Miss Quested and Mrs. Moore are good Brits in turn of the century India.  They have the best intentions and want to meet real Indians and see the real India.  When Dr. Aziz takes them to visit the Marabar Caves, they seem to be penetrating deep into the heart of India.  However, Miss Quested is overwhelmed by the caves & accuses Aziz of attacking her & for all their good intentions, they are shown to be just as incapable of understanding Indians as the worst of their fellow Brits.

This is certainly the best of Forster's novels.  The clash of cultures makes for interesting reading.  However, after a century of decolonization and independence, it's legitimate to ask whether places like India are better off today, as independent nations, than they were in 1900, as colonies.  Forster makes the point that the English will never understand the Indians & can never be friends with them, but will Hindus ever understand Moslems & can they ever be friends?  More importantly, even if the English never could befriend the Indians, wasn't their governance, at least, enlightened & constructive?
Whereas, the Hindus who feel actual hatred towards the Moslems (& vice versa) have governed in a backward and destructive manner?  Should ethnicity be the deciding factor in who governs a country or are governing principles (democracy, capitalism, religious tolerance) more important to the welfare of the population?

It seems to me that Forster & his ilk bet on ethnicity & events have shown them to be catastrophically mistaken.

(Reviewed:)

Grade: (B) Orrin C. Judd

Tweet