Monday, January 21, 2008

Howard's End of the World as We Know It

Some (Tibby, perchance) "feel fine" as they face the end of the world they have known. Some, like Mrs. Wilcox, face its death with dignity yet without change. Yet others, the Wilcoxes, embrace modernity "steadily" only to find themselves clinging to "panic and emptiness." For E.M. Forster's Howard's End is not interested in belaboring the binary of past and present, but rather portrays the clashes and connections between his contemporary modernist camps or "types," brought dramatically to the forefront after the demise of Ruth Wilcox, a characterization of dying Victorian femininity and aristocracy.

Thus, the contradictions in the Modern English Wo/Man are best represented by a "family feud": the cultured, continental Schlegels depict "feminine" values by prioritizing passion, ethics, and personal ties, whereas the ever-practical, materialist imperialists the Wilcoxes are concerned with the "public" sphere of business, acquisition, and social strictures. Forster's ultimate message in his novel seems to ring loud and clear -- "only connect" the public and the private, the masculine and feminine, form and ethics, and a hopeful pathway to England's future may be made. It is, however, a paradigm only made possible by the capitulation of the hegemonic, dominant former categories and by a willingness of liberal English intellectuals to be flexible by associating with their complements, rather than withdrawing to Oxford or the Continent. In an obvious stand against hypermasculine values, Forster implies that the promise of Howard's End necessitates a feminine ability to empathize and compromise through the character of Margaret.

We should not forget, however, that the "other Miss Schlegel," as Mary Gordon notes in the intro of my book's version, has both the first and last word. Though we see the decline of Helen through Meg's changing perspective in Howard's End's central sections, objectively her courage is of a separate but equal sort. The eminence (or as some would say, the threat) of Socialism in early twentieth-century intellectual circles is represented by her hasty love affair with Mr. Bast and her ideas of wealth redistribution; concurrently, Helen's revision of gender roles is more radical than Meg's in her status as a turn-of-the-century single mother. Her arrival upon the scene brings about Mr. Wilcox's ability to "connect" as much as Meg's patient administrations. Helen's final word -- "never" -- also pinpoints Forster's "ironic self-criticism" (Martin and Piggford, "Queer Forster") inherent in his utopian pastoralism.

His revised domesticity, centered in a fading rural environment, may "never" occur, at least without serious effort on both "sides" of the equation. This recognition may very well be the meaning of the repeated "goblin" motif as seen through Helen's eyes. In a parallel fashion, Forster's detached, worldly cynicism continually encroaches upon the straightforward ideals he espouses, as do his reminders to the audience that what we are allowed to visualize, whether our distaste of Tibby and Charles or our preference for the Schlegels, is a product of so much literary "storm und drang".

Forster also focuses upon the motif of modernity's dehumanization, particularly through the symbol of the "motorcar." A part of the environmental background to current audiences, the fact that the invention was then-controversial (to the author at least) is nearly unimaginable. However, it represents the recurring problem Howard's End presents, that of mobility through space. Without a particular connection to a locale, a human connection is made even more improbable, as acquaintances as well as furniture may be translocated or disposed of with increasing ease. Charles Wilcox's attachment to his own, which must be "sold" nearing his manslaughter of Mr. Bast, signals further his impersonal nature, whereas the Wilcox patriarch's insistence on "walking" to see his wife foreshadows his redemption.

Therefore, Forster's "thundering good sort" of a novel is at once radical and reactionary as it situates human values and ideals in a "blurring" modern life.

No comments: