Through Shakepeare’s Eyes

Through Shakepeare’s Eyes.  By Joseph Pearce, Ignatius Press, 2010.

 

Joseph Pearce has become one of today’s leading literary biographers, specializing in the lives of Christian authors.  Early in his life, Pearce belonged to the National Front, a group promoting race hatred and separatism, but a jail sentence led him to discover the works of G.K. Chesterton, and Pearce jettisoned his old political and social beliefs, and went from angry agnostic to joyful and inquisitive Catholic.  His work includes biographies and analyses of G.K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Oscar Wilde, J.R.R. Tolkien, and C.S. Lewis, among others.  Unafraid of Virginia Woolf, Pearce’s study of the mercurial poet Roy Campbell, was reviewed here in December 2011.

 

Recently, Pearce has been exploring the works of William Shakespeare, especially in The Quest for Shakespeare, an overview of Shakespeare’s life based on recently discovered evidence.  Shakespeare was traditionally viewed as a loyal Protestant, but Pearce argues that Shakespeare was actually a recusant Catholic during a time when the Catholic faith was being fiercely persecuted by the Protestant authorities.  Furthermore, Pearce believes that Shakespeare inserted his religious beliefs into the plots and morals of each of his plays.  Pearce wrote Through Shakespeare’s Eyes to illustrate this point, writing that:

 

“This volume differs significantly from its predecessor and companion, The Quest for Shakespeare, in the sense that the sources from which I have been working are the texts of the three plays The Merchant of Venice, Hamlet, and King Lear, along with some of the finer criticism of these plays.  I did not have to trawl through dozens of biographies and other studies of Shakespeare in order to bring together all the different threads of his life into one volume.  In this sense, the present volume might be said to have been easier to write than was its companion.  It was, in any event, easier to research.  I think, however, and in spite of such appearances to the contrary, that it was hardly easier to write.  Grappling with a genius of Shakespeare’s magnitude is never easy.  It is as exhausting as it is exhilarating!” (11).

 

Only the aforementioned three plays are studied here, although it the analysis is so intriguing that one wishes that he had covered more plays.  The critiques are fascinating, though the complexity of Shakespeare’s work means that they cannot be wholly definitive.  What this book succeeds at doing is presenting Shakespeare’s work from a Catholic and historical perspective.  The analyses of The Merchant of Venice and Hamlet are excellent.  For some reason, the critique of King Lear is much shorter than either of the other two, and it really could have used a lot more detail in order to flesh out the religious themes of the drama.

 

Pearce includes large quantities of background information about Shakespeare’s life and times, occasionally recovering ground from The Quest for Shakespeare, but this is necessary for people who have not read the previous book.

 

“Clearly the most reliable guide to a work is the author himself, who has the fullest grasp of all the contextual ingredients that inform and flavor the text.  It is, therefore, necessary to understand as much about the author as possible, and as much as possible about the time and culture in which he lived.  We need to know the author’s most important beliefs, which are those beliefs that inform every aspect of his life.  These are his theology and his philosophy.  At this juncture we should remind ourselves that everyone works from theological and philosophical presumptions.  Even atheism is theological, in the sense that the presumption that God does not exist informs the way that the atheist perceives everything else.  The “Real Absence” of God is as crucial to the atheist as is his Real Presence to the believer.  There is, therefore, no escaping God’s primal importance, regardless of whether it springs from the primal assumption that he is or the primal assumption that he is not.  It is one of the deepest paradoxes, and perhaps one of God’s funniest jokes, that God is always present even when he is absent.” (10).

 

It is intriguing that fans of Shakespeare are able to find exactly what they want to find in his work, and that critics tend to shape Shakespeare in their own desired image.  Pearce argues that previous conceptions of Shakespeare and the author’s interpretations have been based on caprice and pure theory, rather than any serious attempt to study the real man and his times.  Pearce therefore has to battle the accusation that he is attempting to impose his own vision of what Shakespeare ought to have been like, but for the most part, Pearce succeeds in defending his arguments by explaining the mindset of a Catholic in a suddenly Protestant England.  Pearce asks the reader to question both traditional historical narratives and literary perspectives in order to look at the material with a fresh attitude.   

 

“Every work of literature is the incarnation of the fruitful relationship between the artist and his Muse.  From a Christian perspective, the Muse is the gift of grace; from an atheistic perspective, it is the author’s subconscious.  In both cases, the work of literature remains an expression of the personhood of the author.  In the former case, the Christian believes that the gift of grace is freely given, like the talents in the Gospel parable, and can be used or abused by the artist according to the predilections of his will (much as the gift of life is freely given and can be used or abused).  In the latter case, the atheist believes that the subconscious “Muse” finds expression in the creative process.  It can be seen, therefore, that Christians and atheists share the essential belief that the work is the creative incarnation of the personhood of the author.  This being so, an author’s theological and philosophical beliefs will be the most important influence upon the work, simply because they are the most important influence on the way in which the author perceives reality.

 

Since the evidence shows that Shakespeare was a believing Catholic, it is clear that seeing his plays through his Catholic eyes is the best way, indeed the only way, of understanding the deepest meanings that they convey.  This book endeavors, therefore, to see the plays through Shakespeare’s eyes, giving us a “Bard’s-eye” view of their true meaning.” (13).

 

It is intriguing to see Pearce’s take on these plays.  For example, while Pearce condemns anti-Semitism, he also believes that it is improper to view Shylock as anything but a villain, even if he can be viewed sympathetically at times.  Another trope commonly used in productions and interpretations of The Merchant of Venice is that Portia brazenly cheats during the final casket scene.  Pearce argues that the oft-cited rhyming clue is actually nothing of the kind.  People who may have grown fond of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern from the Stoppard play may be surprised to find Pearce arguing the reader that the two characters are meant to be villains, betraying their friend by spying upon him for a murderous king.  All of Pearce’s assertions come from a religious perspective.  He writes:

 

“If Shakespeare was a Catholic, and was greatly influenced by the Catholicism of his parents and the persecution that surrounded the practice of Catholicism in his day, it forces us to reread the plays in an entirely new light.  The more that historical evidence comes to light, the less able are the doyens of postmodernity to do what they like with the plats.  In the past, the lack of knowledge of the personhood of Shakespeare has enabled critics to treat him as a tabula rasaupon which they can write their own prejudiced agenda.  For the proponents of “queer theory,” he becomes conveniently homosexual; for secular fundamentalists, he is a protosecularist, ahead of his time; for “post-Christian” agnostics, he becomes a prophet of postmodernity.  It was all so easy to mold Shakespeare into our own image when the Bard was a myth, but now that he is emerging as a man, a living person with real beliefs, such distortion becomes more difficult.  For “postmodern” Shakespeare scholars, the emergence of tangible evidence for the Catholic Shakespeare is not only a challenge but a threat.  If he was a Catholic, he becomes irritatingly antimodern...  From the perspective of tradition-oriented scholars, the evident clarity of moral visions that they had always perceived in the plays becomes more explicable and more clearly defined.” (206-207).

 

Pearce’s analysis of Shakespeare presents the Bard as a man with a strong moral compass, as well as an unparalleled gift for crafting words.  By attempting to explore the soul and the worldview of the man, Pearce presents a very deep and profound perspective on Shakespeare’s work.  Pearce’s work in literary criticism is highly skilled, but reading Through Shakepeare’s Eyes made me realize that he needs to direct his talents in a different direction every once in a while.  Having read his thoughts on Shakespeare, I want to see him try his hand at directing Shakespeare.  It would be fascinating to see some of Shakespeare’s plays (especially The Merchant of Venice, Hamlet, and King Lear), directed by Pearce, possibly filmed with commentary as well.  One thing is for certain– one will never look at Shakespeare in the same way after reading Through Shakespeare’s Eyes.

 

 

–Chris Chan

True Freedom: On Protecting Human Dignity and Religious Liberty

True Freedom: On Protecting Human Dignity and Religious Liberty.  By Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, Random House, Inc., Kindle e-book, 2012.

 

Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan is a prominent figure in American Catholicism, and increasingly, world Catholicism.  After severing as Archbishop of Milwaukee for several years, Dolan was transferred to New York City and promoted to Cardinal.  In recent months, Cardinal Dolan has been a vocal critic of the federal government’s mandate that requires Catholic employers and medical institutions to violate their religious principles by providing or funding for contraceptives and sterilizations.  In an effort to define his argument for why the government’s new policy is not just unconstitutional, but also unconscionable from a Catholic moral perspective, Cardinal Dolan has written a brief monograph, True Freedom: On Protecting Human Dignity and Religious Liberty, available online as an e-book, in order to explain Catholic teachings on these matters and why the government mandate ought to be opposed.

 

The title of this monograph comes a quote by Pope Leo XIII, who declared that, “True freedom… is that freedom which most truly safeguards the dignity of the human person. It is stronger than any violence or injustice. Such is the freedom which has always been desired by the Church, and which she holds most dear.” 

 

This monograph is meant to outline Catholic teaching in a succinct and readable manner, and Cardinal Dolan succeeds in his objective, coming across as an intelligent and principled man of faith.  There are no preachy overtones, no plaintiveness, and no demonizing of his opponents. The justifications for his arguments come from multiple sources, ranging from theology to discussions on natural law.  Cardinal Dolan describes natural law thusly:

 

“Natural law is a concept of objective truth, known by anyone with the power of reason. For instance, it is always and everywhere wrong to deliberately take the life of an innocent person. This is an objective truth, and it is not relativized by the special interests of religious preference, class, gender, or individual bias. Natural law is also at the heart of our first freedoms declared so boldly in our nation’s Declaration of Independence: “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.” 

 

It is a question of endowments that are intrinsic to us by the very fact of being human. And thus the rights appropriate to us are “unalienable.” They cannot be taken away by any state, power, law, or choice of individuals. 

 

And what specifically cannot be taken away? Our life, our liberty. No human institution or individual has given us these rights. They have been given to us by God.”

 

All people, regardless of creed or political persuasion, have a duty to themselves and to their fellow citizens to protect their rights and freedoms.  Increasingly, however, there is increasing social and political pressure to limit certain freedoms that have long been enjoyed by people of faith.  Much of the political effort to create laws that force certain religious people to violate their consciences has been driven by an ideology that is often referred to as the Culture of Death.  Pope John Paul II popularized the use of the phrase “the Culture of Death.”  This term refers to an ideological approach to life and society that holds virtue, innocence, and even life itself in contempt.  The Culture of Death spreads by making it unfashionable, unpopular, and even illegal to act in a manner in accordance to certain principles, particularly those held by the Catholic Church.  Cardinal Dolan explains the attraction and allure of the Culture of Death, for after all, the adherents of the Culture of Death do not refer to it by that name.

 

“Such a culture of death can only thrive, of course, in a world in which God has been excluded, and in which everyone can evade the responsibility of solidarity by claiming to define his or her own morality. Personal freedom—the ability to do what I want, when I want, because I want to do it—is seen as the only absolute value. 

 

Can sustained human rights, those unalienable rights with which we have been endowed by our Creator, girded by law, survive in such a culture? The pragmatic, utilitarian worldview, so popular in some segments of government and society, is used to construct a system of laws protecting human rights, particularly that of life itself, that are like blowing leaves—everything is constantly being renegotiated, based on shifting winds of utility, convenience,
privacy, and self-interest.”

 

Dolan argues that the Culture of Death specifically targets children and the most vulnerable members of society.  The reason why the Church opposes the federal mandate and the attempt to legally compel Catholics to violate their consciences is because it wishes to protect the safety of innocent people.  The only way to counteract the forces of the Culture of Death is to identify the problems and to provide an alterative and opposite ideological perspective.  Dolan writes:

 

“Take, for example, the fact of the “being” of the baby in the womb. That “being,” that life, trumps the values of usefulness, efficiency, convenience, privacy, or satisfaction of one’s needs. A culture of life with supportive laws guarantees this. 

 

A baby is useless and impractical from a raw, pragmatic, utilitarian, or consumerist view. A family that I know, with eight healthy, beautiful children, tells me that they regularly feel the stares of disdain and hear the tsk-tsks from enlightened folks who look as if they’re about ready to produce a flyer for vasectomies, tubal ligation, abortion, or chemical contraceptives. I worry this experience is becoming the norm for any mom and dad with two or more children under the age of five! With China’s

 one-child policy—enforced by grave punishment—those who have more than one child may seem to insist on a quaint practice. And Western Europe, I’m sad to say, has its own voluntary one- or no-child policy, enforced by a culture in which nominally Christian couples reject large families, and this is increasingly true in our own beloved country. Modern, secular cultures seem to view the baby as a commodity or an accessory at best and an inconvenience or a burden at worst. 

 

For many couples, babies are now postponed by chemicals and latex, until a couple might decide they’d enjoy one and then are irritated when they can’t conceive, driving them to laboratories where perhaps technology can make up for what only nature does perfectly. I know that this does not apply to all infertile

 couples. I’ve counseled far too many husbands and wives, who are living good, faithful lives, open to God’s plan for them, who nonetheless sincerely long for a child but are having difficulty conceiving. Still, for many, it’s another example of what I want, when I want, because I want. We can read articles about couples who want to design their own baby, essentially ordering one from a catalog. If pregnancy occurs, and the baby is not to their liking, especially if sick or less than perfect, they can always stop the pregnancy and maybe try again. Many people have babies, if at all, to satisfy their own desires, not to sacrifice for the child’s; to fulfill their own needs, not because they long to spend the rest of their lives fulfilling their children’s needs; to reward themselves, not because they want to shower love upon their kids. 

 

To this culture of death, the Church boldly and joyfully promotes the culture of life.”

 

Dolan presents the Church’s teachings in a very clear and colloquial manner.  This monograph is meant to influence not just Catholics, but people of all faiths, especially those who might be unsympathetic or even hostile to the Church’s moral stance.  Only the first half of this e-book is devoted to Cardinal Dolan’s monograph.  The second half is titled “Dolan in Conversation,” written with John L. Allen, Jr.  It contains a concise biography of the Cardinal’s life and career, with a particular focus on his goals for strengthening the faith and religious education of Catholics in America and around the world. The e-book concludes with the following declaration: “Whatever the future may have in store for Dolan—whether he stays in New York until he dies, whether he’s eventually called to Rome to work in a senior Vatican post, or something else entirely—he will be a force in the Catholic Church both nationally and internationally, and it’s well worth trying to discern what that might mean.” 

 

–Chris Chan

 

 

The Little World of Don Camillo

The Little World of Don Camillo and the other entries in the Don Camillo series.  By Giovanni Guareschi, Benediction Books, Penguin, 1950-1970.

 

The Don Camillo series consists of numerous fictional short stories, all set in a seemingly idyllic Italian village in the years following the Second World War.  Some of the stories are farces, others depict battles of the sexes, and a few are political satires.  All of them are parables, and the short stories of Giovanni Guareschi are some of the most profound and enjoyable religious-themed fiction of the twentieth century, and certainly rank amongst the funniest stories of any kind ever.

 

Don Camillo is the parish priest of a small town, and though he has no doubts whatsoever about his religious faith or the doctrines of his Church, he still has very human flaws.  On television or in other venues of popular culture, when a priest is portrayed as anything less than saintly, that priest is portrayed as a bigot or incapable of restraining his sexual impulses.  Guareschi is far more believable– and subtle– in his characterization of Don Camillo, where the priest’s primary flaws are his quick temper and his slowness to abandon a grudge.  In all other respects, Don Camillo is a model priest, although he often takes an unorthodox approach to saving people’s souls.  

 

Don Camillo’s chief nemesis is Peppone, the town’s mayor, an equally fiery-tempered member of the Communist Party.  Don Camillo and Peppone are often at each other’s throats, but they often have to work together for the good of the town.  They are never friends, but over the course of the series they develop a highly reluctant respect for each other.  Both Don Camillo and Peppone are physically powerful men who use their fists to resolve their differences much more often than they should.  In extreme cases, Don Camillo picks up a cricket bat or a park bench in order to teach an offender a lesson.  Intriguingly, as a Communist, Peppone officially attacks the Church, in private life Peppone and many of his followers attend church services regularly and make sure that their children receive the sacraments.  Don Camillo has no sympathy for communism whatsoever, although he is as quick to attack the rich and powerful when they stray from God’s Commandments as he is to attack the communists, crooks, and other assorted sinners composing the populace.

 

The other major characters include Peppone’s wife, who is often not as loyal to her husband’s political causes as he would wish her to be.  The local Bishop is an extremely decent and long-suffering figure who competently handles the countless frustrating administrative duties and problems, many of which are due to Don Camillo’s heavy-handed methods to resolving conflict.  Finally, the voice of God himself is a major figure in the series, speaking through the enormous crucifix in Don Camillo’s church, firmly but kindly guiding Don Camillo through moral quandaries.

 

In his introduction to his first volume of Don Camillo stories, Giovanni Guareschi describes his fictional world and the moral compass that directs his characters:

 

“The Little World of Don Camillo is to be found somewhere in the valley of the Po River. It is almost any village on that stretch of plain in Northern Italy. There, between the Po and the Apennines, the climate is always the same. The landscape never changes and, in country like this, you can stop along any road for a moment and look at a farmhouse sitting in the midst of maize and hemp - and immediately a story is born.

 

Why do I tell you this instead of getting on with my story? Because I want you to understand that, in the Little World between the river and the mountains, many things can happen that cannot happen anywhere else. Here, the deep, eternal breathing of the river freshens the air, for both the living and the dead, and even the dogs, have souls. If you keep this in mind, you will easily come to know the village priest, Don Camillo, and his adversary, Peppone, the Communist Mayor. You will not be surprised that Christ watches the goings-on from a big cross in the village church and not infrequently talks, and that one man beats the other over the head, but fairly - that is, without hatred - and that in the end the two enemies find they agree about the essentials. 

 

And one final word of explanation before I begin my story. If there is a priest anywhere who feels offended by my treatment of Don Camillo, he is welcome to break the biggest candle available over my head. And if there is a Communist who feels offended by Peppone, he is welcome to break a hammer and sickle on my back. But if there is anyone who is offended by the conversations of Christ, I can't help it; for the one who speaks in this story is not Christ, but my Christ - that is, the voice of my conscience.”

 

The plotlines are diverse and inventive.  In one, Don Camillo refuses to christen Peppone’s son because the mayor wants him named Lenin (“Have him baptized in Russia,” Don Camillo snaps.).  In another, Don Camillo has to prevent Peppone from committing a murder, and in yet another Don Camillo has to help the dropout Peppone pass a school-level test in order to finally get his grade-school degree.  Sometimes Peppone and Don Camillo join forces to catch criminals or terrorists, or on occaision the mayor has to bail Don Camillo out from the consequences of his bad temper.

 

The Don Camillo stories have been adapted for film and television in Europe, though all of the screen versions of Don Camillo are at this writing completely unseen by me.  I am, however, familiar with a BBC radio dramatization of the stories, consisting of twenty half-hour episodes, faithfully adapting and expanding some of the best tales.  Initially, the well-respected British character actor Alun Armstrong stars as Don Camillo, and Ian Hogg takes over the role later in the series.  The radio series is preternaturally entertaining, perfectly capturing the soul and the style of the stories, blending humor and poignancy in unexpected ways, and never sacrificing a poignant moral for the sake of an easy joke.

 

Though all the human characters have to wrestle with base emotions and feet of clay, stories all have incontrovertible morals, though the humor staves off any preachiness.  In one tale, “A Lesson in Tactics,” from Don Camillo’s Dilemma, Don Camillo bends the truth in order to gain money the town badly needs.  At the end, Don Camillo has the following conversation with God:

 

“Don Camillo went to kneel before the Crucified Christ over the main altar.

“I’m not especially pleased with you, Don Camillo,” Christ said.  “The old man and Peppone and his friends behaved themselves more creditably than you did.”

“But if I hadn’t stirred up the situation a bit, nothing would have come out of it,” protested Don Camillo weakly.

“That doesn’t matter.  Even if some good comes out of your evildoing, you’re responsible to God for what you did.  Unless you understand this, you’ve misunderstood God’s word completely.”

“God will forgive me,” murmured Don Camillo, lowering his head.

“No, Don Camillo, because when you think of all the good which your sin has done for the poor you won’t ever honestly repent.”

Don Camillo threw out his arms and felt very sad, because he knew that Christ was quite right.” (149)

 

The Don Camillo stories seamlessly intertwine a deep and genuine sense of morality into the dialogue and plot resolutions.  No character is purely virtuous (save for Chrst, and no character is beyond redemption or the mercy of God.  The little angel-vs.-devil cartoons scattered throughout the books add to the series’ charm.  Unfortunately, the quality of some translations from the original Italian varies a bit, and some volumes published in America omit certain stories, which is a disappointment for completists.  Indeed, once you visit The Little World of Don Camillo, you may never want to leave.

 

­­–Chris Chan

Saint Thomas Aquinas: “The Dumb Ox”

Saint Thomas Aquinas: “The Dumb Ox.”  By G.K. Chesterton, 1933.

 

 

It sounds surprising that a book devoted to one of the great theologians of all time would refer to its subject as “The Dumb Ox,” but that is exactly what G.K. Chesterton did in his reflections on the life and legacy of Saint Thomas Aquinas.  St. Thomas’s immense size and his tendency to be silent during his formal education led to him being given that nickname.  Yet his quiet and sometimes awkward demeanor disguised a prodigious memory and razor-sharp analytical skills, and over time St. Thomas would produce some of the classic works of Catholic theology, which would eventually lead to his being declared a Doctor of the Church.  Chesterton’s book is not a biography so much as it is his own reflections and interpretations of Aquinas’s works.  In his introduction, Chesterton writes:

 

“This book makes no pretence to be anything but a popular sketch of a great

historical character who ought to be more popular. Its aim will be achieved, if it

leads those who have hardly even heard of St. Thomas Aquinas to read about

him in better books. But from this necessary limitation certain consequences

follow, which should perhaps be allowed for from the start.”

 

G.K. Chesterton’s wrote two books on saints, the other being St. Francis of Assisi (see the August 2011 review).  St. Francis of Assisi and St. Thomas Aquinas were completely different in appearance, and approach to their faith, but both were great saints, and Chesterton observes that there can be very different paths to sainthood.  St. Francis lived his faith in an aesthetic manner, and St. Thomas sought to understand the ways of God through intellectual work and logic.  As Chesterton muses:

 

“St. Thomas was a huge heavy bull of a man, fat and slow and quiet; very mild

and magnanimous but not very sociable; shy, even apart from the humility of

holiness; and abstracted, even apart from his occasional and carefully concealed experiences of trance or ecstasy. St. Francis was so fiery and even fidgety that the ecclesiastics, before whom he appeared quite suddenly, thought he was a madman. St. Thomas was so stolid that the scholars, in the schools which he attended regularly, thought he was a dunce. Indeed, he was the sort of schoolboy, not unknown, who would much rather be thought a dunce than have his own dreams invaded, by more active or animated dunces. This external contrast extends to almost every point in the two personalities. It was the paradox of St. Francis that while he was passionately fond of poems, he was rather distrustful of books. It was the outstanding fact about St. Thomas that he loved books and lived on books; that he lived the very life of the clerk or scholar in The Canterbury Tales, who would rather have a hundred books of Aristotle and his philosophy than any wealth the world could give him. When asked for what he thanked God most, he answered simply, "I have understood every page I ever read."

 

In an essay on Chesterton’s Saint Thomas Aquinas, Dale Ahlquist, President of the American Chesterton Society, wrote that, “Evelyn Waugh claimed that G.K. Chesterton never actually read the Summa Theologica. He simply ran his fingers over the binding and absorbed its content.”  The historical accuracy of this anecdote is open to question, but there is another story from Chesterton’s secretary, Dorothy Collins, who claimed that Chesterton composed part of his book on Aquinas, asked her to pick up some library books on the subject, flipped through a single one, and after a quick stroll finished the manuscript. 

 

A major theme in this book is the role of theology in the world, and how the moderns have disconnected themselves from theology, and why people need a strong grasp of theology in order to better understand the world.  In a society where theology is not respected, people are left vulnerable to all manners of trends, fans, and random ideas in general.  Chesterton writes:

 

“In truth, this [debate over theology] vividly illuminates the provincial stupidity of those who object to what they call "creeds and dogmas." It was precisely the creed and dogma that saved the sanity of the world. These people generally propose an alternative religion of intuition and feeling. If, in the really Dark Ages, there had been a religion of feeling, it would have been a religion of black and suicidal feeling. It was the rigid creed that resisted the rush of suicidal feeling. The critics of asceticism are probably right in supposing that many a Western hermit did feel rather like an Eastern fakir. But he could not really think like an Eastern fakir; because he was an orthodox Catholic. And what kept his thought in touch with healthier and more humanistic thought was simply and solely the Dogma. He could not deny that a good God had created the normal and natural world; he could not say that the devil had made the world; because he was not a Manichee. A thousand enthusiasts for celibacy, in the day of the great rush to the desert or the cloister, might have called marriage a sin, if they had only considered their individual ideals, in the modern manner, and their own immediate feelings about marriage. Fortunately, they had to accept the Authority of the Church, which had definitely said that marriage was not a sin. A modern emotional religion might at any moment have turned Catholicism into Manichaeism. But when Religion would have maddened men, Theology kept them sane.”

 

Understanding religion with the power of the mind helps to strengthen believers against attacks, heresies, and misconceptions.  In his closing paragraphs, Chesterton observes how following Aquinas’s life of the mind can make someone a better Christian, because faith and reason are complementary virtues, not antonyms.

 

“To sum up; the reality of things, the mutability of things, the diversity of things,

and all other such things that can be attributed to things, is followed carefully by

the medieval philosopher, without losing touch with the original point of the

reality. There is no space in this book to specify the thousand steps of thought by which he shows that he is right. But the point is that, even apart from being right he is real. He is a realist in a rather curious sense of his own, which is a third thing, distinct from the almost contrary medieval and modern meanings of the word. Even the doubts and difficulties about reality have driven him to believe in more reality rather than less. The deceitfulness of things which has had so sad an effect on so many sages, has almost a contrary effect on this sage. If things deceive us, it is by being more real than they seem. As ends in themselves they always deceive us; but as things tending to a greater end, they are even more real than we think them.”

 

 

–Chris Chan

Unafraid of Virginia Woolf: The Friends and Enemies of Roy Campbell

Unafraid of Virginia Woolf: The Friends and Enemies of Roy Campbell.  By Joseph Pearce. Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2004.

 

Unafraid of Virginia Woolf is a biography of the British poet Roy Campbell, as well as a portrait of the Spanish Revolution and the ensuing persecutions of Catholics during that time.  Joseph Pearce has made a career of exploring Catholicism in literature, as well as bringing heretofore obscure aspects of religious history to his readers.  This book was originally published in England under the title Bloomsbury and Beyond.  The new title is better.

 

Early in his career, Campbell was a golden boy in British literary circles, and was taken into the heart of the Bloomsbury Group.  Campbell renounced this privileged position after his wife was seduced by Vita Sackville-West, the noted author and Virginia Woolf’s mistress.  Campbell fled England with his wife and daughters, rebuilt his marriage, experienced a religious crisis, and converted to Roman Catholicism. (113-121) The expatriate poet quickly developed a burning distaste for the pretension and permissiveness he believed that the Bloomsbury Group embodied– and for that matter, all that they desired to accomplish as modernists– and sought to attack them and their ideology in his work.  In his poem The Georgiad, he specifically targeted the Bloomsbury Group, their sexual mores, and their irreligion for satire.  

 

“Nor knew the Greeks, save in the laughing page,

The philosophic emblem of our age,

Whose Hoof is stamped on all, whose voice is law,

Whom every poet serves with reverent awe.

And makes his voice one deafening he-haw,

One loud complaint of devastating grief,

Against his life, his loves, and his beliefs,

Still in his tender disillusion sore

Because, ten years ago, there was a war,

Seeing in all things woes to wound his nerves–

Save in, the damp philosophy he serves.

Which is the fountain-source of all his woes

And yet to which the fool for healing goes.” (167)

 

After the poem was published, it is not surprising that the Bloomsbury Group attacked Campbell.  Their criticisms were much more subtle than Campbell’s jibes at them, however, and they spread false rumors about Campbell’s inferiority complex compared to the rest of Bloomsbury (a lie, Campbell’s ego convinced him that his work was superior than that of anyone else from Bloomsbury), and poorly educated (another fib, Campbell was multilingual and perfectly capable of reading authors the vengeful Bloomsbury authors claimed he could not possibly understand outside of translations). (166)

 

Pearce observes that Campbell’s attack on the Bloomsbury Group, as well as his verbal assaults on other enemies, was notable for its absence of charity and its vitriolic tone.  One of the reasons why Campbell made so many enemies is that he was reluctant to drop grudges and he was able to continually refuel the fires of anger.  Nevertheless, his friendships were often real and lasting, and such as when he befriended the  some of the Inklings; the academic, Christian writers such as J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis who were polar opposites of the Bloomsbury Group.  Campbell made a distinct impression on his similarly-minded friends.  Indeed, Tolkien based the physical description of Strider the Ranger from The Lord of the Rings on Campbell.

 

Pearce describes the turbulent world of the Spanish Civil War.  At that time, the Catholic clergy was specifically targeted for attack by the Republican forces, who intended to erase the influence of the Church from Spain.  An entire monastery of monks who had befriended the Campbell family was killed.  Other members of the clergy would be tortured in sadistic ways, such as by having rosary beads stuffed into their ears.  Twelve bishops, 4,184 priests, 2,365 monks, and approximately 300 nuns were slaughtered during the war.  The Campbells themselves were nearly killed, but his experiences and the religious lessons he learned during this time would influence his poetry for the rest of his life.

 

In “Mass at Dawn,” an example of Campbell’s religious poetry, Campbell expresses the centrality of religion in his new Catholic worldview.

 

 Mass at Dawn

I dropped my sail and dried my dripping seines


Where the white quay is chequered by cool planes


In whose great branches, always out of sight,


The nightingales are singing day and night.


Though all was grey beneath the moon’s grey beam,


My boat in her new paint shone like a bride,


And silver in my baskets shone the bream:


My arms were tired and I was heavy-eyed,


But when with food and drink, at morning-light,


The children met me at the water-side,


Never was wine so red or bread so white.

 

In his essay “Roy Campbell: Bombast and Fire,” (http://www.catholicauthors.com/roy_campbell.html) Pearce writes, “Roy Campbell was considered by many of his peers, most notably by T.S. Eliot, Dylan Thomas, and Edith Sitwell, as one of the finest poets of the 20th century. Why then, one wonders, is he not as well-known today as many lesser poets? The answer lies in his robust defense of unfashionable causes, both religious and political, but also, and more regrettably, in his unfortunate predilection for making powerful enemies. Seldom has a life been more fiery, more controversial, and more full of friendship and enmity than that of this most mercurial of men.”  

 

Unafraid of Virginia Woolf  is a fascinating look at how religious faith can shape a creative artist’s imagination, as well as heal seemingly irreparable fissions in a marriage.  It also provides an indelible picture of the often-overlooked atrocities that took place during the Spanish Civil War.

 

 

–Chris Chan