On the novel

Tuesday, November 20th., Cadogan Square, London.

E.M. Forster is a first rate novelist and an acquaintance of mine. He has recently published a book  "Aspects of the Novel" based on a series of lectures given at Cambridge. To my mind Forster is less like a lecturer than any lecturer ever was before. He is colloquial and glories in being so. He is larkish, witty, humorous, epigrammatic, full of sly fun. He laughs at himself, the public, the 'big guns', the entire art of fiction. He has praised me handsomely and then, writing of "The Old Wives' Tale" stated that "it misses greatness" - knocking me out in three words! I forgive him for that. After all I might say the same about "Howards End".

What endears me to Forster more than anything is his eager admission that he is only a 'pseudo-scholar'. I have hitherto concealed the fact that I too am only a pseudo-scholar. I will try no more. I state exultantly that I am a pseudo-scholar. 

As regards the novel, Forster decidedly knows what he is talking about; he knows in a manner and with an understanding possible only to a creative artist and impossible to any real scholar, because no real scholar can be also a creative artist. Nobody intelligent enough to be interested in the higher manifestations of the art and craft of fiction could read his book without pleasure and profit.

I was particularly taken by his observations on the question of plot. He says: "A plot is a narrative of events with the emphasis on causality." It is not the same as a story. Thus, 'The King died and then the Queen died' is a story. 'The King died, and then the Queen died of grief' is a plot. It would be difficult to be at once more illuminating and more succint.

My friend Mr. Frank Swinnerton is reported to have been engaged (perhaps an engagement not quite amounting to a betrothal) for years upon a work on the English novel. I have been pining for that work as it is certain to be good. But if it is better than Forster's it will be good with a profane adverb. Forster has to a considerable extent assuaged my longing for the thesis of Swinnerton. The latter may be well advised to stay clear of Forster's book so as not to feel unduly discouraged.