I mentioned below I have been reading Chesterton's America. The editor, Mr. Bennett, has done a very interesting thing. While Cecil Chesterton's text forms the backbone of the book, he brings in commentary on each period of history from other Distributists' writings; for example, we find passages from G.K. Chesterston, Hillare Belloc, Herbert Agar, and other intertwined with the main text.

 

It is interesting to read an outside view (an English view at that) of American history. I have read several things already which we never heard in school. Just to name three: That New England relied heavily on slave trade for their economy at least until the mid-to-late 1700's. Related, that the view in the South that the African slaves were somehow sub-human was not introduced and not widely held until into the 19th century. And thirdly, the whole "No taxation without

representation" rationale for the American Rebellion was somewhat of a sham. In fact some 80% of British subjects were taxed without representation at the time. The matter was more complicated ....

 

But MOST surprising to me is that fact that I am reading Cecil and GK side-by-side and finding I like reading Cecil more than GK. Who would have thought?

 

Oremus pro invicem!

Chesterton's America

Got this book in the mail today. I was inspired by this review by my favorite editor.

 

 

Can't wait to get started ... and by the way the Chesterton in the title is not GK, but his brother Cecil.

 

On another note, we picked 9 gallons of blueberries today in Chesterfield. These should last us a little while.

Oremus pro invicem!

The Blockade Runners

Just finished listening to The Blockade Runners by Jules Verne courtesy of www.Librivox.org. First, a hat tip to the reader. I have listened to him on several other novels, most recently one by Louis L’Amour, and, by chance, he is from Simpsonville, SC.

About the book: it is short and takes place around 1862 (written in 1864). The basic plot concerns a ship which plans to run the Federal blockade of Charleston, SC in order to deliver arms and return with much-needed cotton to the British Isles.

What most fascinated me was the attitude about the conflict (the war between the states, the war of Northern aggression, or the Civil War-depending on your persuasion.) The main protagonist, the ship’s captain, believed the war was about slavery-though, at least initially, he was partial to the Confederate cause, but not a fan of slavery . Recall the author was French and the protagonist was British.

It is always interesting to get outside perspectives on this. Recall that a year or two ago I read Chesterton’s (Cecil’s) America (my commentary here) . Of course Chesterton's view was more nuanced and presented a history of the country leading to the conflict. Things are always more complicated than they seem.

****************

Here’s an observation for those who listen to books frequently. Why is it that women readers can easily give voice to a male character in the book without sounding ridiculous, but a man reader cannot do the same for a female character in the book.

In the present book I am listening to (a Max Brand western), the male reader does the sensible thing. When reading the dialogue of a female character, he doesn’t try to sound female; he simply changes his inflection slightly as he does with each character.

(BTW – in my view Max Brand westerns don’t hold much of a candle to Louis L’Amour.)

Oremus pro invicem!