Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Enjoyable disagreement, February 25, 2002
Since Chesterton and Shaw so vehemently disagreed with each other on many topics, one would expect this quick text to be filled with antagonism. Instead, it is a delightful explanation of Shaw's background, biography and beliefs, told in a gentle, light-hearted manner. Chesterton shows a great respect for his adversary, while making clear his own views through quite a few of the one-sentence quotables for which he is well known.
|
|
|
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
WRITER TO WRITER, January 27, 2004
In only one hundred pages Chesterton encapsulates the influences on and works of George Bernard Shaw, and he is on top form. I should say up front for those that want the Drive-Thru version, go direct to chapters 2 and 6 (35 pages total) for a sound grasp of the man, the playwright, and the later works; and double back to chapter 5 (20 pages) for the earlier works. The last chapter explains how Shaw lost his faith in humanism through reading Plato [tis se philei, o Sokrates;], and fell back in disarray to Nietzsche for backup.What makes this biography so incisive? Firstly the fact that Chesterton and Shaw were old friends and debating partners. Second, that they were both literary gents of sharply contrasting style, and consequently struck generous bright sparks off one another. Under this stimulus the normally verbose Chesterton style is reigned in, which is a relief to those who have ever been frustrated by it. (It should go without saying that he is worth persevering with, but I took about five reads of 'Orthodoxy' to really get it. His fiction is much more concise - odd but true.)
|
|
|
1 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Hitch Your Wagon to Shaw., September 17, 2005
George Bernard Shaw is supposedly the opposite of Shakespeare, who was too pessimistic, being described as a 'serious optimist.' In Shaw's play "Man and Superman" creative evolution is the topic in serious dramatic terms, performed in 1903. He is the precursor of what is now called "creative intelligent design" as described in the book OF PANDAS AND PEOPLE (1993). While he had problems with the biological randomness of Darwin, he pretty much eliminated God from the equation of how human life began.
The God-incorporated alternative to Darwinism now being proposed by who else but the President of the United States of America, Shaw felt that the life force is transmitted by rare men of genius who were selected by nature to carry on the work of building up an intellectual consciousness. In "Man and Superman" the Don Juan was an asexual but in a way religious and felt that life could be improved and that meant getting rid of 'imprisoning conventions.'
The intelligent design is a hot topic now among theologians, educators and scientists who want this concept taught in the schools along with Darwin (leaving out the Biblical account). Shaw left out completedly the thought of God having anything to do whatsoever with the human existence; it was just a 'what-if' story idea which extremely religious people believe to be the truth.
Shaw's "Devil's Disciple" was his first commercial success with Richard Mansfield as the matinee idol starring in the play set during the American Revoluiton. His earlier "Man and Superman" was placed on a restricted list by the libraries so it could not infect young minds with its unorthodox view of God and matrimony. His play about prostitution, so prevalent in the century he was so prolific with his works, "Mrs. Warren's Profession," played to a sold out audience with up to 3,000 people turned away at the door. This popular sensation was closed down by the police and the entire cast faced charges of 'disorderly conduct.'
Every star wanted to be Henry Higgins in "Pygmalion" played by Peter O'Toole and Leslie Howard. Rex Harrison played the part in the movie, "My Fair Lady." Lynn Fontanne and Wendy Hiller, along with Mrs. Partick Campbell on whom the play was based, wanted to play Eliza Doolittle.
He wrote to Mrs. Campbell "I can't be sympathetic; these things simply make me furious," when her son was killed in 1918 by the Germans as the war was ended. He wrote articulate letters throughout his life to many people, "some subjects that language cannot accommodate."
He had his place in our world and prophesied what was to come on Broadway, the British stage, and the controversial world of science and biology. He was the forerunner to beat all!
|
|
|
|
