Contents

Talk:G. K. Chesterton

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the G. K. Chesterton article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 180 days

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL, Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government / Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance). Christianity: Catholicism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as High-importance). Journalism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Philosophy: Philosophers / Metaphysics / Social and political / Religion / Contemporary Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Metaphysics Social and political philosophy Philosophy of religion Contemporary philosophy London High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 29, 2017, May 29, 2021, and May 29, 2024.

Chesterton is a difficult subject for an encyclopedia because he is such a strange mixture of brilliantly phrased insights with simplistic antitheses and polemics. Hence the critical commentary upon his works is polarized: often either scathing/dismissive or ultra-eulogistic. Our challenge is to make a judicious selection that represents both extremes, while also mentioning those critics who suggest where common ground might be found. (To some extent this has been done in the section on Chesterton’s anti-Semitism.) A further problem is that those who reject his world-view tend not to bother debating his merits, whereas his fans (largely conservative Christians) often trawl for the eulogies while ignoring the dismissals and refutations.

Adam Gopal in an important New Yorker article on this problem, one which should be referenced here, (“The troubling genius of G. K. Chesterton”) claims that “His Catholic devotees are legion and fanatic . . . but not always helpful to his non-cult reputation,” especially when they insist on praising “his gassy Church apologetics”.

In Wikipedia's article at present (16 June 2020) there is clearly an imbalance in the critical opinions cited. For instance, the over-the-top praise by Etienne Gilson is not balanced by views from other Thomist experts. Also for instance, the enthusiastic quotations from T. S. Eliot misrepresent Eliot’s generally cagey and often negative views of Chesterton. (Google “Comments by T. S. Eliot on Chesterton” for plentiful proof of this).

What is missing is not just a fair sampling of Chesterton’s “bad notices”, but (more importantly) quotations from those offering mixed and nuanced views of how Chesterton’s merits and defects interact, whether as literary critic, essayist, or novelist.

Sorry! I’m not offering to do this large job—--merely pointing out that it remains to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcasella (talk • contribs) 04:05, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm a first time commenter and may be doing it wrong. Just finished reading "The Man Who Knew Too Much" by GK Chesterton and was surprised it wasn't referenced as one of his books on this page. Below is a citation for this book from another Wikipedia page - The Man Who Knew Too Much (book)

"The Man Who Knew Too Much". The Hartford Courant. 24 December 1922. p. SM12. ISSN 1047-4153. OCLC 8807834. Retrieved 25 August 2012.(subscription required)

2607:FEA8:AC1C:7600:4147:3890:DBC1:A7D4 (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He was actually 72 at death: 1874 to 1936 97.126.13.29 (talk) 22:18, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Try again! DuncanHill (talk) 22:36, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I recall reading about her once. Googling for her does return some hits, e.g. this, this, and this. Her name would be Dorothy Collins. 37.47.228.211 (talk) 02:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothy Collins was Chesterton's last secretary, a great friend and support to his wife Frances Chesterton, and his literary executrix. She is often described as a surrogate daughter or the daughter the Chesterton's never had, but she was never formally adopted. When they met in 1926, she was in her early 30s, hardly a child. After his death she spent decades combing through the multitudinous writings he left at his death and editing them for posthumous publication. She is buried at Beaconsfield in Shepherds Lane Cemetery in the same grave as Gilbert and Frances. JohnGHissong (talk) 20:29, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A topic emerged in April of 1923 concerning Chesterton's opposition to World War I based on a complete misreading of his 1916 Crimes of England. The work is deeply ironic, evident from its conceit as a friendly address to a fictitious and ignorant German Professor Whirlwind. England's "crimes" consist in nurturing Prussia in the past, especially against Austria, and her failure to stop Prussian aggression before it blossomed in WWI. JohnGHissong (talk) 20:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, the use of his 1922 poem, "Elegy in a Country Churchyard," to support his supposed anti-war views is utterly misleading, as is readily discernible to anyone who has read his cumulatively voluminous weekly Illustrated London News columns. From the beginning of the WWI to the end, his dogged support for WWI never wavered, although, as the poem indicates, he had rather more sympathy for the soldiers and sailors fighting the war than the politicians orchestrating it. I removed the reference to the poem. --JohnGHissong (talk) 10:45, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Under legacy the sub-topic heading for the canonization process seems wordy. This could be resolved by moving the single sentence mention of beatification from the Death and Veneration subheading and compiling it into a single heading under Veneration or Cause for Sainthood etc. Just wanted some input. LordGoat1 (talk) 04:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I did something to shorten the title. I hope that is okay. SnailsSpace (talk) 05:23, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]