I am in a book group that will tomorrow start The Everlasting Man by GK Chesterton. GKC is known for paradox, but paradox is only a tool of his to see things afresh. We do not see the amazing things that surround us, but Chesterton shows them to us. I was worried that because the book begins with seeing man with new eyes, especially early man, that the updating of science would render the examples uncomfortable in their wrongness. There is some of that in the book, but I was pleased to find right at the beginning an example that is even more true now that we know more about our ancestors and the domestication of the horse on the Steppe. It was a lucky chance (if chance you call it), for the horse was good food who fed himself even in winter, but was impossible to ride. One of the very few barely tractable ones - perhaps even the only one in a century - was seen by a reckless herder who had a wild idea. Chesterton's paragraph about it was a bit prescient.
Now, as it is with the monster that is called a horse, so it is with the monster that is called a man. Of course the best condition of all, in my opinion, is always to have regarded man as he is regarded in my philosophy. He who holds the Christian and Catholic view of human nature will feel certain that it is a universal and therefore a sane view, and will be satisfied. But if he has lost the sane vision, he can only get it back by something very like a mad vision; that is, by seeing man as a strange animal and realising how strange an animal he is. But just as seeing the horse as a prehistoric prodigy ultimately led back to, and not away from, an admiration for the mastery of man, so the really detached consideration of the curious career of man will lead back to, and not away from, the ancient faith in the dark designs of God. In other words, it is exactly when we do see how queer the quadruped is that we praise the man who mounts him; and exactly when we do see how queer the biped is that we praise the Providence that made him.
2 comments:
We met yesterday at my home to discuss "The Everlasting Man". This is my first book by G.K. Chesterton. Five of us gathered after reading Part 1 (Ch 1-8) and we dove right into metaphysical issues captured by questions such as "What's the point?" and "Can a century-old assessment on the history and state of humanity be relevant for contemporary analysis?" To this second question, we all feel that the writing is indeed relevant despite experiencing resistance with the heavily influenced perceptions and writing style typical of late 19th and early 20th century European culture. Our conversation helped me to recognize that the resistance I feel is like the first mile of a long hike over high summits. Even though I have covered hundreds of miles with a heavy pack, whenever I start up again after months off the trail, that first mile is a shock to my body. It protests and tries to convince me that I am about to die if I continue. With a beating heart and rapid shallow breaths I am not fooled, I will beat this body into submission. Perhaps the march up to this cognitive summit is creating the same urgent reaction in my mind, so I must overcome my despair and keep climbing. The support of Dale Ahlquist (editor and commentor for this 2023 version of the book) is immensely helpful, much like the supportive commentary that interprets allusions and inferences written by Shakespeare that have simply been lost to time. I offer two quotes, the first by GK from the Introduction:
"That, I think, is a true picture of the progress of any really independent intelligence today; and that is the point of this book. The point of this book, in other words, is that the next best thing to being really inside Christendom is to be really outside it." (p. 23)
My guess is that GK wrote the main body of book first, then organized it, and lastly wrote an Introduction to help us brace for his stream of consciousness. He realized that his readers may get lost. The group agreed that GK is begging the reader to find a way to step outside of all human history and influence to catch a truly objective glimpse of the world. We are naturally constrained by a subjective worldview, like the fish that does not realize it is wet. Yet pulling the fish out of water to 'gain perspective' is an abrupt and brutal affair. And what about me? Can I ignore my body gasping for air for at least a moment to see reality for what it is instead of what I make of it? Is this the moment of salvation for a man; facing the Creator God like the prophets of old and seeing reality for what it is?
"Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." (Isaiah 6:5)
The second quote is from the chapter 5 commentary (p. 187) that brings more clarity to the point of Part 1 and encourages me to gird my loins as I crest over this lower summit to reach the heights promised by Part 2 and discover who is The Everlasting Man.
"In the pagan world, the artist seeking to express beauty, the philosopher seeking to express truth, and the priest seeking to express the divine are each on their own track. Chesterton says the rivers of philosophy and theology flow parallel. They will not intersect until Christianity brings them together. Let’s be clear: He is not hinting at the ending. He’s smacking us over the head with it to make sure we’re following the argument. However, it’s difficult not to stop here a while and watch the fireworks. His mastery of the classics and his deft weaving together of the great myths is a tour de force."
Five of us. We saw some things similarly and some things differently, which is always a great start.
Post a Comment