5/10/13

Three Foes of the Family

IT WAS certainly a very brilliant lightning-flash of irony by which Mr. Aldous Huxley lit up the whole loathsome landscape of his satirical Utopia, of synthetic humanity and manufactured men and women, by the old romantic quotation of "Brave New World". The quotation comes, of course, from that supreme moment of the magic of youth, nourished by the magic of old age, when Miranda the marvellous becomes Miranda the marvelling, at the unique wonder of first love. To use it for the very motto of a system which, having lost all innocence, would necessarily lose all wonder, was a touch of very withering wit. And yet it will be well to remember that, in comparison with some other worlds, where the same work is done more weakly and quite as wickedly, the Utopia of the extremists really has something of the intellectual integrity which belongs to extremes, even of madness. In that sense the two ironical adjectives are not merely ironical. The horrible human, or inhuman, hive described in Mr. Huxley's romance is certainly a base world, and a filthy world, and a fundamentally unhappy world.  But it is in one sense a new world; and it is in one sense a brave world.  At least a certain amount of bravery, as well as brutality, would have to be shown before anything of the sort could be established in the world of fact. It would need some courage, and even some self-sacrifice, to establish anything so utterly disgusting as that.

But the same work is being done in other worlds that are not particularly new, and not in the least brave. There are people of another sort, much more common and conventional, who are not only working to create such a paradise of cowardice, but who actually try to work for it through a conspiracy of cowards. The attitude of these people towards the Family and the tradition of its Christian virtues is the attitude of men willing to wound and yet afraid to strike; or ready to sap and mine so long as they are not called upon to fire or fight in the open. And those who do this cover much more than half, or nearly two-thirds, of the people who write in the most respectable and conventional Capitalist newspapers.  It cannot be too often repeated that what destroyed the Family in the modern world was Capitalism. No doubt it might have been Communism, if Communism had ever had a chance, outside that semi-Mongolian wilderness where it actually flourishes.  But, so far as we are concerned, what has broken up households and encouraged divorces, and treated the old domestic virtues with more and more open contempt, is the epoch and Power of Capitalism. It is Capitalism that has forced a moral feud and a commercial competition between the sexes; that has destroyed the influence of the parent in favour of the influence of the employer; that has driven men from their homes to look for jobs; that has forced them to live near their factories or their firms instead of near their families; and, above all, that has encouraged, for commercial reasons, a parade of publicity and garish novelty, which is in its nature the death of all that was called dignity and modesty by our mothers and fathers. It is not the Bolshevist but the Boss, the publicity man, the salesman and the commercial advertiser who have, like a rush and riot of barbarians, thrown down and trampled under foot the ancient Roman statue of Verecundia.  But because the thing is done by men of this sort, of course it is done in their own muggy and muddle-headed way; by all the irresponsible tricks of their foul Suggestion and their filthy Psychology. It is done, for instance, by perpetually guying the old Victorian virtues or limitations which, as they are no longer there, are not likely to retaliate.  It is done more by pictures than by printed words; because printed words are supposed to make a some sense and a man may be answerable for printing a them. Stiff and hideous effigies of women in crinolines or bonnets are paraded, as if that could possibly be all there was to see when Maud came into the garden, and was saluted by such a song. Fortunately, Maud's friends, who would have challenged the pressman and photographer to a duel, are all dead; and these satirists of Victorianism are very careful to find out that all their enemies are dead.  Some of their bold caricaturists have been known to charge an old-fashioned bathing-machine as courageously as if it were a machine-gun.

It is convenient thus courageously to attack bathing-machines, because there are no bathing-machines to attack. Then they balance these things by photographs of the Modern Girl at various stages of the nudist movement; and trust that any thing so obviously vulgar is bound to be popular. For the rest, the Modern Girl is floated on a sea of sentimental sloppiness; a continuous gush about her frankness and freshness, the perfect naturalness of her painting her face or the unprecedented courage of her having no children. The whole is diluted with a dreary hypocrisy about comradeship, far more sentimental than the old-fashioned sentiment. When I see the Family sinking in these swamps of amorphous amorous futility, I feel inclined to say, "Give me the Communists." Better Bolshevist battles and the Brave New World than the ancient house of man rotted away silently by such worms of secret sensuality and individual appetite.  "The coward does it with a kiss; the brave man with a sword."

But there is, curiously enough, a third thing of the kind, which I am really inclined to think that I dislike even more than the other two. It is not the Communist attacking the family or the Capitalist betraying the family; it is the vast and very astonishing vision of the Hitlerite defending the family.  Hitler's way of defending the independence of the family is to make every family dependent on him and his semi-Socialist State; and to preserve the authority of parents by authoritatively telling all the parents what to do. His notion of keeping sacred the dignity of domestic life is to issue peremptory orders that the grandfather is to get up at five in the morning and do dumb-bell exercises, or the grand mother to march twenty miles to a camp to procure a Swastika flag.  In other words, he appears to interfere with family life more even than the Bolshevists do; and to do it in the name of the sacredness of the family. It is not much more encouraging than the other two social manifestations; but at least it is more entertaining.

~G.K. Chesterton: From The Well and the Shallows.


The Well and the Shallows:
"One of Chesterton's last books, this book is considered by Chesterton critics and fans as one of his finest collections of essays on a variety of cultural, social and moral issues that seem even more urgent today."
At Amazon




"Miracles do happen"

"I CONCLUDE that miracles do happen. I am forced to it by a conspiracy of facts: the fact that the men who encounter elves or angels are not the mystics and the morbid dreamers, but fishermen, farmers, and all men at once coarse and cautious; the fact that we all know men who testify to spiritualistic incidents but are not spiritualists, the fact that science itself admits such things more and more every day. Science will even admit the Ascension if you call it Levitation, and will very likely admit the Resurrection when it has thought of another word for it. I suggest the Regalvanisation. But the strongest of all is the dilemma above mentioned, that these supernatural things are never denied except on the basis either of anti-democracy or of materialist dogmatism--I may say materialist mysticism. The sceptic always takes one of the two positions; either an ordinary man need not be believed, or an extraordinary event must not be believed."

~G.K. Chesterton: Orthodoxy.

5/9/13

"Almost a sacred thing"

"IN a word, we talk about a man who cannot see the wood for the trees. St. Francis was a man who did not want to see the wood for the trees. He wanted to see each tree as a separate and almost a sacred thing, being a child of God and therefore a brother or sister of man."

 ~G.K. Chesterton: St. Francis of Assisi.




Legend of St Francis: 14. Miracle of the Spring, by Giotto di Bondone.
Fresco, 1297-1300; Upper Church, San Francesco, Assisi.


Platitudes Undone

G.K. Chesterton responds to Holbrook Jackson’s little book, Platitudes in the Making by scribbling anecdotal notes in between the lines thereof ––

JACKSON: Be contented, when you have got all you want.
CHESTERTON: Till then, be happy.


JACKSON: Don’t think – do.
CHESTERTON: Do think! Do!


JACKSON: A lie is that which you do not believe.
CHESTERTON: This is a lie: so perhaps you don’t believe it.


JACKSON: As soon as an idea is accepted it is time to reject it.
CHESTERTON: No: it is time to build another idea on it. You are always rejecting: and you build nothing.


JACKSON: Truth and falsehood in the abstract do not exist.
CHESTERTON: Then nothing else does.


JACKSON: Truth is one’s conception of things.
CHESTERTON: The Big Blunder. All thought is an attempt to discover if one’s own conception is true or not.


JACKSON: No two men have exactly the same religion: a church, like society is a compromise.
CHESTERTON: The same religion has the two men. The sun shines on the Evil and the Good. But the sun does not compromise.


JACKSON: Only the rich preach content to the poor.
CHESTERTON: When they are not preaching Socialism.


JACKSON: In a beautiful city an art gallery would be superfluous. In an ugly one it is a narcotic.
CHESTERTON: In a real one it is an art gallery.


JACKSON: Theology and religion are not the same thing. When the churches are controlled by the theologians religious people stay away.
CHESTERTON: Theology is simply that part of religion that requires brains.


JACKSON: Desire to please God is never disinterested.
CHESTERTON: Well, I should hope not!


JACKSON: We are more inclined to regret our virtues than our vices; but only the very honest will admit this.
CHESTERTON: I don’t regret any virtues except those that I have lost.


JACKSON: Every custom was once an eccentricity; every idea was once an absurdity.
CHESTERTON: No, no, no. Some ideas are always absurdities. This is one of them.


JACKSON: No opinion matters finally; except your own.
CHESTERTON: Said the man who thought he was a rabbit.


JACKSON: The future will look upon man as we look upon the ichthyosaurus – as an extinct monster.
CHESTERTON: The ‘future’ won’t look upon anything. No eyes.


~Quoted in Wisdom and Innocence: A Life of G.K. Chesterton, by Joseph Pearce.

Note: Holbrook Jackson was a British journalist, writer and publisher. He was a joint editor of the New Age, editor of T.P.’s Weekly and a biographer of both G.B. Shaw and William Morris.


George Holbrook Jackson in 1913.

• Amazon

5/8/13

"There is a creed"

"IT MAY have seemed something less than a compliment to compare the American Constitution to the Spanish Inquisition. But oddly enough, it does involve a truth; and still more oddly perhaps, it does involve a compliment. The American Constitution does resemble the Spanish Inquisition in this: that it is founded on a creed. America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence; perhaps the only piece of practical politics that is also theoretical politics and also great literature. It enunciates that all men are equal in their claim to justice, that governments exist to give them that justice, and that their authority is for that reason just. It certainly does condemn anarchism, and it does also by inference condemn atheism, since it clearly names the Creator as the ultimate authority from whom these equal rights are derived. Nobody expects a modern political system to proceed logically in the application of such dogmas, and in the matter of God and Government it is naturally God whose claim is taken more lightly. The point is that there is a creed, if not about divine, at least about human things."

~G.K. Chesterton: What I Saw in America.

5/7/13

The Republican in the Ruins

“THERE WAS another ideal of freedom which the English never had at all. There was another ideal, the soul of another epoch, round which we built no monuments and wrote no masterpieces. You will find no traces of it in England; but you will find them in America.

The thing I mean was the real religion of the eighteenth century. Its religion, in the more defined sense, was generally Deism, as in Robespierre or Jefferson. In the more general way of morals and atmosphere it was rather Stoicism, as in the suicide of Wolfe Tone. It had certain very noble and as some would say, impossible ideals; as that a politician should be poor. It knew Latin; and therefore insisted on the strange fancy that the Republic should be a public thing. Its republican simplicity was anything but a silly pose; unless all martyrdom is a silly pose. Even of the prigs and fanatics of the American and French revolutions we can often say, as Stevenson said of an American, that ‘thrift and courage glowed in him.’ And its virtue and value for us is that it did remember the things we now tend to forget; from the dignity of liberty to the danger of luxury. It did really believe in self-determination of the self, as well of as the state. And its determination was really determined. In short, it believed in self-respect; and it is strictly true, even of its rebels and regicides, that they desired chiefly to be respectable.

But there were in it the marks of religion as well as respectability: it had a creed; it had a crusade. Men died singing its songs; men starved rather than write against its principles. And its principles were liberty, equality, and fraternity, or the dogmas of the Declaration of Independence. This was the idea that redeemed the dreary negations of the eighteenth century; and there are still corners of Boston or Philadelphia where we can feel so suddenly in the silence its plain garb and formal manners, that the walking ghost of Jefferson would hardly surprise us.”

~G.K. Chesterton: Excerpt from The Republican in the Ruins, in The New Witness, 6/10/21.



The "Committee of Five" that drafted the U.S. Declaration of Independence:
Roger Sherman, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Robert Livingston. (Images from Wikipedia)

5/6/13

"Those who pass through birth and death"

"PHILOSOPHY is not the concern of those who pass through Divinity and Greats, but of those who pass through birth and death. Nearly all the more awful and abstruse statements can be put in words of one syllable, from 'A child is born' to 'A soul is damned.' If the ordinary man may not discuss existence, why should he be asked to conduct it?"

 ~G.K. Chesterton: George Bernard Shaw.