The Everlasting Man

A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.

Rating: 4.5/5 – Beautiful writing and a unique perspective on apologetics.

I started this book on the recommendation of C.S. Lewis, for whom it was an instrumental part of his conversion.

This is a literary, poetic, and totally unique approach to apologetics that I have never encountered before, all told in beautiful, enchanting prose.

Chesterton makes two principle arguments: That man is wholly unlike the other animals and that Jesus is wholly unlike the other men. On this foundation he builds his case for the truth and power of the Gospel over all other supposedly competing narratives.

I came away from this book with a host of new thoughts and a desire to show more read a lot more Chesterton’s other works. I don’t know if I can pay a book a bigger compliment than that. show less

I don't understand how this book continues to get such high ratings and still is being praised. Agreed, it clearly contains 'strokes of genius', insights that were cleverly found on the basis of the information available at the time (1925). So I'm not going to dispute that Chesterton had a very sharp mind. But this book is nearly a century old, which is an insurmountable handicap for a work that claims to offer a history of the world. His passages about prehistoric man and about the earliest civilizations are completely obsolete according to current insights. And Chesterton's language is – and I’ll try to stay polite – very derogatory and sometimes utterly racist: for example, he constantly uses the words 'rude savages' when show more talking about Australian aborigines, and the infamous n-word also crops up regularly. The whole book, exudes an exclusively white, Eurocentric spirit; you can't really blame Chesterton for being a child of his time, but he’s really laying it on thick. And then there’s his horrible, pedantic style, with a constant ridicule of dissenting opinions, especially those based on scientific research (which, by the way, immediately prompted him to make a slight adjustment in an appendix). Obviously, this is an extremely polemical work, with a single goal: namely jamming it down our throat that with the introduction of Christianity world history has taken a fundamentally different path. I could follow that somewhat philosophically and theologically (but not in the terms Chesterton uses), but historically this just doesn't make sense. I really looked forward to reading this, but unfortunately, it was another disappointment. I don't understand how this book continues to get such high ratings and still is being praised. Agreed, it clearly contains 'strokes of genius', insights that were cleverly found on the basis of the information available at the time (1925). So I'm not going to dispute that Chesterton had a very sharp mind. But this book is nearly a century old, which is an insurmountable handicap for a work that claims to offer a history of the world. His passages about prehistoric man and about the earliest civilizations are completely obsolete according to current insights. And Chesterton's language is – and I’ll try to stay polite – very derogatory and sometimes utterly racist: for example, he constantly uses the words 'rude savages' when talking about Australian aborigines, and the infamous n-word also crops up regularly. The whole book, exudes an exclusively white, Eurocentric spirit; you can't really blame Chesterton for being a child of his time, but he’s really laying it on thick. And then there’s his horrible, pedantic style, with a constant ridicule of dissenting opinions, especially those based on scientific research (which, by the way, immediately prompted him to make a slight adjustment in an appendix). Obviously, this is an extremely polemical work, with a single goal: namely jamming it down our throat that with the introduction of Christianity world history has taken a fundamentally different path. I could follow that somewhat philosophically and theologically (but not in the terms Chesterton uses), but historically this just doesn't make sense. I really looked forward to reading this, but unfortunately, it was another disappointment.
For a view positive remarks, see my History-account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/4399439729 show less

It's difficult for me to review The Everlasting Man adequately, largely for two reasons.

One is that G.K. Chesterton, being both a philosopher and a man of letters, here speaks in a style both rambling and strongly reminiscent of a lecture (or series of lectures). It's not patronizing, but the most important ideas Chesterton means to communicate can easily become buried. Ask me what the book is about, and from remembering the description I saw before I read it, I can tell you it's supposed to be a study of history and anthropology working under the assumption that the Bible is true and Jesus Christ is who He said He is; but press me to tell you what the book is about based on what I actually read in it, and I 'll probably have to show more say..."lots of things." C.S. Lewis is easier to follow.

The other is that Chesterton (also a Catholic par excellence) draws very extensively on Catholic philosophy for his interpretation of history and anthropology. I'm mostly ignorant of Catholic doctrine and philosophy, leaving me unable to fully appreciate (meaning "absorb," not "like" or "accept") all the...nuances, probably...of everything he says to illustrate his broader points. But something I picked up that I hadn't really thought of is that there were, according to Chesterton, two kinds of paganism. One was the "diabolism" represented by the Canaanite tribes' worship of their monstrous fire god Molech; the other was a softer idolatry born of the demands of the imagination; it's related to poetry and the need to make it.

I just remembered to mention something else, the real failing of the book. I already knew Chesterton was Eurocentric, having read that in reviews; but Chesterton's displays of cultural and (occasionally) racial arrogance are more blatant than I expected. He makes it clear that he considers everything outside European civilization the province of ignorant savages. That was enough to roll my eyes at (and I'm a conservative), but after he stepped below that by making some reference to "niggers" (he might not have been referring to Africans--I forget), I felt embarrassed for him while simultaneously appreciating the rest of what he has to teach. It doesn't help that later in the book, he takes a gratuitous cheap shot at Americans.

It's a book I should read again in the near future.

__________________________________________
11/5/2016

Since I first read The Everlasting Man, it has steadily risen in my esteem. I have many times taken it down to reread certain sections. I always reread it with fascination and delight; one can tell because I've long since underlined liberally on almost every page. I gave my review another star, but still won't ascribe a fifth star, because of Chesterton's embarrassing use of a racial epithet. show less

This wasn't quite what I was expecting, but I did still enjoy it for the most part. I don't know if I am just too jaded by apologetics and deep into church history, but I wasn't struck by anything here as profound or paradigm-shifting. This is certainly a book for those who already hold Christian beliefs, as I didn't find the evidence against other belief systems that impressive. There is something unique about original Christianity, and it feels like a lot of that is utterly lost today in Christian nationalism.

Christian apologetics is not my thing. On the other hand, Chesterton could be insightfully witty about ignorant anti-Christians. Like Oscar Wilde, Chesterton seems to write very insubstantially, and his work is best consumed in quotations, rather than in whole-book chunks. I don't think he's quite so precious as Wilde, though.

https://www.chesterton.org advertises a new, thoroughly annotated version of the book. Chesterton was an exceptionally erudite person so some of his allusions, being both erudite and dated, would be incomprehensible to many contemporary readers.

From beginning to end this book is a defense of Roman Catholicism and an endless attack on all contrary opinion. It is not an easy read. It is not for some one with an elementary school education nor even a high school education. Unless you are fortunate enough to have had some Latin, maybe a little Greek, studied Greek and Roman mythology, possibly some archeology, ancient history much of this is likely to go completely past you. For those relatively few scholars amongst us this is a glorious exposition of heaven and earth. For others it may turn into a case of, what in the world is he ranting about. Whether Catholic or not it is worth a try. Don’t give up. An understanding of the world as heaven and earth, believers and show more non-believers is there waiting for exposure. show less

Theological tractate as an adventure novel?
"Why not?" Chesterton said.
I can argue with some details, but in general... Five Stars.