"...

both could be in danger of being dismissed as m/m genre
Hmmn - but that depends on whether a reader has defined "m/m" as a "genre" in their head. I don't, for instance! Well, except for that particular m/m romance "genre", which I rarely even try and read after having been continually let down by it. So now I read books, and if some of the books involve m/m relationships instead of f/m, well they're still just books. I guess I'm not mad on the idea of labelling anything in this or that "genre", because there should ideally be all kinds of cross-over between genres, and... well, and I just hate labelling and boxing things up... *g*

Publishable writing
Heee - I'd say there was a huge difference between "publishable" and "published", it's just that publishers don't always take note... *g*

If it's just more about your favourite characters then yes, it probably falls short of literature. But when some writers place those characters in different settings and see how they cope (e.g. Birdwatchers Guide), or write semi-metaphysical stuff like yours where they're waiting to see what will happen in heaven, then I think literature is a possibility hovering in the wings.
Interesting... (and hah - I'd forgotten about that fic! *g*) I think we'll divide here again - "more about your favourite characters" could absolutely be literature in my book (so to speak *g*), depending on what that "more" is. Just the pretty pr0n? Well, no... but as you say there are fanfic writers out there who write much more deeply than that, so that you end up considering the outside world that the lads (whichever lads) or lasses deal with. Hmmn - would seeing how the lads cope in different settings define literature...? I'm not sure - I suppose it depends how the different settings are dealt with, as much as the coping... and whether an author writes something that makes us think about the world around the lads (or after the lads *g*), or just the lads themselves! Trying to think of anything I'd think of as borderline "literature" in fanfic, now... well, maybe Rhiannon's Larton stories, of course! They leave us as much with an idea of the lads world as of what the lads are doing, and make me wonder about it... but then that's coming back to the definition I've been making up of literature as something that tells you more about the world and/or human nature...

...plus, enough rambling cos I have to get back to work (stoopid day) but yeay musing and rambling and thinky-thoughts!

[moth2fic.livejournal.com]

So maybe literature has to make us think about something new or in a new light? And a typical whodunnit rarely does that though there are some that do. And some run-of-the-mill stories can include good writing - maybe some nice descriptions or whatever and well structured plot without adding anything much to the world or asking to be re-read. Not sure at all about this... But I think really good writing makes us stop and think in one way or another.

I agree about the boxes - but critics do put work in boxes, and so do the publishing houses and the bookstores. So for example, sci fi was treated as 'genre' after a surfeit of what the publishers called 'pulp fiction' which was designed (by them, not the authors) to be read and thrown away, a bit like a magazine. Then along comes someone like Margaret Atwood with The Handmaid's Tale, and then Oryx and Crake shortlisted for the Booker, and she gets exemption because she's a 'respected' author. I personally read 'books' but I'm all too well aware of the boxes people apply. I'm busy writing a series of fantasy detective stories and am angsting about whether to label them YA or not - what effect that will have on marketing. And I have done beta work for friends who have similar 'problems'.

And you have been put off the particular m/m romance genre because of some bad experiences but I would say I've had similar experiences in every genre. And some delightful surprises, too.

Yes, I'd agree that a case can be made for Larton as literature and mainly because not only is it well written but it bears re-reading to get new insights out of it. And different settings can be as trivial as 'Cowley is going to ask the lads to take over' or as extreme as sci fi. I just don't often, personally, get much from stories that are simply following canon episodes and giving us extra thoughts or off scene action etc. They can be pleasant to read but not very memorable. Larton is definitely memorable! But I'm sure some readers could make a case for some episode fic! Every book or fic needs to be rated individually by the reader...

I'm enjoying thinking about this but I doubt if there's a full answer waiting anywhere in the wings...!!