Cuentos Ingleses de Misterio

by G.K. Chesterton, Daniel Defoe, Wilkie Collins

En esta compilación de Ramón D. Tarruella se ofrece un amplio panorama de los estilos con que fue desarrollado el género por Daniel Defoe, Wilkie Collin, Saki, Thomas Hardy, Catherine Wells, Sir Arthur Connan Doyle, y Gilbert Keith Chesterton. Sherlock Holmes, creado por Conan Doyle, el padre Brown de Chesterton y otros detectives nacidos de escritores ingleses definieron el sello de los Cuentos Ingleses de misterio

Genres: History, Politics, True Crime, Nonfiction, British Literature, Ebooks, War

222 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1915

About the author

Gilbert Keith Chesterton was an English writer, philosopher, lay theologian, and literary and art critic.

He was educated at St. Paul’s, and went to art school at University College London. In 1900, he was asked to contribute a few magazine articles on art criticism, and went on to become one of the most prolific writers of all time. He wrote a hundred books, contributions to 200 more, hundreds of poems, including the epic Ballad of the White Horse, five plays, five novels, and some two hundred short stories, including a popular series featuring the priest-detective, Father Brown. In spite of his literary accomplishments, he considered himself primarily a journalist. He wrote over 4000 newspaper essays, including 30 years worth of weekly columns for the Illustrated London News, and 13 years of weekly columns for the Daily News. He also edited his own newspaper, G.K.’s Weekly.

Chesterton was equally at ease with literary and social criticism, history, politics, economics, philosophy, and theology.

Reviews

[Manuel Alfonseca · Rating 2 out of 5]

ENGLISH: This book, published in 1915, was Chesterton's participation in the British anti-German propaganda during the first world war. The crimes mentioned in the title refer to Chesterton's idea that the British had been too friendly with the German for the previous two centuries, and that the first world war was one of the consequences.

Another consequence, according to Chesterton, was the outrageous way in which the English governments treated the Irish during the 18th and 19th centuries. (Chesterton distinguishes the English government from the English people.) In my opinion, this was one of England's crimes, but it was not the fault of the Germans, even though there were German mercenaries among the soldiers who massacred the Irish. And there were none during the terrible famine in Ireland, which the English government refused to alleviate.

In this context, I have made a note of the following quote: It may be a good thing to forget and forgive; but it is altogether too easy a trick to forget and be forgiven.

ESPAÑOL: Este libro, publicado en 1915, fue la forma en que Chesterton participó en la propaganda británica anti-alemana durante la Primera Guerra Mundial. Los crímenes mencionados en el título se refieren a esta idea de Chesterton: que los británicos habían sido demasiado amigos de los alemanes durante dos siglos, y que la primera guerra mundial fue una de sus consecuencias.

Otra consecuencia, según Chesterton, fue la forma escandalosa en que los gobiernos ingleses trataron a los irlandeses durante los siglos XVIII y XIX. (Chesterton distingue al gobierno inglés del pueblo inglés). En mi opinión, este sí fue uno de los crímenes de Inglaterra, pero no fue culpa de los alemanes, aunque hubiese mercenarios alemanes entre los soldados que masacraron a los irlandeses. Y no los hubo durante la terrible hambruna de Irlanda, que el gobierno inglés se negó a paliar.

En este contexto, he tomado nota de la siguiente cita: Puede ser bueno olvidar y perdonar; pero olvidar y ser perdonado es un truco demasiado fácil.

[Wendi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very dated, but still Chesterton.
If you want to understand the mindset of the pro war, anti German Britisher in the midst of WW1, this is a five star read. If you want the best of Chesterton, it's probably one star. There are still plenty of gems in the style, if not substance, of his arguments, as well as the analogies he makes, hence two stars. Besides which I could not possibly give Chesterton a single, lonely star for any reason.
Still, most readers will be happier using their time on something else.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

G.K. Chesterton is generally at his weakest in political polemic: His most difficult books to wade through are such titles as The Appetite of Tyranny, The Utopia of usurers, and The Barbarism of Berlin. Fortunately, The Crimes of England is among his better polemical works.

What Chesterton does is examine the history of England going back several centuries and finds that it was too favorably impressed by the Germans, as opposed to the French, Irish, and other European peoples. This was published after the First World War had already begun, and its author is trying to see what errors led to this conflagration. Instead of seeing the typical historical causes -- the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the desire of Austria to punish the Serbs, the huge military and naval buildup by the Germans -- he sees a weakness in his country of essentially having the wrong friends. For instance, on the subject of Ireland, he writes:

The truth about Ireland is simply this: that the relations between England and Ireland are the relations between two men who have to travel together, one of whom tried to stab the other at the last stopping-place or to poison the other at the last inn. Conversation may be courteous, but it will be occasionally forced.

At times, GKC startles with insights that are as germane today as when they were written a century ago:

By some of the dark ingenuities of that age of priestcraft a curious thing was discovered—that if you kill every usurer, every forestaller, every adulterater, every user of false weights, every fixer of false boundaries, every land-thief, every water-thief, you afterwards discover by a strange indirect miracle, or disconnected truth from heaven, that you have no millionaires.

I doubt that The Crimes of England will ever become more popular than the author's Father Brown stories, Orthodoxy or Heretics, or The Man Who Was Thursday, but it is a thoughtful self-examination of what led to the awful mess that England found itself in during 1914 and the following few years.

[Alex Sarll]

In my pocket I carry a device which can out-compute the supercomputers of the era in which I was born. Lately, I have been using it to read a distinctly topical polemic from almost a century ago. This is just the sort of paradox which would delight Chesterton - though as he himself notes here, a paradox is simply a startling thing said once, where a more absurd thing repeated often enough instead becomes a fashion. With typical apparent perversity, Chesterton's response to the Great War was to hold his own nation to account - a move which might be considered risky. Except, of course, that most of the crimes he details turn out to be our past alliances with and sympathies towards Germany in general and Prussia in particular. There is a problem here, in that much of the history of which he assumes knowledge (and free Kindle classics have no footnotes) has been eclipsed in the general understanding by the history during which he was writing; my grasp of Frederick the Great, for instance, is frankly minimal, so at times I was hearing the commentary on a film I've not seen. Elsewhere - as on Ireland - he makes a compelling case (though it should be noted that, of all my favourite writers, he's almost certainly the one with whom I disagree on the most things). A niche read, sometimes a confusing one, but never a bore.

[Walter · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is another volume in Chesterton's works during the First World War which justified the British participation in the war. In it, Chesterton takes the unusual and highly controversial position that, while Germany is to blame for the war through her aggression and barbarism, it is really England who is at least partially to blame for Germany's crimes by aiding and abetting previous behavior by Prussia for centuries. Indeed, just as Prussia used naked aggression to partition Poland, to wrest Silesia from Austria and Alsace-Lorraine from France in the 18th and 19th Century, so had England displayed similar behavior against the Irish and other minorities in the past. Such a position would not be popular among his fellow Englishmen during wartime, but it was a courageous position to take. Unfortunately, I do not believe that Chesterton did a sufficient job in proving his position.

While it is true that England took the side of Prussia, and indeed of other Germanic nations such as Holland, because these peoples were fellow Germanic Protestants. Indeed, when England overthrew her Stuart monarchs in the Glorious Revolution of 1688, it wasn't to France, Spain or Austria that England went to find a replacement for the throne. Instead, she went to Holland to take on the House of Orange, and then to Germany to install the house of Hanover. Once England joined the Protestant camp in Europe, she was wedded, for better or worse, to that small group of nations who also embraced Protestantism. And, because of this, England was inclined to side with these nations in the wars of the 17th - 19th centuries. But this does not mean that England had embraced barbarism per se. It merely meant that England was inclined to side with those who she considered to be her brethren against the Catholic camp. Chesterton addresses this brilliantly, but he draws the wrong conclusions from it.

Unfortunately, wartime polemics are never works of brilliant thought because the author is confined to the official position, and he must work the acrobatics of sophistry to make the official position palatable. Since Chesterton is a brilliant thinker and writer, this work is not one which his fans should start with. However, for those who want to learn more about Chesterton and his thought, this book should definitely be on their reading list.

[Judy · Rating 3 out of 5]

G. K. Chesterton felt that a true patriot loves his/her country while viewing that state realistically. Written in 1915, Chesterton felt that England could not really claim the moral high road in World War I because, in fact, England helped to cause the war. Chesterton points to the fact that England supported Prussia and allowed it to get away with political bullying and territorial acquisitions over a period of years. Chesterton argues that this tacit cooperation allowed Prussia to reach its zenith of power that encouraged the Kaiser to act rashly and aggressively. He also points out that England dealt poorly with both the French Revolution and the rise of Napoleon. And he threw in a few words about how the English were dealing with the Irish both during the Home Charter debate and historically. A very interesting look at the domestic debate that divided Great Britain during the first world war.

[John Yelverton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite the many valid and poignant points that G.K. Chesterton makes, it's quite ludicrous that while blaming Germany for their crimes to admit that England is not blameless; yet blame England's guilt on the Germans who infested England, i.e. King George and his ilk.

[Jessica Roberts · Rating 3 out of 5]

I will be the first to admit my area of expertise is....

Not the early 20th century. But. However. Etc. Even I know the Germans and German policy from the 18th Century on down were not responsible for every disaster the English used Germany for. And England used them a lot in the 18th Century. I'll give Chesterton kudos for breaking the British government's knees over its conduct in Ireland, but the deification of the Brits over the Germans is a bit much.

[José Alexander Muñoz · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Los tres desconocidos" de Tomas Hardy, es, a mí juicio, el mejor cuento.

[William · Rating 2 out of 5]

OK listening 🎶🔰

Another will written British 🏰 historical short stories by G. K. Chesterton. It was not what I expected. I enjoy his mysteries not historical study. Give it a try it may work for you. Enjoy the adventure of reading all kinds of different types of novels and books. 2022

[Christina Gutke · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, it can hardly be assumed that G K Chesterton is anything but a great and clever writer but perhaphs this book took me longer to get into due to the depths of its historical discussion that frankly, I was left treading in. Still, it was a good read and my favorite quote from it was "every citizen is a revolution", I love that!

[Jim Dilmore · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's delightfully written. The subject matter is both dated and frozen in time to mid-World War I. For that reason, it's both anachronistic and from a great perspective (for history buffs). Chesterton's writing is nimble, clever, and intelligent, making it worth a read for lovers of writing.

[Grigory · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's really just a war-time essay trying to villify enemy.

Chesterton is very talanted annd witty and it's funny how he uses words like "heathens", "herecy" and alike. But nobody should honestly beleive that WWI was German's fault and other countries were "dragged" into it.

[Andrea Hickman Walker · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lots of interesting history that I know little about since it's mostly about the events leading up to and the very beginnings of the First World War.

[Lesha Symons Ervin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Humorous at times.