The Man Who Was Thursday (20Th-Century Classics)

Rating:
Summary: As entertaining as thinly veiled Christian allegory gets
Review: When I was in middle school, I started reading C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. Somewhere during the end of the second book, though, I got the strange feeling that the book had gone haywire. This is the part where Aslan, the noble lion, dies and then is resurrected. At this point, I didn't know much about Christianity, so I'm not sure if I even spotted the parallel with Christ, but I knew that something foreign to the world the author created in the first book had crept into the book, and ruined it. When I finally figured out what Lewis was trying to do, I felt a little offended, like I had been slipped a dressed-up pamphlet and been tricked into reading it. An honest writer, instead of writing a "novel", might simply have published the single sentence: read the Bible and think about it.

Now, by the end of The Man Who Was Thursday, I felt something of the same annoyance, but Chesterton offers so many little marvels and jewels of observation along the way that I forgive him - mostly. An example: "For he was a sincere man, and in spite of his superficial airs and graces, at root a humble one. And it is always the humble man who talks too much; the proud man watches himself too closely."

The plot of the book is incredibly involved, and continually in motion: it involves a spy placed inside an anarchist council with members named after each of the seven days, the President of the organization being named Sunday. Now, could that name have some religious significance, I wonder? The problem with the book is that the entire plot has just been a setup to get characters to a metaphysical Christian conclusion that has no ressemblance to the reality of the rest of the book. Now, everything that had been taken at face value so far is symbolic, and meant to represent something about man's relationship with God. You almost feel like all of the twists and turns of the plot were a complete waste of the time; the reality of the first 170 pages of the book is devalued, despite being well-constructed and magnificently original. As with Lewis, I felt like if Chesterton had theological points to make, he should have written a book of theology.

Then again, maybe the framework of the book, which lends itself to a hundred interpretations, is a more effective tool to get readers to think about the religious questions asked than a simple work of biblical exegesis. How succesful this book is for you, then, is largely going to depend on whether Chesterton's obsessions are your obsessions: the nature of the God as depicted in the Bible, and so on. At the moment, at least, I'm afraid that I am not, and am searching for my answers elsewhere, even though I still felt some of the grandeur of the book's conclusion. I was pleased enough with what was here, but am still disappointed that the book I was reading turned out to be about something else altogether.

Rating:
Summary: Strange, Funny, Profound -- Pure Chesterton
Review: This is undoubtedly one of the most bizarre books I've ever read, and it takes more than one reading to "get it," but taking the wild ride that is this book it well worth it. This book is, in every sense of the word, a mystery -- and the mysteries it explores range from simple crime to suffering to the peace of God. Chesterton, as always, evokes laughs all along the way, from the unsettling beginning to the quite unexpected end. I could never have guessed who Sunday was.

There is much here for our entertainment and our edification. As we know, reality is frequently not what it seems -- so it is in this fantastic story. Read it, re-read it, digest it. I'll warn you in advance: it isn't easy to digest. But it's worth it.

Rating:
Summary: Unique philosophical adventure
Review: This is a surreal philosophical adventure story set at the turn of the 20th century, packed tight with clever ideas and witty conversations, and is like practically nothing else you will ever read.

It might also be regarded as a religious allegory about as subtle as the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, the author's odd protestations to the contrary notwithstanding. As an atheist it didn't bother me at all; and knowing the author's claims about the book I even managed to ignore the allegorical aspect until close to the end, when it becomes impossible to pretend it is not a religious allegory. So, why did the author deny it?

For that matter, did he really deny it: he didn't say that the book does not include a "depiction of the Deity", merely that it does not contain a "serious depiction of the Deity". Unfortunately he died a few days after saying it, so nobody had a chance to seek a clarification. Most editions of Thursday contain the article in which the author talks about this, so if you read the book you'll know what I'm talking about and be able to make up your own mind.

I've read it twice now and loved it both times. Late Victorian/Edwardian London and Europe is one of my favourite locales for adventure fiction and movies, with the world on the brink of becoming our own, but still retaining some of the innocence, honour and tall hats of the former.

The book's oft-forgotten subtitle is 'A Nightmare', and scarcely a page goes by without the author going out of his way to add to the sense of irreality by mentioning that scenes and people resemble paintings, or stories, or plays, or dreams, and so on. Don't get too hung up on whether it was all a dream (or nightmare) or not: of course, it was all a book.

Rating:
Summary: Only problem with this edition...
Review: The only problem with this edition is that it does not have the dedication to E. C. Bentley. If you purchase this edition you really ought to find the poem on line and paste it into the front of the book. "There was a cloud upon the minds of men..."

Rating:
Summary: Witty, Whimsical, Espionage Story - An Allegorical Puzzle
Review: The Man Who Was Thursday could have only been written by G. K. Chesterton, a remarkably versatile writer, essayist, and poet whose works defy categorization. Defoe created Friday; Chesterton gives us all seven days as well as philosophical policemen on the trail of anarchists. The plot verges on the bizarre, but somehow Chesterton manages to adroitly balance philosophy, suspense, and whimsy. My admiration and respect for the vivid imagination of Chesterton increases each time I return to this delightful book.

The Man Who Was Thursday is best enjoyed as a surprise. Avoid learning too much before your first reading. Afterwards, you undoubtedly will return to the reviews, simply to understand how others interpreted Chesterton's uniquely fascinating work.

The Man Who Was Thursday is so unexpected, so different, that I am convinced that most readers are compelled to share their reading experience with others. There are so many layers to the story, and so many unanswered questions. (Perhaps, this explains why this largely unfamiliar book has so many, many reviews.) I look forward to your own analysis of Chesterton's remarkable story. Cheers.

Rating:
Summary: Do Not Read Customer Review "Haunting and Good"
Review: unless you want to know how the book ends. I was really interested in reading it, but now probably won't. What's the point of reading a thriller if you know the ending in advance?

Rating:
Summary: As entertaining as thinly veiled Christian allegory gets
Review: When I was in middle school, I started reading C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. Somewhere during the end of the second book, though, I got the strange feeling that the book had gone haywire. This is the part where Aslan, the noble lion, dies and then is resurrected. At this point, I didn't know much about Christianity, so I'm not sure if I even spotted the parallel with Christ, but I knew that something foreign to the world the author created in the first book had crept into the book, and ruined it. When I finally figured out what Lewis was trying to do, I felt a little offended, like I had been slipped a dressed-up pamphlet and been tricked into reading it. An honest writer, instead of writing a "novel", might simply have published the single sentence: read the Bible and think about it.

Now, by the end of The Man Who Was Thursday, I felt something of the same annoyance, but Chesterton offers so many little marvels and jewels of observation along the way that I forgive him - mostly. An example: "For he was a sincere man, and in spite of his superficial airs and graces, at root a humble one. And it is always the humble man who talks too much; the proud man watches himself too closely."

The plot of the book is incredibly involved, and continually in motion: it involves a spy placed inside an anarchist council with members named after each of the seven days, the President of the organization being named Sunday. Now, could that name have some religious significance, I wonder? The problem with the book is that the entire plot has just been a setup to get characters to a metaphysical Christian conclusion that has no ressemblance to the reality of the rest of the book. Now, everything that had been taken at face value so far is symbolic, and meant to represent something about man's relationship with God. You almost feel like all of the twists and turns of the plot were a complete waste of the time; the reality of the first 170 pages of the book is devalued, despite being well-constructed and magnificently original. As with Lewis, I felt like if Chesterton had theological points to make, he should have written a book of theology.

Then again, maybe the framework of the book, which lends itself to a hundred interpretations, is a more effective tool to get readers to think about the religious questions asked than a simple work of biblical exegesis. How succesful this book is for you, then, is largely going to depend on whether Chesterton's obsessions are your obsessions: the nature of the God as depicted in the Bible, and so on. At the moment, at least, I'm afraid that I am not, and am searching for my answers elsewhere, even though I still felt some of the grandeur of the book's conclusion. I was pleased enough with what was here, but am still disappointed that the book I was reading turned out to be about something else altogether.

Rating:
Summary: Thought-Provoking Novel
Review: Chesterton writes a fascinating novel that seems to be about faith in the end, although one would not have suspected that at the beginning. It is very important to remember that the subtitle of the book is "A Nightmare" (missing from most covers) when you read it as this helps to interpret the book. Chesterton added a note to some editions to emphasize this.

Rating:
Summary: Genius!
Review: A group of anarchists dedicated to the destruction of the world? Get prepared for a scary and amusing adventure! This book reveals in an amazing way the genius of G.K.C. It's a difficult story to describe but there is, at least, to ways to interpret it: first of all, as the progress of a surreal riddle that ends in a bizarre culmination created by Chesterton; and second, as a type of religious allegory full of "hidden" meanings. In any case, this book will satisfy the wise readers looking for a good time, and also those who will dare to discover, as the subtitle encourages, the full significance of this "nightmare"...

(*You should also find the book interesting if you're familiar with the work of C.S. Lewis and George MacDonald, or have a particular interest in Christian apologetics. Chesterton had, as it is well known, a deep influence on Lewis and a generation of Christian thinkers.)