Fancies Versus FadsChesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
General
Fancies Versus Fads
Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
English essays -- 20th century
We have thus before us, in a very true and typical modern picture, the
two essential parts of modern culture. It consists first of false
history and second of fancy history. What the American tourist believed
about Plymouth Rock was untrue; what she believed about Stonehenge was
only unfounded. The popular story of Primitive Man cannot be proved. The
popular story of Puritanism can be disproved. I can fully sympathize
with Mr. Wells and his heroine in feeling the imaginative stimulus of
mysteries like Stonehenge; but the imagination springs from the mystery;
that is, the imagination springs from the ignorance. It is the very
greatness of Stonehenge that there is very little of it left. It is its
chief feature to be featureless. We are very naturally and rightly moved
to mystical emotions about signals from so far away along the path of
the past; but part of the poetry lies in our inability really to read
the signals. And this is what gives an interest, and even an irony, to
the comparison half consciously invoked by the American lady herself
when she asked “What’s Notre Dame to this?” And the answer that should
be given to her is: “Notre Dame, compared to this, is _true_. It is
history. It is humanity. It is what has really happened, what we know
has really happened, what we know is really happening still. It is the
central fact of your own civilization. And it is the thing that has
really been kept from you.”
Notre Dame is not a myth. Notre Dame is not a theory. Its interest does
not spring from ignorance but from knowledge; from a culture complicated
with a hundred controversies and revolutions. It is not featureless, but
carved into an incredible forest and labyrinth of fascinating features,
any one of which we could talk about for days. It is not great because
there is little of it, but great because there is a great deal of it. It
is true that though there is a great deal of it, Puritans may not be
allowed to see a great deal in it; whether they were those brought over
in the “Mayflower” or only those brought up on the “Mayflower.” But that
is not the fault of Notre Dame; but of the extraordinary evasion by
which such people can dodge to right and left of it, taking refuge in
things more recent or things more remote. Notre Dame, on its merely
human side, is mediæval civilization, and therefore not a fable or a
guess but a great solid determining part of modern civilization. It is
the whole modern debate about the guilds; for such cathedrals were built
by the guilds. It is the whole modern question of religion and
irreligion; for we know what religion it stands for, while we really
have not a notion what religion Stonehenge stands for. A Druid temple is
a ruin, and a Puritan ship by this time may well be called a wreck. But
a church is a challenge; and that is why it is not answered.
Much Too Modern History
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