|
|
May 20, 2013
|
|
A Writer for All TimePosted on Sep 30, 2011
By Allen Barra (Page 2) His influence has emerged in the most unlikely places: a young Czech writer, Franz Kafka, thought Chesterton “so happy that one might almost believe he had found God.” Neil Gaiman, the most popular graphic novelist in the world, paid him homage with the character Gilbert in his “Sandman” series. For me, the problem with “G.K. Chesterton, A Biography” is that I don’t think Ker cares all that much about Chesterton’s relevance to the modern age. The question inevitably arises: Was Chesterton, by our standards, a conservative or a liberal? Our standards, I’m afraid, would have elicited nothing but contempt from him. As he wrote in an essay in 1929, “The business of the Progressives is to go on making mistakes, while the business of Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected.” The real problem with conservatism, he thought, is that it is “based upon the idea that if you leave things alone, you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone, you leave it to a torrent of change.” If forced to choose, he probably would have opted for traditionalist: “Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead.” He was a witty and unsparing critic of both socialism and capitalism; he actually wrote for a socialist paper, The Daily Herald, for a time because the editors gave him the freedom to attack socialism in front of a readership prepared to disagree with him. It was, however, his criticism of capitalism that earned him some of his most fervent friends and enemies and has kept him at arm’s length from modern conservatism. As GKC famously wrote, “Modernity is not democracy; machinery is not democracy, the surrender of everything to trade and commerce is not democracy. Capitalism is not democracy; and is admittedly, by trend and savour, rather against democracy. Plutocracy by definition is not democracy.” Unlike his conservative friends, he made a sharp distinction between private enterprise and private property: “A pickpocket is obviously a champion of private enterprise, but it would perhaps be an exaggeration to say that a pickpocket is a champion of private property.”
G. K. Chesterton: A Biography
By Ian Ker
Oxford University Press, 688 pages
The Everyman Chesterton
By G.K. Chesterton (Author), Ian Ker (Editor, Introduction)
Everyman’s Library, 952 pages
Chesterton’s definition of patriotism often conflicted with that of his contemporary, Rudyard Kipling (both died in 1936). The poet laureate of the British Empire, Kipling was contemptuous of his native country; Chesterton, the apostle of smallness, loathed the empire—he opposed the Boer War and was outspoken for Irish independence—while loving England with a passion that would have made Dickens blush. Ker quotes a contemporary: “He knew nothing so vulgar as that contempt for vulgarity which sneers at the clerks on bank holiday or the Cockneys on Margate sands.” Unfortunately for the 21st century, Chesterton never truly developed his political philosophy, Distributism, beyond his 1926 book, “The Outline of Sanity,” which advocated the spreading of wealth—attention, President Obama!—through simple measures such as boycotting big stores and creating laws geared to the establishment of small shops. William F. Buckley loved Chesterton the Catholic but not the progressive thinker; in his recent memoir, “Outside Looking In,” Garry Wills recalls that “when [Buckley] asked me at our first meeting if I was a conservative, I said, ‘Is a Distributist a conservative?’ Buckley replied, ‘Alas, no.’ ” (By the way, Wills’ 1961 book “Chesterton,” remains one of the best analyses of Chesterton’s political and economic thought. I’m hoping that Wills will follow up and elaborate on Chesterton’s political and economic ideas.) None of GKC’s political writings nor his fiction, except for an excellent selection of the “Father Brown” stories, is represented in “The Everyman Chesterton.” The anthology is nearly as long as the biography, and considering that it contains thick portions of his hard-to-find studies—“Dickens,” “The Victorian Age in Literature,” “The Everlasting Man,” “Orthodoxy ” and “St. Thomas Aquinas”—“The Everyman Chesterton” is a terrific bargain. Two out-of-print but easy to find earlier collections—“The Man Who Was Chesterton” (1960) and “A Chesterton Anthology” (1985, selected and introduced by P.J. Kavanagh)—are, to my mind, more rounded expressions of Chesterton’s genius (for one thing, both contain numerous excerpts from his critical essays and political journalism). Both “G.K. Chesterton, A Biography” and “The Everyman Chesterton” will be huge favorites of any lover of the man. What is less likely is that they will make Chesterton lovers of novices. However readers choose to make their entrances into the world of GKC, they are advised to jump in. But be wary: The pool is very big. Our greatest living cultural critic, Clive James, wrote in “Cultural Amnesia,” “My shelves containing Chesterton still outdistance my shelves containing Edmund Wilson, but with Wilson I know my way around almost to the inch, whereas there are cubic feet of Chesterton’s output where I can’t find my way back to something I noticed earlier. …” James also said, “Catching up with Chesterton’s prose is the work of a lifetime. He wrote a lot faster than most of us can read.” Try the above mentioned anthologies or, for that matter, any book by Chesterton. “If a key fits a lock,” he wrote in “Orthodoxy,” “you know it is the right key.” Allen Barra is a regular contributor to The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post Book World, and Bookforum and a contributing writer for American Heritage and The Village Voice.
1
2
Advertisement Previous item: Well Said, Mr. Chesterton Next item: A Peek at Henry A. Giroux’s ‘Education and the Crisis of Public Values’ New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By Mine's A Newt, November 16, 2011 at 8:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m with Anarcissie. The “wisdom” is roughly what you’d expect from an ultra-
conservative Catholic antisemite who was initially attracted to fascism, though
he abandoned fascism in time not to be a traitor when WWII broke out.
Chesterton’s “humour” has never struck me as anything but fatuous. I read “The
Man Who Was Thursday” without a laugh, or even a smile out of any of its
dreary pages. I’ve also read more or less all of “The Napoleon of Notting Hill”,
though with increasing boredom and irritation so that I was skimming by the
last 20 pages or so. And it’s a short book.
In the Father Brown mysteries, once you’ve noticed that the person who isn’t an
ultra-orthodox Catholic always turns out to be the murderer, there’s little point
in reading them as detective stories, and, given the thin quality of the writing
and the characterisation, there’s no other reason to read them.
So no thanks. There’s a reason why Chesterton’s been largely forgotten. He
Report thiswasn’t much of a writer.
By MeHere, October 2, 2011 at 6:23 pm Link to this comment
I read some of Chesterton’s work a long time ago. Interesting writer. My favorite
Report thisbook was Manalive.
By Anarcissie, October 1, 2011 at 8:34 am Link to this comment
Someone gave me a copy of Orthodoxy when I was yet a teenager. I dutifully read as much of it as I could. Even in my wayward youth I could see how specious his philosophical and critical ideas were; he seemed to be attracted far too strongly to the clever (he thought) quip, and ‘paradoxes’ which were no more than reversals or inversions of already incoherent common prejudices. The writing itself was all right, I suppose, but I could not abide the confident, indeed, fatuous tone of self- and class-superiority which emanated from it. I doubt if I managed to get through the book to the end, but I don’t remember. My reaction to it was so averse that I have never read any of his other works, which I suppose might at least serve as moderate entertainments.
Report thisBy Larry Tribe, September 30, 2011 at 12:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Thanks! If you’re not a fan of Chesterson’s wit and wisdom you’re missing pleasant moments.
Report this