Evangelical intellectuals and gk chesterson

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adamski
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
South_Bound said:
OK. I’ll bite: How did my post “beg for” his childish, rude response?

Why wouldn’t I know about Chesterton? We Protestants do read books, you know. In fact, the OP is predicated on the premise that *so many Protestants *read Chesterton that it’s surprising, for some reason, to Catholics.
Click to expand...
Well, because if he is known for anything other than his size and curious mode of dress, it is for the degree to which his writing is run through with Catholicism.

And if I have offended you too, I apologise.
 
South_Bound said:
Just as anything I would write would be heavily influenced by Protestant theology, but I wouldn’t write “…and this Protestantism says this, and Protestantism does that”.

In my experience, Chesterton didn’t, either.

And even if I’m wrong and every single page Chesterton wrote was about nothing but how wonderful the Catholic Church is, that’s still no excuse for the Catholic poster to be rude about it, especially when such a response was unprovoked in any way.
Click to expand...
To be referred to as Catholic (tout court) is more common for me on another board I post on, than on this one.

GKC
 
Picky_Picky said:
Well, because if he is known for anything other than his size and curious mode of dress, it is for the degree to which his writing is run through with Catholicism.

And if I have offended you too, I apologise.
Click to expand...
No, I’d have to care to be offended. Mostly, I just noticed that you can’t back up your allegation that my post somehow provoked his rude and childish response.
 
GKC said:
Given my interest in military history, I could agree.

GKC
Click to expand...
That’s unfortunate. I happened to have taught history, including military history, and studied under Hal Moore, one of the pre-eminent military historians of our time.

We could have had some very interesting conversations.
 
Picky_Picky said:
Well OK and that’s between you and GKC. Can I just say, though, as someone with no money on this race, that what you said does sort of sit up and beg for the kind of comment GKC made. And I don’t think that is any reflection on you — Chesterton was, after all, a very minor writer (now I’m in for it, too!) and there is no reason you should be totally up to speed on him.
Click to expand...
Sometimes I wish he would get to the point a little faster. Perhaps I’m suffering from attention deficit disorder.
 
South_Bound said:
That’s unfortunate. I happened to have taught history, including military history, and studied under Hal Moore, one of the pre-eminent military historians of our time.

We could have had some very interesting conversations.
Click to expand...
Possibly. My central interest, for over 50 years, has been WWII, particularly the Pacific theater and mostly particularly, the end game there-in.

Currently 50 pages away from the end of Wohlstetter’s PEARL HARBOR:WARNING AND DECISION.

Next up, Lacey’s PACIFIC BLITZKRIEG: WORLD WAR II IN THE CENTRAL PACIFIC.
But I know Dilly, too.

And, by reputation, Moore.

GKC
 
tomarin said:
Sometimes I wish he would get to the point a little faster. Perhaps I’m suffering from attention deficit disorder.
Click to expand...
If he got to the point faster, there would be less of him to read and collect. Granted, that might make my shelf problem (in respect to him) a little less pressing, but I garner all I can get. Which is, currently about all he published, as in his own name, in book form, excepting THE GLASS WALKING STICK.

GKC
 
Picky_Picky said:
Well OK and that’s between you and GKC. Can I just say, though, as someone with no money on this race, that what you said does sort of sit up and beg for the kind of comment GKC made. And I don’t think that is any reflection on you — Chesterton was, after all, a very minor writer (now I’m in for it, too!) and there is no reason you should be totally up to speed on him.
Click to expand...
Picture smiley with indignant expression, here.

GKC
 
GKC said:
Possibly. My central interest, for over 50 years, has been WWII, particularly the Pacific theater and mostly particularly, the end game there-in.

Currently 50 pages away from the end of Wohlstetter’s PEARL HARBOR:WARNING AND DECISION.

Next up, Lacey’s PACIFIC BLITZKRIEG: WORLD WAR II IN THE CENTRAL PACIFIC.
But I know Dilly, too.

And, by reputation, Moore.

GKC
Click to expand...
Admittedly off topic but by the way, I enjoyed “Retribution” by Max Hastings. Learned a lot about the war in the Pacific. Thanks for recommending it.
 
GKC said:
Possibly. My central interest, for over 50 years, has been WWII, particularly the Pacific theater and mostly particularly, the end game there-in.

Currently 50 pages away from the end of Wohlstetter’s PEARL HARBOR:WARNING AND DECISION.

Next up, Lacey’s PACIFIC BLITZKRIEG: WORLD WAR II IN THE CENTRAL PACIFIC.
But I know Dilly, too.

And, by reputation, Moore.

GKC
Click to expand...
Good for you.
 
GKC said:
If he got to the point faster, there would be less of him to read and collect. Granted, that might make my shelf problem (in respect to him) a little less pressing, but I garner all I can get. Which is, currently about all he published, as in his own name, in book form, excepting THE GLASS WALKING STICK.

GKC
Click to expand...
True. However I was trying to express my frustration at not always understanding where he is going with his argument, which is perhaps a product of his rhetorical style which belongs to an earlier era. I would never label him as “unreadable” as some contemporary people have but I do acknowledge the archaic style in which he writes does present some challenges to the modern reader. The pay-off is usually worth the effort however.
 
tomarin said:
True. However I was trying to express my frustration at not always understanding where he is going with his argument, which is perhaps a product of his rhetorical style which belongs to an earlier era. I would never label him as “unreadable” as some contemporary people have but I do acknowledge the archaic style in which he writes does present some challenges to the modern reader. The pay-off is usually worth the effort however.
Click to expand...
Archaic is a suitable word, seen from our contemporary perspective.

GKC
 
Picky_Picky said:
Well OK and that’s between you and GKC. Can I just say, though, as someone with no money on this race, that what you said does sort of sit up and beg for the kind of comment GKC made. And I don’t think that is any reflection on you — Chesterton was, after all, a very minor writer (now I’m in for it, too!) and there is no reason you should be totally up to speed on him.
Click to expand...
Even if you’re right about him being a minor writer you have to admit he looms large (pun intended) in certain circles.
 
South_Bound said:
Good for you.
Click to expand...
Never good enough, though. It never ends. Next up, probably, is a re-reading of Drea’s MACARTHUR’S ULTRA:CODEBREAKING AND THE WAR AGAINST JAPAN, 1942-1945.

Last two finshed before Wohlstetter were a re-reading of Lewin’s THE AMERICAN MAGIC and Gannon’s PEARL HARBOR BETRAYED, which fits neatly into Wohstetter’s account.

Haven’t done serious reading on Chesterton for quite a while, though 5-6 books are stacked, for when WWII palls (my reading thrusts vary). Last one I recall reading on the man was Ker’s Chesterton bio and Oddie’s magisterial 747 page opus CHESTERTON AND THE ROMANCE OF ORTHODOXY, one of perhaps 3 books absolutely essential to understanding him.

Keeps me off the streets and causes a lot of hazards to walking around the house at night.

GKC
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top