Charles Dickens: A critical studyChesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
General
Charles Dickens: A critical study
Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
Dickens, Charles, 1812-1870
This boy who dropped down groaning at his work, who was hungry four or
five times a week, whose best feelings and worst feelings were alike
flayed alive, was the man on whom two generations of comfortable
critics have visited the complaint that his view of life was too rosy
to be anything but unreal. Afterwards, and in its proper place, I
shall speak of what is called the optimism of Dickens, and of whether
it was really too cheerful or too smooth. But this boyhood of his may
be recorded now as a mere fact. If he was too happy, this was where
he learnt it. If his school of thought was a vulgar optimism, this is
where he went to school. If he learnt to whitewash the universe, it was
in a blacking factory that he learnt it.
As a fact, there is no shred of evidence to show that those who have
had sad experiences tend to have a sad philosophy. There are numberless
points upon which Dickens is spiritually at one with the poor, that is,
with the great mass of mankind. But there is no point in which he is
more perfectly at one with them than in showing that there is no kind
of connection between a man being unhappy and a man being pessimistic.
Sorrow and pessimism are indeed, in a sense, opposite things, since
sorrow is founded on the value of something, and pessimism upon the
value of nothing. And in practice we find that those poets or political
leaders who come from the people, and whose experiences have really
been searching and cruel, are the most sanguine people in the world.
These men out of the old agony are always optimists; they are sometimes
offensive optimists. A man like Robert Burns, whose father (like
Dickens’s father) goes bankrupt, whose whole life is a struggle against
miserable external powers and internal weaknesses yet more miserable--a
man whose life begins grey and ends black--Burns does not merely sing
about the goodness of life, he positively rants and cants about it.
Rousseau, whom all his friends and acquaintances treated almost as
badly as he treated them--Rousseau does not grow merely eloquent, he
grows gushing and sentimental, about the inherent goodness of human
nature. Charles Dickens, who was most miserable at the receptive age
when most people are most happy, is afterwards happy when all men
weep. Circumstances break men’s bones; it has never been shown that
they break men’s optimism. These great popular leaders do all kinds of
desperate things under the immediate scourge of tragedy. They become
drunkards; they become demagogues; they become morpho-maniacs. They
never become pessimists. Most unquestionably there are ragged and
unhappy men whom we could easily understand being pessimists. But as a
matter of fact they are not pessimists. Most unquestionably there are
whole dim hordes of humanity whom we should promptly pardon if they
cursed God. But they don’t. The pessimists are aristocrats like Byron;
the men who curse God are aristocrats like Swinburne. But when those
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account