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

Page 30 text:

22 THE LOYOEA ANNUAL Chesterton considers that today the thinkers are too scien- tific— there is not enough healthy idealism; they do not pay enough attention to the spiritual in illustrating principles, but would explain all by mental analysis, which as all followers of the truth know is inadequate. Chesterton’s critical study of Dickens is undoubtedly his best piece of critical literature. Chesterton criticises Dick- ens in a manner peculiarly his own, and though we find the ever-present paradox, and epigram — without which we could not have “ Chesterton he has made a sincere effort to por- tray Dickens as he was, not commonplace as some would have him, nor yet divine. In reading this study ' of Dickens we feel with every page we read that the critic is in sym- pathy with the author, and in it we find Chesterton more in the role of an interpreter, explaining things to our satisfac- tion or amusement; rather than as a critic continually dis- agreeing with the writer. The poems of Chesterton are many and varied in their themes, and more remarkable for boldness of expression and strength of diction, than for metrical rhythm. The poem, “A Christmas Carol,” is true in its sweet significance; strange and strong is the following stanza from “ The Ancient of Days:” “ A staring doll’s-house shoves to him Green floors and starry rafter. And many-coloured graven dolls Live for his lonely laughter. The dolls have crowns and aureoles. Helmets and horns and wings. For they are the saints and seraphim. The prophets and the kings.” So much has already been said regarding Chesterton’s pe- culiar use of words, which are mostly monosyllabic, that we

Page 29 text:

THE LOYOLA ANNUAL 21 paradox, is genially caustic, and entertainingly critical; he has reduced, what others have propounded in pamphlets, to an epigram. As from time to time one man has borrowed from another, and as Solomon declared “ there was nothing new under the sun,” we seem to find many things in Ches- terton which have been set forth by others, but we must admit that never have we seen them in so agreeable or strange a dress. Mr. Chesterton displays an optimistic sense of romance, which Dickens in his portrayal of the meanest or lowest character always showed; Chesterton, like Dickens, loves the world at large. In “ Heretics,” Chesterton attacked the philosophy of oth- ers; his own is contained in “Orthodoxy,” here he confesses his faith in the Christianity of the Apostles’ Creed, and we find the book replete with surprising thought boldly expressed. “ Orthodoxy ” in our opinion is the most representative book which has come from Chesterton’s pen; it shows the man’s style at its best; it gives ample examples of his peculiar method of expression; and beyond all else it gives his creed; his life in so far as his different stages of belief have affected it. In “ Orthodoxy ” we find Chesterton endeavoring to im- prove on that which he condemned in “ Heretics ” and it is a profound study, of which many do not see the philosophi- cal purport, in so far as it relates how a man, mostly through his own reasoning and theorizing on the different social and religious conditions of the day, dealt with the deeper mys- teries and found the answer — God. If Chesterton were a Catholic, he could not have given a better apology of Christianity to the world, or in a more popular or truthful way defended Scholastic Philosophy. “ Orthodoxy ” is not a book containing new theories, but a book of proven truths, and though we would not call it re- ligious, it is philosophical from beginning to end.

Page 31 text:

THE LOYOLA ANNUAL 23 reread his sentences for the mere sake of noticing the ease v 7ith which he writes. His phrases are clear and easy, al- most laconic; there is a pleasing terseness and concreteness in his manner of expression; what strikes us most and causes us often to revert to it, is the fact that matters deep in their significance, or profound in the principles the} would incul- cate, or again flippantly paradoxical in their meaning, can be expressed in such simple words and phrases. The reason people think Chesterton insincere, is from the fact, that he has easily overcome those very difficulties which they themselves find so hard to reconcile with modern modes of thought and expression. In reading “ All Things Considered,” a series of thirty-five short essays on different topics none of which are connected in any way, and some of which individually give one the im- pression of being mere jottings, our interest is held through- out; we read them with a relish and appreciation of the con- summate power of the man, for it seems that he has worked his personality into the lines and we read not mere words, but rather seem to listen to him speaking, in such a pleasing and conversational style are his subjects treated. He has hit upon the very point in literature which makes it palatable, and worthy of consideration, viz., the power to present a sub- ject or idea in a vivid and intellectual manner, which is the keystone of the literary art. His essays are bright, sincere, witty and above all enthusiastic, for this is a marked faculty of the man, that no matter what his subject is, whether it be the eccentric course of a recreant head-piece across a crowded thoroughfare, or a search into the subtleties of the metaphysical world, he is always enrapt with his theme and its paradoxical treatment. Though we think that at present the works of Chesterton are not fully appreciated in their material, philosophical and