He was emotionally constipated.

Mr. Stevens was a gay man but he didn't understand his lack of desire for her. Being gay was seen as a disease and not normative, hence the repression.

This quote from your link, " When the individual's personal space is violated, they feel suffocated and feel the need to free themselves and be independent. People who have SPD tend to be happiest when they are in a relationship in which the partner places few emotional or intimate demands on them. It is not people as such that they want to avoid, but emotions both negative and positive, emotional intimacy, and self disclosure ".
That describes most guys does it not? An interesting counter-example to Stevens is the character that Hopkins plays in " Howard's End ". Here his character can laugh, hug, kiss, and ask a woman to marry him with no apparent difficulty.
The flip side to that emotional openness is that it is relatively easy for him to break down crying in public.
The one thing that is universally despised in a man is that of being a crybaby, of having no control over one's emotions.
Traditionally, if a man wanted to marry a girl or woman, he went to her father and asked if it was okay for him to marry the father's daughter. If the father agreed, the girl or woman had no choice but to marry the guy.
Women in the past could not own property except under a husband's name, they could not have a bank account except under a husband's name, they could not vote period, etc. They were treated as property because they were considered to be basically property.
In exchange for being a housekeeper for the husband and giving him children if he wanted them, the wife generally got in return a safe, secure home, and benefits that unmarried women did not.
Being in Service did not allow for marriage, it was a single person's occupation, and I don't think Stevens was keen on giving up a position he had no doubt worked very hard to achieve.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

Stevens, and as someone who recently viewed this film for the first time ever to figure out my own personality flaws, seems to exhibit signs of Schizoid Personality Disorder, and Anthony Hopkins did a terrific job of showing aspects of this throughout the entire film, particularly in all his scenes where he has the spotlight shined on him.
Schizoid Personality Disorder is fairly well explained here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder

Mr Stevens' dedication did not allow explicit language like that. He stated the terms to Miss Keaton but she couldn't help her feelings. His strong self-control and icy behaviour covered his warm feelings towards her. They could have spent their lives working with each other had Miss Keaton, ironically, been less serious.

Every aspect of his life involved avoiding risk. He refused to take sides in debates even when asked, he never criticized his boss even though he knew he was wrong, and he was never going to leave Darlington and take a wife.
He's a man chained down by his own inhibitions. He misinterprets this attitude as duty.

If I may add without seeming condescending, your questions are not difficult to answer, although I can understand why someone would ask them:
You stated:
'Can someone help me here? I am aware Stevens (Hopkins) was a dedicated man, dedicated to his job and the man he worked for, but that doesn't stop him falling in love'.
My answer - He did fall in love with Kenton. This movie is an intensely moving love story, but there isn't a single kiss or hug between the protagonists. That I believe is a paradox but decidedly effective one given the professional context in which both were working.
'The core of the film centers on Stevens' and Kenton's (Thompson) time together, working in that big mansion. To be blunt, what the heck is stopping either of them saying to one another'I love you' or at least, 'I LIKE you.'
My answer - The context in this movie is very important to highlight concerning acts of love etc. This was not just a big mansion, nor what they did was trivial work. They had come visit regularly some of the most important people in the world. Without the utmost dedication senior staff wouldn't hold their jobs for a nanosecond. See also the time period 1930's. People in high service positions do not say things to one another like 'I love you' or at least, 'I LIKE you.' - unless they are junior or an under butler as per what occurs in the movie.
You will notice also the subtlety by which Steven's and Kenton relate to one another. Kenton does not want Stevens to think she is not professional in the same way Stevens does not want Kenton interfering with his dedication in maintaining world class service. Stevens said in one scene preparing for the conference, (words to the effect Let's show them England is still about dignity."
'This is a bizarre film and subject that indeed has to be explained to me because it's just too weird.'

• I completely disagree. What is so magical about this film is how realistic and normal it is. This is how people were in the context as outlined in my previous response.
  'For example, the viewer is supposed to think all Kenton is waiting for is for Stevens to say something. But all Stevens is waiting for is for Kenton to say something.'
• Yes and isn't that the irony? It's sad but this happens everyday for whatever reasons. Sometimes it's the 'not' what is said which can be as profound as what is said.
  I hope that might clear some things up with regards to your queries.
  My 120 favorite movies
  http://www.imdb.com/list/Uvw_F2_GMx8/
  What are your favorites?

I agree Charles. Thot i was the only one on this board who thinks he's a coward, plain & simple. I never caught the part of his father's confession about his inablility to love, just where he says his wife cheated on him. he said it ruined his love for her.
Anyway, you're totally right about rationalization. His profession allowed him to stay hidden away from real life & anything that might challenge his fragile psyche.
He probably would've made a lousy husband anyway, so Miss Kenton was much better off. I think the only reason she thot she loved him was because of his emotional unavailability. Common sense most likely told her he was just a bastard void of any compassion or empathy. : >) : >

I never the read the book, so I may be missing something, but what I took from the movie was that his main flaw was fear. Fear to think, fear to act, fear to love. Much like his father, who admits on his deathbed that his own inability to love drove his wife into the arms of another, Stevens recognizes that his own inability to think or act, rationalized as devotion to service, is contemptible, and often tries to rewrite his own history in this matter (his feigned after the fact distress over the plight of the jewish servants, his denial of being in the service of Lord Darlington, etc.). Even at the end, when a bird appears in the house, he shows apprehension about dealing with such an unexpected intrusion upon the order of things, and without Congressman Lewis there to take charge, one is left with the impression that Stevens would have preferred to simply open a window and hope the matter resolved itself without much effort on his part. Anywaythat's what I took from it.
-Charles

He's walking past Miss Kenton's room, hears her crying, walks right in and goes up to her as she's crouched over, obviously in a highly emotional state, and all he does is ask her something to do with business.
He went in to say something meaningful, after he heard the crying, but on the last moment couldn't go through with it and made up that nonsense about dust in an alcove or whatever it was. It was quite obvious to me.

Not detachment but repression.

For me, the part that seemed to really show his emotional detachment was right after he broke the bottle of wine.
He's walking past Miss Kenton's room, hears her crying, walks right in and goes up to her as she's crouched over, obviously in a highly emotional state, and all he does is ask her something to do with business.
No, "Are you all right"? or "How may I help you"? or even a "What can I do for you"?
Just business as usualfor him, anyways!!
"Go back to your oar, Forty One."

I believe that part of the reason for the inclusion of Mr. Stevens' father in the story was to explain how he developed the emotional shortcomings that prevented him from expressing his feelings about anything, including closeness with another person. Much of the latter part of the movie is dedicated to showing the conflict within the Stevens character, brilliantly written and acted I might add.

A few guesses:

• Stevens thought that was too old for Kenton. She is about 30 and he may be 50 or 60. She didn't wanted an affair, she wanted family and children
• He felt that he was too old to change his life, whether for her or for any other reason
• Being married wasn't possible for people 'in service' for purely practical reasons: lack of suitable accomodation on the grounds of the house, no way to travel to the nearest town
  Well, this may explain his behaviour. But it doesn't explain hers. With exception of episode with the book she isn't shown flirting with him. And even during this episode is strange: he was having a small nap. Any sensible person would leave him alone and come back later. Instead she behaves like a spoiled child who wants attention of his mother right now.

You have summed it up, but Stevens' problem is that service and duty are all, and he cannot let personal relationships intrude. There are other threads on their 'relationship' on this board which you may enjoy reading.