Red Angels by G. K. Chesterton

I quoted from this essay in a book review earlier. I thought it might be interesting to others to read the full essay. Enjoy:

G. K. Chesterton

“Red Angels”

published in the collection Tremendous Trifles

I find that there really are human beings who think fairy tales bad for children. I do not speak of the man in the green tie, for him I can never count truly human. But a lady has written me an earnest letter saying that fairy tales ought not to be taught to children even if they are true. She says that it is cruel to tell children fairy tales, because it frightens them. You might just as well say that it is cruel to give girls sentimental novels because it makes them cry. All this kind of talk is based on that complete forgetting of what a child is like which has been the firm foundation of so many educational schemes. If you keep bogies and goblins away from children they would make them up for themselves. One small child in the dark can invent more hells than Swedenborg. One small child can imagine monsters too big and black to get into any picture, and give them names too unearthly and cacophonous to have occurred in the cries of any lunatic. The child, to begin with, commonly likes horrors, and he continues to indulge in them even when he does not like them. There is just as much difficulty in saying exactly where pure pain begins in his case, as there is in ours when we walk of our own free will into the torture-chamber of a great tragedy. The fear does not come from fairy tales; the fear comes from the universe of the soul.

.....

The timidity of the child or the savage is entirely reasonable; they are alarmed at this world, because this world is a very alarming place. They dislike being alone because it is verily and indeed an awful idea to be alone. Barbarians fear the unknown for the same reason that Agnostics worship it— because it is a fact. Fairy tales, then, are not responsible for producing in children fear, or any of the shapes of fear; fairy tales do not give the child the idea of the evil or the ugly; that is in the child already, because it is in the world already. Fairy tales do not give the child his first idea of bogey. What fairy tales give the child is his first clear idea of the possible defeat of bogey. The baby has known the dragon intimately ever since he had an imagination. What the fairy tale provides for him is a St. George to kill the dragon. Exactly what the fairy tale does is this: it accustoms him for a series of clear pictures to the idea that these limitless terrors had a limit, that these shapeless enemies have enemies in the knights of God, that there is something in the universe more mystical than darkness, and stronger than strong fear. When I was a child I have stared at the darkness until the whole black bulk of it turned into one negro giant taller than heaven. If there was one star in the sky it only made him a Cyclops. But fairy tales restored my mental health, for next day I read an authentic account of how a negro giant with one eye, of quite equal dimensions, had been baffled by a little boy like myself (of similar inexperience and even lower social status) by means of a sword, some bad riddles, and a brave heart. Sometimes the sea at night seemed as dreadful as any dragon. But then I was acquainted with many youngest sons and little sailors to whom a dragon or two was as simple as the sea. Take the most horrible of Grimm's tales in incident and imagery, the excellent tale of the "Boy who Could not Shudder," and you will see what I mean. There are some living shocks in that tale. I remember specially a man's legs which fell down the chimney by themselves and walked about the room, until they were rejoined by the severed head and body which fell down the chimney after them. That is very good. But the point of the story and the point of the reader's feelings is not that these things are frightening, but the far more striking fact that the hero was not frightened at them. The most fearful of all these fearful wonders was his own absence of fear. He slapped the bogies on the back and asked the devils to drink wine with him; many a time in my youth, when stifled with some modern morbidity, I have prayed for a double portion of his spirit. If you have not read the end of his story, go and read it; it is the wisest thing in the world. The hero was at last taught to shudder by taking a wife, who threw a pail of cold water over him. In that one sentence there is more of the real meaning of marriage than in all the books about sex that cover Europe and America.

.....

At the four corners of a child's bed stand Perseus and Roland, Sigurd and St. George. If you withdraw the guard of heroes you are not making him rational; you are only leaving him to fight the devils alone. For the devils, alas, we have always believed in. The hopeful element in the universe has in modern times continually been denied and reasserted; but the hopeless element has never for a moment been denied. As I told "H. N. B." (whom I pause to wish a Happy Christmas in its most superstitious sense), the one thing modern people really do believe in is damnation. The greatest of purely modern poets summed up the really modern attitude in that fine Agnostic line— "There may be Heaven; there must be Hell." The gloomy view of the universe has been a continuous tradition; and the new types of spiritual investigation or conjecture all begin by being gloomy. A little while ago men believed in no spirits. Now they are beginning rather slowly to believe in rather slow spirits.

.....

Some people objected to spiritualism, table rappings, and such things, because they were undignified, because the ghosts cracked jokes or waltzed with dinner-tables. I do not share this objection in the least. I wish the spirits were more farcical than they are. That they should make more jokes and better ones, would be my suggestion. For almost all the spiritualism of our time, in so far as it is new, is solemn and sad. Some Pagan gods were lawless, and some Christian saints were a little too serious; but the spirits of modern spiritualism are both lawless and serious— a disgusting combination. The specially contemporary spirits are not only devils, they are blue devils. This is, first and last, the real value of Christmas; in so far as the mythology remains at all it is a kind of happy mythology. Personally, of course, I believe in Santa Claus; but it is the season of forgiveness, and I will forgive others for not doing so. But if there is anyone who does not comprehend the defect in our world which I am civilising, I should recommend him, for instance, to read a story by Mr. Henry James, called "The Turn of the Screw." It is one of the most powerful things ever written, and it is one of the things about which I doubt most whether it ought ever to have been written at all. It describes two innocent children gradually growing at once omniscient and half-witted under the influence of the foul ghosts of a groom and a governess. As I say, I doubt whether Mr. Henry James ought to have published it (no, it is not indecent, do not buy it; it is a spiritual matter), but I think the question so doubtful that I will give that truly great man a chance. I will approve the thing as well as admire it if he will write another tale just as powerful about two children and Santa Claus. If he will not, or cannot, then the conclusion is clear; we can deal strongly with gloomy mystery, but not with happy mystery; we are not rationalists, but diabolists.

.....

I have thought vaguely of all this staring at a great red fire that stands up in the room like a great red angel. But, perhaps, you have never heard of a red angel. But you have heard of a blue devil. That is exactly what I mean.

Reflections on Shakespeare

I was thinking earlier about my experience with Shakespeare. It has been a long and interesting road. I first encountered Shakespeare at the high school level. I was home schooled and back in the eighties there wasn't a lot to choose from. In order to have a curriculum my parents used the A Beka program. It is a horrid program that my Dad hated, but was all that was out there. By the age of 15 I had developed a life-long hatred for their "history" material. I loved literature, but their English books were quite bad. Understand that by the time I was doing high school material my reading level was far beyond my years. Yes I was reading Agatha Christie and Louis L'Amour, but I also had discovered on my parent's shelves The Inferno, The Iliad, The Odyssey, and others. I also read all of the history I could find.

I remember my first Shakespeare text was The Merchant of Venice. Later I discovered how much those hacks at A Beka had edited the text. Miserable. I didn't like it at all. So you can imagine how much I dreaded my next experience. The play Julius Caesar was my next experience. It was edited and a bit boring. At least until I reached Marc Antony's speech. I was captivated with how he manipulated the crowd. It just so happened that our little library in Ringgold, Louisiana had a video of a production of Julius Caesar starring Charlton Heston as Antony. I checked it out and watched it on a little portable TV/VCR unit in my room. I learned two things that day. Shakespeare was amazing and the censors that edited the texts for A Beka Books were illiterate morons. The next day my mother took me back to the library. There I found Orson Welles' production of MacBeth. I was hooked again. Before the next year was my aunt had loaned my a copy of Kenneth Branaugh's Henry V that she had recorded on HBO. It was a new production at that time. I also saw Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet.

Now jump forward to college. My freshman English class was another life changing experience.  I was lucky enough to have a professor who knew how to teach and also had an infectious passion for literature. There was a traveling Shakespeare company known as the Shenandoah Shakespeare Express that came to visit during my first semester. They put on a minimalist production of three plays every tour. That season it was MacBeth, Merchant of Venice, and Comedy of Errors. I went to see Comedy of Errors on my own. I also took my aunt and her husband. I was hooked again. In our English class we read Merchant of Venice and went as a class to see the performance. I was astounded. I loved this play. The morons at A Beka had cut the very heart out of the play (pun intended). I saw that troupe many times over the coming years. Such memories. MacBeth, Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Julius Caesar, Much Ado About Nothing, A Midsummer Night's Dream, As You Like It and so many more.

In that same freshman English class I wrote a film review of Zeffirelli's Hamlet starring Mel Gibson (fascinating, but weird). We read Hamlet and also saw a production of the play by the college theater. It was a pretty good production as I remember. By this time I was forever hooked on Shakespeare.

In the summer of '94 I did a study program hosted at Oxford University. One of my classes was Shakespeare: Page and Stage. We went every week to Stratford-upon-Avon to see the Royal Shakespeare Company perform. I saw Coriolanus, Twelfth Night, A Midsummer Night's Dream, Henry V, and King Lear. It was an interesting experience. It was my first time to see Shakespeare done by a large professional company. At the time, and to this day, I still prefer the minimalist approach, but it was a fascinating experience. I loved Coriolanus. I remember that the actor who played the title character was quite good. The actor's name was Toby Stephens. Later he would appear as the villain in the James Bond film Die Another Day. Henry V was very disappointing. I had loved Branaugh's production. The actor playing Henry seemed confused and unsure. I remember during an intermission telling one of my professors that I wouldn't follow him down the street much less "once more into the breach." She laughed and agreed. Of course that actor Iain Glenn has gone on in recent years to star in Season 2 of Downton Abbey and now as Jorah Mormont in the HBO series Game of Thrones.

The production of Lear at the Barbican in London was weird. At the time I knew none of the actors So all I could judge was the performance that I saw. As I went online to see the names of the actors I saw so many years ago I was astonished to learn what I had seen. The actor playing Lear was none other than the great Robert Stephens. He didn't seem great to me. I remember commenting later that he played Lear like he was stoned. Two weeks later I learned in a conversation on the trip home that he had indeed left the production and checked himself into rehab. I may have seen his last performance as an actor. He died the following year. The highlight of the performance was the actor who played Edgar: Simon Russell Beale. He was performance was one of the greatest I have ever seen from an actor on the stage.

Since those college days I have seen other performances on stage and film. I loved Ian McKellan's Richard III and saw Brannaugh's Hamlet. I first learned to loathe Baz Luhrman after watching the travesty that he had the nerve to call Romeo and Juliet (and I don't even like that play). The first summer out of college all of my friends were out of town so I spent my weekends in my new apartment watching the BBC productions of Shakespeare and putting together jigsaw puzzles. My alma mater (where I work) put on an excellent production of The Tempest. I also helped my aunt out as "technical director" for her middle school and high school productions of Much Ado About Nothing, Comedy of Errors, and Midsummer Night's Dream. (By technical director I mean I ran sound, hammered nails, and spent a lot of time yelling at teenagers to behave and to enunciate.) It was a a great experience.

Of course once my kids came along it has not been possible to go to the theater. When you have two autistic sons you spend a lot more time at home. I often wonder what would have happened if our little library in Ringgold had not carried that video. What if I had gone to Ringgold High School (shudder)? I was fortunate that my parents always encouraged my reading so I was free to experience the wonders of the classics while others were taught by poor teachers and came to dislike reading. It has been a number of years since I last encountered Shakespeare. Perhaps I need to get my hands on those classic recordings made by the BBC. There are a lot of great film production available. Some good radio productions as well.

This has been a lot longer than I usually like to go on, but it was a fun trip down memory lane. If you stuck around thanks for sharing. No go see some Shakespeare.

What can you do?

Doesn't look like much does it? It's only 32 cents. If you spend four times that amount you can get a single soft drink or bottle of water. What can you do with 32 cents? Well, if you were to put that aside every day you could donate $10 a month. That would mean $120 a year. Maybe you think that the needs out there are too big and that your little $120 doesn't help. That's where you are wrong. It does when you work with others. See, 1,000 people doing the same thing would bring in $120,000. That's big money to some places. For the cost of one Starbucks regular coffee a week you could help make a difference. Did you graduate from college? Give to your college. Maybe give to a food bank, or a fund for homeless children. Don't just throw it around, be wise with your giving. The truth is that all of us can do a lot with a little if we work together.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Where Do Your Rights Come From?

I came across a quote that I thought very important. In America so many have forgotten that our legal traditions come to us via the English system. I love how this is described. in the quote below.

"The English law was fundamentally different from the Continental in that, on the Continent, ‘all laws take into account human rights’ whereas English law ‘took the view that you took into account the rights of individuals’. On the Continent, rights existed only when proclaimed by law. In Britain, they existed automatically, without government fiat, unless the law abridged them."

Charles Moore - Margaret Thatcher: From Grantham to the Falklands

Notice that the rights exist apart from government. This is what Jefferson was talking about in the Declaration of Independence. A right is not given by the government, it is unalienable.

Now look at the language used by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Notice that government is created to secure these rights. Government does not grant them. When the Constitution was going through the ratification process the biggest argument against it was that there was no Bill of Rights. This was a crucial issue. This was one of the reasons that George Mason and Patrick Henry opposed the Constitution. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were both disturbed by the lack of a Bill of Rights. Adams was perplexed because he had included a Bill of Rights when he almost single handedly wrote the Constitution of Massachusetts. Mason had written the initial draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights. If you read that Declaration you can see the foundation for both the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution.

Of course these concepts go back even further. The principles here can also be found in the English Bill of Rights that was presented to William and Mary after the Glorious Revolution. The English Bill of Rights was influenced by the writings and thought of John Locke. Locke acknowledged that much of his thought came from his reading of scripture. There is so much more here and I will have to study it a lot more.

Anything Goes? - The Rev. Frederick Buechner

Anything Goes? - The Rev. Frederick Buechner

Excellent comments by Frederick Buechner.

Red & The Pledge

We need this more than ever. Always a classic. Watch Red Skelton explain the Pledge of Allegiance.

The Cross

Thinking on the Cross this morning. The image of a dying man on a tree is supposed to be the image of a man cursed before God and man. How like God to change that image into the image of the ultimate l or and blessing of God for the salvation of Man from the curse of sin.

—————————————————————————————————-

When I Survey

When I survey the wondrous cross
On which the Prince of glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.

Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast,
Save in the death of Christ my God!
All the vain things that charm me most,
I sacrifice them to His blood.

See from His head, His hands, His feet,
Sorrow and love flow mingled down!
Did e’er such love and sorrow meet,
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?

His dying crimson, like a robe,
Spreads o’er His body on the tree;
Then I am dead to all the globe,
And all the globe is dead to me.

Were the whole realm of nature mine,
That were a present far too small;
Love so amazing, so divine,
Demands my soul, my life, my all.

Shot Heard 'Round The World

238 years ago as the sun rose over Lexington, Massachusetts 700 British soldiers faced off against a small group of militia. No one knows who fired the first shot, but the British fired into the militia and charged with the bayonet. Eight Americans were killed. The British soldiers moved on to Concord. There a larger force of American militia stood their ground and turned the British soldiers back. The rest of the day turned into a running chase as the British soldiers were pushed back into Boston. That day, those courageous militiamen started something that would change the world for the better. Think on those brave men today as you enjoy the freedom that they and so many others have fought and died for.