G.K.

Chesterton and
The Dickens Fellowship
Merja Makinen

M E R J A MAKINEN was the Dickens House Scholar during 1983.

G.K. Chesterton's association w i t h the Dickens F e l l o w s h i p was

b o t h l o n g (at least t w e n t y - t w o years and perhaps m o r e ) and f r u i t f u l .
For a l l t h a t , Chesterton d i d n o t involve h i m s e l f i n the r u n n i n g o f
the society and his lectures were, as Professor M o n o d describes, ^
o f t e n hasty performances w h i c h reverted t o topics already aired i n
his b o o k s o n D i c k e n s . Yet, i n i n t r o d u c i n g Chesterton as the Presi-
dent f o r 1921-1922, J . W . T . Ley c o u l d a f f i r m , " M r . Chesterton has
always been one o f the Dickens Fellowship's Vice-Presidents w h o
were such i n f a c t as w e l l as i n name. He has ever been ready t o
serve. H e has t u r n e d u p at m a n y o f its f u n c t i o n s , and has never
refused a n appeal i f he c o u l d help i t . " ^ Indeed, once "get h i m t o
promise t o lecture or take p a r t i n a meeting, or t u r n u p at a dinner,
and y o u need w o r r y n o m o r e . He w i l l be there, i f he has t o t r a v e l
half across E n g l a n d (as he d i d once i n m y o w n experience).

T h e F e l l o w s h i p was f o u n d e d o n October 6, 1902, w i t h B . W . M a t z

as H o n o r a r y Secretary, James M . S u t h e r l a n d as H o n o r a r y Treas-
urer, Percy F i t z g e r a l d as the f i r s t President and a range o f Vice-
Presidents t h a t i n c l u d e d Sir H e n r y I r v i n g , H a r r y Furniss, A r t h u r
Waugh, M a r c u s Stone, F . G . K i t t o n , A r t h u r M o r r i s o n and W.P.
F r i t h . Its aims, a c c o r d i n g t o the early minutes, were t o k n i t together
i n a c o m m o n b o n d o f f r i e n d s h i p lovers o f the great master o f h u m -
our a n d pathos, Charles D i c k e n s ; t o take such measures t o remedy
or a m e l i o r a t e , as f a r as lay i n its power, the existing social evils
w h i c h w o u l d have appealed t o the heart o f D i c k e n s a n d t o help the

Dickens's comic character, " M r . Fezziwig's B a l l , " i n the famous A

Christmas Carol.

467
 The Chesterton Review

cause o f the p o o r a n d the oppressed; to assist i n the preservation o f

buildings a n d objects associated w i t h his name and m e n t i o n e d i n his
w o r k s . The f i f t y Vice-Presidents were to be selected f r o m the des-
cendants o f the novelist a n d f r o m persons o f recognised eminence i n
L i t e r a t u r e , Science, the A r t s , or N a t i o n a l Service. A l t h o u g h the
early F e l l o w s h i p was a c o m m e m o r a t i v e , benevolent society rather
t h a n a l i t e r a r y one, the p r o p o r t i o n o f L i t e r a r y Vice-Presidents was
high: "there was h a r d l y one m a j o r w r i t e r o f the p e r i o d , " to quote
Professor M o n o d , " w h o d i d n o t become a Vice-President."'^ A t the
t i m e o f Chesterton's o w n presidency, the Vice-Presidents included
H . G . Wells, A r t h u r P i n e r o , M a r i e CorelH, J . M . Barrie, Sir A r t h u r
C o n a n D o y l e , W . W . Jacobs and Jerome K . Jerome.

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , there is no exact record o f w h e n G . K . Chester-

t o n f i r s t j o i n e d the D i c k e n s F e l l o w s h i p . A l t h o u g h he c o l l a b o r a t e d
w i t h one o f the f o u n d i n g members, F . G . K i t t o n , o n the B o o k m a n
B o o k l e t , Charles Dickens, i n 1903, i t was n o t u n t i l M a r c h 7, 1906
(that is, the year o f p u b l i c a t i o n o f his Charles Dickens), that we
have the f i r s t r e c o r d o f his association w i t h the F e l l o w s h i p . He t h e n
s u p p o r t e d the C h a i r d u r i n g C u m i n g Walter's address, " D i c k e n s as a
M y s t e r y M a k e r w i t h Special Reference t o Edwin Drood," w h i c h p u t
f o r w a r d w h a t Chesterton was later j o k i n g l y t o describe as "the
a b o m i n a b l e a n d atrocious heresy"^ t h a t D a t c h e r y was Helena L a n d -
less i n disguise. A t the t i m e , the f u t u r e a u t h o r o f the Father B r o w n
stories c o n f i n e d himself t o a r g u i n g that there was a d i s t i n c t i o n , i n
mystery w r i t i n g terms, between "clues" and " b l i n d s , " a n d that i f
D i c k e n s had meant Helena t o be D a t c h e r y he w o u l d have u n d o u b t -
edly given her some comic characteristic t o ally her w i t h h i m .

D u r i n g J u l y a n d A u g u s t o f 1907, the F e l l o w s h i p m o u n t e d a
P i c k w i c k E x h i b i t i o n t o celebrate the seventieth anniversary o f the
novel's p u b l i c a t i o n , c o l l e c t i n g together a wide range o f editions,
translations a n d parodies as well as i l l u s t r a t i o n s a n d m e m o r a b i l i a .
The season's lectures c o n t i n u e d the P i c k w i c k theme, w i t h recitals
f r o m the n o v e l a n d l a n t e r n lectures o f f e a t u r e d locaHties. T h e f i r s t
o f the lectures given o n A u g u s t 1 was by Chesterton and was
entitled " T h e S u p e r i o r i t y o f the P i c k w i c k E n g l a n d . " P i c k w i c k a n d
Weiler he saw as the o l d bourgeoisie and democracy at their finest
and most v i g o r o u s , f r o m w h i c h the M r . P i c k w i c k class had since
degenerated i n t o prosperous s t o c k b r o k e r s or f a d d y ideaHsts. Encap-
s u l a t i n g the novel as a " p o e m i n w h i c h people d i d t h i n g s — d r i n k i n g

468
The Dickens Fellowship

a n d so f o r t h — o n the heroic scale"^ and r e p r o v i n g the " m o d e r n

n o v e l " f o r g l o a t i n g over the emotions o f its vanquished characters,
Chesterton e x p o u n d e d that Dickens was never cruel i n his h u m o u r
and that nearly a l l the greatest comic characters were " g o o d m e n "
( F a l s t a f f being the exception t o break any rule).

A t the f o l l o w i n g year's A n n u a l D i n n e r i n October, Chesterton

was p r o p o s i n g the c u s t o m a r y toast t o " T h e I m m o r t a l M e m o r y o f
Charles D i c k e n s . " D i c k e n s , he explained, was i m m o r t a l because he
was always close t o the f u n d a m e n t a l concepts o f society. He was the
o n l y nineteenth-century English w r i t e r t o write o f the p o o r as
brothers and n o t as a f o r e i g n n a t i o n :

There are plenty o f people i n the modern w o r l d who are

k i n d to the poor. There are millions w h o want to be more
k i n d to the poor. There are millions, f o r the matter o f that,
who want to be more k i n d to everything. They try to be kind
to tigers, generally without success. But their kindness is not
founded upon an idea that the thing to which they are kind is
a part of themselves, belongs to themselves, i n any sense.
They are a little more than k i n d and less than k i n . There is
no brotherhood i n the idea. Read most of the sociologists;
read ( I regret to say) most o f the Socialists: read most o f the
people belonging to my political party and of all other p o l i t i -
cal parties when they write about the English democracy, and
you w i l l generally observe that the idea that the mass o f the
people are like yourself is completely absent. There is no
sense o f brotherhood. The philanthropist is not a brother. He
is but a supercilious aunt.^

F u r t h e r m o r e , D i c k e n s was the last m a n i n EngHsh Hterature t o p o r -

t r a y , i n S a m W e i l e r f o r example, the concept t h a t the p o o r had
some f o r m o f k n o w l e d g e t o i m p a r t — t h a t they c o u l d also teach the
r i c h . M o v i n g o n t o his f a v o u r i t e theme o f r e f u t i n g Dickens's "exag-
g e r a t i o n . " Chesterton claimed that o n l y the decorous, public-school-
inculcated class f o u n d i n his w o r k that:

you have only to walk into the nearest public-house, which is

a very good thing to do, or into the nearest pawn-shop, or
into the nearest coffee-house—I do not object to that i n any
extreme and desperate cases—you have only to walk into any
of these, and y o u w i l l f i n d that the place is packed w i t h
extravagant characters . . . every man who has met the ordi-
nary democracy o f England f o r ten minutes, knows they are
all Dickens characters. ^

469
 I

The Chesterton Review

I n this same year, the presidency o f the Leeds b r a n c h being l e f t

vacant, Chesterton agreed t o accept the post f o r 1908-1909 (the Fel-
l o w s h i p posts r u n f r o m October, the m o n t h o f its i n i t i a l f o u n d a -
t i o n ) . I n A p r i l , 1909, i n L o n d o n , he t o o k the chair o f a lecture
scheduled t o be given by E d w i n P u g h o n Great Expectations, but
changed, because o f illness to a W i l l i a m Miles recital o f extracts
f r o m Dombey and Son and Pickwick Papers. M r . Miles, w h o bore
a m a r k e d resemblance to D i c k e n s , h a b i t u a l l y gave such readings,
and Chesterton, i n e n d i n g the evening, praised his a b i l i t y i n present-
ing b o t h Dickens's characters and the atmosphere o f the novels.

The early m o n t h s o f 1910 were a busy t i m e f o r Chesterton i n

the F e l l o w s h i p calendar. A t Manchester d u r i n g the a n n u a l celebra-
tions o f Dickens's b i r t h d a y o n F e b r u a r y 7, he addressed that b r a n c h
o n " D i c k e n s and Snobbishness." D e n o u n c i n g the B r i t i s h c o n v e n t i o n
o f believing the aristocracy t o be i n t r i n s i c a l l y m o r e significant t h a n
the o r d i n a r y populace, Chesterton t w i n n e d Dickens and Chaucer as
the t w o great voices c a l l i n g us back t o c o m m o n h u m a n i t y . B o t h
these authors had had their v i o l e n t a n d l i v i n g art criticised f o r being
v u l g a r a n d s u p e r f i c i a l , b u t l i t e r a t u r e "was not supposed t o be G o d
A l m i g h t y s u m m i n g u p at the end o f the w o r l d . I t was supposed t o
be s o m e b o d y t e l l i n g a story a b o u t somebody else." A g a i n r e v e r t i n g
to the charge o f exaggeration, he e x p l a i n e d h o w the r i c h have an
ideal o f d i g n i t y that a m o u n t s t o l o o k i n g impassive ("good f o r m . . .
was s i m p l y e v e r y b o d y t r y i n g t o be m i s t a k e n f o r e v e r y b o d y else"^)
and they tended t o j u d g e the w o r l d by t h e i r o w n class. D i c k e n s , o n
the other h a n d , h a d t a u g h t people t o see the c o m i c romance o f
d a i l y l i f e a n d , f o r this very reason, had survived the era o f pessi-
m i s m at the t u r n o f the century, t o rise again t o prominence

The title o f his M a r c h 9 lecture t o the L o n d o n b r a n c h is unre-

corded b u t the address alluded t o a Dickens f a i r y t a l e a b o u t a r a i n -
b o w t o i l l u s t r a t e h o w most novelists w r o t e o n l y i n one sphere, or
c o l o u r , whereas Dickens amalgamated a l l the colours, f o r he w r o t e
about everything, including b o t h the t r u t h - t o - l i f e o f the lower
classes a n d t h e i r h u m o u r . T h e n , o n A p r i l 4, he a n d his w i f e , a l o n g
w i t h M r s . P e r u g i n i (Dickens's younger daughter Kate, a life Vice-
President) and B . W . M a t z , were guests o f h o n o u r at a special d i n n e r
given at the ladies' c l u b , the L y c e u m , i n P i c a d i l l y . I n his speech
Chesterton r i n g i n g l y p r o c l a i m e d t h a t , a l t h o u g h there had been some

470
The Dickens Fellowship

t a l k recently as t o whether England w o u l d remember Dickens,

Dickens's f a m e was i n no d o u b t b u t the same c o u l d n o t be said o f
the fate o f E n g l a n d . The question was m o r e one o f whether Dickens
w o u l d i n the f u t u r e be remembered "as the classic o f the great
p e r i o d o f change and r e v o l u t i o n or . . . as an i m m o r t a l c o s m o p o l i -
tan a u t h o r o f a people that had perished." The genius o f Dickens
had w o r k e d t o w a r d s health and commonsense, to the restoration
and r e f o r m o f h u m a n c i v i l i s a t i o n and it "was no longer a question
whether he was great, b u t whether we should be great enough f o r
him."'o

Chesterton had no recorded engagements w i t h the F e l l o w s h i p

i n 1911, the year i n w h i c h Appreciations and Criticisms of the
Works of Charles Dickens was published, and he u n d e r t o o k the f o l -
l o w i n g year's B i r t h d a y Celebrations at home i n Beaconsfield.
Instead o f F e b r u a r y 7, the actual date o f Dickens's b i r t h , his
" D i c k e n s E v e n i n g " at the New H a l l was held o n F e b r u a r y 17, a
Saturday, p r e s u m a b l y to attract a larger audience. A l t h o u g h no
record remains o f the t i t l e o f his lecture o n this occasion, a p r o -
g r a m m e o f the event held i n the B r i t i s h L i b r a r y ' s M a n u s c r i p t
D e p a r t m e n t , gives a d e l i g h t f u l insight i n t o the evening's entertain-
ment. T h e p r o g r a m m e lists three " I l l u s t r a t i o n s " to his t a l k , little
d r a m a t i c sketches w h i c h one can assume were p e r f o r m e d i n suitable
p e r i o d costume. T h e f i r s t was o f " D a v i d C o p p e r f i e l d at the Duke's
Head I n n , Y a r m o u t h , " w i t h Chesterton's w i f e t a k i n g the role o f
l a n d l a d y ; his l o n g - t i m e f r i e n d and b r o t h e r - i n - l a w , L u c i a n Older-
shaw, t h a t o f the waiter; and a Master M i c h a e l B r a y b r o o k e , the
role o f D a v i d . The second i l l u s t r a t i o n was " O l d C u r i o s i t y Shop—
Quilp's H o u s e " w i t h M r s . C o m m e l i n e as M r s . Q u i l p ; his y o u n g
secretary o f the t i m e , Freda Spencer, as L i t t l e N e l l ; M r . W . H o l d e n
as Q u i l p a n d Master B r a y b r o o k e again as the boy. The f i n a l illus-
t r a t i o n , " N i c h o l a s N i c k l e b y , Fanny Squeers's Tea P a r t y " had M r s .
C o m m e l i n e as F a n n y Squeers; M r s . Preston as M a t i l d a Price;
Freda Spencer as the H u n g r y Servant; E . T . M a r r i o t t as Nicholas
N i c k l e b y ; a n d M r . D i x o n Davies as J o h n B r o w d i e . A l l three
sketches show d i f f e r e n t f o r m s o f entertaining or eating, thus g i v i n g
perhaps a h i n t at the t o p i c o f the lecture.

Chesterton presided at the 1912 A n n u a l F e l l o w s h i p D i n n e r i n

October w h i c h celebrated the society's f i r s t decade w i t h souvenir
b o o k l e t s o f its h i s t o r y , and he gave the toast t o " T h e I m m o r t a l

471
 I

The Chesterton Review

M e m o r y o f Charles D i c k e n s . " O n this occasion he concentrated

u p o n D i c k e n s being p e r p e t u a l l y remembered because he was a l i v -
ing p r i n c i p l e i n the m o d e r n w o r l d . "People were almost t u m b l i n g
over D i c k e n s i f they t h o u g h t a b o u t any subject whatever i n m o d e r n
E n g l a n d . " E x a m i n e d closely, his attacks u p o n any man's p o w e r o f
oppressing another f o r e s h a d o w e d the present-day c o n f l i c t o f Social-
ism and personal and f a m i l y f r e e d o m . T h r o u g h o u t the evening,
" M r . Chesterton was i n his most h a p p y and o r i g i n a l vein . . . as
u n c o n v e n t i o n a l as his most exacting admirers c o u l d have desired,"
and T o m G a l l o n , i n p r o p o s i n g the toast o f thanks t o the c h a i r m a n ,
expanded u p o n Chesterton's wide range o f accomplishments, t o u c h -
ing o n his i l l u s t r a t i o n s f o r Belloc's The Green Overcoat and e n d i n g
w i t h the w o r d s , " I t has been w h i s p e r e d — b u t I give this as mere
hearsay—that a Fugue i n " A " M i n o r by Chesterton is presently t o
be p e r f o r m e d at the Queen's H a l l , conducted by the Composer."

On January 7, 1914, perhaps the most f a m o u s and spectacular

o f the Fellowship's events t o o k place: "The E d w i n D r o o d T r i a l , " or
to give it its f u l l title, "The T r i a l o f J o h n Jasper f o r the M u r d e r o f
E d w i n D r o o d . " The a i m was to t r y Jasper, adhering closely to the
evidence o f the u n f i n i s h e d b o o k . The Mystery of Edwin Drood,
before a j u r y o f renowned men o f letters w h o w o u l d then a t t e m p t
collectively t o f i n d a satisfactory s o l u t i o n to the mystery. The j u r y
consisted o f George Bernard Shaw ( F o r e m a n ) , Sir E d w a r d Russell,
W . W . Jacobs, Pett Ridge, C o u l s o n Kerahan, E d w i n Pugh, W i l l i a m
De M o r g a n , A r t h u r M o r r i s o n , Francesco Berger, Ridgewell C u l l u m ,
J u s t i n H u n t l e y M c C a r t h y , W i l l i a m A r c h e r a n d Thomas Secombe.
G . K . Chesterton was the judge, his brother Cecil and W . W a l t e r
C r o t c h were the Counsel f o r the Defence, and J, C u m i n g Walters
and B . W . M a t z , Counsel f o r the Prosecution. Given such a g l i t t e r i n g
array o f names, i t was h a r d l y surprising that the event drew w o r l d -
wide interest. Weeks b e f o r e h a n d , the Press r a n features o n the t r i a l
and interviews w i t h the chief participants, so that the public c l a m -
oured f o r seats. The day after, almost every English newspaper had a
f u l l r e p o r t o f the proceedings and the f i f t y or so f o r e i g n correspond-
ents relayed the news t o Europe, A m e r i c a , A u s t r a l i a and N e w Zea-
land, and A f r i c a , The King's H a l l theatre i n Covent Garden was
"packed t o d i s c o m f o r t " o n the evening o f the f o u r t e e n t h and the
audience " f o l l o w e d the evidence a n d arguments w i t h the closest
a t t e n t i o n f o r nearly f i v e h o u r s . " T h e court was realistically stage-
managed w i t h a l l the participants b u t the j u r y i n period costume.

472
The Dickens Fellowship

N o t h i n g m o r e is heard o f Chesterton f o r the next three years

u n t i l , i n December 1917, he lectured to the L o n d o n b r a n c h at the
t o w n residence o f the M a r q u i s o f Salisbury, the proceeds g o i n g i n
aid o f the K e n t i s h T o w n D a y N u r s e r y ( w h i c h left the mothers free
f o r w a r - w o r k i n the factories and elsewhere). The lecture was
entitled " H o w D i c k e n s Tales C o m e T r u e " and opened w i t h the
aside t h a t since he, Chesterton, w o r k e d up the title f i r s t and the
b o d y o f the lectures o n l y later, the audience m i g h t soon come t o the
conclusion that his o w n title was a story w h i c h had not come true.
T h e n proceeding t o t a l k a b o u t Dickens's e s t i m a t i o n o f E n g l i s h
society, he e x p l a i n e d t h a t D i c k e n s was n o t a caricaturist b u t a
r o m a n t i c realist; the C i r c o m l o c u t i o n O f f i c e i n Little Dorrit m i g h t at
f i r s t seem fantastic, b u t i n fact was n o t even s t a r t l i n g i n its t r u t h .
"Dickens's c r i t i c i s m o f life consists largely o f l o o k i n g at an elephant
and seeing it as an elephant."

O n September 16, he w r o t e a letter to the Daily Telegraph,

appealing o n behalf o f the Fellowship's e f f o r t s to establish and
endow a Charles D i c k e n s H o m e f o r B l i n d e d Soldiers and Sailors, at
St. Leonards-on-Sea, Sussex. " N o t even the dead deserve more
h o n o u r t h a n the b l i n d , " he said, "the b l i n d o f the great war w h o
have lost the l i g h t t h a t is nearest to life; and c a r r y a b o u t w i t h t h e m
the darkness, i f not the silence o f the grave."

D u r i n g Chesterton's f i r s t lecture t o u r o f A m e r i c a , the N e w

Y o r k b r a n c h gave a luncheon i n his h o n o u r , o n A p r i l 10, 1921, f o r
n i g h o n three h u n d r e d members and guests representing "the best o f
N e w Y o r k ' s l i t e r a r y society." H i s address d w e l t u p o n "the h u m a n
side o f D i c k e n s a n d he spoke o f the s t r o n g and e n d u r i n g f r i e n d s h i p
o f E n g l a n d a n d A m e r i c a . " T h e l u n c h e o n was such a success that
the branch's next regular meeting m o o t e d that i n f u t u r e their his-
t o r y be reckoned by B . C . (Before Chesterton) and A . C . ( A f t e r
Chesterton).

I n October 1921, G . K . Chesterton became the President o f the

F e l l o w s h i p . D i c k e n s O n the f o u r t e e n t h , he and his w i f e held a
reception at the C o n n a u g h t R o o m s i n L o n d o n , after w h i c h he de-
livered his Presidential address. C o n s i d e r i n g Dickens i n r e l a t i o n t o
j u s t such festive occasions as the one i n w h i c h they were engaged,
Chesterton praised his humane spirit: " a l l sorts o f shades o f melan-

473
 The Chesterton Review

choly . . . have been most dehcately dealt w i t h by the artistic geniuses

o f a l l ages . . . . B u t that red f i r e l i g h t o f direct h u m a n happiness has
been very seldom i n any way successfully indicated even by men o f
the greatest creative genius. There are o n l y a very f e w instances o f it
w h i c h are successful, I t h i n k , and nearly a l l those instances are i n
D i c k e n s . " 16 R i d i c u l i n g the sterile p o r t r a y a l s o f U t o p i a or the puerile
eighteenth-century depictions of paradise that engendered the
B y r o n i c preference f o r devils, Chesterton explained that the strength
o f Dickens's o p t i m i s m was t h a t it made h i m pugnacious. " I n d e e d , I
t h i n k an o p t i m i s t w h o is n o t pugnacious is the most depressing per-
son i n the w o r l d " d e c l a r e d the new President, and advocated giv-
i n g any serene Buddhists that came i n t o his members' acquaintance,
a t h u n d e r i n g smack o n the nose. Dickens's pugnacity was evident i n
his satire, i n his satirical treatment o f A m e r i c a i n Martin Chuzzlewit
certainly, b u t j u s t as m u c h i n his satire o f English society. The effect
o u g h t n o t t o be o f estrangement between the t w o countries, b u t
rather o f u n i t i n g t h e m i n c o m m o n laughter against the r i d i c u l e d .
H o w e v e r , society i n r e t a l i a t i o n , dealt w i t h D i c k e n s j u s t exactly as it
h a d earlier dealt w i t h D a n t e a n d S w i f t w h e n it was faced w i t h t h e i r
accurate criticisms: it concentrated u p o n one aspect o f his w o r k t o
the e x c l u s i o n o f a l l the rest; a n d it chose t o h a r p u p o n Dickens
being a caricaturist o f an unreal, fantastic w o r l d . I n r e f u t i n g this
exaggeration o f Dickens's exaggeration, Chesterton adopted Turner's
answer t o the cavil at one o f his p a i n t i n g s . A viewer c o m m e n t e d , " I
never saw a sunset like t h a t , " t o w h i c h T u r n e r replied, " D o n ' t y o u
w i s h y o u could?" Chesterton said that " T u r n e r recognised that while
an artist may make u p s o m e t h i n g that does n o t exist i n the real
w o r l d , it is his business t o make u p s o m e t h i n g that the h u m a n spirit
desires t o i m a g i n e . " A p p H e d t o a character f r o m D i c k e n s , a D i c k
Swiveller or a M r . P i c k w i c k , f o r example, this c r i t e r i o n would
o b v i o u s l y be met:

But i f y o u read one o f these slow, careful, modern

stories, which describe the gradual development o f some
young lady—how she fell i n love w i t h the drawing master,
and had a strange inward feeling that she wished to hammer
d r a w i n g pins into his head, or something of that k i n d — y o u
all k n o w that delicate description o f human feeling which is
so c o m m o n i n f i c t i o n , when y o u read about that young lady,
and say: " I never met a young lady o f that k i n d , " it is not

474
The Dickens Fellowship

possible f o r the artist to reply: " D o n ' t you wish you could?"
On the contrary, i f he did say: " D o n ' t you wish you could?"
you would have the obvious answer: " I thank God I can't!"'^
T h e President was absent f r o m the 1921 Christmas D i n n e r o n
December 17, b u t d i d n o t f a i l the One H u n d r e d and T e n t h B i r t h d a y
Celebrations o n F e b r u a r y 7, 1922. A p a r t i c u l a r l y festive occasion,
the d i n n e r had an elaborate m e n u as w e l l as a p r o g r a m m e o f music
sung by artists f r o m the G u i l d h a l l o f M u s i c and i t ended w i t h F r e d -
erick T . H a r r y ' s sketches o f Dickens's characters. The Reverend D r .
James (President o f St. John's College, O x f o r d ) t o o k the C h a i r
w h i l e C h e s t e r t o n was once m o r e given the h o n o u r o f p r o p o s i n g the
toast t o " T h e I m m o r t a l M e m o r y o f Charles D i c k e n s . " There was, at
the t i m e , a move a f o o t i n the papers t o " b r i g h t e n up L o n d o n . "
Chesterton, i n p r o p o s i n g the toast, listed the various ways i n w h i c h
one c o u l d celebrate people: by p u t t i n g up statues t o t h e m , or great
buildings; by f o u n d i n g charitable i n s t i t u t i o n s or libraries i n their
h o n o u r ; or by p e r f o r m i n g p u b l i c ceremonies. N o one statue, h o w -
ever, c o u l d s u f f i c e f o r Dickens's genius, he objected; one w o u l d
need t o people the streets w i t h his characters. A n d he proceeded t o
sketch o u t this j o y o u s p r o j e c t : M r . G u p p y at L i n c o l n ' s I n n Fields,
M r . D i c k , p r e f e r a b l y opposite the statue o f Charles I , and a w h o l e
range o f D i c k Swivellers at the t o p o f a l l the roads leading i n t o the
S t r a n d . T h a t w o u l d indeed b r i g h t e n u p L o n d o n ! Nevertheless, he
felt that the most a p p r o p r i a t e way to c o m m e m o r a t e Dickens was
j u s t such a private festive dinner as they were e n j o y i n g .

Chesterton c o n t i n u e d by saying that he was d o u b t f u l whether

D i c k e n s w o u l d have a p p r o v e d o f the attempts t o a b o l i s h the L o n -
don f o g w h i c h he appeared t o have cared f o r j u s t as heartily as a l l
the other aspects o f L o n d o n . " I do not k n o w what one can do to
preserve f o g s — a n y t h i n g that I can do I shall! S m o k i n g as m u c h as
possible seems t o be the o n l y practicable way o f w o r k i n g t o that
end, and it is a m e t h o d w h i c h I shall adopt again i n a very f e w
minutes." T h e c o m i c tone d r o p p e d as he berated those reformers
who, u n l i k e D i c k e n s , cared only f o r w h a t c o u l d be r e f o r m e d . " Y o u
m a y be p e r f e c t l y c e r t a i n t h a t i f y o u cannot be interested i n a t h i n g ,
or i n a m a n , u n t i l it is r e f o r m e d or he is r e f o r m e d , f i r s t o f a l l , y o u
w i l l never r e f o r m h i m , and secondly, it w i l l n o t be w o r t h d o i n g ! "
W i t h this p r o v i s o , he w e l c o m e d the new m o v e m e n t t o b r i g h t e n
L o n d o n , "especially as a resistance to the p u r i t a n p a t r i o t i s m w h i c h

475
 The Chesterton Review

threatens t o d a r k e n London."2o M o r e o v e r , w h i l e the p u r i t a n r e f o r m s

p r o p o s e d t o crush the pleasures o f the p o o r , i t was noticeable t h a t
t h e l u x u r i o u s classes were s i n k i n g i n t o a heartless a n d pagan
riotousness calculated t o make Charles D i c k e n s rise f r o m his grave
i n i n d i g n a t i o n . Despite the f a c t t h a t he d i d n o t w a n t t o t a l k politics,
he said, " A very vehement a n d s t r o n g protest s h o u l d be made, a n d I
t h i n k i t is a p r o p e r a n d f i t t i n g occasion t o - n i g h t t o make such a
protest."2i

B e f o r e Chesterton's year o f o f f i c e h a d ended, c e r t a i n members

h a d a c q u i r e d Dickens's h o m e at 48, D o u g h t y Street, L o n d o n , o n
b e h a l f o f the F e l l o w s h i p , a n d i t was t o become the D i c k e n s House
M u s e u m , b u t the f o r m a l a n n o u n c e m e n t a n d appeal f o r f u n d s was
held over until his successor's Presidential address in October
( F r e d e r i c k M a c m i l l a n , the publisher).

I n its O c t o b e r 1923 issue, The Dickensian ran a symposium i n

c e l e b r a t i o n o f the Fellowship's t w e n t y - f i r s t b i r t h d a y under the t i t l e
" W h y has the D i c k e n s F e l l o w s h i p Succeeded?" G . K . Chesterton's
c o n t r i b u t i o n was succinct—the u l t i m a t e e x p l a n a t i o n was s i m p l y the
great a n d i n e x h a u s t i b l e nature o f D i c k e n s ; a n d as f o r the f u t u r e
o f t h a t i n f l u e n c e , Dickens's satire was p r a c t i c a l l y p r o p h e t i c . Our
Mutual Friend, f o r example, was f u l l o f the current t r i u m p h o f the
profiteer.

T h e A n n u a l O c t o b e r D i n n e r o f the F e l l o w s h i p , celebrating its

t w e n t y - f i f t h anniversary i n 1927, is the last recorded instance o f
Chesterton's association w i t h the society a n d indeed, i n p r o p o s i n g
the toast t o " T h e D i c k e n s F e l l o w s h i p , " Chesterton sounds almost
v a l e d i c t o r y a n d also ( a l t h o u g h i t is n o t o r i o u s l y d i f f i c u l t t o j u d g e
speeches t r a n s c r i b e d o n t o the page) m o r e ponderous. H o n o u r i n g the
F e l l o w s h i p as a " l i v i n g t r a d i t i o n . . . a c h a i n o f h u m a n m i n d s like
a c h u r c h o r r e l i g i o n , t h a t hands o n the m e m o r y o f t h a t m a n o f
genius w h o was . . . the greatest g l o r y o f o u r c o u n t r y i n the n i n e -
t e e n t h c e n t u r y , " he suggested t h a t i f there was at the present t i m e a
r e a c t i o n against D i c k e n s , this was because the sort o f people satir-
ised i n his novels were n o w everywhere i n power. " A l l t h a t i n
Skimpole which D i c k e n s made a b s u r d was said q u i t e seriously
t w e n t y years a f t e r w a r d s by the Aesthetes; was said quite seriously;
a n d , w h a t is m u c h worse, was t a k e n q u i t e seriously. A n d these
people, instead o f being Hke the caricatures o f D i c k e n s , became
serious artistic leaders a n d f o u n d e r s o f schools." S i m i l a r l y , i f M r s .

476
The Dickens Fellowship

Jellyby "were alive n o w she w o u l d n o t s i m p l y sit w i t h her hair

d o w n , staring i n t o vacancy. She w o u l d w r i t e articles t o show that
she was a w o m a n l i v i n g the p u b l i c l i f e w h i c h w o m e n ought to live;
that she was no longer pinned t o the domestic hearth. A n d she
w o u l d get a large n u m b e r o f people t o agree w i t h her."22 y h e f a n -
tastic characters o f Dickens w a l k e d the w o r l d but, instead o f being
laughed at, they were w o r s h i p p e d . Charles Dickens had stood i n the
centre o f sanity and r i d i c u l e d the r i d i c u l o u s , but the w o r l d had since
g r o w n t o o f u n n y t o be made f u n of. T h e F e l l o w s h i p , therefore, per-
f o r m e d an i n v a l u a b l e service i n c a r r y i n g out its great h u m a n and
social w o r k i n the spirit o f Charles D i c k e n s . V o i c i n g his o w n
"enthusiasm f o r the Society and a great belief i n its f e l l o w s h i p , "
Chesterton ends his f i n a l speech praising "the i m m o r t a l m e m o r y o f
the great m a n w h o stands, as I say, i n o u r history very m u c h f o r the
great and g l o r i o u s g i f t t o G o d o f m a n , the g i f t o f laughter f o r the
blasting o f M i n d f o l l y and crime."23

R u n n i n g ever true t o f o r m , Chesterton no m o r e adhered to the

ostensible t o p i c i n his speeches f o r the Dickens F e l l o w s h i p t h a n he
did i n any o f his other lectures or w r i t i n g s . T h e whole wide range o f
his interests c o n t i n u a l l y eased themselves i n t o the arena, whatever
the billed title might be, because Chesterton's admiration for
Dickens, the a u t h o r and r e f o r m e r , was not some circumscribed
h o b b y b u t a f u n d a m e n t a l part o f his w h o l e o u t l o o k o n life.

1 Sylvere Monod, "1900-20, the Age of Chesterton," The Dickensian, Vol.

L X V I , No. 361 (May 1970), 101-120.
2 "Gilbert Keith Chesterton: The Fellowship's New President," The Dicken-
sian, Vol. X V I I , No. 4 (October 1921), 175-177.
3 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I , No. 4, 175.
4 Sylvere Monod, The Dickensian, Vol. L X V I , No. 361, 116.
5 "The Toast of the Dickens Fellowship," The Dickensian, Vol. X X I V , No.
205, 23-27.
6 The Dickensian, Vol. I l l , No. 9, 234.
7 The Dickensian, Vol. I V , No. 11, 285-287.
8 The Dickensian, Vol. I V , No. 11, 286.
9 The Dickensian, Vol. V I , No. 3, 67-68.
10 The Dickensian, Vol. V I , No. 5, 130-131.
11 The Dickensian, Vol. V I I I , No. 11, 288.
12 The Dickensian, Vol. V I I I , No. 11, 288.
13 The Dickensian, Vol. X I V , No. 1, 5-6.
14 The Dickensian, Vol. X I V , No. 10, 264. The Home was established in 1918

477
 The Chesterton Review

and continued up till 1973. The Royal National Institute for the Blind adminis-
tered it after 1926, opening it up to blind civilians as well.
15 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I , No. 3, 165-166.
16 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I I , No. 1, 9-14.
17 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I I , No. 1, 10.
18 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I I , No. 1, 13.
19 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I I , No. 2, 69-71.
20 The Dickensian, Vol. X V I I I , No. 2, 71.
21 The Dickensian, Vol. X X I V , No. 205.
22 The Dickensian, Vol. X X I V , No. 205, 26.
23 The Dickensian, Vol. X X I V , No. 205, 27.

478