GK Chesterton - Heretics

7/31/2019 GK Chesterton - Heretics

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gk-chesterton-heretics 1/307

m

m

@

m

m

M

m

P u b l i c D o m a i n ,

G o o g l e - d

i g i t i z e d / h t t p : / / w w w . h a t h i t r u s t . o r g / a c c e s s_ u s e # p d - g

o o g l e



m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



A U TH O R

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



T R TO N

Y:N W YORK

B ODLEY H E A D:LONDON

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ompany

ss.U .A .

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



-

a n ts

.

. 113

e. 128

y. . . 135

.1 4 2

nson.153

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



dr n W r ite r sa nd

y. 1 79

stsandthe

e a nd a D iv ine

W his t le r . . . 234

h e YoungN a tion2 47

nd t h e l u ms . 2 6 7

n th e I m-

5

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mr k son the I mpor ta n c e

dicates

od-

in a ry

he

me r da ys the he r e tic

It was

police

s.H ewas

in h a v ing r e -

belledagainst

ecurity,the

corouspro-

eprocessesof

h ee p ha dgone a s tr ay.

hodo ,was

alonein

rethana

sthecentre

that the

rn out of

madmit that

odernphrases

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



says,witha

am veryhereti-

lause.The

mea n sno longe r be ing

clear-headed

o r th odo y n o t

;it practically

nmeanone

nsthat

yare philosophi-

nought tocon-

fesseshimself

haredtie,ought

y.Thedyna-

elthat,what-

o d o .

,foraphiloso-

opherin mith-

t agreeintheir

sdonevery

eoftheMiddle

initsobject.B ut

ymoreabsurd

anfor his

ayingthat

andthisisdone

ury,inthe

naryperiod.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



erecontemned;

nisdismissed

o f Ma n.A the ism

-day.Revolu-

m;libertyit-

ewillhave

r d ha w ha sput

Thegoldenrule

We a r e mor e

rt,politics,liter-

n tr a mca r sma tte r s ;

rs;hisopinion

emayturn

ects,but hemust

niverse;for

n,andbe lost.

e c e p t e ve r yth ing. s

e d ed o f th is to ta l

ilosophy.

dedtoshowthat,

ctingpractical

swhethera

t,aCartesian

raspiritualist.

instance.A t

asilyheara

v ing . We r e -

ent that it is

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



anpossibly

anoron the

cewerereally

onits head.

lsforsaving

denounced

sonswould

ouldbecalled

yalH umane

keahordeof

teastowhether

strengthenor

onvincedthat

those

hen theold

allthe heresies,

philosophical

Theirview

ortant that

dent testimony.

uthisso

what any

ryas men

reesinquiryas

hunfit foreat-

lediscussion

when,forthe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



The oldre-

odo were

ernliberty

discussit.

humansuper-

nguswhereall

y e a rsa go it w a s

st.Thencame

giousmen-,the

ut theycould

beanavowed

chievedjust this

ly b a d ta ste tobe a n

ionhasonly

erofsilenceas

ut Lord

dcallit thecom-

e v er the less € ”

w ho th ink tha t the most

out amanis

e thinkthat

er,it isim-

tillmore

W ethink

anenemy,it

snumbers,but

nemy sphi-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



snot whether

matters,but

gelse affects

ncross-e -

ausehe

;inthenine-

eredOscar

uchanattitude,

alservitudebe-

eaquestion

more cruel;

nwhichwasthe

quisition

vingproduced

theverysame

thingswhich

ng.

ligion,

things,has

multaneously,

ccupy.Gen-

ature.They

o f a r t f o r a r t 's

dominatepoli-

bythecry

ma y r ough lybe tr a ns-

sa ke. Pe r s is t-

heidealsof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ourbooks;

cehave

eraturehas

politicshave

Generaltheories

u sb e ene tr ud ed

iontoask,

o s t b y th ise tr u s io n

tter,forhaving

ilosopher "

leisfor the

ive,it begins

isthat whena

g ins , f o r the f ir s t

orousorganismsX

t about their

rproofof

hanthat he

e endofthe

ybetterproof

tionthanthat

he endof

ment Dayand

enostronger

thantheten-

dideals;it isin

cythat wecryfor

n inthe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



oodwhat you

H ildebrand

kingnot for

urch.Danton

kingnot for

y,andfrater-

u ch me nw e re

ndownstairs,

not ofthe

not say,

ight leg,using,you

gh andcalf,

, I T he ir

ywereso

themanlying

t inthat

sh.Inprac-

ndidealizing

dlyweakness.

asthetimeofbig

ndfinewords,

ury,menwere

entiment-

cynicscould

dyearsagoour

eldedtrium-

raffairsare

lent men.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



big wordsand

aceofsmall

fortharace

dernpoli-

ofCaesarand

yaretoopractical

moral;but

ocrityis

e r . O ur ne w a r t ist ic

orallicense,

ndearth with

allisthat a

not say

hanthese;but

nymenstronger

dominatedby

heir religion

anfreedommay

ndagecameto

difficult for

ofart has

ctly artistic

eanything

e a Pa r ad ise

c o n que r G od .

vineComedy in

floor ofhell.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



H a ve theyp r o -

inggrander

utteredby

bytherigid

nowthat they

els.^ Milton

piety,hebeats

Inalltheir

findafiner

s . N or w illyou

lt asthat fiery

aranatalifting

A n d the r e a son

sp h e myisa na rt is t ic ef f e ct ,

ponaphilosophi-

ndsuponbe-

onedoubts

slyandtrytothink

or.Ithink

doftheday

n .

ticsnorthat of

ofgeneral

ybethat

ckandmis-

eto timeper-

rd ly the r e ha s

onstruckand

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ality.Nothing

stheoppor-

s,indeed,a

€ ” the ma n wh o

ndpractically

ist.Nothing%

hat kindof

manwhois

thisraceorthat

auseorthat

whowillnever

omakeit

ianislike

rdsbecause

bandongolf

Thereisnothing

posesas this

toimmediate

slikesuccess.

opportunism

olookat it

etoseethat

armore

nganddiscuss

killedeach

th e H omoous io n

peoplewhoare

o n A c t. o r th e

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



gtoestablisha

get defined,first

ut ourmodern

bout are-

gtosettle

ty.Iftheold

nkind,at least

etomakeit

dernmobs

miststopersecute

ngit.

d f o r manymor e, I f o r

g backto

ralidea of

most dis-

personallyorin

nrelationtothe

teach.I am

Kiplingas a

nality;Iamcon-

c € ” tha t is to say,

thehardihood

oncernedwith

o f the most b r i l l ia n t

alive;Iam

tic € ” tha t is to

uite solid,

Irevert to

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



eenthcen-

of getting

onarisesin

ssayalamp-

sonsdesireto

,whoisthe

pproachedupon

thearidmanner

f ir s t o f a l lc ons id e r ,

f Light be

nt h e issome -

wn.All thepeople

helamp-post

goabout con-

nmediaevalprac-

ydonot work

vepulledthe

ntedtheelec-

ntedoldiron;

ness,because

hought it not

much;some

ashmunicipal

wantedtosmash

thenight,no

o,gradually

w,orthene t

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



p i ri t

et that this

,necessarily

rnandreason-

omeforthis

heideaofsuc-

fight towards

ensoncalled,with

elost fight of

y, o n the o the r

econviction

hesoflaw;its

It canonly

erfectionto

ngupon

ndanimageof

oloursand

ethisideal

rethanhe

heneglect or

hemaycontem-

eamerora

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



andhappiness

ayevengo

loveofsanity.

hics,evenifhe

maninsane

sin a

hierpersonfunda-

n asilkhat

ormany

itheringknowl-

ment claim-

ethan this

hemaybe

kandmiserable,

s lar g e lyong iga n tic

ngththat has

asnoend.

ionswhichcan

nst theinfluence

whetherinthe

gethemystic

” i t isa lw ay s

phimselffrom

sease.H e

continually

heremaybe

hemore

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



histhemore

beno question

me.

bleand

o o te,w h ic h

bolizingand

pamphlet

b le , those tw ove r y

conjunction

n o ld Pu r i tanw a y,

ichIconfess

ming.Ihave

berthat Mr.

ptuouslyanyat-

ofstrongdrink

ons,andsaid

s l iv e r w ou ldbe

temperance

at picturesque

erfectlyembodied

rnethics.In

crowdskneel,

B ut that

kneelisno

yandsubstance

but it isdis-

v e r o f the Ne w

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



onwasthe

e thingthat

fference

ntsofNon-

nismofthe

wholepoint

othingfor

newspapers

essingprecisely

hthefounders

dthemselvesby

ut ifit wasa

keplainlyabout

that it spoke

hichisre-

sented,inthat

Ibsenis typi-

perceivewhat

anuncanny

hichseeswhat

erandmistier

blindwith

themorality

w ith the mor a l ityo f

allthat modern

imagine,

I n f e rno o f a n

raPodsnapian

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



sthreemoral

v en , Pu r ga to r y, a nd H e ll ,

nof improve-

sen hasonly

te n said , a ndw ith pe r f ec t

laylikeGhosts

cessityofan

uitetrue,and

st monstrous

ternalfire.

a l is ts l ike Z o la do in

€ ” the yp r omote

manpromotes

promotesit.

minoritywhich

wedonot ask

Most healthy

ersasthey

r microbes.

orists,likethe

smuchintheir

ealistsanddyna-

eengagedin

hopeless,of

y.

semefor a

swhoimagine

simist.There

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



inIbsen,plenty

eople,plenty

w ise lya nd things

ing.Myjl

hout,and

uenessanda

oubtingattitude

ndvirtuein

ssw hic hc on tr a stsve r y

sswithwhich

heperceives

tion,somede-

owthat the

nowwhyheis

. toc kma n is

eissane.

howvirtueand

thesensethat

dernse ual

alsehoodworks

y,but truthworks

ck.Thereareno^

ereisno ideal

nlyadmitted,

andthought-

n,Mr.B ernard

ce o f I bs e ni s m. M r . h a w

th e ph ra se , T he

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



oldenrule.

nduringand

ermanent key

merit.Iam

esswhether

rto p o in t ou t ,

t thisomission,

tofacewiththe

nessfilledwith

withno definite

ehence-

” the th ingo f w h ich

on sdevils

hat isvisible.

ligion,fell

knowledgeof

fallenasecond

vilremains

ormousunspoken

allenon our

viousageshave

nattempt to

e,what was

part ofthe

questionto

werto these

ndois to

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



cesofobvious

e,against

gnoringthe

bours.Ibsenis

dhunt tobring

ernphrasesand^

k theproblem

f talkingabout

o f i t , isa dodge to

earefondof

hat isadodgeto

earefond

that isadodgeto

hemodern

searbitrary

Thisis,

ot decidewhat is

odnot to

w a yw ithyou r o ld

ss. This,

usnot settlewhat

wearegetting

N e ithe r in r e l igionno r

of therace,

r ly e p r e sse d ,

what isgood,but

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e e ding lyc le a r -

recent work

tionwith

onomists,he

theywere(in

w r on g .Bu t the n e w

elost the

tionsat all.

ywithageneral

ardedas

p r op e r en o ug h i n a ha i r-

an,but indecent

ien c e . Bu t in

ywithwhich

must alsobe

ntothesame

peningpages

n kin d in the

alsof art,reli-

est,andsays

intheirchief

ood.H eis

ssue o f b ir th s.

llproducesatis-

oes,but what

sandmothers.

blythat it

thereader

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mpleofuncon-

odofbegetting

t isthegoodof

e ly hand ingon to

leyourself.It

W h a t is the use o f

d , Toma ke ha m-

A ndof those ha m-

swe r e d , Toma ke

amanwould

stionof the

W ellsandall

essuccessfully

timatevalueof

progress is,

e n u nc ia te d to - da y

mp ar a t ive o f w h ic h

ve.W emeet

m,beauty,or

veidealof

a y, w e me et e ve r yp r o-

weknowabout,

ettinga great

t.Progress,

d,amost digni-

ut asusedin

s,it isludicrous.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



that theidealof

t ofethicalor

e truth.No-

e w or d p r o -

nte c r e eda nda

ycanbepro-

;Imight almost

vewithout

y r a te ,w ithou t be l ie v ing

g re ssby itsver y

hemoment we

edirection,we

tfulabout the

hebeginning

gethat hadless

rss tha nw e. I n

ephilosophic

nmayhavebeen

vediffered

ywent,andin

ctiontheydid

entlytheyhad

s.B ut it is

wedisagree.

en c e l ies inmor e la w

o r le ss l ibe r ty;

concentratedor

lpassionwillreach

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



llectualismor

herweshouldlove

nobodywith

e th e th ingsa bou t w h ic h

snot merely

dleast what is

a ge . I t is ,more -

avesettledleast

progressive

he menwho

ess,might be

particular

esswould

fheavenwhen

donot,

p r ogr e ss isun -

ithout the

ctrine,and

upsofpersons

n.Progress

islogically

us.It isa

donlyrightly

ntheagesof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



d K ip lingandma k in g

n e a r tha s

y

te r-

enly

.W henB yron

ndbored,he

qualitiese ist

qualitiesinthe

himself.The

ssolemn

aveproved

ertainly

uisanceto

llthe leaves

ebecauseof

useofourlack

wouldgo

e bladesof

ofanarmy.

oyousthanwe

n a y, h e i s a go d . o r

heiteration

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



alwaysnew,

rst.

icalisa

amerematter

isnot merely

ybechal-

hallengedto

tterofpoetry.

nsiblesub-

ookinhis

or T h e m i th

n g . H e sa id , We ll ,

mnedmysticism

f f e ct . I a m

m;but the

Inmost

houghthefact

i th , the na me is

ousand

euptoit.

eof theone

t couldclaim

mquewhichall

esmithyis

t t h a smi e d

acksmithisa

that insome

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



hegrocerand

theyfeast on

gblowsinthe

Thebrute

cunningof

tals,the

unconquer-

nqueror,the

wordandthe

armiesand

esethingsare

legibly,on

h.Yet our

lme r V a le nc e ,

e r nonRa ymond ,

sintheirpower

m i th € ” t h is

wouldbe

a certain

rl ofthelip,

ameis mith.

oeverelse

not parvenus.

orythisclanhas

areonevery

isolderthan

ammerof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ot quitethe

hat common

socommon

etical.In

heobstacle.

his claimofours,

mereliterary

selythecon-

omethings

whichis a

d signal-

h e th ings igna l- bo

eremen,in

d-redandsea-

romdeath.

ptionofwhat

what it is

" isunpoetic a l.

n o t u npoe tic a l ; i t

dloverscommit

hentheyhave

tobetouched,

gioustouch )

soneofthe

r andgetting

sleft that are

lyromantic

thinka

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



hereisnorhyme

u n p oetic a l, be c ause

m.B ut the

ofpoetry.A

g na l- bo ;i t isa

lar - bo ison ly

tuaryofhuman

S mith

practicaland

omuchaffected

ameshouts

herwise,

dsoddenwith

youremember

tsabout Mr.

mithbe inghe n -

giventoyou

elaborate

uhavemade

osayabout

borneabrilliant

ovincesof

enedbythat

ngsonlyto

the roman-

gsthemselves.

nceandphilos-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



te a mmaybe ,

ofscience.

rtyby-product

sbeenamong

ntageof these

reissmoke

th at w he r e ve r the r e is the

epurest.

hingtosay,a

andthat always

facesevery-

v e a v ie w of the

pling,that

trated,isthe

inhimorin

rittenbad

hasoftensaid

oftengiven

keGladstone.

oubt that hemeans

ething,and

hat isthat which

h e be s t w a yo f

nwiththat

sistedbyhim-

” I me a nh is in te r e s t

seekingforthe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



togoto his

togoto

ongin his

ponentsare,

ngashe.The

wscertain

e cessively

hat it shows

nde cessively

diergainsmore

ourageof a

etorianguard

nt inRomeas

uriousand

ecivilpower

themilitary

nt Romesoit is

reneverwasa

litarist.There

lessbrave.

av e sungo f ar msa nd

multaneously

thefantastic

mdemjn-

andit demon-

nghasproved

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



disciplineof

ofpeacemuch

war.A ndhis

ble. very-

everything

isnoperfectly

fectlyirrespon-

nhavemadethe

ssion.W e

ockina fit of

egladthat the

mmockinafit

yjumpupona

o ke . Bu t w e a r e

eavethelegsofit

o mha v ingme r e ly

ghisside-armis

ary,Kipling

hedthat the

rcuttingcoats

nousvision

acosmopolitan.

mp le s in the Br i t ish

empirewoulddo

hly civilized

ntheB ritish

pparent inthe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



Themoment

hw o r ld € ” th a t is ,

r e s ts € ” be c ome s

whenthey

unspotte d f r om

it just asmuch

w e ll lo s t. A s tr o -

dthat ngland

ly,Isuppose

world,and

t orb.B ut

” the tr u th th a t the

rldbecomes

certainly

heworld,

ongstothose

e k n ows ng la nd

manknows

n g la nda g r e a t

for long

oit,or to

his,that he

T h e mome n t

cevanishes.

holestrengthof

r world

breathingan

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



,tobecom-

ace,tobe

mbuctoois

livemenwho

athe,not an

heworld.The

eenallthe

gofthethings

t , dr e ss , dec o r um, r ing s

th e e a r sa s in

ancients,orred

ns.Theman

othingat all;

t unitemen

es , a nd the bea u tyo f w ome n ,

sky.Mr.

eglobe-trotter;

epart ofany-

a ma n isnot to

osmopolitanism;

eakness.That

ssedinoneofhis

no f the T r a mp

resthat hecan

ungerorhorror,

neplace.In

emore dead

moreit travels

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



stle-downand

o u thA f r ic a . e r -

r,liketheheavy

oftheNile.

wewereall

e implication

rollingstone

inedtoask,

s, e c e p t s i l lyold

w e be g in tope r c eive

lingstone

ut therolling

becausethe

ndenlarge-

etelegraph

ldsmaller.

maller;it is

t larger.

clovenwitha

dthemicro-

ingsandlive

dysmallthings

spiriting

r-carround

a w hir lo f sa ndor

Bu t A r a b ia is

not aflashof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



lizationswith

ures.Ifwe

ot beas

withtheloyalty

ceofpoets.To

hem.The

n-garden,with

he manwith

distance;the

odernsthink

hingonecan

hoolmistress.

perpetually

enemiessay

s,but hewas

t hemayhave

yhadlarge

t aman

muchgeniality

manwith

nothinglarge

aninnocent

asytothink

e-stones.The

ktoknowthe

des prophe-

areanadmirable

ide a s p r o spe r

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



kinginconti-

wtwo-legged

lusionofthe

piresandits

e o f ma ngoe son

emple,with

g,totally

hed.A ndit*

hialism,possibly

r-carciviliza-

stripping

llandseeing

captureofthe

ncockneyand

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



rd h aw

riseof

loldIbsen

oy,and

n mile

ndpure,it used

bemisunder-

rit isalways

e.Theman

sthisadvan-

donot know

mpaign.They

dagainst a

ralmodern

Chamberlain,

H econstantly

ntsbecausehis

equitedifferent to

oth byfriends

masastrenuous

ict himasa

safact,he is

admirable

cactor.H ehas

melo d r ama € ” th e

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nbackedbya

kto thewall.

rousthat their

mis fo r tune € ”

gethat strength

lishlyandyet

t hasnever

mingandfantastic

et.A sforhis

ealstocommon

plythefirst

audienceswith

r k A n tony € ”

is ;

nblunt man.

eentheaimof

herartist,such

mof the

eisasculptor;

ceusthat he

mberlain

andhis gameis

athemeon

theseplainmen

ons.H ehas

tionscommon

andpeoplewill

ggest ideals

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



endedin smoke;

dnot confuse.

lticpathos;like

squo ta tion , he

ay sf e l l. ^ H e is

ainoffailures;

untainis always

dernworld

sisofMr.

oisalsoa

tageofbeing

h a w isa lwa ys

eewithhim,

t) b y those w ho

umorist,a

geartist.It is

ously,that he

ything,that

damuse.A ll

aringly,the

as tosay

usmasculinity

le f o r ce a nd tr iu mph

in the f a c t that he is

ofarfromhis

ughhoopsor

consistsin

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ndday.H e

drigorouslyto

enorearth.

ethingwhich

weak-minded

ear)inhim,is

chastheyare,

uchasit is,is

hisprinciples,

yinstancein

ation.Ifhe

helawlessness

ofIndividualists.

tism,hedislikes

e l la s in ng lish-

dbondsof

e fiercer

madebylaw-

horityof

omposityof

heirresponsi-

sanecon-

yofart.H e

saying that

hasinfuriated

eequalto

callyjust;he

lityof a

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



manengaged

e r na rd ha w

arlya man

st mayfancy

nedtoten

not really

en swords,it

aight withone.

beliefalways

snot change

in toa f i e d s ta r ,

like azoetrope.

encallthem-

becausethey

anity,because

ermadness

manymuch

at blackiswhite.

hecurrent colour-

inarysensible

ckwhite,it

greenwhite

a l lw ine w h ite

B lue - coa t boy s

te gr a pe s w h ich

givetothe

o n isa so r t o f p in k

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



w hi t e ma n â € ” a

nanyspectrein

ifaman

orabottleof

yellowgrapes,

t isun-

ent official,

n Bur ma h , sa id ,

pinkishmen

fcrackingjokes,

it isequally

vecometo

th.That too

t tootruth-

e r na rd ha w. H e

ebecausehewill

whiteisyellow.

yandsolidityupon

fact that truth

course,must

ion,forwe have

preciationwill

n g a nde c e l le n t .

yare;andsome

stheyare,

ondoesnot

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



w sr e a l ismthe r e is

gwhichis

g n iz e dph ilo sophy

d in T he Q u in -

,inbrief,that

ot becausethey

heywereideals.

omjudgingjustly

generalization

goldenrulewas

dtheobjection

ofreemen,

oingtheonly

t isthegood

everyliberty

ws T he liber ty

afreepeople.

ng a ma n( o r a

bertye cept

ns.Making

imaman.

rb id smen toha ve

e onewho

en.The

sthat thereisno

implyanswered

reisno

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e,orrather it

e.It isan

ovement ofa

d with Mr . ha w

endevelopment

a n . H e w hoha d

efaithsinthe

godinthe un-

dlaidall the

mpossible

reature.B ut

nyonewho

a d eq ua tely, a ndad -

ssedallthis

a w ha sneve r

fhehadhe

forethem.

ealthat has

orld.H ehas

ringhumanity

an,witha

iseManof

omic Ma nof the

w ith ie g fr ie d , with

th is inne r a nd

ygoodthing,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



c e l le n t o r un -

ngsasthey

are tothink

redhands,and

onlyhaving

yare to

thhishundred

nwithtwoeyes

sn o t se e ing

emi-godof

ormaynot

arth,andthen

h is isw ha t Mr .

eedone.W hen

wedonot criti-

y. ora

dmiraculous

isskull, anda

r that baby,is

n d unne r vingma tte r . I t

riggishhabit of

whichmakesit

t ofhim.A

scoolandprac-

ourknees

r.It isthe

ouslifeisan

ct that every

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



hat heisnot

s t so l i ta r ye c e p -

lma im, that

A ndfromthis

ofallthings,

peculiarinsist-

e r b e la bou r inga

anyyearsfor

whasdiscovered,

sverydoubtful

beingwithtwo

avingcometo

ombinedwith

ased,would

ssandremain

beingeasily

umanitywith

ogressforits

m, isinca-

ss,Mr. haw

ophy,but for

if anurse

rsomeyearson

wasnot

thefoodand

babyout of

b. Mr . ha w

whichis

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



es isma n € ” the

ng,fighting,fail-y

ndthethings

reatureim-

havebeen

u p e r ma nha ve

whichalone

Christ at asym-

His great society,

neitherthe bril-

t ashuffler,

i n a w or d , a ma n . A n d

is Churc h , a nd

evailedagainst it.

domshavefailed,

inualweak-

strongmen

onething,the

oundedona

isindestruc-

r th a n itswe a kes t

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ct.A man

annot earn

diaeval urope

Romance;the

ncehasgained

erent thePagan

mth isha sbe en

ousquotation.

to ic say € ”

mandsuccess;

mp ro n iu s,w e lld e se rv e i t .

dChristendom,

the spirit

ith uropean

Tisnot inmor-

e l ldomor e,

t .

dingofour-

aninfinityof

issosimple

it must be

terious.H u-

t menthink

osuccessful

mistaken

it generally

splendour

ilitywillal-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

carlet and

tolet gold

toomuch.

ueactually

sfulasan

virtue.H u-

rthisworld;

Ihadalmost

rld.

dayisthe

manofscience;

as wellasa

emelydifficult

ouslyuproot-

tearingdown

dstothestars,

whoonlyasks

mlessoldhobby

W hena

euniverseis

nce,it isdiffi-

odid it,the

t affair,andthe

mall one.It

ofa manwho

wearthinthe

oubtedlyit was

ftheintellect

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ientificperiod,

owedtheir

theyhad

houseofcards

yhaddoneit

rablepleawas

t.Whenever

hofpridein

goodground

stheywere

yvictorious.

H u ley;there

n.H ewas

nsciousness;one

dulness.This

inningto wane

scienceare

hefinephrase

gtobe proud

ningto be

ld,beginning

ginningto

emselvesto

esthat then-

nglish,

bout theirown

onsciousoftheir

th ey a r e g r owingw e ak e r .

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

semergedin

doescarryinto

plicityofthe

geniuswe

asamanof

rkedaboveall

umility.I

n d inh isc a se , a s

re must be

onvincingthe

ueispredicable

nhisliterary

” v is ionso f th e la st

t amanwho

mb le H e

iesabout carv-

gangelslike

gelsandcarves

incethenhehas

eroftheseblas-

oliticalfuture

gressiveauthor-

ail.Isthe

h u mble I t

resent condition

ngsaspride

of howa

hbig things

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



o n lyansw er is

beginningof

whodoesthe

whodoes

manwhohas

dtohim,and

st,that he

thermentosee

rwhelmedand

me;third,that

yandsincerelyand

orecommon-

dayself.A d-

heyaremost

t is , most r oma n tic . A dv e n -

adventures

ityinMr.

r e a t ma nyothe r

ficult toillus-

r e a ske d f o r a n

n o d iff ic u ltya bo ut

Themost inter-

e l ls is that he

ant contem-

owing.One

himgrow.

anifestation

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

pinions;but it

isnot a

iontoanother

t isaquite

esolidroad

ut thechief

lenessand

uponthe

rtlingopinions

sbeeneven

nconventional

ns.Thisfact

s ty a ndp r ove sh imtob e

dthat theupper

uldbeso much

oneclasswould

o icalchar-

entsforso

desertedit

estartling.Mr.

oftheblameless

timatelysub-

ofscientific

s.H ehas

rywiththesame

tywithwhich

wastrue;

hascometo

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



terarymancan

rdinaryview

elast andwildest

onatowerbefore

mthat twice

t pr e se nt ina ga y

conservativism.

orethat conven-

sgoodan

lity a ndsa nityo f

ofviewon

age.H eonce

hsomesingular

creatures

dbredafterthe

nolongerholds

ngerhold

ut it in Man-

hsmashingsense

t tobelieve

her.It istrue

oposalisthat it

eemstomea

negligible

neobjection

orthyoffinal

ingcouldonly

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

sandcowards.

ificmarriage-

r wrong(as

medicalsuper-

healthymen.

first act of

dbe tosmash

lkliesin

deaofhealth

shealthtodo

d o w ithca r e lessne ss .

isnecessaryto

iarlyunhealthy

in ordertobe

nlytrying to

ss.Ifweare

ceptionallysick

obecareful.

weareaddressing

nghumanity.

o bereckless-

entalfunctions

callytobeper-

asure;they

ormedwith

manought to

titetosatisfy,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

umansoul,y

rnsabout,

plasm,which

inhissplendid

not sufficiently

fmen.Inhis

that achief

beliefinoriginal

u ma nsou l € ” â –

elf € ” he w o u ld

efirst thing

vefound,to

anent pos-

the merefact

nyaccidents

ndtheweak-

heytakethe

sumeit tobe

orateaccount

ones.They

nt morethan

ne n ious ine -

e deliveredby

venstronger

in d if fe r e nce to th e hu ma n

osmopolitan-

fallpatriotic

nocent waythat

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



relsepeople

seemto

nyofus,ifit

lmakewar

o r if w e a dmit

t oropinion,

herewillnot

hefact isvery

beratelyto

annot prevent

mpossibleto

lizations,be-

apossible

wereno

nnations,

tweenUtopias.

tin g doesno t tend to un ion

otodifferentia-

ht forthe

t themfrom

on.Thisva-

aningof the

onalismofthe

t isalso,inci-

rineofthe

o f Mr.We lls s

rone,onethat

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ferent,or

ofadifference.

ethefirst andsim-

it bythesprings

hat thefact of

sthat theyare

maydiffer

heymust agree

iftest hare

lestriangleor

saythehare

oisemoves.

hat it moves,we

that there

ndeveninthe

wesaythat

e.

mp le of Mr .We lls s

a mp le w h ic hhe

hat weseea

adarkerthing,

hastronger

ityoflight

weshouldnot

zeit assuch.

o t f i e d in the

lytocalla

r viceversd.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

eevenforan

v en bya ha ir s -

mple,therecrept

eideaofblue-

ecomedoubtful

ight orless.

svaryingasa

srigidas a

o u tha re r e la t ive in

ournemouthand

u t i f ther e be a ny

hPole,there

etherIam

l. T he a bso lute ide a

tainable.W e

ght. We may

ole.B ut

nable,it does

A ndit isonly

efinablethat

ofB rightonand

faceto

W e lls ,w he n

ifiedideals.

owshissense.

nges;the

nifest and

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ngthat does

heabstract

ellssays

wehaveseen

ysee inanother

ngcommonto

o f l ight € ” w h ich

ellsmight

dingaeonstill

neliest star.

dnovelabout

ees first

hings;he

handthen as

ithhimthrough

sstheideaof

wfulspacesfor

teconception

ot (forinstance)

that Mr.

ttenaverydelight-

astallas trees;

me tohave

tivism. The

Mr . B e r n ar d h a w s

u pe r ma n ide a.

ghthe veilof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a n ts

ntothesame

ee pectedto

atureifhedoes

rstandards.

dardofgreatness

ietszche

es t in g in the up e r -

n isa th ingw h ic h

h e v e r yw or d

is te nc e o f a s ta nda r d

passingus.

n ly thanme na r e ,

fyhim,even

B u t i f he is

aybequite

e toanother

He must sub-

veraweus.

ndard;but that

a mantheir

oldfairy-tales,

goodmen,are

i s t he t a le o f J a ck

hepoint ofview

beendone

tledoubt that

e istedinfact.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



homJack

upe r ma n . I t

redJacka

howishedto

ment ofthelife-

asthecase)

hewould point

ichdeclaresthem

ldenlargeon

quipment,

ct fromtwo

melfwith

championof

ftheprinciple

anonecon-

e singleheart

unimpressed

giant wasapar-

wishedto know

a nt € ” tha t is , a

hat werethe

hisviewsonpolitics

Wa she f ondo f

th e monly ina da r ka nd

e ph r a se f or e mo-

right place

witha sword

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



upermen,for

uperman

neednot fight

llhimthe

ly s tr onger ( w he the r

tronger,Ido

ht tohaveto

strengthwe

hat isno

rthanourselves.

u ch th e g ia nt ' s

houldbecome

ut that is

dernhero-

trongMan,

hat hemaybe

ust besome-

betterhero-

erowasa

morehumanthan

upe r ma n isc o ld

oolishlyfondof

miesintheagony

w ssa dCa e sa r

H e w hoha snev e r

heMan-Godof

, Wa se ve r

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



iteratureis

deoldtales

ymodern

lladsare as

under-dogas

o c ie ty.W he nme n

vedamid

ntheyknew

adonlytwo

ejoicingthat

ng,thesecond

foroncein a

rthisdefianceof

toalterthe

urechallengeto

and inmost

nturewhichis

isdain

onlyareal

mankind.In

woodmenare

ot onlythe

nt,thehero.

omesasort of

ivalrouschron-

a poortinker

A ndthe

binHood re-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



d th e ^ E s t he t es

n d that the

sm

n-

up.

uchfromthe

mingledin

seschieflyfrom

bout what parts

ethedifficulty

onalreligions.

eautifulinall

ytohavecol-

llthecolours

tomakeaper-

anyhuman

g lik e mud , anda

o ns . uc ha

orsethanany

nthecreedof

thedifficulty

odpart and

ygivenreligion.

eavilyonthose

etothinkof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



artscommonly

rts commonly

tlyadmirea

aphotographic

tulateallthen-

eirblackson

appento us

ons.Taketwo

othereligious

y.Takethe

h ilo sophyo f A ugu s te

opleonthe

e sse d in some suc h w or ds

e y doa g r ea t

vulgarand

cellent,but their

nfortunately,

rsto bethe

eaimsof

c e l le n t , but I a m

irable.Their

ntenseand

rlikeall relig-

icand sen-

e not reverent

arereverent,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



licatemeaning

onlypossible

t youwill

n Ma tthe w A r no ld ;

ot findit € ”

war.A man

etotruth

reverent

h e a lvat ion

rokenout in

yshape,are

angryfaith,

ldasthegar-

mistakenfor

le y, inone o f h is

lv a tionA r my

H u le yw a s the

swhohavenever

understood

wnthat there

,any Chris-

betweenthemat-

thods,that to

he alvation

oftheirritual

ne,perhaps,

General

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ummery.H e

theuseful

humanarethe

hoodofthat

y,thenotion

ngartificial,

reallymuch

mplerandmuch

gtouchingthe

akemenfeel

gsto say;it

ertainproper

of these

ples,andshout-

e,ofwearing

herphilosophers

giousdancecame

anwasa rit-

Comtismhad

nconverted,

bytheCom-

gwhat theycon-

master,the

nthestrengthof

faithmust be

r,but tobea

anisreadyto

whenheisnot

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nd hisheadfor

vile,amvery

worksof

ationwhatever.

fwiththe greatest

DarwinDay.

othingin

erehasbeen

ist ecstasy.

athofGod.

ybombardedin

asit moreper-

thanuponthat

o y. he l ley

rmieshavepassed

but theyhave

upasingle

orld smerriment

nameor a

winburnedoes

veofthe

r . W il l ia mA r c he r

oftheinfancy

o r s in the snow.

mournfulyear

oseancient

holeearth.

fthose ages,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nthemany

ritingit. In

eisno treein

ristold in

A b a nkho liday

bankersregard

s,Isuppose,a

partiallyholy.

ysohumana

uld always

ythereap-

ot singand

ourof anything

lA nge loo r the op en in g

do e sno t w or k.A s

yandgloriously

listic.Take

larthings,and

sellersof

beautyofthe

usis thefar

orth.Takeaway

ainsistheun-

n a v e r ysa d

world an

eallymake

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



whointhe

hought the

of theCan-

hought the

whointhetime

vethought

rcantherebe

erevulgar.

yvulgaritywe

wdinessofbe-

omeheavy

waswherever

asfaithin the

efyouwillhave

rityyouwill

eedandmythol-

ouslife,so in

fewillalways

fweeverget

n g lish la nd they

ople,ifall goes

absencefrom

ndlowerforms

cefromnature

havenomore

helackof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



t e a cr ed V i n e

s t u p onus

n

ge

hrownout at

mericanbars

io ns i t isa lmos t

dmoderate

hstuffshould

iththis I

peculiar

dangerousand

o drinkit as

n.If aman

easure,heis

ceptional,some-

yhouroftheday,,

tle insane,

roftheday.

dertoobtain

hingnatural;

not tobe

ndit difficult

hout.The

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



asseenthe

redazzling

yofbeingordi-

ment,andwe

, T h isw ill

ument, doubt-

ument,but he

nt alldaylong

fwetookit

sw il le na b le you

a h e av ie r te mp ta -

t torubit

e hoofofa

gat daybreak.

stivity;it isdiffi-

mli ty. H e nc e

orknows,

coholtothe

eedhardly

kthegiving

usisneces-

eanthat

theproper

consistent with

uldappear

ls € ” a pa r a do .

t neverbecause

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



whenyouare

belikethe

um;but drink

ut it,andyou

nt ofItaly.

forthis is

death and

not needit,

ndtheancient

shadowand

urehaslainupon

z g er a ld s tr a n s lat ion

dintoanim-

ddrifting

rarysplen-

relybanalto

sofmenhas

gthegay

vaguesadness

cal,ethical,

asbeenalmost

liketosay

s,oneofun-

reagreat

against the

st itspro-

terofindict-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



f someold

”

adesall,

yhappymento

o rth y th ings ,o f

hebriefand

ourse,thegreat

esdirected

easfalseand

llyare.One

adthe in-

ranatheist

possiblefor

ast understands

course,the

icalChristian

nofOmar,is

d,it isthat

H isisthat

nenothingelse

gethertheout-

umanwill.

k eso f A ye so r N oes ,

r ike s the Playe r go es ;

wn in to the f ield ,

” h e k no w s € ” h e k no w s.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



pleinanendless

apungent

inpassing

should

oythemsimply

Todo th is is to

ereforetode-

ylikereligion,

d. upposea

ndidmoment of

gconnected

ethingwith

” analmost painful

orinstance,a

ramoment of

sthe mo-

oment' ssake.

ssa ke ,or h isow n

ment,but not

njoysit forthe

hthe flag

eeting;thelove

ek.But the

nal;thelover

hat cannot end.

ernity;these

ydonot seem

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



moments

ybecomeascold

not love

eimmortal

hismost famous

thahard,gem-

hardandnever

o t b e ha nd le do r a r r ang e d .

hardand never

rous,likeflames,

T h e r e isonly

n become

ybecomingas

everbeen

ughterofmen

oftheaesthetes.

tallydifferent

ess,acertain

yishe pecta-

essentialto

to e vilpa ss ions . ve n

s) e f f e ct upon the o th e r

onthis world

ThePuritans,

nhe.The

uorTolstoy

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



houghthe

h lu uries

n,it mayleave

pleasures,and,

powerofhappi-

nrisewithout

admire

noughto

yedwithout

e s. A goodbush

turenorwine

if wehavethe

ss,andOmar

wrongattitude

sehehas in-

to betrulygay,

meeternalgaiety

nnot enjoy

eat asubscrip-

thestarsare

canbereally

W ine , sa y s

a d the he a r t o f ma n ,

art.The

bleonlytothe

ot rejoicein

hings.Ulti-

cept religion,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



me n d idbe lie ve

tuneoftheir

havenever

aneudae-

hasquiteas

ristianvariety.

th a nhe isa sa in t .

oundedona

ofWalt Whitman.

cine,but a

dewine,not

t Omarmakes

e.H efeasts

elsbecausehe

y s, f o r youkn ow

rink,for

here.Drink,

e worldasidle

sethereis

worthfighting

lapsedi na

ohestands

A ndat the

notherfigure,

hevine.

th e w ho le w orld isa s

onofthelove

etrumpets

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



sthestirrup-

thenew

rink,forI

why.Drink,

where.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e sso f the Ye llow Pr e ss

protest

r

of

o-

A lf r e dH a r msw or th

everybodywho

hat it isvery

garandstart-

edcontrariety,

epersonalim-

rnalismoffends

t enough.

ing,but that

hewhole

gacertainlevel

monplace;it may

tobeflat.

reanyofthat

anbeheard

ordinary

ainstandard

thingsshould

ut thestandard

thingsare

ut beingfunny.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



failtoe ag-

ve ly unde r r a te s i t ;a nd it

dforthe

menwhomthe

igued.This

ll;it isthe

a r msw or thmust no t

bservationmore

beableto

r msw or th . I t mu s t

ywhoispowerful,

y,it must

uch.A general

s,ouryellow

uche ternal

headlines.It

nt everything

letters.B ut

rtling,but

wholly

ylightedtrain,

rt tohave

obviousman-

calphabet in

actlythesame

essesuseasimi-

gchildrento

not usean

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



n or d e r tomake the

useit toput

ngssmoother

haracteris

w hic h ir A lf r e d

keep.A lltheir

nt ime nts € ” th a t

thwhichthe

iliar.A ll

rn froma

sit e istsin

me r ic a,w e ha v e no

urnalist in

hecreatesa

denounces

ption,or he

withawicked

n a r e nch jou r -

frisson;he

ident ofthe

ves.Ouryel-

scrupulously

asregards

.But it is

enstobesuch

devenreas-

onofthe mas-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mendacious,

ept tothosewho

sorrow.It

andsuggestive

revealedonly

beimpressive

ealsensation-

eryfond,may

ut evenwhenit

lcourage.

erousthingson

ody.Ifyou

p,yourenderit

willjumpon

ovement haveno

ge;theirwhole

rgeandelabo-

verybodyelse

beringwhat

cethemselves

reachthe

chislargeand

shock.They

o in r a nce ,

nd,or the

ng landa

something

someth ing, tha t is ,w hic h

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



otherstode-

okein fourth-

nshowshe

toshout,so

ationalnature

trytobesen-

dfullofbig and

olewickedness

face,their

oattackthe

lstart acam-

rmasecret

out mothers-

nt ofview

sationalsuch

tosay,inthe

a n der e lk ir k , th at

o me. T he

r agenuinely

beendis-

nest journalist,

iscampaign

sides,I

er,but who

enseofintellec-

red,however,

ockedhis

ncedhisnews-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



f i r s t , bya l l the p e op le

dto readit;and

sagreedwith

rs. Those

d,Iam gladto

eywere gen-

ulness.Thus

kethesteam-

ma im € ” tha t if

ngryenough,

perforhimfor

theseare

seriousa con-

emaintained

ofview.In

tamenessof

mirroredthe

mwhichis akin

st beginswitha

,andendsin

ut heisnot

bythisfate

sonallytobe

rave,whobe-

ust endinmere

wise,whobe-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



st endinmere

ado icalfate

but inthe

t isnot the

bout thisneces-

orshipof

lpossiblewor-

sfollowersare

ndcowards.A

e o f Mr s.G a llup s

nsacrifice,but

orobviouslya

helovesMrs.

ecannot choose

W henthetest

erything,they

umphat all.

hopeful,hopeis

onlywhen

ebeginstobea

tianvirtues,

pensable.

o in the

dernadven-

diumand

gth;andto

dmirestrength;

admirethe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



howished

strong.They

ythat hewho

ethestrong.

havethe

dthem,tohave

rs. B ut they

ts € ” f i r s t , tha t

efirst and

ing;second,

ing,heis

Thelowerani-

ght theirway

isbeso, the

nselfishness,

yblind.The

nonesideand

realittleout of

smuchupto

couldmake

Clovenhoofs

e po lishe dh is

ut inthe

namore

lthroughper-

modernsociol-

commodating

e t ime , they f o r get

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



est consists

ccommodate

worst it consists

eaturesall

endthat is

ngmoreand

n g la nd . ve r y

dmeansby

nushisopin-

tributionnega-

sionthat the

p o s i tive . ve r y man

tonewhichis

llthe heartless

wand weari-

apableof

y,capableonly

mptiblebecause

rong.B ut all

est willendin

NewJour-

ournalism.It

t shapeless,

oneinourday.

hshouldbe

amant;it isthe

yof mpire.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ingofthiskind.

h e b oar da r e no t

c ommonse n se ;

a y r e a d € ”

mp r e sse sA me r ic a n

ownargument.

points,pulled

ousandsof

o undcommon

thanhigh-flown

u d g e ,who th r e w

mehe madean

ofA merican

T h e soundc om-

arlswood,

ingthepro-

victoryofMr.

nthis article

.B ut the

isthat inthat

hewholetruth

tlers,bustlers,

silent men,really

T h e yme a nknoc k -

maticeffect,

selessbit of

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



r ic a np latf o r mand

withaboard

mehim;I

ybea dashing

maybeafine

gingthedagger

o r a ll I know )

mpressedwith

tradeof the

opleaparable

I w ish to

onfusionin

called sound

n th a t a bysso f

ne,that the

sandhasits

tnessofMr.

ifamanhits

ycareswhere

ycareabout

ut thesilent

roughout the

nwasalways

cisiveness.

w h a t have the se na i ls

y o u r c a rpe n try

u tla n der s W he r e

W he r e isy ou r

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a v e you r na i lsdo ne ' '

We must goba c k

Pearsonfor

hat thenails

ohammerednails

otes.

admirably

lismwhichMr.

rnalismwhich

rd.Totakeone

omparableman

ribedinthe

t (ashesmotethe

one.Nailedto

s t! " I n the w h ole

ompositoror

peakoflies

ot tothe

that Pearson s

Irishbull,

a tr ic k .T his is

thesaleofthe

journalismis

at badjour-

urnalism.

hweconsider

edby another

rcommonor

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ticleaworse

fyoulike

willknowthat

nd weakpopular

rtainlyas

owas cer-

nalismasyou

r e at da yso f

dpopularjournalism.

nt ofthis

rythinghesays

itelyweak-

etradesand

spaper.W hen

edoesnot say

ke asaneman.

eachildof three.

A n d like a c h ild

off.Inall

suchan

cityindeception.

ichnowsits

urableoldTory

iumphof

eYankeepress,it

l.B ut it is

he bramble,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ubscomesthe

uchlonger

nalistsofthis

t maybe

dseriousTariff

aintainthat

Reformin

dicrouspre-

venit among

enceisthat

on thepressis

y.Doubtless

semen,for

ereisnomore

cadmirestheir

resthedelicate

arker and

ell.Ifthesemen

othingtosay

ethemin the

ymuchbetter.

ttempt tobe

tothemthat

rnalists.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e

e istenceof

oesfunda-

elieveinthe

ple.Likehis^

es,hisreal

adreamthat

t isnot the

rworldthat

herealityof

Christianity

ethicof urope)

e so r myste r ie s

argument and

them,for

o p e or f a i th € ” th a t

onthemore

vensonunder-

Moorecannot

th e r is the par a do ^

eakerathing

d,that the

moreit should

fdefence.

hereforeMr.

ckeray.Now,

orkingmyste-

ndonewhich

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



say,hasdone

heconception

isaweakness

hter,it dries

ndenergy.

ndsthis;there-

tandthe

er e v e n than it

the sinof

milityisa

hingthanpride.

chwiserand

V anityis

k in do f c omr a de sh ip ;

V anityis

finfinitemulti-

nlythe ap-

readyhas.

njoythejoke

annot even

differenceisthe

onandMr.George

a s b r ushe d

n o w w he re he ha s

t isIfancyheis

adthe wisdom

v e nsonha da

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e

ustyegoism.

muse h imse lf a sw e ll

ichest effects

r e h idde n f r omhis

with the

nsonbelaudshis

ritics,weshall

it isthat

alphilosophyof

Mooreisalways

ew one.

esecret oflifelies

f is the gor gon .

othermenand

dis turned

fect inMr.

eaknessof

ngth.Mr.

yamoralweak-

fluentialaesthetici

eallybemuch

hewerenot € ¢

efeelasif we

eryof really

bysomeuse-

heartist had

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e sameattitude.

nt viewofMr.

. Mo or e thr ougha

o r e by ir e l igh t ,

o nl ig h t, a ndso

es.H ewould

kas thishe

ut theansweris

esnot succeed.

othesin of

self-conscious-

evelation,

ut himselfwill

heatricale cel-

anencyclo-

al personality

ism.jThinking

o bethe

ewill leadto

otherhand,

konlyabout

it inhisown

rginthe secret

noother man

nomanhas

ctically

Confe ss ions .

hepresence

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



e

t ofThackeray

nlyreadanumber

ctingopinions

everperson,

admirespecifi-

yMr.Moore.

nectsCatholicism

mystic ism € ” h e

oundlyabsorbed

ls , a ndhe e pe c ts

c a p ita l I e v e n

€ ” e ve nw he r e i t

ment.W here

a f ine da y, Mr .

h my te mpe r a me n t ,

e r e a no the r ma n

uslyafinestyle,

a s ty l is t Mil tonh a d

Nemesisofthisf.

gtotallyin-

dmanyinter-

donedthem

venwhen

isasfickleas

enwhenhehas

OneIrish *

was ever

andthat iscertainlya

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



sent age.B ut

ionwhichgoes

ke B ernard

ospectionand

nnot prevent

sprevent him

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



s an d i m pl i ci t y

emodern

are

ingswhich

w ith ou t lo s ing the m.A

ingboldand

logical.A

flectiveand

veandorderly.

e p r oudo f being

n simpleand

angevirtues,

ma nmaybe

sciousofbeing

ll theA nglo-

o f b e ingunc on -

honestly

mpossibility

intheirown

A n g lo - a on -

mplelife,

oy.Ifaper-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



obustnessleads

retrue that a

ownsimplicity

great com-

themodern

€ ” the s imp le l i f e in

ianismtothe

oukhobors.

ds,that they

mportant things,

things.They

ngsthat donot

e t , inc os tume , ine t i-

ut theywould

s th a t doma tte r € ”

alacceptance,

ot sovery

a grilled

verymuch

omatowitha

mplicity

yofthe heart,

enjoys.There

what system

eno doubt that

Thereis more

viaron impulse

nutsonprinciple.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



y

tobefound

yaremost

n l iv inga ndh igh th ink in g .

dof,will not

igh thinking.

ry.They

gand plain

say,havinga

highliving)

meaningofthe

that hasgone

orld.It would

theartificialis,

l.It would

asold asany

ritualismis

little plain

arshand

wnethics,how

atedmust be

eallybelieves

o u n tr ya ndw icke d to

andalsandsim-

mly inhis

fectionsoffamily

stothefuller

but theplain

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ha wonder

What agreat

keninorder

n g w il lr eje c t the

ydecisively

sinfulnessof

usthat nothing

isea pleasure

hinkingwill

materialistic

flyformaterial

sthesim-

one,it canbe

llularclothing;

thefiresthat

it matters

c to r iana r mc ha ir s

comple

man;let usnot

le oldgentleman.

leavemyspiritual

acomparative

withmy

ocigars.I

B urgundy.

mcab.Ifonly

myselfthe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



y

yswith aston

t theseare

I inclineto

But Iwill

ywhichlacks

ejoyalike.

edevilish

etolike toys.

dmanyother

nothingis the

nothingdoes

hesounderorderof

seesevery-

nthe comple

essharps

nthenatural

dof natural-

thechildthe

aturalandas

neitherof

natural. or

ained.Theflower

andthe flame

ercrownsthe

fairy-tales.In

hemost rustic

eam-engines.

osophicalobjection

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



payforthem

veryugly,or

;but merely

eevilisthat

doesnot re-

nesaretoo

ot admired

esare

chanical.

ther matters

onclusionisthat

aphilosophy

not anychange

ingsweneed

rposesareall

viewofthe

mansociety;

ndangrilyinthe

ould,ipsofacto,

andspiritual

veryone

touswith

gerandthe

monandthe

allonlybe

at fopsand

hat yeshalleat

withalyeshall

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



y

se thingsdo the

ekingdomof

ndallthesethings

oseamazing

narilygood,prac-

ativelygood

ofmakingall

essesofhealth,

uty,theone

ftheir accu-

gelse.Ifa

eventhheaven,

poresofhis

ntoastar,the

oryeffect upon

th e th ingc a l led

ing f o r w h ich the b e s t

n g , is in i tsna tur e ,

nt things.

onalistically,

th ings tha t on ly th e o-

it ofV enus.

nrationalize

alth.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



n d th e a va g es

n ta g e o f the

b-

n

tu r e o f th ings

ld.H eisa

yeverastudent

herethisdiffi-

omesensea

nly avery

ogresstowards

primitiverace

mportant

heordinary

nderstandas-

omer;hecan

beinganento-

;but hecan

opologymerely

he animal

sthefact which

recordsof

” the f a ct tha t th e

whichleadsto

yor botany

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mythologyor

ceasetobe a

crobe;it is

n inorderto

pressionof

wayofintui-

amanpreter-

hestomachof

urallystupid

H eismaking

rstandhu-

herworld is

;but inthis

mignoranceof

nceofthis

whichanthro-

nbebest learnt,

romtheordi-

n.Thesecret

psmonkeysor

nbytravelling

downtheir

hthecleverest

answerto

n L ondon ;na y, i t

nhasdiscovered

a r b la c kha tshe w ill

redwhymen

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



Themystery

danceshould

ifictravel;it

tionball.Ifa

nsofreligions,

hIslands;let him

knowthe

what society,

yis,let himnot

t himgointo

erealnature

most awkward

econduct of

manofscience,

ssentiallya

ason,hasto

remonial,and,

nisgenerally

a b su rdbe c a use i t o r ig i-

hebarbarian,

heprofessor.

stance, The

elievethat the

e foodupon

Thisisattested

nthegrave,

ngwiththis

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



he priests

quaintedwith

opsy-turvy.

l ish in the tw e n tie th

ncouldsmell.

theyalways

ets,orother

balterrorswere

ofthisaction,

d ladieswho

dbecause

imefor the

that savagesput

eythink that a

tha deadman

mancanfight.

vethat theythink

heyput food

samereason

isane ceedingly

We donot

nwhichmakes

ut that is

motionsof

llyirrational.

geforthesame

nderstand

not understand

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



wedonot

ent any

manmindit

allpurposes

incurably

alhasput on

lourmaterial

yarehuman.

hop,andsayhow

wmuchis

seanyman s

wmuchof it

wmuchner-

gloveofthe

orthe pork-chop

etherealashis

s,therefore,at

ascienceof

cienceofsociol-

lyhopeless,

ertainin

sdesireformoney

an youcanbe

sdesirefor

od.A ndthis

phenomenaof

lowtoanything

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



canconstruct

nts,orwith

neonearth

reliableinstru-

hewholeof

bbles,but not

alwaysfalling

llingtogether

might measure

not witha

esoffolk-lore,let

rationofstories,

u r ce . to r y

gistshavecut

nnedsideby

museumof

s,it isfasci-

ononeof the

hat astory

at sometimeor

t it never

nfaintlyindi-

blethat it

umberoffish-

theyhave

snot inthe

heranyoneever

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



urnalists

warmerelyfor

the otherupon

ha warever

ndredyears

rmanwarsthat did

scientificmind

w a r o f 70 w h ich

olk-lorestu-

willbe un-

lk-lorewillbe

terthanthey

n d o some th ing

gends;they

whichthe

useeverybody

stsofthestories

ausetheyare

nothing inthe

ppenedto

morethanthere

ngoccurred,as

bodyasan

havehappened

softheir

r ie s tha t a r e to ld

onthat theyhap-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



cdoteterminat-

l l . u c ha r e tor t

as la ne c e ss i ty w e

rand,to V ol-

anonymousjudge,

snot inany

thingwas

ythat it was

wn.It ishighly

lleyrand.In

ult tobelieve

dtoamanin

ngmemoirs.

he menI

hispoint of

kelytohave

hisis wherethe

ersfromthe

yreferred.

incident foundto

e o r s i he r oes ,

, to Rus te m, to the

arityofthis

asonableto

oonehero,

ginethat it

uc ha s to ry,

anhavinghis

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



hemysterious

dotalstory,

Ihavesaid,pop-

thiskindof

d D e li la h ,o f

ouslypopular

opularas

causeit tells

un o f a mson

e r c ule sbya

aryorigin,it is

soe plain,as

womanandthe

nd,indeed,I

mecenturies

willrefusealto-

hB arrett eloped

llprovetheir

ionablefact

d wasfullof

.

hedelusions

vebelief is

hingtheycall

vethat primi-

oagodin

ainthem,because

ouldnot reach

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



he istence.

ofa man,the

ausebythis

morereasonable

forallthis

wnalaneat

l discoververy

ingsemi-

ot because

causeit was

ethingsmore

madethema

ensibleand

n g d ow na la ne

act that as

course,she

lo n ga sa tr e e

terwitha

es,andonly

isa tr e e , i t

ginstobe

strange,only

en atree

esknockunder

rselookslike

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



edasdisobe-

r e at v ir tue € ”

dandadmired

hadonlyone

regnant

rsonthisand

amantohave

ereanarchy

y ofthat

sasitsidealmere

essaryto

elytoknowa

onknowsa

a grealdeal

rhehas,is not

thecontrast

anityandPagan-

as € ” a c o n tra s t

percalled

h ic ha ppea r e d in the

d o e s, I th ink , c on ta in a n

ordingtohim,the

d,amere

price,but was

ma nity sA c -

stianitywas

saythat I

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

amatterof

talkingfor

stianityofmy

ristianityun-

,likesomany

ngmycaseupon

Neitheram

dealists,basing

Christ forgot

ywithallits

wouldtake

nyothermi ed

ndIsay that

tobefound

ofdeparture

sm.Isaythat

odernworld

t. imeon

ationinasceti-

nimpulse

m,eveninthe

erclear.

erelationsof

hissosimple

ichisso

t it.The

ndPaganism

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



Mr.Lowes

ey were

n spe a ksa s if Pag a n ism

themorefitted

at thePagan

fman;but if

hmore

it wasthat

oodonearth

ayagain.It

towhichIpropose

dernworld

aganism;there

worldwhichin

Paganism:and

allythe

donisticneo-

n.A llthat

t hymnsorthe

hat hashonestly

Phoebusor

softhe Chris-

holdthe

sbacktothe

takeholdof

rorastring of

hingelseinthe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

in,even every-

an.The

ianorigin.The

Theanar-

sicalscience

konChris-

e isone

is te nc e a t the

seaccurately

dthat is

ganismand

dupinthe

ornatural,vir-

Christianity

virtuesofgrace.

esuchthings

hristianityhas

lvirtues

ed,but in-

ity.Now

rhetoriccould

threewords,

thetwofacts

hefirst evi-

hedelusionof

th e f ir st e v ide nt f a c t , I

chasjustice

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ues,andthat

,andcharity

r tue s .A nd the

nmoreevident,

arethereason-

anvirtuesof

ntheir essenceas

be isope n tomis-

emoreaccu-

eofthese

olvesaparado

not trueof

onalist virtues.

rtainthing

it tohim.

ut theproper

andadheringto

ingwhat is

all.H ope

opeless,orit

eansbelieving

all.

tonoticethe

hesethreepara-

o d e rnmind .

ourtime;it

ofDickens.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

-day;our at-

bythesudden

o n . Bu t f a i th isA

ryonevery

it isapara-

y r e pea ts the f amou s

thepowerof

obeuntrue.

do icalthan

owerofde-

eindefensible.

heerfulincircum-

perate.It is

whichbelongs

ng;but that

ueof hope

eclipse.It is

calledcharity,

vingpoor;but

arityat all,

whorequire

is t a t a l l , o r

r p r a ct ic alpu r pose s

werequire

ther doesnot

is t a t tha t mome n t.

hopeceasestobe

.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



erfectly

edthat going

mistake.It

nable,anddis-

tingand

ages,that

paganage

a g e, in th ise sse n -

vered.A nd

nseagain

rthan the

nthepagans,

bytheutmost

s thepagans.

ect cannot

hristianity;

that everyman

misleading.

irst that occursto

nessin the

st tributeto

is Tennyson s

n to the s tor yo f

urabledesireto

doesnot desire

o g e t h ome .H e

erablequalities

hbaulkhim;

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

adventure

anproduct.

rherownsake;

erythinginthat

een cleanand

odman;a bad

sr e ason the yha d

rent agnosticism

e sou l . o r th is

stheart of

acreationof

orthemapleas-

anunpleasant

eyhad noidea

tsinthinking

t isdangerous;

wecannot

beautifuland

saworldin

common.

ethree

ill now,I

yareallthree

practical,and

lbecausetheyare

ateneed,and

theyare,which

ndto diefor

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



eaningofthe

eonlykindof

is ahopethat

ybe themean-

act that the

eakspirit wants,

els,isthecharity

ikescarlet.

goffaith,it must

methingwe

webelieve

th er pe op le.

virtue,avirtue

llyconnected

trateeven

arado and

annot be

istoricalsymbol;

willnot ques-

undredsof

hasbeenthe

ntsofChris-

sofMr.

inctionbetween

n,ofcourse,

fcourse,most

asternhu-

umility)mi ed

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

uropeanChris-

t whenwe

kingofa

andyears.

n oftheother

ralproposition

overedChris-

reasonthat

€ ” tha t is , b e-

odiscoverit

yofPagan-

nity,canbe

cyinonephrase.

esense,to

hiscivilization

nnot enjoy

ythingelse.

dout inwords

herelucidation,

whoimagine

nlyina ma-

njoyedhimself,

njoyedhimself

tually.B ut it

g;ontheface

Now,the

ythis,that

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



at thefullest

dbye tending

t thefullest

dbyreducing

foreverre-

t ishumility,

estarsfrom

wrongofcasual

ythat themost

andstrong.

oryhaslaidon

wonders.If

eit wouldbe

meteors.Now

timewecallit,

phraseof

o mmonda y. We

ms.W eare

todemandablue

umilityisper-

rimaldarkness.

ngand instan-

t original

ght nore pec-

childlike

lismofthings.

d optimism, like

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

ning.But if

enseasmeaning

sgreat fact

ptimism.The

estheuniverse.

umbleman

he humble

e,the seais

allthefacesin

ethat menare

pleasurethat

ect ofthe

ologicalneces-

yinsistedon,

ut it isequally

t necessityas

amination.It

Jingopolitics

pisingother

hestrongest

Japan,which

gs,but havenot

ftheforeigner

A lmost every

eenthevictory

,onlyavery

t it isapro-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



t issuccessful.

in itsinternal

larrangements

ughChristian

nce(evendown

o e try ) , a nd tha t w h ich

ultimatelythe

heJapanese

Christianand

theyhave

a l te d.A ll th is

nnectedwith

gforastandard

gbeensuffi-

dealistic

,topoint

matterof

tionofthe

sof strong

ment that

a le t. ve r y

wardshiminthe

eant that the

ero-worship.

nerousandhuman

ut thewor-

t noman

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

ut anyman

ut intruthboth

sstrictureupon

rat issue.

isnot that no

imate

ionofChris-

ohimself.

wasastrong

hewasaweak

arlyle s

inhismost

hat menwere

urerand

theyareall

calledthe

alsobede-

qualityofmen.

merelythis,that

hingmoraldan-

en.A llmen

mencan be

octrinedoes

spatheticbelief

b e l ie f ) in the w ise

ve r ya ris -

hasbehaved,inall

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a sma llmob . v e r y

ninthe street € ”

not infallible.

old sh is to ryha ve

icalaffairsas

€ ” the o liga r c hy o f

ce.A ndthe

dsuddenly

avebeenthe

e Mosle mA r mie s , f o r in-

. A nda r e l ig ious

das anarmy

t toe alt but

nglishmen

escendantsof

safact,they

youaskedone

skedB unyan,

rdy,hewould

hewasasweak

he wouldhave

ofhumility,

winbattles,

noughtopuzzle

ueofcharity

uspersonwill

chcharity

n e c usab le .

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nson

illequallyagree

hiswholly

nwhohas

de which,

ot hurt thechar-

hreflect no

t doesa

ountry,and

roudofhis

oreharmto

becausein

orpride.It

roudofwhat

in te lle c t.A nd it d oe s

mselfforthe

€ ” goodne ss .Th e

lycreditable

whomChrist

rike.

insonand

l is,then,this;

ehumandis-

overiesasdefi-

ediscovery

ecannot

nd sa n ity. o r

sondoesnot

cktoanideal

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mankindhas

adtoenjoy-

traordinary

oconstantly

the ideaof

sobviously

nking. or

sticthinking,

ng,andgoes,in

fatherbefore

ythingofthe

aboveall

mptionofthe

LowesDickin-

ntheonlyreal

thesegreat

th e myste r yo f ch a r i ty, the

offaith.If

ghorthe

viveandpursue

rationalself-

” w he re Pa ga nism

allendin

llend,in

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



C el t op h il e s

n w o r ldha sma ny

pro-.

rorsof

a nia is

e a n . I t isona

ysadvanced

ersonisinthe

a punishment

fcourse,the

p o su re ismor e o f

r therich.

isforhim tobe

easierit is

allyrespected

epooreraman

illhavetouse

s to get a be d f o r Â £ .

r y f o r a r is tocr a ts ,

rs.Thisis a

ampleofthe

€ ” the p r o pos i t ion

rningenuity

ec e sf or the inde -

A sIhave

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



rallye hibit

ntheformof

ndofallthe

o-science,has

ndstupid,there

arinventionof

h e ng lishdis -

hat it ismaking

ent ofapoorer

ra moment in

otalkabout

canunderstand

n d the ng lish

are not Celts

e Te u tons . I

aldiscussion

entificcon-

he wholeto

weremainly

nic.B ut no

mmeringofa real

amofapplying

T e ut o ni c t o e it h er o f

nse.

peoplewho

o n r a c e, a nde te n d

a . H ow muc hof the

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a ons( w hoe v er th e y

e dB r i t ish ,Ro -

ndPicard

towildanti-

dilutedblood

ngwhirlpool

aa c t o f w e des ,

aliansisper-

i nteresting

wiserforthe

vecalledupon

s,howeverweak

ngconstant.

n a f lu f o r e ver ;

.

n g l ishgove r ning

rddeityofrace

at theyhad

most genuine

aveyawnedor

beguntotalk

f y ou ha da ttemp ted to

heidealof

othinkwhat

shouldnot

Nelsonwho

chbloodonthe

ketohave

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



gentlemanwho

a lBla ke byw hat

hewasirrevoc-

h ofthe

N a tiona l i tye -

dtodo with

achurchora

hehumansoul

A ndthere

howouldthink

hanadmit

product.

ontsthemodern

uct. ome-

ndence,like

b e e nbo r n in

Ireland. ome-

out ofmany

metimesit isa

argerthings,

erycaseits

youwill,purely

enfivemen

y o ne knowsit w ho

moment when

veryonemust

elaninvasion.

seriousintellect

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mons,summedup

esimplycalled

lldie.A she

Lo r d H ughCe c il ,

rd,woulddiefor

A nd tha t is the

ogicalchar-

wichshould

rwhileA thens

g w hya man

dnot with

ence,in-

mstances,orofrace,

relandis the

omeconquered^

edraces.The

omeIrish,the

dbecomeIrish,

a nd be c ome I r ish ,

wellhasgone

whichdid

beenstrongerthan

ntifically.The

st Norman

sionate cotch

veasanation

nizedandop-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



sisquitean

the truth.

dd b e c a use the yd o

bitantsof

wildbecause

n instrange

ot inthe

ot intheleast

ndpopularly

ply anordi-

e ofanyother

chhasnot

roppressed

corruptedwith

hingCeltic

yhuman.

e)Teutonic,

everit happens

hereisnothing

nglishloved

therpeople

owofthe

hechimney-

madand

smadand

hisawild

gs.Irelandhas

thescience

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



pretendtobe

hematterof

nation,it isa

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



in Mode r nW r ite r sa nd th e

onsidered,

an

dmit

d

shitherto,

sasthat ofLace-

e f f icie nc y, a n d ha s ,

atracebehind.

wasitsrevolu-

dsavage

didnot deny

hild.It

ngit runchild,

thefamily,

a n y th ingsa re ma d e

n.B ut some

emadeaserious

mpugnedit,

ndershavede-

ly.Thecom-

amidthe

peaceful,

isanother

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ssible,and

thefamilyis

dnot at one.

nowadays

mmunity.

forlarge empires

dvantage,how-

orthevillage,

overlook.

mmunitylives

nowsmuchmore

mpromisingdi-

obvious.In

eourcom-

urcompan-

l le te n s ive

oupscomeinto

t iscalledsympathy,

esharplythan

isnothing

ethingwhich

hemenofthe

llwearthe

edfromthesame

thedivine

e morecolours

noftheclique

hesamekind

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



renunciations.

ost degraded

h e lu u r iousa nc h or i te ,

ndulgenceof

e sso f t .

nowedup

eshouldstep

muchwilder

A ndit is

modernperson

chhelives.

neandgoesto

rncultureand

ventsmodern

oo.H egoes

arth.H epre-

ridesona

essentially

hhewasborn;

adywithhis

h e is f le eing f r om

lying.H eis

causeit isa

c i t ingbe c a use

nb e c ause i t isa l ive.

a use toh imthe Ve n e -

peopleinhisown

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mily

theChinese

a passivething

eoldladyin

me sa ct ive .H e is

toostimulating

o f f r e e men ,pe r ve r se ,

romhimself.

lowingand over-

d quiet himself

lsandcroco-

dverydifferent

put theirshape

iveintellectual

onot seek

rt theirown;

rbanstreet do

not contort

causeMr.

cultured

bit asneerbecause

vulture

useamandoes

llroarwith

smoke.The

makeofour

swe e press

edonot really

rownbusiness.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



theirownbusi-

yfor theirrent,

r neighbours.

saythat they

ssomething

kethembecause

that theycannot

edislikethem

eandfirethat

well.W hat we

hort,isnot the

theirsuperb

laversionsto

eralcharacter.

leness(asis

emisan-

ehumanityfor

act,theyhate

ebrutal

mmonmenisa

usablethingaslong

t ofsupe-

istocracyor

ebourgeoisie

usticeto be

themost par-

unpardonable

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



allthecareless

geasthestars,

rain.H eis

asts.That is

dscriptural

domwhenthey

rdshumanity,but

n e ighbou r .T he du ty

etheformof

revenpleasur-

t mayeven

k in the a s t

yfittedtowork

e w e thinkw e a r e;

ernational

offighting.

,themost re-

heresult ofchoice

so ma de a s to

rspecially

ovenegroes

an ocialists

t wehaveto

is the r e € ¢ â € ” a mu c h

hmoreserious

fhumanitywhich

causehemay

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mily

eisa symbol

nvironments

But thisis

fleeingfrom

.A ndthis

ng ofthesocial

yreasonable

rticularvariety

yareseeking

e,andnot for

roperthat a

kthesocietyof

antsisJapanese

ispeoplediffer-

tterstop at

ehousemaid.

agegenius

onifwhat he

ut ifhewants

ntallyandsym-

ong,hehad

nd havea

thesuburban

Ramsgatefor

a d if f icu l t th ing to

e sse s i t , he goes to

th e nhe w ou ldha ve

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



whollyconsisting

ishestothink

say,fora

rrowerlife

individual,

ngabout

osaythat

chtendsto

estrangedelu-

worldwhich

dthan their

uldtest his

monvarietyof

achimney

t onaswell

.A ndthat

did onthe

special

nticbecause

useit is

t.It isro-

isromantic

sy ou ha ve g r oups

vesomespecial

henyouhave

ythat youhave

beginsto

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



hhasits own

coulddo with-

ot made.

o thefamily

rativeought

elationswith

deepest

eventhan

u ld be p r ove d to

eprovedto

venifthe

ystrange.A nd

pectedand

sastheyfall

ng.Thecir-

ybecometame

mstancesover

maingod-liketo

ancallon

eoplewonder

arformof

isreadmore

metaphysics.

merelythat

are.Life

earasabook

appear,and

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mily

sabookof

sanovel.Our

ng;it maycease

ure istence

oreven a

e is te nc e iss t i l l

verysunset

n o u r ne t . I f

canfinisha

ction,andbecer-

.W iththe

dfinishany

ainthat wewere

hemost

hthesimplest

t wewere

eastoryhas

hichispartly

itsessence

sendhishero

st chapterbut

divinecaprice

the gallows

he chooses.

e c hiva lric u r o -

dfreewillinthe

thingcalled

W he nT homas

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



libertyof man,

hecirculating

beastoryor

t agreat part

dfor uswith-

e tobea

ut ifwewish

It may

amamaybe

welikevery

illlessifthe

veryhouror

roubleofin-

n h a scon tr olove r

ntrolover

f a n ove l .Bu t

ng,therewould

ldbenonovel.

so f the r ic ha r e a t

simplythat

yaredull

heyfailtofeel

ketheadven-

romantic

th e e is te nc e o f

chforceall

t likeordo

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



mily

upercilious

ongenialsur-

stobein

eborninto

ngenialsur-

romance.

frameworks

tryandvariety

finiteandim-

toodbythe

ncewoulde ist

eofwhat they

manmakes

andromantic

omthe

nticthing

allfromthe

ryshapeand

o limita t ions € ”

nooutlines;

noshapes.

nfinity.

ngastheuni-

holeuniverse

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



a rt N o ve l is t s an d t he m ar t

orevaluable

dliterature.

mindof

ytellus

oodnoveltellsus

dnoveltells

oesmuch

habout its

elsusthis all

moralbe the

moredis-

re honest it

n c er e novele -

ularman;an

mplicityofman-

ddefinable

undinscrolls

but men s

ngenergiesare

andhalfpenny

ymenof

rnfromgood

powertoappre-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ma r t e t

mbadliterature

esandlookover

ampleof

weakerlitera-

estrongerthe

ybecalled,

tedescription,

fyouprefer

nobbishness.

reallyeffective

nent casefor

ated,let him

alconserva-

mreadtheB ow

fNietzscheI

Nietzscheand

avebothobviously

r;theyboth

moustaches

dtheyboth

somewhat

nhere,however,

sphilosophical

butetothe

ocommonly

zinessandkind-

nevolence,anda

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



Nietzsche,

hestrongman

chonlye ists

er,ofthe

rmanphiloso-

theB ow

resent affairto

yinthepopu-

omevery

icalandphilo-

rateabout

habaronet is

untainchasm

lyleap,but it

neralidea and

ist inhuman

ristocracyis

the amily

me sd isto r tso r e a g -

oesnot fall

akingthe

etitle ofthe

v.B ut above

ofsnobbishness

therkindof

h,withitsmuch

worthyofvery

ifthat mat-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ma r t e t

B ut it is

y,immeasurably

surablyworse

dhumanityas

o o k sa s those o f

andiscover

ideaof

milyH e r a ld u p -

what theidea

who isnot

t weknow

t havecaught

asreadthe

ars.It isthat

he mart et

nguished,not

rt sayings.

baronet,to

baronet who

but isagood

onception

a r s € ” the c on-

hearistocrat

ortalmenand

soto bemore

theshort epi-

vedlyeminent,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ma r t e t

eninMr.H ope

cernabout the

yordinary

inayoungman

ouseofB lent

ngman is

mildcase,and

ent ofromance,

whichwarnsus

ooseriously.

innot making

ppedwithim-

insistingon

sthelast and

.It is,asI

ontemptible

lettewhich

nglikeanA pollo

ma ybe e a g -

,but beautyand

alsofaristocrats,

aynot be

onscientious

oblemen.But

thanareality;

lemanoffiction

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ma r t e t

ingof theration-

heirReason

nreasonissad.

alsonot

hiefofall,of

beingsenti-

allthemodern

e n tha n the te rr o r w h ich

retherobust and

omthemen

entimentalism,

TherehasA

roariousasthat

rthesentimentalist

Dickens.These

werethecrea-

struethat

literatureand

d.B ut the

getowriteso

of manwho

so wellinthe

ss,thesame

ntesquescaleof

onofComedy

scow.A nd

gidand feeble

heymake

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ma r t e t

e f rie ndsh ipa ndh ono u r

boveall,it is

entlyhumane,

rimarypitiesand

clear-headed

didnot mind

ohnsonwas

that ever

mindavowing

fdeath.

nglishin

in g s isone o f those

verheardofuntil

d e c lu sive lyb y

nJe w s .A t the be st ,

mtheDukeof

w a sa n I r ishma n.A t th e

onismwhich

asit doesabout

stalkingabout

c t , th e V ik ingsd id

least.They

otherlike

respect like

the childrenof

n g l ishna t iona l i ty

owith the

t io na l i tyor the I r ish

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



iv o li ty

agmiresbehind

the hillso

makingstraight

Thisisthedrama

everywoman

s i t. u r ther ,

dingit.H ehas

orstrangeden-

s,whoput us

oralanarchists.

athanklesswar

dProgress.

w h y, in the na me

we,whenwe

ssoftheissue

ousmethodsof

Why,whenthe

emenand

casionally,

” na y, to r eme mbe r

ldthedestinies

€ ” w hyshou ldw e

yofphrasesis

o f the A lha mb ra ,

alace,and

articles,have

erioussocial

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



iv o li ty

theclergymen

undamentally

lessjoke.The

dreallyfriv-

Mr.McCabe

ofguaranteeof

themereact

y,let him

n g the r oundo f the

ropinat

e H ouse o f L ords .

mit that thesemen

o le mn tha n I a m. A nd

dadmit that

” mor e f rivo lou s tha n

ebesoeloquent

ntasticand

h y shouldhe be so

bosewriters

sticand

th e r e ar e a g iga ntic

iters;andit is

erbosewriters

detests(and

matter)is

. H ow c a n it ha ve

ent asMr.

andjesting

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ythat isstopping

moderneffort.

ou sme thods ; i t is

u sn e ss ; i t ish is

w h ichs tops the

whohasever

knowsthis.

ena lettertothe

nwhowishes

ksabout

yCabinet minister

nlydevelops

we a ter w house sv ile

osme thods . I

hadnothing

ssthat Iam

nthemodern

rethat Iwas

nityis the

modernworld

eside,and

ther.The

eand glad

eanswerof

nyoneelse

shouldbegrave

maginethescene

ichMr.B ernard

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



iv o li ty

ais t d e puta t ion toMr .

chsidewouldbe

w h ic h the s inc e r i ty

erthat Mr.

ongwithmein

ivolity.H e

yswantedMr.

eriousor comic.

so f Mr . ha w

ious;but surely

aragraphof

a b el le dc omic .H e

wdiscussing,

onofdeliberately

rersdonot

a b o u r the

fthis,because

myremarks

u f f ice i t to sa yhe re

chIcanimagine

toanyother

hesecond

d a f i e da t te n-

t hedoesnot

a p a r ado ,bu t

true.It maynot

tionalismis

uethat when-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



iv o li ty

an c e s, a nd I r e ques t

vethat Imean

meanthis

hesis.The

mmediatelycon-

e al tome no t tobe

th e a c tua l te t

urse,agreat

ut it indetail.

at Mr.McCabe

dangerwhich

nceofreligion

he contrary,

teadecreasein

decreasein

odernWest-

anarchy.I

noughindi-

haveliberty.

cytosuppose

sthat it re-

urobjection

emotivepower.

destroysmere

great re-

ocatesapolit-

lliberty.That

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



iv o li ty

mensang

s;nowoneman

nthat hecan

ongoeson

yonemanwill

erthanthe

e ss thismor e

t the s ingle se n -

sasfollows:

b ra a nd the f ire w o rk s

sterton s

acesin life.

blea placeas

entioned.B ut

oflove,asMr.

theballetsof

so f the A lha mb ra

cularselected

ghanoperation

mmon-

o € ” in the

Middle A ges

€ ” th isha bit o f

heverybody,

dtoaprofes-

ncewithout

ncewithout

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



W it o f W h is tl er

p a ble a nd ingen io usw ri te r ,

in clude d in

ished,

o n don

moralityshould

criticism,and

gument that

hesameinall

eryperiodand

odefyhis critics

rmanent feature

yavery

tr a vaga n t b ia sa g a ins t

ltra-modern

lasany astern

ycommon

mtosaythat

ntirelydifferent

dlikeagreat

tellectualism,

fthetwo

whydoyou

a s if a ma n

esaretotally

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



omehavenone,

thers,some

mearegreen,

point which

rdinarymanof

at makesyoucall

o u me a nbya

w a c a me lw he nyo u

ee isa pe r mane n t

sthereis a

aythat isonly

ndthat art

d,nodoubt,

veryschool;

seetheenduring

practicallysome

verlivedcould

in thestarry

ise qua lly tr ue

pofartists

giantsofthe

but barbarism

gthemodern

araded.A nd

orality;it is

morality.It is

nitemoral

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ife,pagan,

aesthete,wish-

eautymore

nddrinks

snot onlyhis

sohisfavourite

edus to

yonly,heought

hooltreats,

roftheW es-

dnothingbut

nsbyold-fash-

erethelackof

ldprovethat

pictorial,as it

writes heclings

andhisown

rt pourPart

hismoralizing.

fPart pourPart,

Ruskinforhis

tweenart

fitssuccess

ee ss lymi e dup

sofits greatest

radictionthe

Nomanever

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



maddenedbythe

istonguebe-

stifiesagainst

w if t , inwhom

nessto others,

self. ucha

didnot laugh

lais.B ut

wasunhappy,

hat inwhich

periortohis

whichsupe-

ngthesinnerand

esatirisesboth.

oundina thing

a p o em i n w hi c h th e

heweaknesses

ygenius.Con-

pointingout

epointsout his

ighest and

That isnot

n o t f u l lo f a

etohuman

ogetherdoneto

y,becausehe

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



A ndthecase

wassometimes

ethought so

avital knowl-

ught tohave

nybodywho

great deal

manthing,

prayers;but the

ut very

rtainthat the

nandakindof

easethat

whicharises

owerofe -

e element of

toeverysane

isessential

e art within

ge andwhole-

easily,asthey

B ut inartists

pressure,and

scalledthe

rygreat artists

€ ” me n lik e h a k e-

remanyrealtrag-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



allungdevel-

bright and

rningstar,that

posalinthat

Inaword,we

aryman,since

ceptionallawyer.

n a r tis t .A s

d o u t inone o f h is

sincerecritiques,

histlerashisgreatest

ngle eye-

” theseweremuch

esorarrange-

ecouldthrow

eriousreason

eneverthrew

nateaccumu-

eburdenof the

sthereal

h h a spuz z le dso

emofthee -

ourofso many

ehaviourwas

ded;henceit

ysterious.

n w r o te ha k espe ar e .

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nt cannot under-

suchlyrics

d b e aske e na s

transactionsina

Thee planation

kespearehada

lyric,and so

bout hisbusi-

prevent himfrom

thanbeing

rat dinner

inaryman.

adershavehad

t ofviewtobe

l,onewhich

ssingman.If

hisfellowsthe

heequalityof

nce,inthat

withwhich

wdthat hap-

W ha t ma no f

losing one,

nein the

ichwaslost? "

ou if h issona sk fo r

rif heaskfor

n t? " T h isp lain -

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



derie,isthenote

which

moreimportant

ffer,that the

disappear.

nancient

sthe difference

were both

subtlyvaried

thto die.

withother

h e sec ond- r a te g re a t

me n , l ike W hitma n .

periortoother

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



dshinycards,

modern

eryoldand

isperforming

odernman

e cept byen-

caseofthese

anat least say

hat thesym-

symbolswhich

y.Themost

anceremonials

dnot insti-

odyelsewould

nyonewitha

theordinary

something

bolizedother-

humaninstinct,

nnot veryeasily

whitetiesinthe

sebut ritual.

tetiesinthe

l.Nobody

yhumanin-

rytendto

a whitenecktie.

nct would,I

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

ingbycravats

unset,not white

e ck ties € ” ne c k-

arkenedgold.

mp le , isunder the im-

t.But thedaily

at ofanyordinary

ct,onecon-

eofmystical

eoneinstance

maginethat

lady;andwhat

consideredin

ee istenceof

p o r tiono f your

T h is , I

itivesymbol,like

st aswellhaveto

ndif aman,by

on,hadtotakeoff

valrousand

waistcoat toa

hosewhoagree

cerelythink,

ndceremonial

orld.B ut no-

muchincense

ofthis world.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



t areeither

sts.Thecon-

isfiedwitha few

s;theuncon-

withanything

,beingalmost

calledarit-

membersone

itualist because

A ndasome-

ichI have

ngth,between

consciousrit-

sciousidealist and

etoinveigh

€ ” the r e ar e no

veryman

ensthat he

man is inc u ra b ly

t issooftena

forinstance,

ialfigure,and

rmoney,we

ession,andwe

ouldnot do

dosomethings

ulformoney,

umorouslysaid,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



rant that it may

for something

int out that,in

dealofall is

ctical.It is

nsequently,it

ourselvesthat

sytoattaina

erstillto per-

ainedit when

Totakea

alledahigh

ngel;theman

ouldverypos-

enfrenzy,but not,

t thinkhewas

pinghishands

erewings.

da lowideal;

eman.Any one

innineweeks

lfthat hewasa

estlynot the

andpractical

ciallife.It is

hepractical

tratedby

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



r d. I n sho r t , the

that aman

kingassertions

A pparently,a

gasit isa

velymost ofus

enthe con-

muchrather

emanwho

gentlemanwho

Tobecontinu-

andpractical

ngofthings

ssofcompletion

r o ve a ma n tobe p r a c -

mongthemost

ourmodern

hingagainst

in g a nge ls ina

naturalist to

ng sn a kes inde l ir iu m

uralist.

o e a mine the

npractical

instock

great many

ct.W emight

that strangeclass

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

rd union,

it.Ofcourse,

itselfthan

lf.Tohavea

artyinfavour

haveapartyin

artyinfavour

nisnot

s,but where

egoingfor

weakness.It

rsesto acart;

ndturntwo

ler.Turning "

appento be

gsintoone

ppentobeas

ersinto one

is not a

nion,but of

wingtocer-

twonations

oletohelp

d c o tla ndpa ss

compliments;

resrundistinct

onot clash.

atedandCalvin-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



uneducatedand

ermoraland

onationsmay

achother;

unparallel.

ndIrelandare

timesrule

eland.Theedu-

st ducation

o f c o tland , a v e r y

whelming

strict Catholi-

yof nglishmen

TheIrish

isjust large

heducationbeing

mallenough

ingdefinitely

ofthings which

rdreamof

t beenbewitched

eword union.

ver,isnot the

tak e o f the in -

derlyingallthe

icalpolitician.

otherandmuch

destheminds

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

menof all

rbuilt upon

totheuniversal

sandnew

young,about

wholethingis

ot young,New

discussable

othmucholder

horof youth

,ifweuse it

origin.B ut

mplyingvigour,

perience,orhope,

yoftheromantic

relyasclearas

stalefigureof

matterclearly

utionparallel

dent nationality.

n d oda L e ague

y,asIhaveno

TheMilkand

clu b in the se nse tha t

othersense.

ndoldgentle-

W emay

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

onclusionthat

wesitsorigin

e fe r a ndmuch le ss

nglanditself.

egoingtheway

th e A ng lo - a o n

s.Now,of

s,havewe,in

olonies,anyreal

ualyouthas

lityofa merely

uslyoruncon-

nosuchevi-

nsciously,there-

Ofthispure

ample,forin

t poemofMr.

kin g o f the ng lish

c a n Wa r ,Mr .K ipl in g

oungernations

ride. ome

insulting.A ll

ent isthe

colonies

roops,but they

orachieve

Thebest work

e w a sdone , a s

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ythebest nglish

hoot andride

erchantsfrom

weretheen-

e.Themen

hemenwho

in thedis-

agreat uro-

nialsareas

veragewhite

tedthemselves

vehere to

softhistheory

ytomaintain

oreusefulor

Colensoorthe

h isc onte n t ion the r e

tickorstraw

dwithevenless

ureofthecolonies

andimportant.

onstantlyspring-

Q ueenslandor

pectedto

heprairie.

whoisevenslightly

nd I,forone,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

terestedin

mit that the

nothingbut

irst-ratequality.

maginationthe

dsintotheseworks

forceandthe

rs;theforce

nt heart ofthe

iesthemimpar-

ewritersof

ularlynovelin

ot onlynot

rature,but are

producinga

rst-rate

eally almost

writersoftheold

themystery

the bush,for

isin Mel-

h t .Pa ncr a s .Bu t

ndmost suc-

undofthe

ckground,

ownromantic

llymovestheir

themysteryof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ofaH ansom

c e p tions to th is

rrestinge -

nd sh e isqu ite a s

ovestherule.

illiant,andrealistic

elybecause

rtribalkinshipis

MaartenMaar-

c ou n tr yo f r ea l is ts.H e r

misticfictionof

whosevery

r is the one ng lish

l,forthesimple

th e one ng lish

ndprobablynever

reindividual

r eme mbe r inpa r -

byMr.Mcllwain

ctive,andwhich,

t presentedto

et.B ut my

eanyonewith

utedifit is

thecolonial

us,orshows

rewhichwill

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

It maybea

naffectionate

eanother

ven ngland

eyhavenot

es,Idonot

not sayof

havenot afuture,

ons.Imerely

erne pression

destined

de s t ine d

ourse)that

eanything.

hors,suchas

re,when ap

entificattempts

bertyof their

ed,awarningto

al.America,

nthing,canin

chasit chooses.

matterwhich

considerisnot

ginning,but

isonlya

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



on

hiswayof

s,A mericadoes

icularlyfresh

thallthe weak-

n g la ndo r o f

erpoliticsshe

n g la ndha sb r oke n

smandinsin-

henational

blanceto ng-

elancholy.

cythat there

rongpeople.

ghts small

power,andfights

ower,and

sthat theyare

ethe ashesof

fterthat,the

smallpow er i tse lf.

mp to mof dec a denc e

ransvaal;but

sin the w a r w ith

d mor e sha r p lya nd

ironiccontrast

eofastrongline

weakenemy.

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



lateRomanor

nt oftheCara-

nobody.

test ofnation-

hecaseis

olonieshave

t fact may

nt possibilities

ricahasproduced

st certainly

utilityandthe

eA mericanmen

ggodsmaking

histlerabrave,

g DoesMr.

spirit ofa

havenot spoken,

maybe the

ofA mericahas

sunmistakable

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



No v el i st s a nd t h e l u ms

rtime

rine

-

ot,

nism,very

rycloselyprac-

e,particu-

gyourbutler

it isnot

heblowor

essionof

utlerbody

nghimthe

othingun-

esomething

great dealfrom

akindof

short ofthe

really un-

ot toe pect the

Thething

dunfraternal

manitarians

keallowancesfor

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



l th ingsc ons ide r e d,

unduee aggera-

candunfra-

ticeofnot

ctionofthe

ywiththeserious

ement will

riousness.

it isnot even

cracyisnot

nman;democ-

rthecommon

rofhim.It

emanisso

sublime.It

dinaryman

aking,forits

first Roman

emost demo-

editarydespot-

hthereis

anynonsense

forthepost.

th a t is , se le ct ive d espo t-

se tomank ind ,be c ause

manmisunder-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



u ms

prigwhohas no

But irrational

becauseit is

eworst form

Caesarism,or

ant manas

orthat means

,not because

ehedoesnot.

GeorgeIII.

yarethemselves

m.Mentrust

ust themselves.

ausetheydonot

heworshipof

esofweakness

fgreat men

naresmall.

inessenceand

hoosesfrom

declarethat

hene t most

t anymanmay

yisafarworseand

henumbers

ymakeit some-

anaristocracy

b er sw il lp r e-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ey,at anyrate,

ywithinthe

istocracyby

will rulethe

racy.Thusa

dmillionsof

elyfortheir

entlemennor

bya manlike

am,becauseheis

elyclever,and

yagentleman.

racymaye hibit,

otime someof

whichbelongs

musingto

genuityhasbeen

ouseofLords

ndeavouringto

consistedof

ooddefence

admirersofthe

usingit;and

s,inits fulland

dmen.It

nceofthat

oint out that

s,whoowedtheir

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



u ms

last resort to

nthe Lords,

nt.Ofcourse,

sucha conten-

ouseofLords

ofLords,but a

ciers,orthat the

ydonot vote,

prigsandthe

menwith

nstheH ouseof

vantages,isin

enall thepeers

Mr.Gladstone s

nstance,thosewho

he nglish

llthosedearold

ers wereat

tion,thepre-

oldmenwho

middle-class

didreallyrep-

€ ” tha t is to sa y, i t

cited,almost

g.Ofcourse,

ne pression

zardhereditary

avinganykind

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



emocracy.B ut

garchy,let it

east weshall

quired for

yisnot merely

hedemocratic

motion.The

mentaryand

fficult tode-

culiarlydifficult

dage,forthe

ydifficult to

ttitudewhich

nagreetobe

llthethings

erebrains)tobe

Thenearest

would bethe

ldconsider

nceofshock

somewhat

isadeadman

n o t b e l ike ly to

f c on s ider a b le

fa. We

f a l len in to the

A h igh lye du-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



harethesinsof

ythat thesins

edaresinsat

ut thesinof

t isquiteobvious

herich.B ut

reisanysuch

eit wouldbe

morethan

ytomakea

manwhogoes

lyadvicetothe

aideaofa saint

different.The

nuneducated

estogive a

d.Theold

despoilthe

olenceto

manwho

heslumsthat

d just aswe

orals,sowe

titudeinsuch

eofourprac-

ofthat we

cstatethat we

shalldowith

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



flictionofbad

es;theevilof

ythinginthe

analways

.W hether

tion,goodor

ous.Thecase

odern ngland

h;ifyoulike,

archstoofantas-

st themsimply

men,they

ourreligion,

r a ise the p oor .

overnment,asis

ogovernthem

emocraticin

etorrent of

sstudiesof the

hersevery

d er n the book

voidofdemo-

not got much

ndunneces-

fa great

it seemsvery

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ds.It isper-

stersifwewish

makeanybody-

ut it isnot

gardingthem-

hemselves

tionisquite

isnot defensible

nthewayof

, andthe

middleclasses

thosewhoare

sses.H ence,

finedman

helifeasthe

writestories

emasspeaking

enunciation.

bout youorme

ngwithsome

suchasweonly

act farce.The

ect bythefact

reader;but

secannot be

angetothe

udy.Theslum

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



u ms

cribingthesame

actoryandthe

issupposed

actlythesame

andthetavern

anbetweena

erat Pagani s.

hpointingout

r c lassa p ic ka e

ksdirty.B ut

dyingseesthe

ctlyasaclerksees

andanedition

the l if e is ine vi-

sand the

thehighlights

greyinthat

Thekind

ressthepleasures

ndofman

hesebooks

gyofpoverty.

ologyofwealth

act with

ionofthe

yaverydark

ateof the

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



amplesofthe

npopularquality

perhapsthesim-

plewithwhichwe

hat thesewriters

yothervices,

stic.Thepoor

ingrain;the

latitudesand

hisisthe ultimate

B le sseda r e the

or , f o r the yar e

akelife like

ocent educational-

philanthropists

ssedagraveaston-

illingshockers

amastoprob-

mple.The

rtisticthanthe

desireisdeft

unityofartistic

asafull advan-

rythingthat

altherealistic

themelodrama.

asoneindispu-

cstory.The

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



u ms

e.It ismuch

epoorman.

ticwhena

y s , D oyou

" Bu t poo r

h Roa ddosa y,

o w n c h ild "

casion;youcan

ofit allthe

taleandweak

heworkman

I ma ma n .

m a m an t w oo r

istedious,

melodramatic

ecauseone

odramaticin

drama,ifit

curate. ome-

s in the ca se o f

ip lin g s ta lk y

sn g ( if youar e

helateDean

Li t tl e b y Li t tl e . B u t

y mo re l ike r e alsc hool-

boyhood,isfull

s f u l l € ” p r iggish -

weakbut

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



naword,

layafirmbasis

wemust not

omtheoutside.

atic,andseethem

t not take

ma ne pe r t .

nintheA delphi

thechest and

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



n g Re ma r kson the I mpor -

orywhichis

ated.B ut if

ment,that there

thefuture,

ovement of

remainsa

against the

ment.The

talprogress

cernedwith

ngofbounda-

B ut ifthere

h,it must mean

finite convic-

s.The

omingtocon-

lusionsit is

toocleverto

hinghaving

m i nd c an

o

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



dictioninterms.

wastoogoodto

hat wastoostrong

rdlybede-

e,asan animal

rsandmany

ense that they

definedas

shepiles

siononcon-

remendous

on,heis,in the

ee pression

morehuman.

teranotherin a

linestotiehim-

at hehas

aysthat he

sownimagi-

oformofcreed

bythat very

dsintothe

lsandthe

eeshaveno

broad-minded<*

mentalad-

einthecon-

yoflife.A nd

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ght andthe

ofall,or

rswhomI

k,thisisespe-

heydoeachof

irmativeview,

yandaskus

ingmerely

Rudyard

least broad-

h a w.T he pa -

ismoregrave

eopportunism

d o g matic tha n the

mebodycom-

rnoldthat he

le.H ereplied,

verlookanob-

andright,

ng. The

ht not to

riousnessand

writeat all,

ethinksthat

inerror.In

gmaticand

maticandwrong.

,istonoticethat

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



havediscussed

yofferthem-

sofa system.

Mr. ha w most

Mr. hawis

t thething

ing toh imself , is th e

Mr . ha w may

but it isnot

vast and

heonly

omI have

namesIhave

ic,ifonly

efiercest dog-

s.^ Inthefin

ascryingout

omallcauses

stoproduceonly

t wasespecially

dbrilliant plays

dwhentheygot

leofmoralists.

enbyaman

ebest plays

p r e a ch oc ial-

lookedtiny

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



suchasthese

t beinsulted

anhasany

eworkof Mr.

w e lle n joy the

r e nch .Mr .

eorto enrageus.

Kiplingite

nImperialist

us,it should

him.Ifaman

yhisconvic-

l ing sf r om

forthesame

dislike him

islikinghim

ns.If aman

hit ispermissible

toapplaud

danartist is

dwiththe

sanythingto

dernwriters

herbeover-

ereis nospace

m,which,in-

consist chiefly

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



overallthese

warsbytalking

ysayingthat the

pect ofthe

W atsonanother;

w o ne aspe ct o f the

hamGrahame

W ellsoneaspect,

more(say)

t thisseems

evenhadthe

lyin words.

ganaspect of

oknowwhat

hindlegof a

dog.Unfor-

ksabout as-

ks , W ha t is

n h e de nie s the e is t-

eivablebythe

n,canherecog-

o ik e tobe a n

ralsketchtoa

uth aspect of

V ie w Cotta ge , o f co u r se,

n ot e v e n like ve r y

ersuchcircum-

gemight e ist,but

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ind.Nor

bunglingand

essedtobeable

atruth that is

yobvious

hat thereare

u t the de g re e to

pendsstrictly

econception

dicrousto

wearethemore

learthat the

dis,themorewe

reeordis-

hat weshould

ganabstract

arecurrent in

bjectionsto

eelthat we

ehavedealt

ectionis

ytouching

nsisasort ofnotion

ciallyuponcosmic

nthepast for

B ut avery

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



encewilldissipate

whoaremost

no convictions

chester

c ial ismtake oc ial-

in B ond

hat socialism

reeswithit,

ialist fellows

Theman

ilosophy

erstandthe

sagreewith

not at all

certainthat

pponent of

n theact

nfamies,

saints.It

whoknowsno

whois, never-

t allthesepriests

t theMarble

isnot toobigoted

kinshipafter

ut thedandy

hat hedoesnot

lvationist at the

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



beroughlydefined

oopinions.It

teideas bythat

sareindefinite

c al le d the a ppa ll ing

enzyof thein-

ng;it hasmadeall

gpersecutions.

plewhocared

whocaredwere

sthepeople

worldwith

handsofthe

wasthehands

rack.There

ut ofthepainof

produced,not

a ve r yd iff e r en t a nd

igotryinthe

dingomnipo-

rushingout

lood.

odigsome-

ossibleevilsof

ngphilo-

snot (asthey

ndfundamen-

wecallbigotry,

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ation,e aggera-

hwemayagree

ef,that

litics,for

dagainst aman

manlikeMr.

asis danger-

oint,again,

te.Ideasare

mtheyareleast

H eisacquainted

mlikea lion-

themanto^

the manof

willfindthe

etothe head

error,Ithink,

yownparty

iersandbusi-

pirebecause

listic.The

ssmenare a

ycanbe senti-

dealistic

eyfindlying

nownmuch

keawomanfor

n,unaccus-

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



nedtothink

idealit is

r e a mp le ,

sbecausehehad

efollowed

anwithout some

te asmuchof

Peoplesay

rishwhispers,

w h ich ise a c t ly l ik e

p e r s, H e b lo w s

u r e s imp lyc anno t

fsomekind;

nt trulysaid,

pleperisheth.

dealis necessary

alsisinper-

hereisnothing

opentothe

an unbalanced

sshabits.A ll

whothink

Krugerwasat

potism,orthat

Baconwrote

hilosophicalbe-

sfire, and

beautyof

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ayof really

cessivedanger

dinphilosophy

oopposite

m,bigotrywhich

ticismwhich

saythat the

ythat thecure

wthebest

hoosethebest

ourownstrong

perwayto be

ethingmore

iblethana

nion.B ut

viewbegin

hought,and

elevant,as

in ourdays

n if w e think r e -

it irrelevant.

view oftheulti-

hereversuch

t e mor e impor ta n t

nstant that

wable,it

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



hat theidea

e r e issome thing

anabout attack-

gin g f r omit in

ecanbe

ccusationof

squelynarrow.

mparativelycurrent

uncommon

recrowof

sehedistrusted

eof theJapa-

nesewere

t therewas

about distrust-

ferencebetween

calmachinery.

sayof a

ncebecausethey

wouldthinkit

rrisebecausethey

rIndividualists,or

dconscrip-

onabout thenature

h;but adiffer-

ofsin doesnot

pinionabout

verymuch;but

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



object of

a t te r a t a l l .W e

oisin a

ut wehaveno

adifferent

htenment is

nedthat it is

e phrase

tantamount to

nt withthe,

lg io n ise a c t ly

t € ” because

bsent-minded

stone-bagand

eneralviewof

ornot;it alters,

reatesand

,whetherwe

osmosasa

Q ue s t iona sa

as ajoke,

h ed r a la sa joke . I f

believe(ifit

everythingbe

fantasticcon-

pyisgood.

holdametaphys-

heutmost

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ldit sofirmly

allabout its

ossible;in

lemodern

dwith men

theydonot

It maybe

d,asacorporate

onglythat it

mas.It may

instance,insome

oassumethe

aninanother

dogmatic to

ement ofman

fprogressis

immortality,

fviewquiteas

obeoneof

a thingwhich

n,wesee

in spir ing,bu t c e r -

ysicalscience,

hesakeoffacts,

sas sticksand

stiveidea,

proving

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



ract,quiteas

allingon

ichisalsosaid

arenot ina

nglyinoraclesor

nzyof thosewho

lchreofChrist.

hdoesbelievein

ke,wedo not see

themselvesto

eakingofa

ueboth of

p lo r at ions. I

superficialand

gquality,about

inent witharmies

n died.B ut

ularityand

agoniesto

n l iv e € ” a p la ce

pposedtobe

hat donot

neyand

s,at least,

eredourown

holdarefar

rmorebeautiful

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



heseessays

imetotime

ndthat ina

ofthat kindliness

everything,

erationalists

s.Thereare

airy-tales,and

mptuousliterary

oftheladyclothed

o r e r us t ic , elv ish

vemerelyin

me h o ld the un -

istenceofGod;

ledogmaofthe

do o r .

einstant that

nwhoutters

dthescepticism

oythebeliefs,

mtheirlimits

e.We whoare

ghtlyasa

d,andwe

whobelievein

smtobereason-

ut it.Now

ndknowit to

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



sneverknew

nsewhich

nti-Christian

eat march

verything

wllb e c ome a

todeny the

eligiousdogma

sisthat we

sticalsanity

ir e sw illbe

omakefour.

that leavesare

eft defending,

ndsanitiesof

ncrediblestill,

hichstaresus

visibleprodigies

halllookonthe

tha strange

whohaveseen

m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e



m

m

@

m

m

M

m


G o o g l e - d


o o g l e

GK Chesterton - Heretics

Documents

Transcript of GK Chesterton - Heretics