I’m intrigued that students have avoided talking about class, which remains one of those questions that Americans are as “disinclined” to talk about as the English are to “human nature” … 🙂
I’m not sure if this comes through as clearly in the novel — my mind is not yet firing on all cylinders this morning and I didn’t mark it in the text — but in the film version of Maurice, which you simply must see, if you haven’t — a wonderful young Hugh Grant as Clive! — we get a look in one night at Clive’s house as everyone has finished dinner and is standing around in their fancy dress. It’s raining and suddenly multiple holes in the roof let rain in and they have to shift the piano and put out buckets to catch it. Memory suggests there are a few similar moments in the novel when it becomes clear that the class that Clive represents — and the huge but expensive and now crumbling estates of the 19th century — no longer make sense in England. Like those estates and houses, it’s always seemed to me that Forster sees the landed gentry and the heteronormative culture that flourishes there as falling as well. It’s no surprise that the Clive stays locked away in his closet, of sorts, while the new middle class (Maurice) and the working class (Scudder) may have a future together …
Similar issues come up in Evelyn Waugh’s Brideshead Revisited (1945), which also centers on the evolving relationship of two male friends who become sexually involved at university: the aristocratic Sebastian Flyte and the middle class Charles Ryder. Whereas in Maurice, the aristocratic character eventually leads a conventional life of marriage and heterosexuality and the middle class character gets expelled and leads a gay life, in Brideshead Revisited the opposite occurs. The middle class character (Charles) eventually leads a life of marriage and heterosexuality and the aristocrat (Sebastian) gets expelled and leads a gay life. In both novels, the gay character ends up with a partner from the working class. In Brideshead Revisited, this is presented as a sign of how far Sebastian has sunk in the world. (His companion is a sleazy, drug-addled opportunist.) Here we see an example of the declining English aristocracy that Dr. Banks mentions.
I think a theme that is emerging in this course is the greater possibility for democracy in gay relationships, where class lines can be crossed more successfully (or at least more acceptably) than they can in the straight world. We saw this last week, when Stephen took up with an uneducated girl (Mary).
Stephen-
Very interesting point re: class lines being crossed more successfully in the gay world. Do you think other lines are more successfully crossed as well? Race? Religion? Level of education? In some ways I want to think this is true–if one has already had the courage to live one’s truth as a gay person, it seems to stand that other barriers would also be more easily overcome. However, there does seem to be a huge divide in the gay world surrounding race and class. I think about the Showtime series The L Word and how many lesbians were frustrated with the series since most of the women represented on the show were affluent (and white). There does seem to be a big divide in class in the lesbian world.
The theme is presented in these novels but I don’t know that I buy into it myself. I don’t find it very plausible that a relationship where there are significant inequalities, such as the one between Maurice and Alec or even between Stephen and Mary, could stand much of a chance. Stephen treats Mary variously like a child (Hall 331) and like a pet (340). The Stephen-Mary dynamic parallels the one between Mary and her dog (David).
There is also a difference, as we’ll see in later texts, between crossing the lines (of class or race or whatever) over the long haul of a long-term relationship and crossing them temporarily (as in a one-night stand or a short-term relationship). Certainly the possibility of the latter is plausible to me.
Maurice and Alec go from blackmail to happily-ever-after in a few pages. I don’t buy it. By comparison, it’s much more believable that they would run into Mr. Ducie or that the London jeweler would recognize Stephen’s resemblance to her father.
Stephen,
I believe you mention some very significant parts of both “The Well of Loneliness” and “Maurice” through the encounters that the main characters have with people from their past! What do you make of Stephen’s encounter with the man from the jewelry store in London? Do you think that she is embarrassed to be seen there buying a ring for a “special” friend? Do you think she is worried that encounter might amount to some juicy gossip that leaks back to Morton?
Likewise, do you believe that Maurice is strategic in blowing off Mr. Ducie at the museum? Do you think that Maurice’s intentions in doing so are related to his lack of desire toward “rekindling” a friendship with the former teacher? Or are his actions more so stemmed from the fact that he is with Scudder at the time? Could his reasoning further more be due to the conversation that took place between Mr. Ducie and Maurice at the beginning of the book?
Jen,
Your mention of larger barriers that may be more easily crossed in same-sex relationships is a great entity to further investigate as it relates to Stephen’s above response! I do think that you have a measurable point worthy of our consideration when you say that if one is already willing to become a “social outcast” (as it pertains to “The Well of Loneliness” and “Maurice”), then what is the big deal of crossing even larger (or furthered) social barriers? Maybe the whole of it comes down to courage – courage to love and be with that one person who society deems unfit for a particular romance…whether that be same-sex relationships, relationships between two from opposing class systems, or interracial relationships. Although, as you have mentioned, this doesn’t necessarily fit every mold – but I like that you have examined the “courage” aspect to it all. Would you say that Maurice showed courage as he decided to pursue a relationship with Scudder? Did Clive show courage in sharing his love for Maurice? Furthermore, did Clive show courage in putting his feelings toward men aside in order to pursue his marriage with Anne, or was this action more so a result of his cowardice?
Love the connection you make to Brideshead … I almost had that in our reading, but alas, world enough and time … The parallels are quite clear, and then also Downton … I keep thinking one of my London study abroad courses will soon be “Literature Between the Was” so I can do both, and Dowton and a bunch of Rattigan plays … 🙂
Hi Dr. Banks, I think you bring up a very good point about class and social structure in England. When I lived there, I noticed that class was everything – people would ask what part of the city you lived in…if you lived anywhere north of the City Centre, then they immediately stuck their nose up at you (most didn’t even venture north of the City Centre). You could also tell that there was pride in the demeanor of someone who lived in “Didsbury” compared to someone who lived in “Moss Side”…Didsbury is further south from the Manchester City Centre, and these divides were clearly derived from class structure. I suppose this paradigm in “Maurice” stood out to me as a result of living in England and realizing the lengths that one would go to discover your class status and then turn their nose up at you as a result (generally). In America, the social system is typically divided by race (at least that is what I witnessed in the South). Which was also very surprising to me when I moved to the South from Canada – race/ethnicity is not an issue or an area of divide in Canada. If anything, Canada is a medium between England and America – where they seem to still be heavily influenced by British rule, but have adopted many practices and behaviors of America. While reading “Maurice,” I couldn’t help but think back to Downton Abbey and how class was such an issue throughout the T.V. show. The Crawley’s had an estate that needed to be passed down to a man (which created a problem because Robert Crawley only had three daughters), so it was the oldest daughter’s responsibility to find a man who fits in the class structure that could take over the… Read more »
I like the connection you make with Downton Abbey. I would add that the series and Forster’s novel present idealized cross-class romances (Lady Sybil/Branson and Maurice/Alec). We see only the honeymoon period. In neither case do we get to see whether these couples would have overcome their class differences and had lasting success together.
P.S. You get my vote for provocative statement of the week: “race/ethnicity is not an issue or an area of divide in Canada”.
I think in part these characters’ respective classes have varied risks attached to them. For example, Clive is, as you put it, master of the house with enormous social and familiar responsibilities that impact the way he performs his own sexuality. At the other extreme, Scudder is a servant and of lesser means, which may suggest why he reacts so impulsively and daringly even after one encounter with Maurice. Maurice himself is somewhere in the middle, but he doesn’t seem to have much to lose, even contemplating suicide at one point. He trudges on despite his struggle to integrate into a “normal” society and grow into an affection for women. The class to which he belongs, at least in my view, doesn’t seem to affect his behavior in the same ways as Scudder and Clive.
Brandon,
Very interesting that you would point to Maurice as a medium…on two different planes. Maurice is of middle class, so in this setting he seems to act as a medium between the class systems – venturing into the upper class in order to be with Clive romantically, and eventually accepting a man from a lower class system in order to experience a loving relationship. Ironically, Maurice is also an example of another medium which is fleshed out in his response to homosexuality. He doesn’t seem to go to extremes (and stick with them)…he goes to the doctor to be cured of his homosexuality, but that doesn’t persist – kind of adopting a medium between trying to get help and not really wanting it. He teeters between frustration and adoration when Scudder attempts to blackmail him. It seems like Maurice is always taking the middle ground; choosing to balance between extreme responses. Does this seem to be a direct parallel to his middle-class status? Do you think Forster intentionally places Maurice in the “middle” of everything, or is this just coincidence? What other ways does Maurice play the “middle” man?
Because I was so concerned with getting a head-start on Giovanni, I still haven’t finished this book, so I find it difficult to speak of Scudder with any certainty. I read the synopsis of the book, and I do like the idea what Maurice only refers to him as Scudder for much of the book, and referring to him as Alec for the first time was apparently an important moment.
But all I can really speak on is Maurice, and the moment that stood out to me, most of all, regarding his class and his idea of himself as a man. It was when he was speaking to an elder about his mother. He had refused to stop when a school official had asked him to and then afterward refused to apologize; this led to an argument with his mother, which in turn, led to him being chastised by a friend of the family’s.
But the way the chastising happened was very telling. The man didn’t simply lay into him. Instead, he was very sarcastic and talked about how a man like Maurice didn’t need to apologize to his mother or act civilly. No. That was how a county gentleman would act, which Maurice clearly was not. And so it was not love for his mother that he changed his attitude, or even love for Clive or money, or fear, or anything else of the sort. It was vanity, because he saw and wanted to see himself as better, higher, and more gentlemanly, and the insinuation that he was not stung him.
I’m glad you brought up the conversation with Dr. Barry and Maurice surrounding class, Maurice’s decisions with his education, and the way that Maurice treats his mother. Forster writes, “Dr Barry then said, ‘Oh, it’s all for the best. What do you want with a University Degree? It was never intended for the suburban classes'” (84).
Considering this conversation with Dr. Barry that led to Maurice to contemplate his footing in society, do you think that Maurice wished he was born into a higher class, like Clive? Do you think that Maurice looks at Clive’s responsibilities in society, as head of his family’s estate, and wishes he could manage those kinds of responsibilities instead of working in an office? Or did you get the sense that Maurice was content on being a member of the working class, even if Dr. Barry’s sarcasm taught him to reevaluate how he acts within society?
I don’t know if he wished he were born into a different life, but I did get the feeling (and have a vague memory of a character or the narrator saying) that he dreamed of some sort of upward mobility. He would rather have had Clive’s life, standing, and station, and he (and his class) were perceived as wanting to break free from their station and become like their “betters.” And I believe that conversation with Dr. Barry is strong evidence that Maurice really did feel that way.
I found the issue of class to be one of the more interesting points of the novel. The classist system really drives the need for conformity. While Clive may be deemed of the higher class among the three central characters of same-sex relationships in the novel, Clive also seems to be the character with, by the end, more deficiencies. His family estate is in disrepair and deterioration, and Clive had to fight to gain election in his father’s stead, noting that the people had grown “weary of us leisured classes coasting round in motor-cars and asking for something to do” (Forster 103). The deterioration of the importance of Clive’s social stature also can be argued to be reflective of the deterioration of his own moral compass. The fact that Clive “changed” is called into question. Was he really that immature and sheltered from women in his schooling to deem a change? Or is he trying to conform and use women as a way of advancing his social status? This is much removed from his arguing the classic theorists as an undergraduate. Maurice, in the suburban middle class, also suffers character flaws. While he fights the need to conform (he is certainly a masculine “man’s man,” taking the role of man-of-the-house to his mother and sisters) and struggles with his attraction to the same-sex, even trying to “cure” himself by visiting Dr. Barry and the hypnotist, he seems to hate the idea of “mixing” with a lower social class even more. This idea seems to truly disgust him—his resolution to his “love” for Alec is to turn away from his own social class and adult responsibilities to “disappear” with the lowly laborer. What good is it to stay in England? He just disappears, never to be heard from again. This does… Read more »
You bring up some very interesting points of discussion as we dissect the class system of England and the struggles that these three men face throughout the book. It seems like their struggles (and maybe their decisions in the midst of those struggles) are a reflection of the class system they are bound to. Clive succumbs to a heterosexual relationship so that he can run the family estate with a wife by his side – adequately meeting society’s expectations for a man of such class. Alec, a man of lower class, does seem to give up an opportunity in Argentine in order to be with Maurice…but then again – would a man of lower class really know what opportunities he is passing if he has never before been a part of a higher class structure? Then we have Maurice, who really tries to cling to his social class, continue with his work as if there is not a care in the world, while Alec goes on blackmailing him. Eventually, he finds his class system and the responsibilities tied to the working class to be mundane. He really is the only one willing to “leave” his status within society to drop to a lower class system for love. Interesting points mentioned here! Thanks for sharing!
I’m intrigued that students have avoided talking about class, which remains one of those questions that Americans are as “disinclined” to talk about as the English are to “human nature” … 🙂
I’m not sure if this comes through as clearly in the novel — my mind is not yet firing on all cylinders this morning and I didn’t mark it in the text — but in the film version of Maurice, which you simply must see, if you haven’t — a wonderful young Hugh Grant as Clive! — we get a look in one night at Clive’s house as everyone has finished dinner and is standing around in their fancy dress. It’s raining and suddenly multiple holes in the roof let rain in and they have to shift the piano and put out buckets to catch it. Memory suggests there are a few similar moments in the novel when it becomes clear that the class that Clive represents — and the huge but expensive and now crumbling estates of the 19th century — no longer make sense in England. Like those estates and houses, it’s always seemed to me that Forster sees the landed gentry and the heteronormative culture that flourishes there as falling as well. It’s no surprise that the Clive stays locked away in his closet, of sorts, while the new middle class (Maurice) and the working class (Scudder) may have a future together …
Similar issues come up in Evelyn Waugh’s Brideshead Revisited (1945), which also centers on the evolving relationship of two male friends who become sexually involved at university: the aristocratic Sebastian Flyte and the middle class Charles Ryder. Whereas in Maurice, the aristocratic character eventually leads a conventional life of marriage and heterosexuality and the middle class character gets expelled and leads a gay life, in Brideshead Revisited the opposite occurs. The middle class character (Charles) eventually leads a life of marriage and heterosexuality and the aristocrat (Sebastian) gets expelled and leads a gay life. In both novels, the gay character ends up with a partner from the working class. In Brideshead Revisited, this is presented as a sign of how far Sebastian has sunk in the world. (His companion is a sleazy, drug-addled opportunist.) Here we see an example of the declining English aristocracy that Dr. Banks mentions.
I think a theme that is emerging in this course is the greater possibility for democracy in gay relationships, where class lines can be crossed more successfully (or at least more acceptably) than they can in the straight world. We saw this last week, when Stephen took up with an uneducated girl (Mary).
Stephen-
Very interesting point re: class lines being crossed more successfully in the gay world. Do you think other lines are more successfully crossed as well? Race? Religion? Level of education? In some ways I want to think this is true–if one has already had the courage to live one’s truth as a gay person, it seems to stand that other barriers would also be more easily overcome. However, there does seem to be a huge divide in the gay world surrounding race and class. I think about the Showtime series The L Word and how many lesbians were frustrated with the series since most of the women represented on the show were affluent (and white). There does seem to be a big divide in class in the lesbian world.
Hi Jen,
The theme is presented in these novels but I don’t know that I buy into it myself. I don’t find it very plausible that a relationship where there are significant inequalities, such as the one between Maurice and Alec or even between Stephen and Mary, could stand much of a chance. Stephen treats Mary variously like a child (Hall 331) and like a pet (340). The Stephen-Mary dynamic parallels the one between Mary and her dog (David).
There is also a difference, as we’ll see in later texts, between crossing the lines (of class or race or whatever) over the long haul of a long-term relationship and crossing them temporarily (as in a one-night stand or a short-term relationship). Certainly the possibility of the latter is plausible to me.
Maurice and Alec go from blackmail to happily-ever-after in a few pages. I don’t buy it. By comparison, it’s much more believable that they would run into Mr. Ducie or that the London jeweler would recognize Stephen’s resemblance to her father.
Stephen,
I believe you mention some very significant parts of both “The Well of Loneliness” and “Maurice” through the encounters that the main characters have with people from their past! What do you make of Stephen’s encounter with the man from the jewelry store in London? Do you think that she is embarrassed to be seen there buying a ring for a “special” friend? Do you think she is worried that encounter might amount to some juicy gossip that leaks back to Morton?
Likewise, do you believe that Maurice is strategic in blowing off Mr. Ducie at the museum? Do you think that Maurice’s intentions in doing so are related to his lack of desire toward “rekindling” a friendship with the former teacher? Or are his actions more so stemmed from the fact that he is with Scudder at the time? Could his reasoning further more be due to the conversation that took place between Mr. Ducie and Maurice at the beginning of the book?
Jen,
Your mention of larger barriers that may be more easily crossed in same-sex relationships is a great entity to further investigate as it relates to Stephen’s above response! I do think that you have a measurable point worthy of our consideration when you say that if one is already willing to become a “social outcast” (as it pertains to “The Well of Loneliness” and “Maurice”), then what is the big deal of crossing even larger (or furthered) social barriers? Maybe the whole of it comes down to courage – courage to love and be with that one person who society deems unfit for a particular romance…whether that be same-sex relationships, relationships between two from opposing class systems, or interracial relationships. Although, as you have mentioned, this doesn’t necessarily fit every mold – but I like that you have examined the “courage” aspect to it all. Would you say that Maurice showed courage as he decided to pursue a relationship with Scudder? Did Clive show courage in sharing his love for Maurice? Furthermore, did Clive show courage in putting his feelings toward men aside in order to pursue his marriage with Anne, or was this action more so a result of his cowardice?
Love the connection you make to Brideshead … I almost had that in our reading, but alas, world enough and time … The parallels are quite clear, and then also Downton … I keep thinking one of my London study abroad courses will soon be “Literature Between the Was” so I can do both, and Dowton and a bunch of Rattigan plays … 🙂
Hi Dr. Banks, I think you bring up a very good point about class and social structure in England. When I lived there, I noticed that class was everything – people would ask what part of the city you lived in…if you lived anywhere north of the City Centre, then they immediately stuck their nose up at you (most didn’t even venture north of the City Centre). You could also tell that there was pride in the demeanor of someone who lived in “Didsbury” compared to someone who lived in “Moss Side”…Didsbury is further south from the Manchester City Centre, and these divides were clearly derived from class structure. I suppose this paradigm in “Maurice” stood out to me as a result of living in England and realizing the lengths that one would go to discover your class status and then turn their nose up at you as a result (generally). In America, the social system is typically divided by race (at least that is what I witnessed in the South). Which was also very surprising to me when I moved to the South from Canada – race/ethnicity is not an issue or an area of divide in Canada. If anything, Canada is a medium between England and America – where they seem to still be heavily influenced by British rule, but have adopted many practices and behaviors of America. While reading “Maurice,” I couldn’t help but think back to Downton Abbey and how class was such an issue throughout the T.V. show. The Crawley’s had an estate that needed to be passed down to a man (which created a problem because Robert Crawley only had three daughters), so it was the oldest daughter’s responsibility to find a man who fits in the class structure that could take over the… Read more »
Hi Tiffany,
I like the connection you make with Downton Abbey. I would add that the series and Forster’s novel present idealized cross-class romances (Lady Sybil/Branson and Maurice/Alec). We see only the honeymoon period. In neither case do we get to see whether these couples would have overcome their class differences and had lasting success together.
P.S. You get my vote for provocative statement of the week: “race/ethnicity is not an issue or an area of divide in Canada”.
I think in part these characters’ respective classes have varied risks attached to them. For example, Clive is, as you put it, master of the house with enormous social and familiar responsibilities that impact the way he performs his own sexuality. At the other extreme, Scudder is a servant and of lesser means, which may suggest why he reacts so impulsively and daringly even after one encounter with Maurice. Maurice himself is somewhere in the middle, but he doesn’t seem to have much to lose, even contemplating suicide at one point. He trudges on despite his struggle to integrate into a “normal” society and grow into an affection for women. The class to which he belongs, at least in my view, doesn’t seem to affect his behavior in the same ways as Scudder and Clive.
Brandon,
Very interesting that you would point to Maurice as a medium…on two different planes. Maurice is of middle class, so in this setting he seems to act as a medium between the class systems – venturing into the upper class in order to be with Clive romantically, and eventually accepting a man from a lower class system in order to experience a loving relationship. Ironically, Maurice is also an example of another medium which is fleshed out in his response to homosexuality. He doesn’t seem to go to extremes (and stick with them)…he goes to the doctor to be cured of his homosexuality, but that doesn’t persist – kind of adopting a medium between trying to get help and not really wanting it. He teeters between frustration and adoration when Scudder attempts to blackmail him. It seems like Maurice is always taking the middle ground; choosing to balance between extreme responses. Does this seem to be a direct parallel to his middle-class status? Do you think Forster intentionally places Maurice in the “middle” of everything, or is this just coincidence? What other ways does Maurice play the “middle” man?
Because I was so concerned with getting a head-start on Giovanni, I still haven’t finished this book, so I find it difficult to speak of Scudder with any certainty. I read the synopsis of the book, and I do like the idea what Maurice only refers to him as Scudder for much of the book, and referring to him as Alec for the first time was apparently an important moment.
But all I can really speak on is Maurice, and the moment that stood out to me, most of all, regarding his class and his idea of himself as a man. It was when he was speaking to an elder about his mother. He had refused to stop when a school official had asked him to and then afterward refused to apologize; this led to an argument with his mother, which in turn, led to him being chastised by a friend of the family’s.
But the way the chastising happened was very telling. The man didn’t simply lay into him. Instead, he was very sarcastic and talked about how a man like Maurice didn’t need to apologize to his mother or act civilly. No. That was how a county gentleman would act, which Maurice clearly was not. And so it was not love for his mother that he changed his attitude, or even love for Clive or money, or fear, or anything else of the sort. It was vanity, because he saw and wanted to see himself as better, higher, and more gentlemanly, and the insinuation that he was not stung him.
Jayde,
I’m glad you brought up the conversation with Dr. Barry and Maurice surrounding class, Maurice’s decisions with his education, and the way that Maurice treats his mother. Forster writes, “Dr Barry then said, ‘Oh, it’s all for the best. What do you want with a University Degree? It was never intended for the suburban classes'” (84).
Considering this conversation with Dr. Barry that led to Maurice to contemplate his footing in society, do you think that Maurice wished he was born into a higher class, like Clive? Do you think that Maurice looks at Clive’s responsibilities in society, as head of his family’s estate, and wishes he could manage those kinds of responsibilities instead of working in an office? Or did you get the sense that Maurice was content on being a member of the working class, even if Dr. Barry’s sarcasm taught him to reevaluate how he acts within society?
I don’t know if he wished he were born into a different life, but I did get the feeling (and have a vague memory of a character or the narrator saying) that he dreamed of some sort of upward mobility. He would rather have had Clive’s life, standing, and station, and he (and his class) were perceived as wanting to break free from their station and become like their “betters.” And I believe that conversation with Dr. Barry is strong evidence that Maurice really did feel that way.
I found the issue of class to be one of the more interesting points of the novel. The classist system really drives the need for conformity. While Clive may be deemed of the higher class among the three central characters of same-sex relationships in the novel, Clive also seems to be the character with, by the end, more deficiencies. His family estate is in disrepair and deterioration, and Clive had to fight to gain election in his father’s stead, noting that the people had grown “weary of us leisured classes coasting round in motor-cars and asking for something to do” (Forster 103). The deterioration of the importance of Clive’s social stature also can be argued to be reflective of the deterioration of his own moral compass. The fact that Clive “changed” is called into question. Was he really that immature and sheltered from women in his schooling to deem a change? Or is he trying to conform and use women as a way of advancing his social status? This is much removed from his arguing the classic theorists as an undergraduate. Maurice, in the suburban middle class, also suffers character flaws. While he fights the need to conform (he is certainly a masculine “man’s man,” taking the role of man-of-the-house to his mother and sisters) and struggles with his attraction to the same-sex, even trying to “cure” himself by visiting Dr. Barry and the hypnotist, he seems to hate the idea of “mixing” with a lower social class even more. This idea seems to truly disgust him—his resolution to his “love” for Alec is to turn away from his own social class and adult responsibilities to “disappear” with the lowly laborer. What good is it to stay in England? He just disappears, never to be heard from again. This does… Read more »
Victoria,
You bring up some very interesting points of discussion as we dissect the class system of England and the struggles that these three men face throughout the book. It seems like their struggles (and maybe their decisions in the midst of those struggles) are a reflection of the class system they are bound to. Clive succumbs to a heterosexual relationship so that he can run the family estate with a wife by his side – adequately meeting society’s expectations for a man of such class. Alec, a man of lower class, does seem to give up an opportunity in Argentine in order to be with Maurice…but then again – would a man of lower class really know what opportunities he is passing if he has never before been a part of a higher class structure? Then we have Maurice, who really tries to cling to his social class, continue with his work as if there is not a care in the world, while Alec goes on blackmailing him. Eventually, he finds his class system and the responsibilities tied to the working class to be mundane. He really is the only one willing to “leave” his status within society to drop to a lower class system for love. Interesting points mentioned here! Thanks for sharing!