JAN 2026 "Maurice" discussion: FORSTER'S TERMINAL NOTE
Talk GoodThings I've Read
Join LibraryThing to post.
1DebiCates
Links to all Maurice threads in this group read:
INTRODUCTION
PART ONE
PART TWO
PART THREE
PART FOUR (end of novel)
FORSTER'S TERMINAL NOTE (This thread)
Final Thoughts
Discussion on Forster's "Terminal note."
INTRODUCTION
PART ONE
PART TWO
PART THREE
PART FOUR (end of novel)
FORSTER'S TERMINAL NOTE (This thread)
Final Thoughts
Discussion on Forster's "Terminal note."
2elenchus
I'm reconsidering my initial thoughts after finishing the NOTE, based upon our discussions here. But here's what I wrote specifically in my review:
Forster in what is styled a TERMINAL NOTE admits that he created Maurice essentially as the opposite of himself. Alongside my interpretation of Clive and Maurice as essentially contrasting ideal types of gay men in British society, this suggests that Clive could be autobiographical. Particularly interesting insofar as Clive is not presented altogether sympathetically or even apologetically.
So before reading the note, for that matter before finishing the novel, I had the impression that Maurice and Clive were almost alternative Ideal Types (in the Weberian sense, not as "perfection"). Coming to Forster's admission that Maurice was written intentionally as the opposite of himself, suggested to me that maybe Clive was then a reflection of himself? Not sure I'm so persuaded of that, anymore.
Forster in what is styled a TERMINAL NOTE admits that he created Maurice essentially as the opposite of himself. Alongside my interpretation of Clive and Maurice as essentially contrasting ideal types of gay men in British society, this suggests that Clive could be autobiographical. Particularly interesting insofar as Clive is not presented altogether sympathetically or even apologetically.
So before reading the note, for that matter before finishing the novel, I had the impression that Maurice and Clive were almost alternative Ideal Types (in the Weberian sense, not as "perfection"). Coming to Forster's admission that Maurice was written intentionally as the opposite of himself, suggested to me that maybe Clive was then a reflection of himself? Not sure I'm so persuaded of that, anymore.
3DebiCates
>2 elenchus: I understand the debate. I'm not entirely sure either, but am tempted to peg personal experiences of Forster onto the characters in so many ways.
Truth is, now that I think of it, he could indeed feel all those things, be all those characters, desire to make different choices at any given moment of his life. From the get-go, it was the struggle and the coming to some kind of resolution that seems so penetrating in the novel, and thus I assumed was based on experience. In fact in the forward and in that BBC program, they both speak of his rejuvenation and relief in writing Maurice, after his recent big success which was stifling rather than liberating to him.
Truth is, now that I think of it, he could indeed feel all those things, be all those characters, desire to make different choices at any given moment of his life. From the get-go, it was the struggle and the coming to some kind of resolution that seems so penetrating in the novel, and thus I assumed was based on experience. In fact in the forward and in that BBC program, they both speak of his rejuvenation and relief in writing Maurice, after his recent big success which was stifling rather than liberating to him.
4GregM3
>3 DebiCates: "Truth is, now that I think of it, he could indeed feel all those things, be all those characters, desire to make different choices at any given moment of his life."
Love this!
Love this!
5GregM3
I just finished the Terminal Note this morning, before leaving for work. I enjoyed this look into Forster's thoughts, and the glimpses of his early readers' comments were fascinating. I laughed at Lytton Strattchey's reactions; as a cynic, how could he have responded otherwise?
And I like this tongue-in-cheek imagining of the characters forward into the 1960's:
"Clive on the bench will continue to sentence Alec in the dock. Maurice may get off."
There's his clear-headedness on class differences there as well as a hint of what could be called Clive's internalized homophobia.
And this passage I especially appreciated, in terms of the ending:
"Unless the Wolfenden Report becomes law, it will probably have to remain in manuscript. If it ended unhappily with a lad dangling from a noose or with a suicide pact, all would be well, for there is no pornography or seduction of minors. But the lovers get away unpunished and consequently recommend crime."
So, it was the happy ending that made it especially challenging to publish, apparently!
I wish Forster could have seen a few decades into the future. Nothing is ever perfect, but it's incredible how much has changed on gay acceptance since he passed away in 1970. Even over my lifetime, so much has changed.
And I like this tongue-in-cheek imagining of the characters forward into the 1960's:
"Clive on the bench will continue to sentence Alec in the dock. Maurice may get off."
There's his clear-headedness on class differences there as well as a hint of what could be called Clive's internalized homophobia.
And this passage I especially appreciated, in terms of the ending:
"Unless the Wolfenden Report becomes law, it will probably have to remain in manuscript. If it ended unhappily with a lad dangling from a noose or with a suicide pact, all would be well, for there is no pornography or seduction of minors. But the lovers get away unpunished and consequently recommend crime."
So, it was the happy ending that made it especially challenging to publish, apparently!
I wish Forster could have seen a few decades into the future. Nothing is ever perfect, but it's incredible how much has changed on gay acceptance since he passed away in 1970. Even over my lifetime, so much has changed.
6DebiCates
>5 GregM3: So, it was the happy ending that made it especially challenging to publish, apparently!
Ain't that a kick in the head? Crazy. The very reason we love it today is the reason he couldn't publish it then. That is some change for ya. I like to think he saw a glimpse of the direction things were taking even by 1970. Sadly, I think what he said he saw was things change from illegal to contempt. That might have been in the P. N. Furbanks Introduction I read. But still here we are. The genie is out of the bottle and you can't put it back in. Onward ho!
Ain't that a kick in the head? Crazy. The very reason we love it today is the reason he couldn't publish it then. That is some change for ya. I like to think he saw a glimpse of the direction things were taking even by 1970. Sadly, I think what he said he saw was things change from illegal to contempt. That might have been in the P. N. Furbanks Introduction I read. But still here we are. The genie is out of the bottle and you can't put it back in. Onward ho!
7StaciaV
"Terminal Note" seems such an ominous title for an afterword, imo.
I had to wonder if the title "Terminal Note" reflected the quote that Greg pointed out: "Unless the Wolfenden Report becomes law, it will probably have to remain in manuscript. If it ended unhappily with a lad dangling from a noose or with a suicide pact, all would be well, for there is no pornography or seduction of minors. But the lovers get away unpunished and consequently recommend crime."
As in, an ominous or terminal solution/ending would have been acceptable; whereas, happiness was not.
And it's sad that Forster wrote his note over 40 years after first starting Maurice & things really hadn't changed for the positive in those decades of his lifetime.
I am very glad to have read the notes, though. I think I enjoyed them as much or even more than the novel itself.
I had to wonder if the title "Terminal Note" reflected the quote that Greg pointed out: "Unless the Wolfenden Report becomes law, it will probably have to remain in manuscript. If it ended unhappily with a lad dangling from a noose or with a suicide pact, all would be well, for there is no pornography or seduction of minors. But the lovers get away unpunished and consequently recommend crime."
As in, an ominous or terminal solution/ending would have been acceptable; whereas, happiness was not.
And it's sad that Forster wrote his note over 40 years after first starting Maurice & things really hadn't changed for the positive in those decades of his lifetime.
I am very glad to have read the notes, though. I think I enjoyed them as much or even more than the novel itself.
