C2Culture·3 min·473 words

A Defence of Nonsense

G. K. Chesterton, about 1915
Bain News Service, publisher · Public domain · G.K. Chesterton LCCN2014686602 (cropped).jpg (Wikimedia Commons)
Mark words from level
Worksheet PDF

The matters which most thoroughly evoke this sense of the abiding childhood of the world are those which are really fresh, abrupt and inventive in any age; and if we were asked what was the best proof of this adventurous youth in the nineteenth century we should say, with all respect to its portentous sciences and philosophies, that it was to be found in the rhymes of Mr. Edward Lear and in the literature of nonsense. 'The Dong with the Luminous Nose,' at least, is original, as the first ship and the first plough were original.

It is true in a certain sense that some of the greatest writers the world has seen—Aristophanes, Rabelais and Sterne—have written nonsense; but unless we are mistaken, it is in a widely different sense. The nonsense of these men was satiric—that is to say, symbolic; it was a kind of exuberant capering round a discovered truth. There is all the difference in the world between the instinct of satire, which, seeing in the Kaiser's moustaches something typical of him, draws them continually larger and larger; and the instinct of nonsense which, for no reason whatever, imagines what those moustaches would look like on the present Archbishop of Canterbury if he grew them in a fit of absence of mind. We incline to think that no age except our own could have understood that the Quangle-Wangle meant absolutely nothing, and the Lands of the Jumblies were absolutely nowhere. We fancy that if the account of the knave's trial in 'Alice in Wonderland' had been published in the seventeenth century it would have been bracketed with Bunyan's 'Trial of Faithful' as a parody on the State prosecutions of the time. We fancy that if 'The Dong with the Luminous Nose' had appeared in the same period everyone would have called it a dull satire on Oliver Cromwell.

… Religion has for centuries been trying to make men exult in the 'wonders' of creation, but it has forgotten that a thing cannot be completely wonderful so long as it remains sensible. So long as we regard a tree as an obvious thing, naturally and reasonably created for a giraffe to eat, we cannot properly wonder at it. It is when we consider it as a prodigious wave of the living soil sprawling up to the skies for no reason in particular that we take off our hats, to the astonishment of the park-keeper. Everything has in fact another side to it, like the moon, the patroness of nonsense. Viewed from that other side, a bird is a blossom broken loose from its chain of stalk, a man a quadruped begging on its hind legs, a house a gigantesque hat to cover a man from the sun, a chair an apparatus of four wooden legs for a cripple with only two.

Questions

  1. C2What is the main claim of this excerpt?
  2. C2According to paragraph 2, how does nonsense differ from satire?
  3. C2Why does the writer imagine 'Alice in Wonderland' being published in the seventeenth century?
  4. C2What is the writer's attitude to the "portentous sciences and philosophies" of the nineteenth century?
  5. C2In paragraph 3, a thing cannot be wonderful "so long as it remains sensible". Here "sensible" means…
  6. C2Why do people "take off our hats, to the astonishment of the park-keeper"?
  7. C1The images at the end — a bird as "a blossom broken loose", a house as "a gigantesque hat" — are meant to…

Talk or write about it

  • Think of a nonsense poem, cartoon, film or joke you love. Does it make you see ordinary things differently, as Chesterton claims?
  • Choose an everyday object and describe it "from the other side", the way Chesterton describes a chair or a house.
A Defence of Nonsense — English reading, level C2 | Krumeto