I mentally confused this with Woolf's "A Room of One's Own"-- completely different (or so I imagine as I haven't gotten to that one yet) and thus set the tone for my reading relationship with this book.

I loved the initial Italian setting of Florence filled with museums, artwork, and mischief. Lucy Honeychurch (easily my favorite fictional name) and her cousin Charlotte Bartlett enjoy the trip and part 2 finds us back in England at the homestead of the Honeychurches. Mayhem ensues and the true point of the book finally comes to light. I struggled with the writing and the plot of this book. At times it made absolutely no sense and I found myself scratching my head. I rooted for Lucy and George to get together and had a hard time understanding the vitriol of the times.

Glad that I read this one and happier that it is over.

I'm about halfway through this book. For such a slim volume it is shocking how long it is taking me to finish this. It's so boring! Don't tell me I'm not a sophisticated reader: I appreciate and love plenty of books wherein "nothing happens." Take a look at Henry James, nothing hardly ever happens- the climax of action is someone not doing anything, or glancing, or sneezing, and then pages upon pages ensure analyzing that nothing/glance/sneeze until the protagonist realizes that life is unalterably changed forever. But Room with a View is different, there is left nothing to the imagination- everything i hopelessly two-dimensional or obvious. Maybe it is because it's a "social novel" about class and all that other boring crap British writers seem so hung up about in the most obvious ways. Here's basically how the first half of Room with a View goes, abridged:

PART ONE.
Lucy Honeychurch was a pretty English girl visiting Florence. Everyone knew she was rich, because her family owned acres of property in England, and land is very important to English people. She wasn't from London, she was just a rich country woman, which made her conventional. She was travelling in Florence with a spinster aunt, because all pretty English girls have spinster aunts for the express purpose of accompanying them on their travels to the continent. No one spoils fun quite like a spinster aunt. They arrive in Florence to find that their room doesn't have a view. This is the worst thing that has ever happened to Lucy. It was like getting to school and finding apple juice in her lunchbox, when she had explicitly said she only liked grape juice. Near as she was to tears, she tried best to restrain herself, when by miracle of fiction, two men, an funny old man and his mute son, appear and offer her their room, because anyway, men don't even like views! After deliberating for a day about the propriety of taking the men's rooms, they do so, and views are never mentioned again- they don't even seem to appreciate the view that their womanness has been programmed to appreciate. Lucy sees some man murdered, and gets blood all over her postcards which cost her seven lira. George Emerson (the son) arrives and throws her bloody postcards in the river, a gesture which inexplicably distresses Lucy. She resolves never to see him again, because he litters. She sees him again because she can't control anything, and is forced to spend time with people whose company she alternately enjoys and loaths. George Emerson kisses her in a field of violets, innocently, like two middle schoolers (probably a horrible kisser), and Lucy's world ends and she is shipped off to Rome to look at buildings or pray.

PART TWO.
In Rome, Lucy and Mr. Vyse get engaged. She says "no" twice but ultimately he stalks/harrasses/wears her down and forces a maybe of out of her. He returns with her to England and finds everyone she loves to be an idiot. He thinks he is being clever by inviting the Emersons to live in the same country neighborhood. Lucy hates this. It is the second worst thing that has happened to her (since the room sans view fiasco).

Youth, love and time on your hands...whatever does one do with it all? What an upper class English lady of the early 20th century does with it is the basis for E.M. Forster's A Room with a View.

I expected more of a Death in Venice kind of languishing prose, but instead it felt, for the most part, more akin to Austen...except when it slipped into a borderline Bronte-esque melodrama. There was the snobbish principles and philosophy du jour as well as serious melancholy to be had in plenty, but to my surprise Forster wedged in enough levity to lighten it all up, not allowing it to sink into a mire of self-righteous platitudes and those all too earnest yet often misguided youthful yearnings. The writing was smart, though not too clever for its own good, aside from one gripe. Knocking down of the 4th wall and addressing the audience once every fifty or so pages was a distraction. Either utilize the technique through out consistently and force the reader to accept it or don't use it at all.

Okay, I lied. I have two gripes. The grounds upon which the love affair between Lucy and George is based on could've used more developing. I didn't fully buy into it. By the end I was okay with their relationship, but the start of it needed something more.

Goodreads' dang 5 star doesn't allow it, but if I could, I would actually rate this 3.5 stars.

Since this is the third time I have read this book over the years I would imagine that anyone reading this will get the idea that it is one of my favorite books of the early 20th century. For those of you approaching it for the first time it is necessary to give it a chance......published in 1908, the writing will at first seem antiquated and stilted but once you get into the rhythm of Forster's style, you will be hooked. It also moves very slowly. It is a simple story of a young woman following her heart and not bowing to the staid and suffocating behavior that society expected from the female gender at the beginning of the 20th century. It is short, sweet, and satisfying.

Romantic comedy this is not. The rosiness of a woman stumbling upon convenient fantasy fulfillment by marrying into privilege and bourgeois wealth do not tinge the themes of this classic. Rather this aspires to the novelty of a sort of female bildungsroman. A woman who is roused into the acknowledgement of her desires and self through the unwitting intervention of men considered unworthy of being even good travel companions - how many male authors/poets/dramatists of Forster's generation have cared enough about class distinctions and gender inequality to fashion such a narrative?
I can think of G.B. Shaw- a dramatist unlike Forster, but contemporaneous in stature and rise to fame - who did wean a generation away from the romanticism of war and the burnish of social affluence and forced them into acknowledging the foolishness of prejudices. Shaw, who gave a working class flower girl an indestructible sense of self-worth and a right to reject the suave, much older, educated benefactor in favor of the younger man who loved her without reservations, should be mentioned in the same breath as Forster in my eyes. Both looked upon women as humans and not as passive accessories meant to magnify the worth of the men in their lives and that's reason enough for me to be an unabashed fangirl for life.

n  "He had robbed the body of its taint, the world's taunts of their sting; he had shown her the holiness of direct desire."n

Sexually and emotionally inhibited young woman savoring personal liberty for the first time through the love of a man of inferior social standing who assumes a consciously passive role in earning her affections - this was, perhaps, Forster's way of contradicting and affirming Austenian values at the same time. The very possibility of the intersection of marital bliss and lack of wealth and connections in a prospective husband and disregard for societal approval lay well outside the limits of Austen's imagination but she did endow her many women characters with enough dimensions to be keenly distinguishable from each other.

n  "They have sinned against passion and truth, and vain will be their strife after virtue. As the years pass, they are censured. Their pleasantry and their piety show cracks, their wit becomes cynicism, their unselfishness hypocrisy; they feel and produce discomfort wherever they go."n

What else is there to say? Here's to the unexpected joy of discovering another male author of the last century, who was effortlessly free of the abysmal sexism that is so regrettably palpable in the work of many novelists (of all genders) of the present. Here's to a great story-teller who ventured beyond the narrow horizons conferred on him by his times.
I foresee much more Forster in my future.

I imagine that in the early twentieth century, this book could have been marketed as a "beach" read. It's fast-paced, romantic, endearing, funny, dramatic and even fulfills a little bit of that wanderlust feeling we all get in the summer months.

Frankly, I couldn't stop smiling throughout this entire novel. This is one of those books in which the setting (though it may be as stunning as Florence, London, or the English countryside) takes a back seat to the vibrant and highly entertaining characters. Miss Lavish, Mr. Emerson, Miss Bartlett, Freddy (!!!), Mrs. Honeychurch, Mr. Eager, Mr. Beebe - all such unique and large personalities. I absolutely adored this novel and really recommend it to anyone who finds the idea of reading classics in their spare time daunting or tiresome... this book reads like a fancy YA novel, and apparently that's exactly my cup of tea.

For more bookish photos, reviews and updates follow me on instagram @concerningnovels.

“Has Italy filled you with the fever of travel ? Perhaps George Emerson is right . He says that Italy is only a euphuism for Fate .”

I have the author Sarah Winman to thank for my finally reading this book. One of the characters in her upcoming novel Still Life which I just finished, tells of her knowing E.M. Forster and the book is read by a character in the novel. While this is a social commentary on Victorian England in many ways, it’s an ode to Florence and it’s art, to Italy and how full of life it is and a nod to women, surprising for the time reflected here. It was lighter than I expected, and it felt slow at times, but nonetheless a good story with a great ending.

My literary travels took me to Italy twice this past week. It will hardly make up for my trip that was canceled last year, but still a beautiful view from any room where I was reading.

I'm a sucker for a sweet, kind-hearted, naïve and sheltered heroine. Especially when they slowly learn how to be brave. So this book was perfect for me to read.

Lucy Honeychurch (how's that for a name) is a sheltered young Englishwoman in 1908. She lives with her mother and little brother Freddy. She goes on an exciting travel-abroad trip with her stuffy older cousin. There she meets the Emersons - also English - old Mr. Emerson who is loving and honest to a fault. His outspoken ways are considered vulgar and shocking, but Lucy thinks he's sweet and recognizes his good heart. And his son - George Emerson - a dashing, thoughtful, rather melancholy man who soon turns Lucy's world upside-down.

Why? Because he's handsome? Because he's charming? No. Because he encourages her to think for herself and introduces her to all sorts of crazy ideas about gender equality. I love this type of old-fashioned romance novel where the hero has actual substance and not just a set of six-pack abs.

Lucy slowly, slowly starts to think for herself. She starts to grasp what life is really about - living, people, nature, love - not what she's been trained to think that it's about: gossip, being proper, religion, and society's opinion.

She makes a huge mistake in bowing to societal pressure and getting engaged to the priggish, domineering, bossy, judgmental and pretentious Cecil Vyse. He adores telling her how to think, who to like, who to sneer at (he loves sneering). He's training her to be a pompous a**hole, just like he is.

Luckily for Lucy, George moves into the neighborhood, setting her mind and heart awhirl for a second time.

Will she stay with Cecil? Will she end up with George?

...

I'm always worried going into a classic book. Sometimes I love them (Anna Karenina, Gone with the Wind, Little Women, Watership Down, White Fang) and sometimes there are boring and dreary and a total slog to get through (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Two Years Before the Mast).

I was pleasantly surprised that this book was a joy to read. It's written in a relaxed, easy style that is fun and relatable. I was completely caught up and swept away by Lucy's problems. Cecil was infuriating me to no end. I was yelling at him and cursing him out. Every time George showed up, I'd hold my breath, waiting to see what liberal philosophies he was going to tell Lucy about and get her mind working again.

I felt like Cecil was the most frustrating, anger-inducing character. When an author writes an "evil" character, let's say a rapist or a murderer or a child-abuser or a slaver, it's obvious this person is bad news. You (the reader) hate him, the protagonist hates him, and you only have to worry about what evil he'll wreck on people's lives. "Villains" like Cecil are much more insidious. They don't commit crimes, or physically hurt anyone. Instead, they take great delight in putting other people down in subtle ways, controlling others, and caring only about themselves and their own needs. Cecil doesn't KNOW he's a jerk - he's very insecure about his masculinity and therefore takes out his doubt and frustration by pretending to be the "big man," telling others what to do all the time and expressing contempt for people that he sees as 'beneath him.' He uses Lucy as a prop for his own ego - she is such a sweet, innocent, sheltered woman that he makes the mistake in thinking she's also docile. Having someone like this at his side makes him feel like a big, strong man. Putting others down and making them feel small is also a way he makes himself feel better. But he is proper and has money and good standing in society, so Lucy thinks he must be right in his opinions - and everyone around her encourages her to marry him.

Lucy herself impressed me a lot. I could see that a lot of people would just see her as a sheltered girl who is rather stupid. But I don't. She's being raised in a society where being proper is everything. Women aren't supposed to think, they're supposed to get married and have children. Lucy is someone I admire because even though she's sheltered, she hungers for a world greater than the one she's living in. She doesn't even realize it, but there's a big hole in her life that afternoon tea with gossipy ladies can't fill. Going to Italy and seeing the beauty and different society there starts to open up her eyes - aided by a kiss from George.

After moving back to England, she finds herself again bowing to the constraints and demands of proper English society. She makes a mistake in getting engaged to Cecil. But when George shows up again, the gears in her head start turning again - and she  realizes that Cecil is annoying and tiring to be around. She bravely goes to him and breaks off their engagement. She tells him straight out that his behavior is appalling and she doesn't appreciate him telling her what to do and think. She expresses anger that he looks down at her mother and brother with contempt. I thought she was so brave and strong to be able to do this. I really admired her. In the end, she STILL doesn't want to admit that she loves George, but a heart-to-heart talk with George's father soon straightens her out. She elopes with George but has to accept estrangement from her family and friends for her 'scandalous,' 'improper' behavior.

I love that, not only does she stand up to Cecil, but she stands up to George. He's always putting down Cecil as a man who likes telling her how and what to think - and she calls George on doing the same thing. Touché. He realizes that he himself is trying to bring her around to his way of thinking, and apologizes. Lucy turns into a very brave and outspoken woman, and I really like that she calls "bullshit" not only on the "bad guy" - Cecil - but on the "good guy" George as well.

In fact, the best, most attractive guy to me is old Mr. Emerson - a man who truly seems to understand the world and to understand what is important. He is also honest and has a huge heart. But I can see that George is more attractive and more her age - I'd never expect for her to end up with the old widower. But  she gets the best of both worlds - George as a husband and Mr. Emerson as a father-in-law. I was rather sad that she ends up estranged from her family and friends - they may be a bit silly and shallow, but I feel like Lucy really loved them.

Tl;dr - One of the better classics. I really enjoyed reading it and was completely caught up in the characters and plot.

Uma história surpreendentemente progressista para a altura em que foi escrita, com ideais fixos sobre a emancipação e individualidade femininas na sociedade edwardiana.

Lucy é uma jovem limitada pelas restrições sociais da altura que, numas férias em Itália conhece George. Este oferece-lhe uma perspetiva diferente sobre si mesma, e a obra debruça-se sobre a aceitação da mesma. Fiquei surpreendida com os temas e gostei particularmente da escrita despretensiosa do autor.

3.5 stars, rounded up to 4

Absolutely amazing. I love E.M. Forster - his writing is beautiful, his dialogue perfectly pitched, and the way he writes about love just amazing. I also love the way this novel looks at "respectability" and the position of women in Edwardian society.

I actually went looking for the six star rating. This was perfect, exquisite. EM Forster at his very best. Drama, lightness of touch, beautiful settings, fascinating characters. This has everything. And it has old Mr. Emerson and Reverend Beebe. Glorious