Charles Dickens: A critical studyChesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
General
Charles Dickens: A critical study
Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
Dickens, Charles, 1812-1870
His letters exhibit even more the same incessant creative force. His
letters are as creative as any of his literary creations. His shortest
postcard is often as good as his ablest novel; each one of them is
spontaneous; each one of them is different. He varies even the form and
shape of the letter as far as possible; now it is in absurd French!
now it is from one of his characters; now it is an advertisement for
himself as a stray dog. All of them are very funny; they are not only
very funny, but they are quite as funny as his finished and published
work. This is the ultimately amazing thing about Dickens; the amount
there is of him. He wrote, at the very least, sixteen thick important
books packed full of original creation. And if you had burnt them all
he could have written sixteen more, as a man writes idle letters to his
friend.
In connection with this exuberant part of his nature there is another
thing to be noted, if we are to make a personal picture of him. Many
modern people, chiefly women, have been heard to object to the Bacchic
element in the books of Dickens, that celebration of social drinking as
a supreme symbol of social living, which those books share with almost
all the great literature of mankind, including the New Testament.
Undoubtedly there is an abnormal amount of drinking in a page of
Dickens, as there is an abnormal amount of fighting, say, in a page of
Dumas. If you reckon up the beers and brandies of Mr. Bob Sawyer, with
the care of an arithmetician and the deductions of a pathologist, they
rise alarmingly, like a rising tide at sea. Dickens did defend drink
clamorously, praised it with passion, and described whole orgies of
it with enormous gusto. Yet it is wonderfully typical of his prompt
and impatient nature that he himself drank comparatively little. He
was the type of man who could be so eager in praising the cup that
he left the cup untasted. It was a part of his active and feverish
temperament that he did not drink wine very much. But it was a part
of his humane philosophy, of his religion, that he did drink wine. To
healthy European philosophy, wine is a symbol; to European religion
it is a sacrament. Dickens approved it because it was a great human
institution, one of the rites of civilization, and this it certainly
is. The teetotaller who stands outside it may have perfectly clear
ethical reasons of his own, as a man may have who stands outside
education or nationality, who refuses to go to an University or to
serve in an Army. But he is neglecting one of the great social things
that man has added to nature. The teetotaller has chosen a most
unfortunate phrase for the drunkard when he says that the drunkard is
making a beast of himself. The man who drinks ordinarily makes nothing
but an ordinary man of himself. The man who drinks excessively makes
a devil of himself. But nothing connected with a human and artistic
thing like wine can bring one nearer to the brute life of nature. The
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account