The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

Our journey ends in Wiltshire. We learn details about Stephen's parents, then Stephen's childhood and his residency with Emily.

How does Stephen deal with the events in the previous section? How does Rickie?

The ending took me by surprise! Any thoughts on that event-and any other events in Part 3?

Looking at the book as a whole, were there any characters who stood out-whether you disliked them, admired them, were confused by them, felt sorry for them?

Does this book have a real protagonist?
Who is the strongest character?

Any comments on the book as a whole?

I enjoyed Forster's writing, as always.
In my mind, that is the strongest part of the book.
As for the rest........

A few comments:
1. I didn’t immediately pick up that the opening chapter in this section was a flashback to Rickie’s parents and I was wondering why Aunt Emily’s husband was alive. I soon figured it out but it reminded me that I was often unaware of such things during this book. The transitions were abrupt and you spent the opening of a chapter figuring out where and when you were at. My problem could also have been that I did not find the plot of much interest, probably due to the characters.
2. Rickie’s demise was sure handled quickly. Prior to that, I was looking for but didn’t really see growth in Rickie. His change in behavior and breaking with Agnes and going with Stephen was not due to a great personal ‘revelation’ but really was just motivated by his applying his simple standard – hate father, hate his kid, love mother, love her kid – than any character growth. This standard itself seems a bit off to me.
3. As to the characters I like best – the answer is none. As I said in a previous discussion, I couldn’t relate to the characters’ motivations or the characters themselves. I thought all the relationships seemed a bit off, as illuminated in their dialogues. I would have probably found it a better ending if all the characters were killed off in some catastrophe.
4. After the Bostonians and this book, maybe I should read a book with characters, or even a character, I can root for.

The characters were all flawed, some more than others.
I read Howards End a long time ago and didn't really like it enough to reread it, so it's hard to decide which book I like the least, that one or The Longest Journey.

The plot was all over the place in this book, and the main characters were a mixed bag as well.

But I'm glad I chose it as moderator's choice since I have now read all of Forster's main novels. He certainly has a range of topics for his novels, and has created some memorable characters-but maybe Rickie is not among them, being such a passive character for three quarters of the book.

Brian wrote: "After the Bostonians and this book, maybe I should read a book with characters, or even a character, I can root for."

Right, after The Bostonians, this book, and a particularly disturbing memoir, I'm really looking forward to Arsene Lupin - a fun romp that won't leave me frustrated.

I also found the transitions (and the deaths!) abrupt. Aunt Emily described Rickie's life as pointless (or worthless? I've forgotten the exact word). Stephen seemed to say that Rickie made his own life, as it turned out, possible. Is the author challenging us to judge whose life matters?

Abrupt is the word - and nobody dies of a normal cause. I never felt like I understood Stephen, so I wasn't thrilled that he was the survivor.

Rosemarie wrote: "But I'm glad I chose it as moderator's choice since I have now read all of Forster's main novels. ."

I may have given it only 2 stars but i am glad I read it, too. I think I voted for it when it was in a regular book group poll. Thanks for choosing it and moderating, Rosemarie.

Thank you, Brian, but I couldn't have led a discussion without other readers.
Thanks to everyone who participated.

I didn't want to rate it until the discussion was over, but for me it was a 2 star read as well.

I also gave 2 stars. I don’t see how an editor could have approved it!

I didn't like the way the story moved in fits and starts, and that the deaths came so suddenly.

There are some parallel scenes around the railway tracks.
Stephen saves a child early on in the book, then is saved in turn by Rickie.

An extreme example of irony-Rickie's works are successful posthumously.

Yes, deaths were very sudden in the story. I thought deaths were used as symbols to indicate change.

It looks like I'm in the minority since I liked and enjoyed it. But I do see your points of view and agree with most of them.

Rosemarie wrote: "The characters were all flawed, some more than others.
I read Howards End a long time ago and didn't really like it enough to reread it, so it's hard to decide which book I like the..."

Out of the two, Howards End is certainly the better-written, although both are somewhat thematically similar. I liked Howards End more than The Longest Journey.

Thanks, Piyangie.
The Longest Journey doesn't have the flow of the other books.

Rosemarie wrote: "Thanks, Piyangie.
The Longest Journey doesn't have the flow of the other books."

I agree, Rosemarie. Even though I enjoyed, this is one of Forster's weak novels.

Forster's not a huge favorite of mine in general, but I suppose Howard's End is my favorite of the three I've read. I'm glad I read this one, though.

I also would like to thank Rosemarie for moderating this book. I agree with most of you that this is a very uneven book. At times it was unclear to me what was actually happening. Like Brian I did not immediately pick up on the flashback in the opening chapter of this section. And I had to read the description of Rickie‘s death twice before I actually was sure who died. It felt strange that the death of one of the main characters of this book was dealt with in half a sentence.
As in the Bostonians, no real development of the characters. None of them very likable. Not Foster‘s best work.

It's nice to be able to talk about The Longest Journey even thought you've concluded the book, I will join Pyangie as being one who likes the book, very much, despite its obvious flaws. When it came out, one critical reaction were that it had too many deaths. Abrupt ones, too, I agree. Forster said it was his favorite novel, and by that I think he means the one that most closely embodied himself as a young, uncertain man, as an artist, as a closeted homosexual. Rickie is happiest at Cambridge--the scene in the woods with his best friend, talking philosophy and being in nature, the two being so connected--that is Forster's idea of heaven. Rickie is immature, undeveloped, without the faith in himself that will keep him alive. It's shocking but fitting that he should die helping his strong friend, the survivor. I was initially very surprised that the protagonist--yes, there's no question Rickie is the protagonist--is knocked off before the end, but perhaps the better part of him, his work, survives.

Anne wrote: "Forster said it was his favorite novel,"

I have found that, generally, an author's favorite book or a rock group's songwriter's favorite song or even an auteur director's favorite film rarely syncs with my favorite and is more apt to be at the opposite end of my favorite scale. Usually, writing or filming to please yourself more than the public accomplishes exactly that.

That makes a lot of sense, Brian.