The England of G. K. Chesterton: Patriotism, Christianity, and National Identity in Twentieth-Century Britain

对切斯特顿的重新研究，对于当前20世纪英国史学中的一些核心问题和相互关联的问题具有重要意义。世纪的罗马人问题近来一直困扰着历史学家。这是彼得和苏珊·佩德森1994年编辑的一项里程碑式的研究的主题，也是去年7月在利兹维多利亚研究中心举行的一次国际会议的主题。自世纪末以来，英国和英国的民族认同和爱国主义问题一直是史学辩论的重要议题，最引人注目的是克里山·库马尔、乔纳森·克拉克和罗伯特·科利斯的近期著作。所有三位历史学家都强调切斯特顿在这一时期发展英国身份的民粹主义暗流和增强民族自我意识方面的重要性;但对他作为英国民族地位先知的工作，其基础，影响和历史遗产的详细探索尚未进行。同样，J.H.格兰杰的书，爱国主义：《英国，1900-1940》（1986）成功地引出了切斯特顿对爱德华七世爱国主义的“嘈杂”气氛的贡献。但仍有许多地方需要进一步阐述，尤其是我在《历史杂志》（The Historical Journal）最近的一篇文章中所阐述的公民身份和爱国主义话语之间的紧张关系。最后，对世纪早期英国文学新闻的研究，作为政治辩论和意见的一个关键渠道，在约翰·格罗斯的《英国文人的崛起和衰落》（1969年）的影响下继续蓬勃发展，我的主要目的和目标是展示切斯特顿的作品是如何代表英国民族的时刻。身份认同与世纪初英国知识和文化精英所宣扬的公民身份的世俗话语发生冲突;英国的种族观念在塑造20世纪及以后的英国人的自我理解和身份认同方面也发挥了重要作用，尽管民族文化日益世俗化，但已故的传统却以不同的形式得以维持-维多利亚时代的文人作为公共道德家，远远超出了爱德华七世时期，这使人们对维多利亚时代和20世纪现代之间界限的现有理解变得复杂。世纪的英国帮助提高了罗马天主教在英国的“英语”形象，但当代作家和批评家对罗马天主教的“现代化”倾向作出了错误的判断。潜在的应用和好处这项研究直接关系到最近几个月在英格兰和英国加剧的关于国家认同和爱国主义性质的公众辩论。切斯特顿将英国民族视为“秘密民族”--既反对统治，又反对被统治--的概念，以及他对爱国主义的倡导，在民族文化上留下了永久的印记。这一点最近得到了作家和评论家的认可;帕特里克赖特在《卫报评论》和随后的《环境》杂志上，但赖特从根本上误解了切斯特顿和他的崇拜者是愚蠢的反动派。这项研究提供了一个更丰富，更平衡的切斯特顿的爱国主义和他的英语view.In此外，这项研究将在一定程度上纠正克里斯Baldick最近在牛津文学史，现代运动第10卷中强调的20世纪初的文学研究的空白。正如他所认为的，目前在英语研究中对现代主义和现代主义者的关注实际上已经使切斯特顿等非现代主义作家靠边站，他的影响力远远大于一些主要的现代主义人物。由于切斯特顿的散文作品和诗歌不能脱离他不断通过新闻引起的争议，我的研究将有助于对这一时期更广泛的文学欣赏

A new study of Chesterton is important to a number of central and interrelated concerns in the historiography of twentieth-century Britain at present. The issue of the Victorians in the twentieth century has much exercised historians recently. It was the subject of a landmark study edited by Peter and Susan Pedersen in 1994 and an international conference at the Leeds Centre for Victorian Studies last July. The question of English and British national identity and patriotism since the late-nineteenth century remains high on the agenda of historiographical debate, most notably through recent works by Krishan Kumar, Jonathan Clark, and Robert Colis. All three historians emphasis Chesterton's importance in developing the populist undercurrents of English identity in this period and enhancing national self-consciousness; but a detailed exploration of his work as a prophet of English nationhood, its basis, impact and historical legacy has yet to be undertaken. Similarly, J.H. Grainger's book, Patriotisms: Britain, 1900-1940 (1 986) well succeeds in eliciting Chesterton's contribution to the 'noisy' atmosphere of Edwardian patriotism. But there remains much scope for elaboration, not least in relation to the tension between the discourses of citizenship and patriotism that I have worked out in a recent article in The Historical Journal. Finally, the study of literary journalism in early-twentieth century Britain as a key channel of political debate and opinion has continued to thrive under the influence of John Gross's The Rise and Faff of the English Man of Letters (1969), with recent articles in the Journal of Victorian Culture by Mauriello and Macleod.My main aims and objectives are to demonstrate how Chesterton's writingsrepresent a moment of English national identity that clashed with the largely secular discourse of citizenship propagated by the intellectual and cultural elite in early-twentieth century Britain; also racial conceptions of England played a significant role in shaping English self-understanding and identity in the twentieth-century and beyond, despite the increasing secularisation of the national culture sustained in altered guises the tradition of the late-Victorian man of letters as public moralist well beyond the Edwardian period complicate existing understandings of the boundary between the Victorian and the modern in twentieth-century Britain helped to raise the 'English' profile of Roman Catholicism in Britain between the wars have been misjudged by contemporary writers and critics with 'modernising' agendas1 Potential Applications and BenefitsThis research bears directly upon the public debate about the nature of national identity and patriotism in England and Britain that has intensified in recent months. Chesterton's conception of the English nation as the 'Secret People'- averse to both domination and being dominated- and his advocacy of patriotism have left a permanent mark on the national culture. This has been recognised recently by the writer and critic; Patrick Wright in The guardian Review and_- subsequently the journal, surroundings but Wright has fundamentally misunderstood Chesterton and his admirers as mindless reactionaries. This study offers a richer, more balanced view of Chesterton's patriotism and his English vision.In addition, this research will go some way to correcting the lacuna in studies of early twentieth century literature that Chris Baldick has recently highlighted in volume 10 of the Oxford Literary History, The Modern Movement. As he argues, current preoccupations with Modernism and Modernists in English Studies have effectively sidelined non-Modernist authors such as Chesterton, whose influence was far greater than some of the major Modernist figures. As Chesterton's prose works and poems cannot be divorced from the controversy he continually courted through journalism, my study will contribute to a wider literary appreciation of the period