Fancies Versus FadsChesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
General
Fancies Versus Fads
Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith)
English essays -- 20th century
Now this antagonism, when thus analysed, seems to me to arise from one
ultimate thing at the back of the minds of these men; that they believe
in taking the body seriously. The body is a sort of pagan god, though
the pagans are more often stoics than epicureans. To begin with, it is
itself a beginning. The body, if not the creator of the soul in heaven,
is regarded as the practical producer of it on earth. In this their
materialism is the very foundation of their asceticism. They wish us to
consume clean fruit and clear water that our minds may be clear or our
lives clean. The body is a sort of magical factory where these things go
in as vegetables and come out as virtues. Thus digestion has the first
sign of a deity; that of being an origin. It has the next sign of a
deity; that if it is satisfied other things do not matter, or at any
rate other things follow in their place. And so, they would say, the
services of the body should be serious and not grotesque; and its
smallest hints should be taken as terrible warnings. Art has a place in
it because the body must be draped like an altar; and science is
paraded in it because the service must be in Latin or Greek or something
hieratic tongue. I quite understand these things surrounding a god or an
altar; but I do not happen to worship at that altar or to believe in
that god. I do not think the body ought to be taken seriously; I think
it is far safer and saner when it is taken comically and even coarsely.
And I think that when the body is given a holiday, as it is in a great
feast, I think it should be set free not merely for wisdom but for
folly, not merely to dance but to turn head over heels. In short, when
it is really allowed to exaggerate its own pleasures, it ought also to
exaggerate its own absurdity. The body has its own rank, and its own
rights, and its own place under government; but the body is not the King
but rather the Court Jester. And the human and historical importance of
the old jests and buffooneries of Christmas, however vulgar or stale or
trivial they appear, is that in them the popular instinct always
resisted this pagan solemnity about sensual things. A man was meant to
feel rather a goose when he was eating goose; and to realize that he is
such stuff as stuffing is made of. That is why anyone who has in these
things the touch of the comic will also have the taste for the
conservative; he will be unwilling to alter what that popular instinct
has made in its own absurd image. He will be doubtful about a Christmas
pudding moulded in the shape of the Pyramid or the Parthenon, or
anything that is not as round and ridiculous as the world. And when Mr.
Pickwick, as round and ridiculous as any Christmas pudding or any world
worth living in, stood straddling and smiling under the mistletoe, he
disinfected that vegetable of its ancient and almost vegetarian sadness
and heathenism, of the blood of Baldur and the human sacrifice of the
Druids.
Shakespeare and the Legal Lady
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