What do you think?
Rate this book
Out of the Window
The compelling, thought-provoking story of Ursula, the daughter of a wealthy Mancunian family, who decides to marry Kenneth, an extremely handsome Trade Union official. It asks the question, is sexual attraction enough of a reason to marry someone? Or will the difference in class and background prove too much for the couple to overcome? It is surely no coincidence that it was first published the year after 'Lady Chatterley's Lover'.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1930
4 people are currently reading
708 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
May 14, 2025
You know, there ought to be some other solution for girls in love. It isn't fair that they should be tied all their lives and have children, just because they once felt passionate about some man and were blind to everything else.
The blurb calls Out of the Window "quietly radical" and that is, in fact, the perfect descriptor. While I didn't necessarily love all the turns this book took-- and even considered dropping my rating to four stars because of it --in the end, I can't deny that I was enthralled by the story and left emotionally bruised by it.
Set during a time when the old ways were in decline and new kinds of marriages were emerging--based on romance and sexual attraction --Out of the Window follows Ursula, who falls madly in love with working-class Kenneth, much to the dismay of her middle-class family and friends.
Though she receives plenty of warnings, Ursula is in love and therefore, frankly, an idiot. She has no real understanding of class differences or how the other half lives, and it comes as a massive culture shock when she’s confronted with the day-to-day realities of working-class life.
The novel is also a meditation on gender roles and the division of labour. Ursula comes from a world of leisure where she neither worked nor kept house, and she assumes that in a home without hired help, her new husband will naturally share in the domestic tasks. Kenneth, however, feels emasculated at the mere thought of washing dishes.
I'll admit that I still find myself pondering the message that Linford was trying to convey. She has plenty to say-- about poverty, class differences, snobbery, romance, men and women --but it’s not entirely clear what stance she ultimately takes. Is she sympathetic to the working classes or critical of them? Hard to say. Maybe both.
Throughout, I kept thinking of the song Common People by Pulp-- the story of a rich girl playing at being working class-- and the ending of the book felt like it fully embodied the spirit of that song. MAJOR SPOILER--
February 18, 2025
4.5
I found this a fascinating novel in its forward thinking; it's a little surprising that it was written as early as the 30's. It explores marriage, and whether sexual attraction is enough to make a successful one. Ursula, a doctor's daughter who is upper-middle class, is expected to make a good marriage to Charles, but there is no real spark. When she meets Kenneth, a young, very good looking man at her neighbours party she is smitten. He is a member of a trade union and at the party to talk about the plight of striking miners; he is working class, but also falls for Ursula so, despite opposition from all their families, they get married.
The second half of the book is where this story really gets going, and makes you think. Poor Ursula is I'll equipped to deal with running a house; she really struggles, and Kenneth can't really understand why she can't cope. His mother was perfectly able. No one actually seems to offer Ursula any help, she is thrown in at the deep end and expected to get on with it.
This would make a great book club choice, there is so much in here to discuss and I can't wait for a few more people to have read it to see what others make of it
Many thanks to Persephone Books for giving me a copy to review.
I found this a fascinating novel in its forward thinking; it's a little surprising that it was written as early as the 30's. It explores marriage, and whether sexual attraction is enough to make a successful one. Ursula, a doctor's daughter who is upper-middle class, is expected to make a good marriage to Charles, but there is no real spark. When she meets Kenneth, a young, very good looking man at her neighbours party she is smitten. He is a member of a trade union and at the party to talk about the plight of striking miners; he is working class, but also falls for Ursula so, despite opposition from all their families, they get married.
The second half of the book is where this story really gets going, and makes you think. Poor Ursula is I'll equipped to deal with running a house; she really struggles, and Kenneth can't really understand why she can't cope. His mother was perfectly able. No one actually seems to offer Ursula any help, she is thrown in at the deep end and expected to get on with it.
This would make a great book club choice, there is so much in here to discuss and I can't wait for a few more people to have read it to see what others make of it
Many thanks to Persephone Books for giving me a copy to review.
March 3, 2024
I wonder why Madeline Linford published no books after this one; was it a case of right book, wrong time? When the heroine, Ursula, laments her ill-advised marriage to a working class man with these words, is she a bit too prescient for 1930?
‘You know, there ought to be some other solution for girls in love. It isn’t fair that they should be tied all their lives and have children, just because they once felt passionate about some man and were blind to everyone else. The marriage service should be postponed until they had lived together for a while and the glamorous side of it had got less interesting.’
After all, that’s part for the course now, nearly 100 years later. For all that, women still trail about after men waiting to be proposed to, marriage is still held up as the ultimate prize, and men haven’t got much better than the beautiful Kenneth when it comes to equitable division of household labour.
Or perhaps the sly dig at men’s sexual prowess fell on barren ground:
‘He did not look for ecstasies from her when acquiescence was all that was needed.’
I mean, this is a jab taken at Kenneth, but I fail to see how it wouldn’t also apply to Charles, Ursula’s likely second husband. The only difference between them is that Charles has enough money to shield Ursula from the rough work of pre-washing-machine-era housework. Not that this is a minor thing, of course, especially as its proven that doing this job AND one for paid employment is even tougher. Yet Ursula has no desire to work for money either. She makes a hames of washing clothes by hand or cooking, which I can’t judge her for, as I would find both intolerable. Maybe she was less sympathetic back then? There is definitely a sense of class essentialism, in that Dorothy would be a better wife to Kenneth because she’s used to that kind of work, and Ursula would be a better wife to Charles because she would excel at that kind of dainty hostessing. The idea that either of them would strike out independently isn’t considered. Within the bounds of the lives they lead and don’t question, though, I’m inclined to think that yes, they should have kept to their respective spheres, and that the death of Kenneth was a blessing in disguise. I actually assumed Ursula would run off with Charles, but this was 1930, I suppose.
The writing is very clear and sharp:
‘He had a kind of rough and vigorous beauty, like the figure of an Australian soldier in a memorial window, and the other men in the room seemed limp and colourless beside him.’
And Mrs Fielding is unintentionally funny, a second Mrs Bennet:
‘ “Sandwiches!” mused Mrs Fielding. “Such a nuisance to cut, and Lydia Unsworth can never keep her maids. She’s a nice creature, though I wish she’d wear corsets. I know they aren’t the fashion nowadays, but some people seem really to need them, and it’s such a pity. One can’t very well tell her, though it would be a kindness.’”
‘ “A conversational resurrection, my dear,’ said her husband. ‘We buried the Unsworths under a mound of other topics and rolled the tea table over them. And now, behold, they rise again.”’
Overall it’s a shame Linford didn’t keep on. I hope she enjoyed Women’s Lib.
‘You know, there ought to be some other solution for girls in love. It isn’t fair that they should be tied all their lives and have children, just because they once felt passionate about some man and were blind to everyone else. The marriage service should be postponed until they had lived together for a while and the glamorous side of it had got less interesting.’
After all, that’s part for the course now, nearly 100 years later. For all that, women still trail about after men waiting to be proposed to, marriage is still held up as the ultimate prize, and men haven’t got much better than the beautiful Kenneth when it comes to equitable division of household labour.
Or perhaps the sly dig at men’s sexual prowess fell on barren ground:
‘He did not look for ecstasies from her when acquiescence was all that was needed.’
I mean, this is a jab taken at Kenneth, but I fail to see how it wouldn’t also apply to Charles, Ursula’s likely second husband. The only difference between them is that Charles has enough money to shield Ursula from the rough work of pre-washing-machine-era housework. Not that this is a minor thing, of course, especially as its proven that doing this job AND one for paid employment is even tougher. Yet Ursula has no desire to work for money either. She makes a hames of washing clothes by hand or cooking, which I can’t judge her for, as I would find both intolerable. Maybe she was less sympathetic back then? There is definitely a sense of class essentialism, in that Dorothy would be a better wife to Kenneth because she’s used to that kind of work, and Ursula would be a better wife to Charles because she would excel at that kind of dainty hostessing. The idea that either of them would strike out independently isn’t considered. Within the bounds of the lives they lead and don’t question, though, I’m inclined to think that yes, they should have kept to their respective spheres, and that the death of Kenneth was a blessing in disguise. I actually assumed Ursula would run off with Charles, but this was 1930, I suppose.
The writing is very clear and sharp:
‘He had a kind of rough and vigorous beauty, like the figure of an Australian soldier in a memorial window, and the other men in the room seemed limp and colourless beside him.’
And Mrs Fielding is unintentionally funny, a second Mrs Bennet:
‘ “Sandwiches!” mused Mrs Fielding. “Such a nuisance to cut, and Lydia Unsworth can never keep her maids. She’s a nice creature, though I wish she’d wear corsets. I know they aren’t the fashion nowadays, but some people seem really to need them, and it’s such a pity. One can’t very well tell her, though it would be a kindness.’”
‘ “A conversational resurrection, my dear,’ said her husband. ‘We buried the Unsworths under a mound of other topics and rolled the tea table over them. And now, behold, they rise again.”’
Overall it’s a shame Linford didn’t keep on. I hope she enjoyed Women’s Lib.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 27, 2023
Madeline Linford wrote this novel in the 1930s where it was received as an outspoken view on love, passion and class
Out of the Window follows the whirlwind love story of Ursula and Kenneth who come from very different social standings in 1920s Manchester, England, with their one driving passion being each other's beauty and 'exoticism'.
Linford explored whether a lasting marriage can survive on passion alone and whether having nothing in common and different world views matter.
It is a beautifully written novel with exquisite descriptions of nature and landscape; Linford knows how to set a scene and spoils us throughout.
If you are a fan of realistic 'romance' and domestic feminism then this will be a must read.
Out of the Window follows the whirlwind love story of Ursula and Kenneth who come from very different social standings in 1920s Manchester, England, with their one driving passion being each other's beauty and 'exoticism'.
Linford explored whether a lasting marriage can survive on passion alone and whether having nothing in common and different world views matter.
It is a beautifully written novel with exquisite descriptions of nature and landscape; Linford knows how to set a scene and spoils us throughout.
If you are a fan of realistic 'romance' and domestic feminism then this will be a must read.
May 7, 2024
I found this really interesting, it highlighted the historical constraints of gender and class in 1930s Britain. The characters were well drawn and had hidden depths. They were both likeable and infuriating in equal measure. It's certainly hard not to view their behaviour through 21st Century eyes.
I would give this 3.5*
I would give this 3.5*
March 13, 2024
V emotive
April 9, 2025
This was excellent. But I didn’t find Kenneth at all a sympathetic character.
August 15, 2025
i’ve LOVED this book and now all i want is read the other 4 novels madeline linford wrote, while i’m sad she didn’t write any more after this one, at 35.
this book is easy, well and enjoyably written and full of modern thoughts for a book written in 1930s. it shocks me though that despite how times have changed, some things around housework and care has, sadly, not.
this book is easy, well and enjoyably written and full of modern thoughts for a book written in 1930s. it shocks me though that despite how times have changed, some things around housework and care has, sadly, not.
January 5, 2024
A Persephone title about marriage between classes. Ursula and Kenneth are sexually attracted to each other and the mores of the time preach that since there shouldn't be sex before marriage, young people therefore should marry young. Their relatives warn the couple that their different circumstances (she is comfortable middle class, he is socialist working class) will not make for a comfortable life together. And of course they are right.
The book, written in 1930, is exceptionally outspoken about sex for the time and includes the theory that couples ought to live together before marriage.
The book, written in 1930, is exceptionally outspoken about sex for the time and includes the theory that couples ought to live together before marriage.
March 21, 2024
the ending tore my heart out, only to make me eat it while it was still bloody and beating
4.5
4.5
November 22, 2024
I read this book really quickly. I loved it. It was funny and sad.
September 3, 2025
i wasn’t crazy about the plot but i can appreciate a book written by an author who truly understands language. the range of vocabulary was beautiful and the ending was moving
February 24, 2025
It is interesting that this is the second book in a row I have read with the word ‘window/windows’ in it, that they are both re-issued works, and that the publisher of the two re-issued books is Persephone Books. This book was originally published in 1930 and re-issued in 2023 (prior book I read was 'There Were No Windows' by Norah Hoult).
I very much enjoyed reading this novel. I thought this book was so good I was nearly done with the book in one sitting! (I polished it off in two.) Setting is Manchester England sometime after end of WWI and beginning of WWII. It is about a young woman, Ursula, who comes from a moderately well-off family becoming smitten with a young man, Kenneth, who comes from a relatively poor family. There’s a clear class difference between the two and she is better educated than he is. She is hell-bent on marrying him. The man’s mother, who is a widow, thinks he is making a mistake, and the young woman’s parents and aunt are thinking she is making a big mistake, but she will not listen to them and he will not listen to his mother. When I was reading this, and the lead up to their actual marriage I had this sinking feeling like ‘this is not a marriage made in heaven.... this ain’t gonna work....” I mean, she fell in love with him because she felt somewhat sorry for his poor background and because he was handsome. So physical attraction was a big asset to her. Well, so what happened? Did they get married? If not, with half of the story yet to be told, why not? If they got married, with half of the story yet to be told, how did the marriage fare?
I shan’t tell you — you’ll have to read the book! 😊😊 😊
OK. I’ll tell you but I will put a spoiler alert in here!
Funny: Ursula’s father is a general practitioner and offers Kenneth a cigarette when he meets him for the first time!
An aunt who lives with Ursula and her parents when finding out Ursula is to “marry down (class wise)” because she has fallen in love with Kenneth laments that “it’s a pity that convents for love-sick girls went out with the Middle Ages”. That’s scary....that some parents forced their girls to become nuns.
Note:
• It is interesting that an author who I really love, Winifred Holtby (‘South Riding’), reviewed this book and was only lukewarm towards it. This bummed Madeline Linford out...apparently it primarily got only lukewarm reviews in general, and she never wrote another novel after this one...although it turns out that nowadays the book has gotten very good reviews.
Reviews:
• https://mirandasnotebook.com/blog/out...
• https://northernreader.wordpress.com/...
• https://www.bookword.co.uk/out-of-the...
I very much enjoyed reading this novel. I thought this book was so good I was nearly done with the book in one sitting! (I polished it off in two.) Setting is Manchester England sometime after end of WWI and beginning of WWII. It is about a young woman, Ursula, who comes from a moderately well-off family becoming smitten with a young man, Kenneth, who comes from a relatively poor family. There’s a clear class difference between the two and she is better educated than he is. She is hell-bent on marrying him. The man’s mother, who is a widow, thinks he is making a mistake, and the young woman’s parents and aunt are thinking she is making a big mistake, but she will not listen to them and he will not listen to his mother. When I was reading this, and the lead up to their actual marriage I had this sinking feeling like ‘this is not a marriage made in heaven.... this ain’t gonna work....” I mean, she fell in love with him because she felt somewhat sorry for his poor background and because he was handsome. So physical attraction was a big asset to her. Well, so what happened? Did they get married? If not, with half of the story yet to be told, why not? If they got married, with half of the story yet to be told, how did the marriage fare?
I shan’t tell you — you’ll have to read the book! 😊😊 😊
OK. I’ll tell you but I will put a spoiler alert in here!
Funny: Ursula’s father is a general practitioner and offers Kenneth a cigarette when he meets him for the first time!
An aunt who lives with Ursula and her parents when finding out Ursula is to “marry down (class wise)” because she has fallen in love with Kenneth laments that “it’s a pity that convents for love-sick girls went out with the Middle Ages”. That’s scary....that some parents forced their girls to become nuns.
Note:
• It is interesting that an author who I really love, Winifred Holtby (‘South Riding’), reviewed this book and was only lukewarm towards it. This bummed Madeline Linford out...apparently it primarily got only lukewarm reviews in general, and she never wrote another novel after this one...although it turns out that nowadays the book has gotten very good reviews.
Reviews:
• https://mirandasnotebook.com/blog/out...
• https://northernreader.wordpress.com/...
• https://www.bookword.co.uk/out-of-the...
August 26, 2025
I was so drawn-in to this story!
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews