Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howards End 17

Moral Perspectives in

E. M. F orster' s Howards End

Ayumi T akagi

“What kind of novel is it?" is one of the questions which have been

most vigorously debated by critics about Howards End. While Forster's

previous novels， Where Angels Fear to Tread and A Room with a Vie民 are

often considered as a similar kind of novel， HowaraなEndis usual1y r巴-

garded as呂 workof呂 differentnature. While the earlier novels deal with

young protagonists' struggles to live according to their own judgments in

defi在nceof the empty codes of respectability which parochial societies im.

pose on them， Howar，ゐ Endis concerned with relationships旦mongcharac.

ters from different social groups with respectIve values and means of life

Since Forster's focus moved from the conflict between individual and

single-class society to the one among people with different social back-

grounds， the novel has often been defined in terms of “class struggle"l or

“the Condition of England."z However， Howar.ゐ Enddoes not dramatize

overtly any collisions or antagonism among groups of people internally

bound by common social status or economic interests even though it often

refers to political and social problems of modern British society. As the

reader's perspective is limited in the characters' small private societies，

the reader can see characters engaged in their private activities rather than

in larger enterprises. Though Howards End is wider in scope than the pre崎

町 ousnovels， its object of description is not so different from those of the

18 Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Hoωlar.ゐEnd

prevlOUs ones.

As some critics say， Howards End describes characters' manners and

morals. As in the earlier novels， Forster d巴pictsscenes of characters' daily

life and shows how they see things around them. Through minute descrip-

tions of characters， Forster， as his favorite author Jane Austen did， ex-

poses characters' sensibilities， sometImes“unconscious deceit" or“mud-

dle-headedness，" which cause distortion of understandings.3 F or example，

Forster shows Mrs. Munt getting into a muddle even at the beginning of

the nove1. While justifying to herself her own disregard of Margaret's

advic巳， Mrs. Munt interferes in the matter of Helen and Paul and aggra-

vates the situation. But after escaping from the turmoil， she again deceives

herself by convincing herself that she saved Helen from her predicament

However， all the instances of unconscious deceit which Forster de-

scribes in Howards End are not as harmless as Mrs. Munt's. Many charac-

ters' self-deception is related to power or to privileges that they enjoy; the

problem of sensibility is presented with social context. This differentiates

Howards End from the works by Jane Austen. Jane Austen's world centers

on a single set of morals though it contains characters of different econo-

mic conditions. For example， though Mansfield Park describes the house-

hold of Fanny Price's family in Portsmouth， it is judged as wanting

through Fanny according to the standards of propriety， consideration， and

order represented by Mansfield and its master Sir Thomas Bertram. The

values of Mansfield serve as the point of reference in the novel. However，

in Howards Eηdタ asPaul Delany points out，4 Forster suggests the influ-

ence of economy on sensibility through Margaret who says，“all our

thoughts are the thoughts of six-hundred-pounders， and all our speeches 川 5

In contrast to Austen's world， where most characters seem to engage them-

Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Hoω'ards End 19

selves in relatively similar pursuits in the private world and share the

same morals to an extent， F orst巴r'sworld is divided; characters' life勾styles

vary according to their means of supporting themselves. As far as there is

inequity and privileges concerning money and labor， their behavior and

sensibilities cannot be judged easily. But F orster seems to say that this

does not m回 nthat they can do everything， or that any m印 talityis

acceptable.6 The novel no doubt reflects Forster's concern about the issue

of money as a person who belongs to“th巴 fagend of the Victorian liberal-

ism" and reviews that tradition.7 Hoω'ards End is certainly a variation of

the novel of manners， but Forster attempts the difficult task of seeking the

meeting place of different morals which take root in th巴 socialstructure of

modern British society

I

In Aspects 0/ the Novel， Forster begins his explanation of the proc出 sof

reading a novel by sugg巴stingits analogy with our understandings of

meaning of actual events.8 He finds in reading a good novel the same pro司

cess of converting time・sequenceinto some value as we experience in life.

Though he shortly drops the analogy， Forster continues to explain events

in the novel， contrasting those in time田sequence，“thestory，" wIth those

with causality，“the plot.，，9 In order to appreciate the plot， Forster says，

time-sequence has to be suspended， and the reader should consIder a new

event independently and in relation to past events. Forster suggests the

reader should retain both openness to uncertainty and desire for order to

trace the plot in the novel

The nature of actuallife is of course quite different from that of a novel

with an organized plot， and Forster emphasizes the absence of any order

20 Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howar.ゐEnd

in actual life apart from the one appreciated only by mystics.lO ln Howards

End， however， characters try to find meaning of things and events in daily

life as if they were tracing a plot. They find different meanings in the

same things and events according to their own values. The problem，

however， Is that some characters lack enough openness to different views

and think their interpretations absolute. They act on their limited inter-

pretations and harm others. Thus Forster asks in Howar，ゐ Endthe ques-

tion as to how to see things and events in actual life as they are. On one

hand he reveals diff色renceof sensibility and calls for openn巴ssto an

acceptance of that difference; on the other hand， he warns against being

trapped by egotistical understanding. Describing different sensibilities in

the social contεxt which accounts for them， Forster raises a difficult prob-

lem about morals in modern society.

One polarity of sensibility in Howard注 Endis represented by the

Schlegels. With their steady income from stocks and bonds purchased

from ample funds they inherited from their mother， they lead a wealthy

and leisurely life without engaging in labor. As they do not have to be

conscious of their money， their whole energy is absorbed in private activi-

ties， and Tibby and his two sisters are engaged in the enjoyment of cul-

ture， learning， and association with their friends. Their iinancial security，

guaranteed with little effort， enables them to discount the values of mate-

rial comforts and emphasize mental life. They can nearly ignore financial

damage caused by other people's confidence trick by calling it “rent to the

ideal" (39)， while making much of their lack of confidence in others as

“the work of the devil" (39).

The opposing sensibility is represented by the Wilcoxes (with Ruth al-

ways exempted). ln contrast to the leisurely Schlegels， Henry and Charles

Moral Perspectives j且 E.M. Forster's Howar.ゐ End 21

are engaged in economic activities both in London and abroad through

their commitment to the Imperial and West African Rubber Company. The

commercial principles that rule London become their values， and their

household becomes an extend巴dfield for their commercial activities. The

Wilcoxes apt to think of things and people around them primarily in terms

of an economic relationship. Their numerous houses are commodities.

Such a neighbor as Miss A very becomes a simple charwoman. Servants

are assessed not for their personalities but for th巴irlabor alone.

The differ日nceof sensibility betwe巴nthe two families is most apparent

in their attitudes to words. As Margaret and Helen Schlegel value personal

relationships with other people， they have much concern with their truth-

fulness to language and try carefully to speak in the same way to whomever

they talk. They also find much meaning in knowing others' opmlOns

through reading and discussion. To Helen， language should express hon-

estly “the little thing that says '1''' (231)， and discussion is not idle dis-

sipation but a serious end巴avorto approach truth.

The Wilcoxes also have serious but different concern with language.

As they are keen on games in exercising their bodies， so they are irト

terested in power relation with others in conversation. When Henry knows

that Margaret and Helen participate in a private discussion club， he

approves it not as their effort to approach truth but as their training for

quickness in discussion:‘“Time after time I've missed scoring a point b巴ー

cause the other man has had the gift of the g呂band 1 haven't. Oh， 1 be-

lieve in these discussions問 (129).Henry pays attention above all to lan-

guage as a means of securing advantage over other people in his relation

with them. In conversation， he values advantage in the game of power

more than truthfulness to what he believes.

ZZ Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howar，ゐEnd

1n the modern environment of London， neither of these views of words

can be considered absolute and true. 1n relation to this issue， Henry and

Margaret's visit to his house on Ducie Street presents an interesting case

As Anne Write points out，7 Henry proposes a double deal. Treating Mar-

garet as a prospective wife and as a prospective tenant， Henry stresses the

comforts of the house without telling her about a mews behind it until

Margaret becomes his fiancee. Later， the narrator gives Margaret's view

and his own comment when he discloses H巴n旬、 silenceover this dis-

advantage:

Margaret could not help laughing. 1t was the first she had heard

of the mews behind Ducie Street. When she was a possible tenant

it had suppressed its巴lf，not consciously， but automatically. Th巴

breezy Wilcox manner， though genuine， lacked the clearness of

vlslOn that is imperative for truth. When Henry lived in Ducie

Street he rememb巳redthe mews; when h巳 triedto let he forgot it;

and if anyone had remarked that the mews must be eithεr there or

not he would have felt annoyed，且ndafterwards have found some

opportunity of stigmatizing the speaker as academic. So does my

grocer stigmatize me when 1 complain of the quality of his sulta-

nas， and he answers in one breath that they are the best sultanas，

and how can 1 expect the best sultanas at that price? It is a flaw

inherent in the business mind; and Margaret may do well to be

tender to it， considering all that the business mind has done for

England. (178)

Henry's attitude appears to Margaret somewhat devious and funny， but the

narrator reminds us that Henry's proposal was also for a business contract

and emphasizes that this devious attitude is concomitant with commercial

transaction. This visit to Ducie Street shows disagreement between the

Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howards End 23

ethic of private world and that of commercial world. Yet th巴 reasonfor the

visit suggests Margaret and Henry's mutual dependence; Margaret lacks

practical ability and Henry needs emotional support. The same disunity of

values and codes of language lies at the center of the intertwined action of

Margaret's engagement and marriage and L巴onardBast's fate. The action

of the novel also shows the contr呂stbetween the intention of connection

and the actual difficulty involved in that task

Margaret and Helen's attempt to save L巴on呂rdBast from trouble by in-

forming him of the possible collapse of Porphyrion Fire Insurance Com-

pany is based on their intention to bring about good by combining their

personal concern for Leonard B丘stand Henry's privileged knowledge;

they actually try to connect their private language and H巴nry's business

language. The problem is that M旦rgaretand Helen cannot foresee the prob-

lem involved in their巴ndeavor.It is Leonard Bast who discloses it. Since

he met them at the concert， Leonard was much encouraged by their equal

treatment and understanding for him. When they ask Leonard about Por-

phyrion， however， he feels the need to speak as an agent of the company

and defend its interests. Divided between the contradictory impulses of

speaking to them as usual in his personal language and in his business

language， Leonard finds it impossible to talk with Margaret and Helen.

Though the information of Porphyrion's possible collapse transmitted to

Leonard by Margaret and Helen initiates the process that eventually leads

to Leonard's unemployment， many factors， including the accidental force，

contribute to the situation. Forster does not explain the event in detail，

but he suggests the complexity of the situation and describes the charac-

ters' different interpr巴tationsof it.

Hel巴nshows the keenest interest in Leonard Bast's misfortune but at

24 Moral PerspectIves in E. M. Forster's Howards End

the same time the most simplified understanding of it. Neglecting many

factors involved in Leonard's unemployment， Helen attributes it mostly to

the opinion of Porphyrion given by Henry， which turned out to be wrong.

When Helen blames Henry that his opmlOn that Porphyrion was going

bankrupt was wrong， Henry criticizes her:

“Y ou seem to assume， when a business concern is conducting a

delicate negotiation， it ought to keep the public informed stage

by stage. The Porphyrion， according to you， was bound to say:‘I

am trying all 1 can to get into the Tariff Ring. 1 am not sure that

1 shall succeed， but it is the only thing that will save me from in-

solvency， and 1 am trying.' My dear Helen-" (187)

Henry exploits Helen's concern for “the little thing that says '1'" in order

to show the inappropriateness of the principle of personal honesty applied

to the field of business. Although Henry tries to do so in his problematic

attempt at disposing of social problems entirely， he criticizes Helen's

actual failure; Helen as wel1 as Margaret was ignorant of potential unre-

liability involved in the piece of information which they gave to Leonard.

The problem oJ the application of the code of personal rectitude to a busi-

ness concern is also emphasized by giving the company a personality of a

glant

This giant caused Leonard to do arithmetic and write letters， to

explain the regulations to new clients， and re-explain them to old

ones. A giant was of impulsive morality-one knew that much.

He would pay for Mrs Munt's hearth-rug with ostentatious haste，

a large claim he would repudiate quietly， and fight court by court.

But his true fighting weight， his antecedents， his amours with

other members of the commercial Pantheon-al1 these were as un-

Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howar，ゐEnd 25

certain to ordinary mortals as were the escapades of Zeus. (136)

In spite of her efforts to help Leonard， Helen fails to see the situation in

its full complexity and turns Leonard into a mere symbol of the lower

class exploited by the dishonest entrepreneur. Lacking openness to com-

plicated reality， she adheres to her simple view of honesty and distorts the

slIuatlOn

Unlik巴 Helen，Margaret com回 torealize that it is a problem glvmg

Leonard unreliable information about Porphyrion and feels that not Henry

but she and Helen are partly responsible for Leonard's unemployment.

When Helen fails to See the real situation and judges Henry by the misap-

plied code of personal honesty， Margaret criticizes Helen. At Oniton， Mar-

garet even points out to Helen and Leonard that their accusation of Henry

is based on a mistaken assumption. Though she does not know how to

save Leonard， Margaret tries to see the reality and act just1y on her

observation.

In fact， Margaret is aware of the relativity of any morals in modern soci-

ety， where many things are connected with each other. While Helen

asserts the superiority of the Schlegels' life over that of the Wilcoxes，

Margaret rejects such a simple conclusion. Remembering their own finan-

cial privilege which gives rise to their own values， Margaret says that the

Schlegels' moral superiority is groundless:刷 Moreand more do 1 refuse to

draw my income and sneer at those who guarant巴巴 it'" (172). Realizing

“the chaotic nature of our daily life， and its difference from the orderly

sequence that has been fabricated by historians" (104)， Margaret does not

hurry to judge people and events around her. Instead of criticizing Henry，

Margaret finds more meaning in Henry and her mutual dependence. In

26 Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howards End

view of plurality of perspective on reality， Margaret tries to create a dur司

able relationship with Henry

Margaret， however， has a cnSlS when she realizes how deeply infused

with business ethic Henry's sensibility is. During her engagement and

marriage， while Margaret is observing the Wilcoxes， Henry's commercial

sensibility becomes more apparent: Henry understands people and things

around him almost only in relation to his own material and social advan-

tage. When his affair with J acky Bast is about to come to light at Oniton，

his attention is total1y absorbed in the possible damage that its disclosure

might bring to his reputation. Henry becomes so jealous of his interests

that he momentarily suspects Margaret of plotting with Helen to harm

him. As he becomes so concentrated on protecting his own respectability，

Henry anticipates possible blackmail by the Basts and decides to deny his

acquaintence with J acky and to bring a suit against the Basts according to

circumstances. Yet it does not occur to Henry that he is actually preparing

to tel1 a positive 1ie. Too deeply involved in the game of power before his

eyes， Henry cannot have a long perspective on his own life:

As is Man to the Universe， so was the mind of Mr Wilcox to the

minds of some men-a concentrated 1ight upon a tiny spot， a 1it-

tle Ten Minutes moving self-contained through its appointed

years. No pagan he， who lives for the Now， and may be wiser

than al1 philosophers. He lived for the five minutes that have

passed， and the five to come; he had the business mind. (245)

This problematic sensibility a1so leads H四 ryto reject Helen at Howards

End， which almost causes the col1apse of th巴 marriagebetween Margaret

and himself. When Margaret asks him to al10w Helen to spend a night

among the Schlegels' furniture at Howards End before her departure from

Moral Perspectives in E. M町 Forster'sHowards End 27

England， Henry sees in the situation only the danger that his reputation

might be impaired by receiving an unmarried pregnant woman into his

house. All his attention is paid to his social interests. As he lacks a pers-

pective on his own past， Henry can neither remember that he also had

once a similar relation with J acky nor realize that he is judging himself by

judging Helen. Even when Margaret accuses Henry of his hypocrisy in

condoning his own affair， Henry cannot realize the meaning of her criti-

cism and takes her blame primarily as blackmai1. His commercial sensi-

bility makes him incapable of seeing the situation in which he is placed

E

Although the characters can hardly reconcile their different values， they

are eventually made to realize the 1imitations of their own sensibi1ities.

Through their relations to Leonard Bast's unemployment and death， Henry

and Helen realize the limitations of their s巴nsibilitiesbefore they are shel-

tered at Howards End.

Helen knows her own limitations by the time she comes to Howards

End to get her books. When she is pregnant with Leonard's child， Helen

realizes that she was devoid of love for Leonard and merely excited when

she had relations with him at Oniton. As she casted a halo around Paul

during her early infatuation with the Wilcoxes and changed him into a

man in the darkness who “had whispered ‘1 love you' when she was desiring

love" (23)， Helen turned Leonard into“[aJ real man， who c且redfor adven-

ture and beauty， who desired to live decently and pay his way， who could

have travelled more gloriously through life than the Juggernaut car th昌t

was crushing him" (314). Helen sees that she looked not at the reality but

at the reflection of her romantic desire. Leonard and Paul are“husks that

28 Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howar.ゐE刀d

had enclosed her emotion" (309). When she had relations with Leonard，

Helen more or less exploited him for the satisfaction of her own feelings

The problem embodied in Helen is romantic egoism; she exploits reality

to satisfy her own desire for a romantic ideal without trying to see the

reality.l1 When she listens to Beethoven's Fifth Symphony， Helen changes

it into a story of a hero's shipwreck and his final triumph. The music comes

to mean “all that had happened or could happen in her career" (32) and be-

comes “a tangible statement， which could n巴verbe supersedεd" (32).

Helen reduces things and events to romantic notions and n巴verdoubts the

validity of her interpretation. However， through her ralationship with

Leonard， Helen comes to realize that she was deceived by her own idea:

“1 used to be so dreamy about a man's love as a girl， and think

that for good or evil love must be the great thing. But it hasn't

been; it has been itseH a dream." (335)

Henry comes to know his own limitations through the punishment of

Charles for inadvertently causing Leonard's death‘ When Charles tells

Henry about Leonard's death without any sense of what he has done， Henry

becomes uneasy. The charge of manslaughter against Charles forces Henry

to question his own past behavior. In fact， Charles is the young and worse

version of Henry. Charles is more concerned about material and social in-

terests than Henry. As his children increase in number， he becomes more

and more uneasy about the prospect of his iamily's affluence. He is more

oppressive and dogmatic in his attitude towards other people; he is always

accusing his wife， sister， or servants of some fault. This deficient sensibil-

ity causes Charles to misunderstand the Schlegels and finally to inflict

violence on Leonard Bast. Charles cannot get rid of his early fear of the

Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Ho祝JardsEnd 29

Sch1ege1s' scheme for depriving him of his own property. When his car

runs over a 1ittle girl's cat near Oniton， Charles cannot understand Mar-

garet's intention to stop his car to apo1ogize to the girl. Surprised at her

insistence of her own opinion in disregard of his advice， Charles considers

her as a dangerous woman， a seductress， and actually suspects her of

seducing him by the ruined cast1e at Oniton Grange. When Charles knows

Henry and Margaret's p1an to capture Helen at How紅白 End，the collu-

sion of the Schlege1s丘ppearsundeniable to him:

Honest and hearty was Chades's dislike， and the past spread it-

S巳lfout very clearly before him; hatred is a skilful compositor. As

if they were heads in a notebook， he ran through all the incidents

of the Schlegels' campaign: the attempt to compromise his

brother， his mother's legacy， his father's marriage， the introduc匂

tion of the furniture， the unpacking of the same. He had not yet

heard of the request to slεep at Howards End; that was to b巴 their

master-stroke and the opportunity for his. But he a1ready felt that

Howards End was the objective， and， though he dis1iked the

house， was determined to defend it. (306)

The adherence to his own va1ues and the 1ack of openness to other sug-

gestions make Charles distort the situation and thrash Leonard to punish

the parties invo1ved in this imaginary p1ot. When Leonard eventually dies

and Charles does not understand the meaning of his own behavior， H巴nry

rea1izes limitations of Charles， whom he trusted， and begins to qu巴stlOn

his own behavior as we11.

Even though Forster presents the problem of different sensibilities and

shows the limitations of those represented by He1en， Henry， and Charles，

he does not show how to reconcile different va1ues in Hoω'ards Eηd.12

30 Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's HowarゐEnd

Rather， Forster emphasizes the complexity of morality in modern world to

the full while suggesting the need for some order or some sense of propor-

tion. Throughout the novel Margaret provides a sensibility which becomes

a kind of reference point， but her attempt to 100k at things as carefully as

possible and find a meeting ground between different values does not help

her to save Leonard. All she can do is to criticize Helen and Henry for

their biased interpretations of the reality‘ When Leonard dies Margaret

feels:

Events succeeded in a logical， yet senseless， train. People 10st

their humanity， and took va1ues as arbitrary as those in a pack of

playing-cards. . . . In this jang1e of causes and effects what had

become of their true selves? (327)

In spite of her effort to see things in their full complexity， Margaret can-

not see what things lead to， and she has to retire within herself in order to

retain her belief in some ord巴[

And it comforted her to think that the future was certainly inevit-

able: cause and effect would go jangling forward to some goal

doubtless， but to none that she could imagine. At such moments

the soul retires within， to float upon the bosom of a deeper

stream， and has communion with the dead， and sees the world's

glory not diminished， but different in .kind to what she has sup-

posed. (329)

Here Margaret momentarily withdraws into vision.13 Although many crit-

ics point out that Margaret's vision represents the principle of harmony

which is differ巴ntfrom the one she believed in， her VlSlOn here is not

enough to bear such weight. For example， John Beer says that the moment

marks the change of tone of the novel from the predominance of events to

Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howards End 31

that of her vision.14 According to Beer， Margaret becomes a value in her-

self as a visionary person who harmonizes people with her spirit of love，

and she finally limits the attempt to her little world of Howards End.

However， the reality that she has witnessed is too grave for the complete

triumph by her vision; in fact， Margaret eventually gives up her love for

Henry. Rather， it is Forster who gives her a limited success at the ending.

Though Margaret cannot find the truth or order which she has b巴enseek-

ing， Forster finally approves her by rejecting such sensibilities repre-

sented by Henry， Char1es，在日dHelen. Even at the end of the novel， Mar-

garet's idea about people has not chang巴d:

“Differences - eternal differences， planted by God in a single

family， so that there may always be colour; sorrow perh呂ps，but

colour in the daily gray." (336)

Therefore， the ending at Howards End is rather a temporary escape from

the unsolved problem of modern society. As sensibilities take root in the

social structure， personal recognition of the limitation of one's own sensi-

bility is not a genuine solution and serves as the basis for coming happi-

ness only in private circles. When the characters ar巴 shelteredat Howards

End， the house ceases to be a mere property and revives as a place for

life; the ending even suggests the revival of a farm. App昌rentlythe charac-

ters are placed out of the urban society. However， this life at Howards

End does not provide a substantial alternative way of life. The rurallife at

the ending is superficial， since the house had almost lost its connection

with the agrarian culture even且tthe beginning of the novel and soon be-

came a simple VlSlOnary place. Moreover， the story about the failure of

Howards End as旦 farm，related by Henry in Chapt巴r24， reveals the actual

32 Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's Howards End

financial problem of farming and undercuts the pastoral atmosphere at the

ending.15 Howards End is also involved in the commercial activities. In

fact， the suburbs drawing near to this privileged place from London su合

gests the resurging problem which Helen and Leonard's child must meet.

The ending momentarily suspends or defers giving an answer to the prob-

lem of finding a means to connect values of private life and those of busi-

ness. It rather simply stresses the importance of this task by endorsing the

attempt to seek proportion.

Thus Forster develops his drama of different menta1ities in the back-

ground of domestic life， but his private drama has a deep connection with

the structure of modern society. The difficulty of finding a solution to the

question F orster raises may be inherent in the design of the novel， but his

urge for an acceptance of the plurality of the meaning of reality and his

simultaneous concern with sound mentality testify to his d巴色punderstand-

ing of the problem of morality in modern society

Notes

1. Lionel Tril1ing， E. M. Forster (London: The Hogarth Press， 1953) 102.

2. John Colmer， E. M. Forster: The Personal Vo仰 (London:Routledge and

Kegan Paul， 1978) 87-88. Colmer finds also aspects of a commedy of manners

and of “Rhythm" and “Prophecy" in Howar，ゐEnd.Anne Wright: Literature of

Crisis， 1910-22: Howards E托d，Heartbreak House， Women in Love and The Waste

Land (London: The Macmillan Press， 1984) 24

3. E. M. Forster，“Notes on the English Character，" Abinger Harvest (London:

Edward Arnold， 1953) 20ー23.

4. Paul Delany， '''Islands of Money': Rentier Culture in E. M. Forster's How.

ards E冗d，"Engl，ぉhLiterature in Tra刀sition31 (1988) 285.

5. E. M. Forster， Ho包JarlゐEnd(London: Edward Arnold， 1973) 59. Subsequent

references from this novel appe乱rin the text by page numbers only

6. Alistair Duckworth says，“As a novelist， his concern was with domestic life，

Moral Perspectives in E. M. Forster's HozωrdsEnd 33

but in dornestic life he found the blindness and the cruelty that vitiated social

life， as well as the tolerance， kindness， love， and respect for personal relations

that potentially， rnight ennoble and irnprove society" (Alistair Duckworth，

Howar.ゐ End:E. M Forster's House of Fiction， [N巴wYork: Tweyne Publishers，

1992] 91).

7. Delany finds that the novel reflects Forster's consciousness of hirnself be-

longing to“rentier culture，" but 1 do not agree to his jdea that the novel sirnp‘

ly vindicates Forster's financial condition and shows the superiority of the

Schlegels to the Wilcoxes. As to Forster's view on the econornic basis of the

rniddle-class people in the 19th century， see “The Challenge of Our Tirne" and

“Henry Thornton" in Two Cheers for Democracy (London: Edward Arnold，

1972)

8. E. M. Forster， A学ectsof the Novel (Harrnondsworth， Middlesex: Penguin

Books， 1976) 42-43.

9. Aspects of the Novel， 88-89.

10. See E. M. Forster，“Art for Art's Sake，" Two Cheers for De1ηocr・'acy.

11. John Edward Hardy points out Helen's confusion of ideas and people and

her adherence to her own opinions (John Edward Hardy， Man in the Mod.初1

Novel [Seattle: University of Washington Press， 1964] 38-41)ー

12. Norman Page says the novel presents the “debate" rather than “case" (Nor-

rnan Page， E. M. Forster [Houndsrnills: Macrnillan Education， 1987] 79)

13. As to Margaret's withdrawal， see Barbara Rosecrance，“'Howards End，" E M.

Forsteηed. Harold Bloorn (N ew Y ork: Chelsea House， 1987) 133.

14. John Beer， The Achieve7nent of E M. Forster (London: Chatoo and Windus，

1962) 120

15. As to the pastor呂1ending， see Anne Wright.