The Metaphysical Mysteries of G.K. Chesterton: A Critical Study of the Father Brown Stories and Other Detective Fiction, by Laird R. Blackwell. McFarland, 2017. 188 pages. Softcover, $49.95.
The Metaphysical Mysteries of G.K. Chesterton is a collection of short reviews and recaps of most of Chesterton’s novels and short stories that feature crimes. Father Brown tales make up the vast majority of the miniature essays, but novels like Manalive, and short story collections like The Paradoxes of Mr. Pond and The Club of Queer Trades are featured.
Blackwell introduces himself as a longtime fan of Chesterton’s detective fiction, and his appreciation for Chesterton’s most brilliant twists and crime situations reveal a deep appreciation for the great man’s writing skills. However, Blackwell falls into the subcategory of critics who balks at the overt religiosity of Chesterton’s works, and this leads to some critical judgements on Blackwell’s part that may chafe many members of the The Society of Gilbert Keith Chesterton, myself included.
Throughout the book, Blackwell complains about Father Brown’s sermonizing, and the introduction of moral themes into the detective stories. This is a common complaint in many circles, but I find it rather unfair that Father Brown is attacked for being a priest who takes pride in his job and is good at it. It seems as if critics like Blackwell are insisting that religion has to be relegated so deeply into the private sphere, that not even fictional priests are allowed to discuss it.
On multiple occasions, Blackwell accuses Father Brown of “religious chauvinism” simply for defending the Catholic faith and for arguing in favor of Catholic moral principles and worldviews. (Blackwell tends to repeat his criticisms over and over again, using the same language most times.) The critics may rail against preachiness, but to me it seems like an attempt to drive certain viewpoints out of the public eye. I have yet to find a prominent reviewer demand that acclaimed postmodern novelists delete long passages about nihilism and moral relativism from their books on the grounds of preaching an unwelcome perspective, and I see no reason why Father Brown should be told to shut up when the prophets of despair are allowed free rein.
Personally, I have always seen Father Brown’s sermons as a means of explaining how the human mind and soul can go dreadfully wrong, causing people to commit all sorts of crimes. To me, Father Brown’s reflections are comparable to the summations in psychological crime novels that explain the mental processes behind a violent killer’s psyche. Studying the spiritual rot and shortcomings that may lead someone to crime seem just as important to me as the psychological, cultural, and socio-economic stimuli that cause lawbreaking and destruction.
Blackwell includes a list of what he considers to be Chesterton’s best detective stories, though I personally was stunned to discover that the tale I believe to be the best Father Brown story of all, “The Chief Mourner of Marne,” didn’t make the cut.
This book’s primary value comes from Blackwell adding his personal insights and perspectives on Chesterton’s mysteries and occasional insights on his plotting skills. However, fans of Chesterton’s work will find little that they don’t already know. People who have already read Chesterton’s fiction extensively will already know the details of the stories, and the short summaries (many of which are less than a page and a half long), have been carefully tailored to avoid spoilers, though many of the summaries are so vague as to provide few details about the short stories whatsoever. After reading The Metaphysical Mysteries of G.K. Chesterton, I felt like I was getting a nice insight into why one scholar enjoyed Chesterton’s work, but I did not learn anything original, or even come across any criticisms that I hadn’t seen many times in the past.
This is the first critical study of Chesterton’s crime writing to be nominated for the Mystery Writers of America’s Edgar Award for Best Critical/Autobiographical Work (the award is still pending as of this writing). It’s nice to see Chestertonian studies finally getting more recognition, but given the plethora of fine books on Chesterton and his writings, it’s disappointing that some of the other, more informative and insightful works about Chesterton haven’t made it onto similar award lists in the past.
–Chris Chan
This review first appeared in Gilbert!
