The Logical vs. the Abstract.
The cultures and characters are stereotypical, but the false dichotomy does allow for things to be explored.
Click here for TIME Magazine’s list.
Funny how time affects views. Originally, people didn’t like this book because it showcased inappropriate relationships between conquerer and colonized. Forester made India too knowable and too relatable. Now, those “relatable” details are viewed with scorn as every -ism gets piled on this book: sexism, racism, imperialism. Somehow the firebrand that was disliked for showing the humanity of India is now denigrated because he didn’t show the humanity of India. You just can’t win.
Yes, the book has the air of a western, ego-centric flair from a writer in imperialistic 1920s. There is a silly division of labor: the British are always logical to a fault while the Indians are willy-nilly mystical. However, there is some insight to how this view still lives with us today, and how as a westerner myself I yearn for the mystical viewpoint Forster puts in the mouth of his Indian characters.