Dear Leo,
I've finished reading Chesterton's The Man Who Was Thursday. There are several excerpts I'd like to look at more closely. The first is as follows:
~ from Chapter Six: The Exposure
I like pondering the meaning and function of borders. It seems to me that the idea of borders is one of those things that is essential. By "essential" I don't mean simply "necessary," as in something required to fulfill a practical need, but rather "of a fundamental essence," as in it cannot not be! It seems to me that, just as the human mind can't fully grasp the idea of eternity and yet cannot truly believe in it's own end, the human mind also seeks to define things: to sort out "this vs that," and it is the notion of "borders" or "horizons" or "thresholds" that helps us conceive the distinction of things and of ourselves.
I'm not sure I really believe absolute borders exist anywhere other than the human mind, except between Creator and the created. It seems to me that all creation is more one than it is its dissect-able parts. Furthermore, the Creator has sought to be "One" with His creation! So, it seems to me, that the fundamental nature of reality is Whole-ness, One-ness.
Even-so, it is also clear that human-beings NEED borders and definitions in order to function healthfully and peacefully. I think we have to place these limits on ourselves and each other because we have lost our Original Freedom when we sought a faux-freedom outside of God's revelation of the Reality He created. When we cast aside our relationship of the created w/ her Creator, we find ourselves bound to making our own limits. We continually try to break those limits, but we keep making other limits. Our only True Freedom is in a loving relationship with our Creator.
But, really, I diverge. Back to Chesterton: What does he mean about the tree and the tower at the two ends of the earth? He could mean the tree of life which became the Cross of Christ, but what then is the tower? Is it the tower of Babel? Furthermore, he doesn't really describe that tree terribly favorably. And why is one "possessed of a spirit" and the other has a "shape [which] was wicked"? By giving us a metaphor that seems to be made of polar opposites, he seems to favor a dualistic world-view. But I know that he elsewhere shows he doesn't favor dualism. Chesterton, it seems to me, holds a more whole view of the world, life, and thought. I'll try to find sources to back up my assertion. But for now I want to wrestle w/ his metaphor. The phrase "violent and unaccountable" is certainly a major clue. And the notion of an "ultimate horizon" gives us the sense he's talking about the world's destiny: where what we know meets up with what is utterly beyond us.
What does Chesterton mean by "unaccountable"? Does he mean rebellious? As in "not accountable to any other entity"? I'm more familiar w/ that word used to mean "inexplicable," but I really think, here, Chesterton is saying these figures representing anarchy are looming violently on the horizon because they hold themselves accountable to no-one, and by default to chaos and ultimately oblivion.
When was Chesterton writing this? 1908. So, this was before World War I, which began in 1914 with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. What would Chesterton have been experiencing and observing in England in the early 1900's? There was an election in 1906, and the winners introduced new welfare reforms. But how did Chesterton view all that? I'm sure the Boer Wars had to influence Chesterton's thought re governing and anarchy. But I know nearly nothing of this period of history. The more I research, the more questions I have!
Sigh! I guess I'll have to do much more study before I can dig into this!
I've finished reading Chesterton's The Man Who Was Thursday. There are several excerpts I'd like to look at more closely. The first is as follows:
Each figure seemed to be, somehow, on the borderland of things, just as their theory was on the borderland of thought. He knew that each one of these men stood at the extreme end, so to speak, of some wild road of reasoning. He could only fancy, as in some old-world fable, that if a man went westward to the end of the world he would find something -- say a tree -- that was more or less than a tree, a tree possessed by a spirit; and that if he went east to the end of the world he would find something else that was now wholly itself -- a tower, perhaps, of which the very shape was wicked. So these figures seemed to stand up, violent, and unaccountable against an ultimate horizon, visions from the verge. The ends of the earth were closing in.
~ from Chapter Six: The Exposure
I like pondering the meaning and function of borders. It seems to me that the idea of borders is one of those things that is essential. By "essential" I don't mean simply "necessary," as in something required to fulfill a practical need, but rather "of a fundamental essence," as in it cannot not be! It seems to me that, just as the human mind can't fully grasp the idea of eternity and yet cannot truly believe in it's own end, the human mind also seeks to define things: to sort out "this vs that," and it is the notion of "borders" or "horizons" or "thresholds" that helps us conceive the distinction of things and of ourselves.
I'm not sure I really believe absolute borders exist anywhere other than the human mind, except between Creator and the created. It seems to me that all creation is more one than it is its dissect-able parts. Furthermore, the Creator has sought to be "One" with His creation! So, it seems to me, that the fundamental nature of reality is Whole-ness, One-ness.
Even-so, it is also clear that human-beings NEED borders and definitions in order to function healthfully and peacefully. I think we have to place these limits on ourselves and each other because we have lost our Original Freedom when we sought a faux-freedom outside of God's revelation of the Reality He created. When we cast aside our relationship of the created w/ her Creator, we find ourselves bound to making our own limits. We continually try to break those limits, but we keep making other limits. Our only True Freedom is in a loving relationship with our Creator.
But, really, I diverge. Back to Chesterton: What does he mean about the tree and the tower at the two ends of the earth? He could mean the tree of life which became the Cross of Christ, but what then is the tower? Is it the tower of Babel? Furthermore, he doesn't really describe that tree terribly favorably. And why is one "possessed of a spirit" and the other has a "shape [which] was wicked"? By giving us a metaphor that seems to be made of polar opposites, he seems to favor a dualistic world-view. But I know that he elsewhere shows he doesn't favor dualism. Chesterton, it seems to me, holds a more whole view of the world, life, and thought. I'll try to find sources to back up my assertion. But for now I want to wrestle w/ his metaphor. The phrase "violent and unaccountable" is certainly a major clue. And the notion of an "ultimate horizon" gives us the sense he's talking about the world's destiny: where what we know meets up with what is utterly beyond us.
What does Chesterton mean by "unaccountable"? Does he mean rebellious? As in "not accountable to any other entity"? I'm more familiar w/ that word used to mean "inexplicable," but I really think, here, Chesterton is saying these figures representing anarchy are looming violently on the horizon because they hold themselves accountable to no-one, and by default to chaos and ultimately oblivion.
When was Chesterton writing this? 1908. So, this was before World War I, which began in 1914 with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. What would Chesterton have been experiencing and observing in England in the early 1900's? There was an election in 1906, and the winners introduced new welfare reforms. But how did Chesterton view all that? I'm sure the Boer Wars had to influence Chesterton's thought re governing and anarchy. But I know nearly nothing of this period of history. The more I research, the more questions I have!
Sigh! I guess I'll have to do much more study before I can dig into this!
