Tara's Reviews > The Everlasting Man
The Everlasting Man
by G.K. Chesterton
by G.K. Chesterton
I've read this twice now, and I continue to think this is a vastly overrated book. Pieces of it are beautiful and rather brilliant, but only slight pieces. There's the argument about not dismissing ideas simply because they fell out of fashion - were they actually disproved? The answer is, yes, and the book falls short because the author's intelligence was strangled by his Euro-centric, racist, sexist beliefs. He is entirely blind to the crimes of Western Culture, and he seems to have sincerely believed that yes, perhaps the Conquistadors weren't so great, but the Aztecs practiced human sacrifice, so it's wonderful that all the indigenous people were wiped out to make way for the West. Rome is turned into the center of all things glorious, and after his passionate attacks on certain academics for basing enormous theories on shaky evidence, it's a great act of hypocrisy to deduce the feelings of every Roman from pretty much nothing.
I'm also pretty offended by any book that talks about how right and true Christianity is and how the whole world was "tired" and bound to come around - without really talking about anything that Jesus actually preached. He's far more fascinated with dogma and propping up creeds than in reading the gospels. Argh. It's frustrating, because some of Chesterton's other writings truly are insightful and full of his much-lauded (un)common-sense. Unfortunately, I think it's a big mistake to tout this book as a brilliant apologetic. I seem to have the strange idea that an apologetic shouldn't mean excusing (and glorifying) the last 500 years of Western exploitation of the people and lands of the planet, and that discussing Christianity shouldn't be an excuse for defending the Old Boys Club. This book is sort of the anti-Tolstoy.
I'm also pretty offended by any book that talks about how right and true Christianity is and how the whole world was "tired" and bound to come around - without really talking about anything that Jesus actually preached. He's far more fascinated with dogma and propping up creeds than in reading the gospels. Argh. It's frustrating, because some of Chesterton's other writings truly are insightful and full of his much-lauded (un)common-sense. Unfortunately, I think it's a big mistake to tout this book as a brilliant apologetic. I seem to have the strange idea that an apologetic shouldn't mean excusing (and glorifying) the last 500 years of Western exploitation of the people and lands of the planet, and that discussing Christianity shouldn't be an excuse for defending the Old Boys Club. This book is sort of the anti-Tolstoy.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Everlasting Man.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
| 03/28/2016 | marked as: | read | ||
Comments (showing 1-9 of 9) (9 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Don Incognito
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Dec 15, 2010 09:44AM
What do you mean by calling it the anti-Tolstoy?
reply
|
flag
*
Tolstoy's The Gospel in Brief and The Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You were nearly entirely about Jesus and his teachings. I thought that was sort of, you know, the point of Christianity. From this particular work of Chesterton's, though, you wouldn't know that.
Reading this now and feeling strong disappointment. Reading it alongside Wells, "A Short History of the World" and Wells is bare bones blowing GKC out of the water. Embarrassment to Christian literature.
Miranda wrote: "Reading this now and feeling strong disappointment. Reading it alongside Wells, "A Short History of the World" and Wells is bare bones blowing GKC out of the water. Embarrassment to Christian liter..."Perhaps, but notwithstanding that you're a new Goodreads user, your existing reading list doesn't suggest you read much Christian literature.
I hardly think a person's opinion of a book should be taken less seriously because they have or have not an extensive number of goodreads reviews. Chesterton remains brilliant. He remains, also, a product of his time, subject to its virtues and vices. This book paid homage more to the vices than virtues.
My point was that unless she has read much Christian literature, which her list suggests she hasn't, she doesn't have much of a standard of comparison for deciding what constitutes an embarrassment to Christian literature.
Over the top hatred of Western civilization. You use cultural Marxist terms like "racist, Euro-centric, and sexist". My guess is you're Jewish? Maybe not religiously but ethnically? I wouldn't imagine you would care for a conservative Catholic author.


