Author Topic: what is not catholic in english prose? (Read 889 times)

spouse of Jesus · « **on:** February 24, 2010, 12:21:02 PM »

As a student of english literture, I read some works of Jane Austen, Thomas Hardy and Henry James etc. We read them only as examples of literary movements without much focus on the works themselves.
However, to me it seems that they are too similar. For example, before/in the eighteenth century, the novelists seem not to like to speak about anything other than some elegant ladies with their gloves and hats and the decoroum and manners, falling in love in someone who is either a cop/soldier or some idiot from Henry VIII's church :barf: (the parson, minister etc.) It all nevertheless looks very good if you compare them with modern novels. The problem is that what is often represented as the return to Tradition, good taste and social values looks too much like that victorian society.
But how can we forget that those buildings, though "ellegant and marvelous",were colored with the innocent blood of so many Saints whom those "civil and well-mannered" gentry loved to kill??? as though charm and decorum could hide a beast's heart and make it human!
I have come across some articles on-line that were meant to attack feminism, vulgarity and some other modern errors by giving the victorian society as a good model and example of all that is traditional, charming and orderly.
Catholicism is neither this nor that. I hate feminism and emanicipation lies, but at them time, I believe that the idea of being foxy and mysterious, hiding in a corner to hunt a man with some majestic charm is idiotic. As though men had to choose between an unavialable career woman and a seductive hard to get "fox" whose only strange was in being dishonest and not too nice! Surely there must be a catholic althernative.
So far for the things that attracted my attention as a girl, those of you who have more information and education surely have much more to add.
BTW, TIA seems a little bit to be advertising an 18th century culture. Am I right?

Jamie · « **Reply #1 on:** February 24, 2010, 02:04:27 PM »

Quote from: spouse of Jesus

As a student of english literture, I read some works of Jane Austen, Thomas Hardy and Henry James etc. We read them only as examples of literary movements without much focus on the works themselves.
However, to me it seems that they are too similar. For example, before/in the eighteenth century, the novelists seem not to like to speak about anything other than some elegant ladies with their gloves and hats and the decoroum and manners, falling in love in someone who is either a cop/soldier or some idiot from Henry VIII's church :barf: (the parson, minister etc.) It all nevertheless looks very good if you compare them with modern novels. The problem is that what is often represented as the return to Tradition, good taste and social values looks too much like that victorian society.
But how can we forget that those buildings, though "ellegant and marvelous",were colored with the innocent blood of so many Saints whom those "civil and well-mannered" gentry loved to kill??? as though charm and decorum could hide a beast's heart and make it human!
I have come across some articles on-line that were meant to attack feminism, vulgarity and some other modern errors by giving the victorian society as a good model and example of all that is traditional, charming and orderly.
Catholicism is neither this nor that. I hate feminism and emanicipation lies, but at them time, I believe that the idea of being foxy and mysterious, hiding in a corner to hunt a man with some majestic charm is idiotic. As though men had to choose between an unavialable career woman and a seductive hard to get "fox" whose only strange was in being dishonest and not too nice! Surely there must be a catholic althernative.
So far for the things that attracted my attention as a girl, those of you who have more information and education surely have much more to add.
BTW, TIA seems a little bit to be advertising an 18th century culture. Am I right?

I think the Victorian times are a bad alternative to modern times as it had all of the sleaze - just below the surface waiting to bubble up.

My own favorite time period is the Middle Ages (most of it) because the world was entirely Catholic (except for the occasional groups of heretics) and women and men were women and men.

If, however, you are looking specifically for books in English of that period, you will find very little - and most historical novels contain added sex scenes and the like to appeal to modern minds.

However, if you are able to skip a few pages when a sex scene is about to begin, I recommend these two books for you:

1. The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco (it contains a sex scene between a young student and a peasant girl) - this is a murder mystery set in the Middle Ages. Historically it is very good - Umberto Eco is a very good researcher. You need to read this in translation (originally Italian I think).

2. Pillars of the Earth (contains at least one sex scene if I recall correctly) - a cathedral builder travels England with his family in the hopes of finding work. This is a very absorbing book and it has a sequel which is also good. My only complaint (aside from the sex) about this book is that the research done was not as good as Mr Eco's so there are some incorrect descriptions of Mass (the author obviously presumes Mass in the Middle ages was the same as the Novus Ordo as he describes people in the congregation replying to the priest who is facing them the whole time).

Belloc · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2010, 02:55:28 PM »

True, the Victorian erea, for any positives, did have rampant foundling homes spring up as a record number illigitimate children fathered..it was a sort of Calvinist revival, all pure and holy outside, but seething underneath...recall, the breakdown of society and teh family thanks to industrialization and infections in citiies with filth, povertyand exposure to birth control, abortion,etc-Eugenics..

Middle Ages far more preferable, no not perfect, but far better and a great age for Christdom...

Telesphorus · « **Reply #3 on:** February 24, 2010, 03:17:52 PM »

Quote from: spouse of Jesus

The problem is that what is often represented as the return to Tradition, good taste and social values looks too much like that victorian society.

Works that idolize romantic love are dangerous. Although I don't think you can say Thomas Hardy and Henry James glorify it. Rather they treat it as a deadly sphinx.

Quote

I have come across some articles on-line that were meant to attack feminism, vulgarity and some other modern errors by giving the victorian society as a good model and example of all that is traditional, charming and orderly.

It's important to distinguish between good traditional customs founded on a social order that had inherited a great deal from Christendom, and the moral outlook of the authors of these works. Authors at that time paid more respect to what was good in society than they do today. It does not mean they were good. I loved the Count of Monte Cristo as a boy, but now I realize it is a very bad book.

Quote

Catholicism is neither this nor that. I hate feminism and emanicipation lies, but at them time, I believe that the idea of being foxy and mysterious, hiding in a corner to hunt a man with some majestic charm is idiotic.

Charm and natural shyness (being demure) are very nice. That all comes to an end quickly enough. Feminism destroys courtship and marriage. If it can destroy courtship its work in destroying marriage is much easier.

Quote

whose only strange was in being dishonest and not too nice!

Women tend to be ruthless in such matters, that is true.

Quote

So far for the things that attracted my attention as a girl, those of you who have more information and education surely have much more to add.
BTW, TIA seems a little bit to be advertising an 18th century culture. Am I right?

TIA has a nostalgia for a courtly and aristocratic ideal. It is not all bad, but it can be dangerous, if we try to puff ourselves up pretending to be latter day knights and ladies. Not that was shouldn't emulate good manners or act chivalrously.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #4 on:** February 26, 2010, 06:32:35 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

TIA has a nostalgia for a courtly and aristocratic ideal. It is not all bad, but it can be dangerous, if we try to puff ourselves up pretending to be latter day knights and ladies. Not that was shouldn't emulate good manners or act chivalrously.

Victorianism is hardly "aristocratic". As refined as it is (which is what I like about it) it lacks that Catholic heart at it's center and so it cannot fulfill what is necessary for true chivalric aristocracy.

Catholic Samurai · « **Reply #5 on:** February 26, 2010, 06:41:51 PM »

Quote from: spouse of Jesus

Catholicism is neither this nor that. I hate feminism and emanicipation lies, but at them time, I believe that the idea of being foxy and mysterious, hiding in a corner to hunt a man with some majestic charm is idiotic. As though men had to choose between an unavialable career woman and a seductive hard to get "fox" whose only strange was in being dishonest and not too nice! Surely there must be a catholic alternative.

Take a look at the noble Vendeeans of France, the pre 20century Tejano and Hispanic rancheros. They are the best alternatives because they lived and breathed Catholic chivalry.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #6 on:** March 04, 2010, 12:01:38 AM »

Spouse, you are extremely perceptive. I hope you realize that God has given you immense gifts of insight, and he gave them to you so that you would not be fooled by anyone teaching the faith falsely.

But Henry James is not Victorian, he's American, of the early 20th century. He was my favorite writer along with Balzac when I was an aspiring writer. Though James is not Catholic, his best books do have a certain morality, are strongly against adultery ( Golden Bowl ), divorce ( What Maisie Knew ), feminism ( The Bostonians ) and secret-society anarchy ( Princess Cassamassima ), for what that's worth. Let's say they follow the natural law! Unfortunately The Portrait of a Lady does have feminist undertones, and James had the bad habit of portraying Americans as innocents abroad who are devoured by a decadent Europeans, which gives some of his works an anti-Catholic scent, like Daisy Miller.

As for Thomas Hardy, he is a great writer if by "great" we mean powerful and inspired. But it is probably the devil who inspired him -- as with Shakespeare. ( The Tempest is so overtly Satanic and Kabbalistic that I can't believe people still claim Shakespeare was a secret Catholic ). There is an element of Satanism and deep evil in the work of Hardy, too, especially Jude the Obscure. That book is about a humble Catholic man ruined by the love of a woman. The book ends with him dying in bed while a Catholic Mass is held outside his apartment window, and his dying words are the inverse of the Mass -- he is praying for his soul to be extinguished. The book is extremely shocking and nihilistic but that tends to be overlooked now because it just seems "classic."

All that you are saying is true about the Victorian era, and that is why the only novel that really shows the surreal underlying monstrosity of that time is Alice in Wonderland. It is obvious in the new movie version, though I don't watch movies, that the Red Queen is patterned on Henry VIII's even more vicious daughter, Jєω-lover, narcissistic psychopath and mass murderer of Catholics, Elizabeth Tudor. Her entire reign literally replaced angels with demons -- the priests were chased off and starved and her "consorts," male prostitutes if they actually did sleep with the "Virgin Queen," were given the power. She created a realm of enchanters, magicians, perverts, and heretics. I doubt anyone as totally insane as this has ever ruled a nation before, and that is why she keeps recurring in art.

Red Queen

The reason why the movie is coming out now is a sort of occult boast. Elizabeth is really the queen of America, the spiritual queen -- America is the New Atlantis of Francis Bacon, another toadying slave of Elizabeth. America is her ʝʊdɛօ-Protestant "wonderland" come to life.

In the Victorian era, all of this was subconsciously known and hidden behind a veener of polite manners. The cast of characters of Alice in Wonderland, the Cheshire Cat, the Caterpillar who is opiated and is like some druggy poet-oracle -- perhaps based on Shelley or Byron -- the Jabberwock, the Mad Hatter -- who is Satan -- all represent a rogues' gallery who show the real chaos of the time.

spouse of Jesus · « **Reply #7 on:** March 04, 2010, 03:20:59 AM »

Thank You Raoul.
It is you who are so intellectual and analytic. : :smile: