Loyola University Maryland - Evergreen / Green and Gray Yearbook (Baltimore, MD)

Page 27 text:

THE LOYOLA ANNUAL 19 The anonymous author of “ A Criticism of Chesterton,” writes that a number of causes were influential in the change of attitude, but especially the communing v ithin himself, which v as caused by the Boer War, and the growth of the Imperialistic spirit in England. War was good; it was noble and elevating if waged by equal pov ers, still better if the w eak conquered the strong, but degrading if the strong overwhelmed the weak. As when years before the “ Letters of Junius ” ap- peared, the same sort of interest w’as aroused in 1900 by the cryptic signature G. K. C.; all v anted to know who he was, and though he was with the losing side, by his pov erful per- sonality he compelled men to read him, and his fame was national at the end of the war. Chesterton’s next move was a denial of so called prog- ress,” in that fantastical creation — ‘‘ The Napoleon of Not- ting Hill.” It was not, however, until Chesterton published “ Heretics ” that he raised his standard and showed his aver- sion to anything that was narrow, or clannish; to whatever was abstruse or obscure; his motto seems to be “let every man stand forth in the fight, and if his doctrines or theories can resist the attacks of critics — such as Chesterton — well and good, for then they are orthodox, but if they cannot, the authors are heretics and are ostracised.” It is some years since the publication of “ Heretics,” an astonishing book, in which with the liberty of a free-lance he showed keenly and persuasively his total disagreement or doubting compliance with things in general as they exist to- day. The book appears to the reader who endeavors to grasp its purport, to be directed in its attack against the notion, that men’s attitude toward the universe is great or small only in the relation which this position bears to the expressive grace of its delineation. This work which delights the cul- tivated, and reasoning mind, says plainly, “ the one most im-

Page 26 text:

18 THE LOYOLA ANNUAL Gilbert Kntl} (A Competitive Essay: Adapted,) O one has come in touch with the writings of Gilbert Keith Chesterton, the talented young English poet, au- thor, journalist and critic, without feeling something of the nature of the man himself, which is so prominently displayed in his writings. After perusing the cheerful platitudes of some of the earlier literary lights of England, it is v ith a gasp of relief that we turn to some of the inspired absurdities and bold truths expressed by some of the younger generation, with such a man as Chesterton as their leader. Few people at present appreciate the value of Chesterton’s writings and the influence that they must finally have on modern literature, and the per- versity of modern thought. The ideal of Chesterton’s youth was Whitman, whose in- fluence we see in all of Chesterton’s earlier works, and it was under Whitman’s tutorage, as it were, that he became a so- cialist. While a socialist Chesterton was a strong revolutionist, treat- ing traditional Christianity as a trumped up reversion of Christ’s doctrine, while he praised the Founder. However, we are glad that the revolutionary period of Chesterton’s life was of short duration, for in his first prose work, ‘‘ The Defendant,” we see the socialist gradually turning protectionist; the rad- ical becoming conservative. As in his poems he has attacked and ridiculed the champions of traditional and historic religion and materialistic progress, so in the “The Defendant” he at- tacked those who would do away with the existing order; those whom he fittingly calls in his subsequent books the “ iconoclasts.”

Page 28 text:

20 THE LOYOLA ANNUAL portant thing in a man is his philosophy, and many promi- nent philosophers are dangerously wrong.” There has been too much levity Mr. Chesterton thinks in the treatment of philosophy. The men of the day seem to fear the infinite and the absolute. Is the finite and the rela- tive any more clear to them? With one universal voice the “ high brows ” of the day deny the existence of the absolute ; or, if it has existence it will be unknowable forever. Mr. Chesterton asks with the persistency of a Socratian, “ What do you mean? Explain yourself?” But they cannot explain, and as no conclusive proof of their high-sounding dictums are forthcoming, Mr. Chesterton with the straightforward- ness of conviction of the truth of his words sets down these bombastic, unstable thinkers as mere heretics, who are ever struggling to maintain their equilibrium in a chimerical world of their own creation. Rudyard Kipling, who is among those denominated as iconoclasts,” is a heretic because of his Militarism. Bernard Shaw is a heretic because he lacks the faculty of idealization ; in his preface to his critique of Shaw he claims that the peo- ple agree with Shaw because they cannot understand him; while he says emphatically that he only understands Shaw, and still does not agree with him. Mr. Chesterton seems to have a firm conviction of the dis- tinction between right and wrong; there are several ways of viewing the world, either in relief or in perspective, or as it is. Perhaps there is truth in what has been said by one of Chesterton’s critics, viz., that : “ He has given us old say- ings in new garbs.” We wonder, too, notwithstanding the originality and terse- ness in style whether the thought is as original; have we heard these things before, if we have, we have not heard them in this way for a certainty. Chesterton, a master of the