Opinion of G.K. Chesterton

[TJ in Oregon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton

[Sol]

A very good writer, but with execrable views. HP.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Haven't read much of him, but from what I know, awesome dude. FF and such.

[Zioneer]

Would prefer George Bernard Shaw.

[Sumner 1868]

Chesterton also mocked the idea that poverty was a result of bad breeding "[it is a] strange new disposition to regard the poor as a race; as if they were a colony of Japs or Chinese coolies. ...The poor are not a race or even a type. It is senseless to talk about breeding them; for they are not a breed. They are, in cold fact, what Dickens describes: 'a dustbin of individual accidents,' of damaged dignity, and often of damaged gentility."

FF, suffice to say.

[Sol]

Chesterton also mocked the idea that poverty was a result of bad breeding "[it is a] strange new disposition to regard the poor as a race; as if they were a colony of Japs or Chinese coolies. ...The poor are not a race or even a type. It is senseless to talk about breeding them; for they are not a breed. They are, in cold fact, what Dickens describes: 'a dustbin of individual accidents,' of damaged dignity, and often of damaged gentility."

FF, suffice to say.

It is true he wasn't a classist--but he was bigoted in nearly every other way I can think of, and his personal biases just ooze out--at least in his Father Brown short stories. Have you ever read "The God of the Gongs?"

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What's valuable in Chesterton can be accessed through much less...uh, dubious...intellectual inheritors of various stripes. What's repugnant in Chesterton is more specific (though, sadly, not unique) to Chesterton. HP.

[© tweed]

not that good of a writer.  I'm more or less in agreement w/Nathan on him.  Tolkien and CS Lewis are both much better at what they did. 

unless you're a Roman Catholic partisan, then the equation changes.

[afleitch]

Would prefer George Bernard Shaw.

A hundred times over.

If you really read much Chesterton, for example, 'What's Wrong With the World', it's often a staggering wreck.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

not that good of a writer.  I'm more or less in agreement w/Nathan on him.  Tolkien and CS Lewis are both much better at what they did. 

unless you're a Roman Catholic partisan, then the equation changes.

There's this wonderful Tolkien letter all about how bad he thought The Ballad of the White Horse sucked.

Even if you are a Roman Catholic partisan, there are very few legitimate reasons not to prefer Tolkien, or, say, Fulton Sheen or somebody.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Hilarious Person.

[Simfan34]

I have heard only good things about him but have never read anything of his, to be honest.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Another demonstration that philosophical outlook is not the only factor shaping what people think of Chesterton: Terry Pratchett liked to quote from him in interviews.

[Insula Dei]

As does Zizek.

I really love Chesterton, I must admit, and I do feel that to pretend he isn't a better writer than Shaw is a bit silly.

[© tweed]

As does Zizek.

I remember that!  though a Chesterton quote, Zizek proved that the subversive core of Christianity is that God is a committed narcissist, only capable in the last analysis of loving Himself.

[© tweed]

some related Zizekian pearls of wisdom inspired by deliberation on Chesterton:

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As does Zizek.

Maybe there's a link to facial hair?