In his lecture series, Forster explores his role as a literary critic and its link to literature. He shares insights into his approach as a critic, sometimes referencing the opinions of other critics and occasionally questioning the critic's place in the literary domain.

In the introduction, Forster dismisses traditional methods of literary criticism that emphasize tracing historical development and examining how past authors influence their successors. He also mentions T. S. Eliot's idea of tradition, which suggests that critics should work to preserve the best elements of literary tradition. Forster quickly dismisses this as an impractical endeavor. However, he concurs with Eliot that critics should consider literature as a unified entity, rather than being restricted by historical periods.

Throughout the book, Forster occasionally references other literary critics, often to present differing perspectives. He also continues to examine the critic's relationship with literature, noting that his lectures might have drifted away from literature itself in favor of abstract theorizing. Ultimately, Forster emphasizes that the most crucial criterion for evaluating literature is the "human heart," concluding that the most essential "test" of a novel is "our affection for it."

Forster's lecture series on the novel explores not only the analysis of novels but also the expectations placed on the reader. He asserts that grasping a plot demands both intelligence and memory. While curiosity might initially draw a reader into a story, Forster views it as a basic and unremarkable quality. To truly understand a plot, the reader must use intelligence. He explains that curiosity engages a reader with individual bits of information, but it is intelligence that allows one to appreciate the plot's mystery and assess the connections between various pieces of information.

Furthermore, Forster stresses the importance of memory for readers to recall how earlier details in a novel relate to later developments. Thus, it is the writer's responsibility to honor the reader's memory by ensuring each piece of information contributes meaningfully to the overall narrative. Forster also notes that grasping the prophetic elements in a novel requires both humility and the "suspension of a sense of humor." Readers need humility to perceive the novel's prophetic voice and must suspend their sense of humor to avoid mocking the universal or spiritual aspects that enhance the work. Through these criteria, Forster outlines what he believes defines the ideal reader of great literature.

Forster, in his examination of prophecy, identifies the universal aspect as the most significant feature of a novel. By "universal," Forster implies a broad spiritual sense, not necessarily linked to a particular faith or religious doctrine. He explains that the universal element in a novel might connect to specific religions or spiritual traditions, or it could reflect profound human emotions like love and hate. This element can be conveyed either directly or through subtle, indirect means. To demonstrate his idea of the prophetic, Forster contrasts passages from George Eliot’s Adam Bede and Fyodor Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. He notes that although both authors originate from Christian backgrounds and seek to express the notion of redemption inspired by love and compassion, Eliot’s overt reference to Christianity feels overly didactic. In contrast, Dostoevsky’s nuanced and indirect allusion to Christian spirituality achieves a prophetic quality. Forster further comments that while Eliot sincerely invokes spirituality, her Christian references remain within the bounds of realism and do not inspire a spiritual response in the reader. Conversely, Dostoevsky, also a realist, imbues his characters with a sense of the infinite or universal. This allows us to apply St. Catherine of Siena’s words to his work: "God is in the soul and the soul is in God as the sea is in the fish and the fish is in the sea."