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

一项关于切斯特顿的新研究对目前二十世纪英国史学中的一些核心和相互关联的问题具有重要意义。二十世纪维多利亚时代的问题最近一直困扰着历史学家。这是彼得和苏珊·彼得森于1994年编辑的一项里程碑式研究的主题，以及去年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19世纪末以来，英国和英国的民族认同和爱国主义问题仍然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·科利斯最近的著作。这三位历史学家都强调了切斯特顿在发展这一时期英国身份认同的民粹主义潜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性预言家的工作、其基础、影响和历史遗产的详细探索尚未展开。同样，J·H·格兰杰的著作《爱国主义：英国，1900-1940(1986)》很好地引出了切斯特顿对爱德华七世时代爱国主义喧嚣氛围的贡献。但还有很大的阐述余地，尤其是关于公民身份和爱国主义的论述之间的紧张关系，我在最近发表在《历史杂志》上的一篇文章中指出了这一点。最后，在约翰·格罗斯(John Gross)的《英国文学家的崛起与衰落》(The Rise and Faff of the English Letters of Letters，1969)一书的影响下，作为政治辩论和观点的主要渠道的英国文学新闻学的研究继续蓬勃发展，莫列罗和麦克勒最近在《维多利亚文化期刊》上发表了文章。我的主要目的和目标是展示切斯特顿的作品如何代表了英国国家认同的时刻，这一时刻与20世纪初英国知识分子和文化精英所宣传的公民身份的大部分世俗话语相冲突；此外，在二十世纪及以后，英格兰的种族观念在塑造英国人的自我理解和身份认同方面发挥了重要作用，尽管民族文化的日益世俗化以改变的面目维持着维多利亚晚期文学家作为公共道德家的传统远远超出爱德华七世时期使20世纪英国对维多利亚和现代之间的边界的现有理解复杂化英国帮助提高了罗马天主教在英国的‘英语’形象两次世界大战之间被当代作家和批评家误判为‘现代化’议程1潜在的应用和好处这项研究直接涉及到近几个月来在英格兰和英国关于国家身份和爱国主义性质的公共辩论。切斯特顿将英国民族视为秘密民族的概念--既反对统治，也反对被统治--以及他对爱国主义的倡导，在民族文化中留下了永久的印记。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》和随后的期刊《环境》中都认识到了这一点，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。这项研究为切斯特顿的爱国主义和他的英国视野提供了一个更丰富、更平衡的观点。此外，这项研究将有助于纠正克里斯·巴尔迪克最近在《牛津文学史》第10卷《现代运动》中强调的20世纪早期文学研究的空白。正如他认为的那样，目前英语研究中对现代主义和现代主义的关注实际上已经将切斯特顿等非现代主义作家排挤在外，切斯特顿的影响远远超过了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通过新闻不断追求的争议，我的研究将有助于对那个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