Heretics · Chapter
XV: On Smart Novelists and the Smart Set explained
Chesterton argues that bad literature, such as penny dreadfuls, reveals the true assumptions and energies of mankind better than good literature, which only shows the mind of one man.
What happens
Chesterton argues that bad literature, such as penny dreadfuls, reveals the true assumptions and energies of mankind better than good literature, which only shows the mind of one man. He contrasts the honest snobbishness of old aristocratic novelettes with the more pretentious and servile snobbishness of modern 'Smart Set' fiction, which falsely attributes wit and intellectual superiority to the upper classes. He contends that true wit and humor belong to the common people, and that modern wits lack the heartfelt sentimentality necessary for genuine laughter, unlike the robust humor of writers like Dickens and Dr. Johnson.
Themes in this chapter
Critique of Modern Literature
Chesterton criticizes modern smart novelists for their pretentious snobbishness and lack of genuine humor, contrasting them with older, more honest forms of literature.
Democracy and Aristocracy
The chapter explores the nature of aristocracy, arguing that true wit and humor belong to the common people, not the upper classes, and that modern snobbishness is servile.
Humility and Romance
Chesterton praises the sentimentalism and hearty laughter of writers like Dickens and Dr. Johnson, linking genuine humor to an open and humane heart.
Characters to notice
- Unknown Narrator
The narrator presents a critique of modern smart novelists and the smart set, contrasting them with older, more honest forms of literature.
- Nietzsche
Mentioned as a philosopher who, like Bow Bells novelettes, worships the strong man, but Nietzsche attributes scorn for weakness, which the narrator considers a sign of invalidism.
- Dr. Johnson
Cited as an example of a clearheaded, humorous man who could talk seriously about religion and avow his fear of death, embodying true good talk.
- Dickens
Used as an example of a sentimentalist whose robust humor came from a capacity for silly sentimentalism, contrasting with modern wits.
- Shakespeare
Mentioned alongside Byron as an example of a writer whose enormous imbecilities contrast with the feeble limitations of modern wits.
- Byron
Referenced as a writer whose enormous imbecilities are needed for hearty laughter, unlike modern wits.
- Mr. W. S. Gilbert
Quoted for the phrase 'precious nonsense' from Patience, used to describe the careful nonsense of modern wits.
- Stevenson
Mentioned in the context of the literature of the smart set and the idea of the amusing baronet.
Key passages
“In one sense, at any rate, it is more valuable to read bad literature than good literature. Good literature may tell us the mind of one man; but bad literature may tell us the mind of many men.”
Bad literature is more valuable than good literature because it reveals the collective mindset of society, whereas good literature only reveals the mind of an individual author.
Chesterton introduces his argument that popular, low-quality literature is a better guide to public assumptions than high art.
“The more dishonest a book is as a book the more honest it is as a public document.”
A book that is insincere as a work of art is more truthful as a record of public opinion.
This paradox underscores Chesterton's view that cynical, mass-produced fiction reflects societal norms more accurately than sincere art.
“The essential dream of aristocracy is magnificence and valour; and if the Family Herald Supplement sometimes distorts or exaggerates these things, at least, it does not fall short in them.”
The core ideal of aristocracy is splendor and bravery, and while cheap romances may exaggerate these, they at least capture the essence.
Chesterton defends old-fashioned snobbish literature for honestly portraying aristocratic ideals, unlike modern smart novels.
“The poor are merely sentimental, and very excusably sentimental, if they praise the gentleman for having a ready hand and ready money. But they are strictly slaves and sycophants if they praise him for having a ready tongue. For that they have far more themselves.”
It is understandable for the poor to admire a gentleman's wealth or generosity, but praising his wit is servile because the poor are actually wittier.
Chesterton argues that true wit belongs to the common people, not the aristocracy, making modern flattery of upper-class intellect a form of sycophancy.
“The gentleman is a Stoic because he is a sort of savage, because he is filled with a great elemental fear that some stranger will speak to him. That is why a third-class carriage is a community, while a first-class carriage is a place of wild hermits.”
The gentleman's stoicism stems from a primitive fear of social interaction, which is why third-class train compartments foster community while first-class ones isolate passengers.
Chesterton critiques the aristocratic ideal of stoicism as a form of social fear, contrasting it with the communal nature of lower-class travel.
