In this remarkable situation it is plainly not now possible (with any
hope of a universal appeal) to start, as our father did, with the fact of sin. This very fact which was to them (and is to me) as plain as a
pikestaff, is the very fact that has been specially diluted or denied. But though moderns deny the existence of sin, I do not think that they have
yet denied the existence of a lunatic asylum. We all agree still that there is a collapse of the intellect as unmistakable as a falling house.
Men deny hell, but not, as yet, Hanwell. [Hanwell was a lunatic asylum.] For the purpose of our primary argument the one may very well stand where the other stood. I mean that as
all thoughts and theories were once judged by whether they tended to make a man lose his soul, so for our present purpose all modern thoughts and
theories may be judged by whether they tend to make a man lose his wits. It is true that some speak lightly and loosely of insanity as in itself
attractive. But a moment’s thought will show that if disease is beautiful, it is generally some one else’s disease. A blind man may be picturesque;
but it requires two eyes to see the picture. And similarly even the wildest poetry of insanity can only be enjoyed by the sane. To the insane
man his insanity is quite prosaic, because it is quite true. A man who thinks himself a chicken is to himself as ordinary as a chicken. A man who
thinks he is a bit of glass is to himself as dull as a bit of glass. It is the homogeneity of his mind which makes him dull, and which makes him mad.
It is only because we see the irony of his idea that we think him even amusing; it is only because he does not see the irony of his idea that he
is put in Hanwell at all. In short, oddities only strike ordinary people. Oddities do not strike odd people. This is why ordinary people have a much
more exciting time; while odd people are always complaining of the dullness of life. This is also why the new novels die so quickly, and why
the old fairy tales endure for ever. The old fairy tale makes the hero a normal human boy; it is his adventures that are startling; they startle
him because he is normal. But in the modern psychological novel the hero is abnormal; the center is not central. Hence the fiercest adventures fail
to affect him adequately, and the book is monotonous. You can make a story out of a hero among dragons; but not out of a dragon among dragons. The
fairy tale discusses what a sane man will do in a mad world. The sober realistic novel of today discusses what an essential lunatic will do in a
dull world.
Orthodoxy, first published in 1908, by G. K. Chesterton, is in the public domain, and available from Project Gutenberg. The previous post in this series is here.
Thanks for reading! Read Chesterton.
Musings on science, the Bible, and fantastic literature (and sometimes basketball and other stuff).
God speaks to us through the Bible and the findings of science, and we should listen to both types of revelation.
The title is from Psalm 84:11.
The Wikipedia is usually a pretty good reference. I mostly use the World English Bible (WEB), because it is public domain. I am grateful.
License
I have written an e-book, Does the Bible Really Say That?, which is free to anyone. To download that book, in several formats, go here.
The posts in this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You can copy and use this material, as long as you aren't making money from it. If you give me credit, thanks. If not, OK.
The posts in this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You can copy and use this material, as long as you aren't making money from it. If you give me credit, thanks. If not, OK.
Sunday, January 11, 2015
Excerpts from Orthodoxy, by Gilbert K. Chesteron, 4
Labels:
Chesterton,
G. K. Chesterton,
insanity,
lunacy,
Orthodoxy,
sin
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment