::READERS REVIEWS::

Seriousness sends men mad - Imagine a 1984 London where society has frozen at turn-of-the-century levels, a King is randomly selected from the populace, and nobody really takes politics seriously.

Of course, it only takes one wise, weird little man to turn all of that on its head. G.K. Chesterton's magnificently absurd comic novel explores a common theme in his books -- a person who entertains himself with an absurdly serious world -- in an increasingly heated situation where the little boroughs of London have become warring kingdoms. Not much in the way of sci-fi, but a delicious little social satire.

Friends of the eccentric Auberon Quin are understandably shocked when he is selected as the new King of England... especially since his main focus is definitely not power ("Oh! I will toil for you, my faithful people! You shall have a banquet of humour!"). After bumping into a young boy with a toy sword, Quin decides to revive the old city-states of medieval times, with city walls, banners, halberdiers, coat of arms, and ruling provosts -- all as a joke.

But ten years later, a young man named Adam Wayne -- who happens to be the little boy who inspired Quin -- refuses to let a road go through Notting Hill. Quin is first delighted and then perplexed by Wayne, a man who treats the King's joke with deadly seriousness. Now a full-out medieval battle is brewing between the boroughs of London, and Auberon Quin finds that his joke may have some very serious consequences...

G.K. Chesterton was no H.G. Wells when it came from trying to imagine the future --- the 1984 London he imagined was pretty much the same, technologically and socially, as the London of 1904. It's the message that important in this tale, as personified first by a deposed president and then by Wayne -- pride and patriotism in one's country and culture, especially a small one, is something to be prized.

And Chesterton handles this concept with a sense of humor worthy of Quin, outright mocking the respectable and boring ("The provost of West Kensington is mad because he thinks he is respectable, as mad as a man who thinks he is a chicken!"). The humor starts off fairly ordinary (Quin standing on his head as he's declared king) and moves into more sophisticated realms with the elaborate medieval games. It would be scary to contemplate, if it weren't so hilarious.

The greatest satire is in this future society itself, and it's occasionally scary to contemplate. With his knowledge of human nature, Chesterton predicts ennui, complacency, disdain of religion, cultural indifference, and a public oblivious to the mad wackiness of their leaders because they just don't care. It hits a little too close to home.

His writing is full of color and striking description ("... a blue and gold glittering thing, running very fast, which looked at first like a very tall beetle"). And while the battle of Notting Hill doesn't really pull you in, the powerful speeches that are given during important scenes -- such as when Quin talks to Wayne about the damage his joke has caused -- are among Chesterton's best dialogue.

Auberon Quin is a pretty fun character, acutely aware of life's absurdity and determined to have as much fun from it as possible -- but he becomes a bit more serious at the prospect of people being killed. Wayne is the complete opposite -- young, passionate, intense, and vehemently patriotic. He's set apart from all those stuffy codgers because his love is not for respectability and normalcy, but for his home of Notting Hill.

Chesterton may have gotten the future of England all wrong, but "The Napoleon of Notting Hill" is still a wildly amusing little satire, with two very different heroes and a very unrecognizable London. A deserving classic.

Highly inspiring book - Writing from the year 1904, G. K. Chesterton weaves a tale of London in 2004--a London that has forgotten democratic principles to the extent that it chooses its absolute rulers alphabetically. Of course, when a country picks its ruler in such a haphazard way, it is difficult to predict what may happen. For England, it means that the eccentric Auberon Quin becomes ruler. (At the time he is informed of his appointment as king, Auberon is putting his head between his legs and mooing like an cow.) The new King Auberon is not crazy, but neither does he understand how to wisely govern a country. As a joke--he sees everything as humorous--he forces all the districts of London to each put up their own city walls (guarded of course); the Lord High Provost of each district to go out announced by heralds with trumpets; and each region of the city to have its own distinct colors, banners, robes, and hats. "Londoners had no particular objection to the King making a fool of himself," Chesterton writes, "but they became indignant when it became evident that he wished to make fools of them." However, there is one Lord High Provost--a rather young provost--that takes King Auberon's joke seriously.

Nineteen-year-old Adam Wayne has never been out of London, and therefore his neighborhood, Notting Hill, is the world to him. And the king's calls for local patriotism inspire him to the extent that he likes the red district robe that he must wear. He even finds himself a broadsword to go with it. So when the other provosts, out of self-interest, want to run a public works project through a street in his district, he opposes the measure and begins arming halberdiers to protect Notting Hill. Can Adam Wayne fend off the more massive forces of the other districts? And if he somehow manages to win a fight against devastatingly superior numbers--what would his victory do to London?

This book is significant, not only literarily, but historically; Irish revolutionary Michael Collins later pointed to it as a major factor in his personal decision to fight against the English. And for a world more consumed with bigness than even the British Empire in its heyday, Chesterton's emphasis on the true meaning of patriotism is desperately needed. His imagination, humor, and sense of pathos mix to create a highly enjoyable read (and an inspiring one, as Collins found out).

"The Napoleon of Notting Hill" is not, in my opinion, Chesterton's best book; some parts of the story drag a bit, especially where King Auberon covers some of the most intense fighting as a war correspondent. The battles are naturally one of the most fascinating parts of the book, and most readers would rather stand beside Adam Wayne in the thick of things than hear Auberon's report about the fighting. And the rather philosophical ending, while it helps clarify the meaning of the novel, comes off a bit flat since the army of Notting Hill had just fought to its death. Overall, however, the book is a worthwhile read--imaginative, fascinating, and, for the localizers among us, a call to action.

Highly inspiring book - Writing from the year 1904, G. K. Chesterton weaves a tale of London in 2004--a London that has forgotten democratic principles to the extent that it chooses its absolute rulers alphabetically. Of course, when a country picks its ruler in such a haphazard way, it is difficult to predict what may happen. For England, it means that the eccentric Auberon Quin becomes ruler. (At the time he is informed of his appointment as king, Auberon is putting his head between his legs and mooing like an cow.) The new King Auberon is not crazy, but neither does he understand how to wisely govern a country. As a joke--he sees everything as humorous--he forces all the districts of London to each put up their own city walls (guarded of course); the Lord High Provost of each district to go out announced by heralds with trumpets; and each region of the city to have its own distinct colors, banners, robes, and hats. "Londoners had no particular objection to the King making a fool of himself," Chesterton writes, "but they became indignant when it became evident that he wished to make fools of them." However, there is one Lord High Provost--a rather young provost--that takes King Auberon's joke seriously.

Nineteen-year-old Adam Wayne has never been out of London, and therefore his neighborhood, Notting Hill, is the world to him. And the king's calls for local patriotism inspire him to the extent that he likes the red district robe that he must wear. He even finds himself a broadsword to go with it. So when the other provosts, out of self-interest, want to run a public works project through a street in his district, he opposes the measure and begins arming halberdiers to protect Notting Hill. Can Adam Wayne fend off the more massive forces of the other districts? And if he somehow manages to win a fight against devastatingly superior numbers--what would his victory do to London?

This book is significant, not only literarily, but historically; Irish revolutionary Michael Collins later pointed to it as a major factor in his personal decision to fight against the English. And for a world more consumed with bigness than even the British Empire in its heyday, Chesterton's emphasis on the true meaning of patriotism is desperately needed. His imagination, humor, and sense of pathos mix to create a highly enjoyable read (and an inspiring one, as Collins found out).

"The Napoleon of Notting Hill" is not, in my opinion, Chesterton's best book; some parts of the story drag a bit, especially where King Auberon covers some of the most intense fighting as a war correspondent. The battles are naturally one of the most fascinating parts of the book, and most readers would rather stand beside Adam Wayne in the thick of things than hear Auberon's report about the fighting. And the rather philosophical ending, while it helps clarify the meaning of the novel, comes off a bit flat since the army of Notting Hill had just fought to its death. Overall, however, the book is a worthwhile read--imaginative, fascinating, and, for the localizers among us, a call to action.

A short masterpiece - The Napoleon of Notting Hill is one of the best books you've probably never read. Even for some literature majors and heavy readers, probably; it was never required reading for me. Some conservatives, the deep and philosophical ones (ones who do more than listen to Rush Limbaugh, no insult intended), are familiar with it. That's how I heard of it--a reference from paleoconservative critic Thomas Fleming.
Written in the 1900s by an Englishman named G.K. Chesterton, The Napoleon of Notting Hill is a fantasy set in 1984--coincidentally, the same year George Orwell's novel is set in. In this future England, the Windsor dynasty (and the Empire, if I recall) are gone. There is a monarchy, but it consists of the crown being periodically given to random citizens.
An idealistic regular guy feels distressed at changes planned to his neighborhood (Notting Hill) by the government and local businessmen. Tearing down buildings or other existing structures to build new roads--that sort of thing. But he wants the neighborhood to stay exactly as it is, because it's his home.
Accidentally encouraged by a sudden royal proclamation that all neighborhoods are to display the trappings of medieval England (the new randomly selected king means it to be nothing but a big joke, and expects the citizenry to feel the same way), the protagonist convinces some of his fellow Notting Hill residents to take up arms against the march of progress.]
I read this in fall 2008, and it was the best novel I had read in years. It's the most Romantic (not romantic) novel I've read since Cyrano de Bergerac, but less childish and more philosophical. I felt inspired.

Since this is also the most quotable novel I've read in years, I offer a few of the best quotations, to entice you into reading this masterpiece:

"It is of the new things that men tire--of fashions and proposals and improvements and change. ... It is the old things that are young."

"For you and me, and for all brave men, my brother...there is good wine poured in the inn at the end of the world."

"If we have taken the child's games, and given them the seriousness of a Crusade, if we have drenched your grotesque Dutch garden with the blood of martyrs, we have turned a nursery into a temple. I ask you, in the name of Heaven, who wins?"


The Napoleon of Notting Hill is, in significant ways, the mirror image of Don Quixote. (I'm always interested in *that* novel, because Don Quixote is my idol.)
How? Don Quixote is an allegedly insane man who travels out into the world to fight evil, whatever forms it may take. He is driven by, among other things, belief in a heroic past that is probably imaginary, which he read about in books. [Background: DQ, whose real name is Alonso Quixano, is an obsessive reader of heroic fiction about medieval Europe--the chivalric age. Miguel de Cervantes depicts these books as nonsensical, historically inaccurate, and good only for entertainment. But Quixano reads too many of them, and eventually "goes mad" as a result. Only then does he become Don Quixote and go questing.]
Adam Wayne (the protagonist of TNNH) is an idealistic but sane man who stays at home to fight a material evil (the plan to tear down part of his neighborhood) that happens to represent the abstract evil of Progress. He is inspired by the societal traditions of medieval England, but unlike DQ, he is neither fighting unspecified evils nor living in the distant past mentally. Wayne is fighting for his immediate neighborhood in the here and now.

The one possible disappointment of this novel is that the aftermath of the final battle, what Notting Hill would be like after its defeat, is not depicted.

An absurd novel with a serious message - "The Napoleon of Notting Hill" is probably the most absurd novel I've ever read. The author, G K Chesterton, was a colorful, verbose and highly eclectic British intellectual. He supported the Boer and the Irish, opposed the suffragettes, and collaborated with Guild Socialists, only to become entangled with the notorious Catholic fundamentalist Hilaire Belloc. I honestly admit that I don't quite understand the man!

Still, there seem to be some unifying themes in Chesterton's voluminous writings. The most obvious is traditional Christianity, first in the form of Anglicanism, later as Catholicism. The reader shouldn't be surprised if some of the characters in his novels turn out to be angels, the Devil, or God himself. Second is a kind of populism. Chesterton emphasizes common sense, the opinions of the common man, the everyday life of the common people, etc. As one of the characters in "The Napoleon of Notting Hill" puts it: "The human being, the common man, whom mere geniuses like you and me can only worship like a god". In his economic writings, he idealizes the peasantry. In other contexts, Chesterton says that life in the city is intrinsically interesting, and calls on realist writers to relate to it. Finally, there is a search for authenticity, as opposed to the artificial greyness of modernity and the tyranny of the Zeitgeist. Somehow, Chesterton believed that this authenticity could be found among ordinary people, hence making a connection to his populism.

All three themes are present in "The Napoleon of Notting Hill", published in 1904 and one of Chesterton's earliest novels. Both the setting and the plot are completely absurd, although the absurdity is revealed to have a point at the very end of the story. The setting is a futuristic Britain. The nation is a dictatorship, but nobody seems to care. Free speech is outlawed, but nobody notices, since nobody has anything important to say anyway! The standard of living is quite high, and the police have been abolished, since there is no crime. The king or dictator is choosen at random by lot. The whole world has been globalized, except Nicaragua. In other words, this society of the future is a parody of the greyness, dullness, lethargy and creeping statism Chesterton saw (or think he saw) in Britain during his own lifetime.

The plot revolves around two characters, king Auberon Quin and the seeming lunatic Adam Wayne. Upon his unexpected ascension to the throne, Auberon decides to resurrect the traditions of the Middle Ages as a sick joke for his own higher amusement. He divides London into independent boroughs, forces the mayors (or provosts) to wear ridiculous medieval attire, orders them to create mock armies, and so on. Unfortunately for the king, one person takes the whole thing seriously: Adam Wayne, the Lord High Provost of Notting Hill, the smallest and least significant borough in London. Before long, Wayne starts an absurd war with the other boroughs, and eventually succeeds in establishing "the empire of Notting Hill". Throughout the novel, we are lead to believe that Wayne is raving mad, and his actions certainly seem to parody nationalism and local patriotism. Only at the end is it revealed that Wayne is actually "the good guy", perhaps even an angel from Heaven. Both Quin and Wayne are overthrown by the people, but they join fortunes and wander off together.

The message of the novel is that nationalism and localism, which looks absurd to modern eyes, aren't artificial but real, more real than the dull greyness of the modern. Local patriotism is authentic, is part of what humanity is really all about. Chesterton was a "Little England nationalist" and called for extensive decentralization.

Another point raised by the novel concerns the relationship between humour and seriousness. The futuristic society described by Chesterton is frankly boring, but when Auberon attempts to protest this state of affairs, he can do little else than frivolity. Indeed, our "postmodern condition" is characterized both by conventional, mass boredom and frivolous mass entertainment. The two things aren't antipodes, but twins. This is Auberon's problem in the novel. Wayne's problem is seemingly the opposite: he takes even the absurd deadly seriously, and hence turns into a cultish fanatic. In the end, however, it turns out that Wayne knows the solution to the problem: humans need to be both humorous and serious, and there is no contradiction between authentic laughter and authentic seriousness. It may sound like a bland message, until you start watching TV!

However, Chesterton's novel also contains a cautionary note: "When dark and dreary days come, you and I are necessary, the pure fanatic, the pure satirist".

Is the world ripe for a real Adam Wayne?

love, humor - Many rush around in a hazy anxiety that they are missing an opportunity to join the future, to be part of it, something special is coming. Chersterton seems to say that the future is highly overrated. The best things for all time and eternity are love and having a sense of humor. There will never be anything better, technoledgy can not make it, nor social theory; if you do not see that then you are amoung the walking dead.

Not as well crafted as "The Man Who Was Thursday" but non-the-less Chetertonian in allegory, sybolism,analogies and voice. Chesterton's allegory and symbolism has a way of getting under one's skin and tearing something up inside. vanity? Is it some pseudo-self dieing and truer one breaking free? Something. His disparaging comments on those who stop after success, why; because their stopping was a sign they sought success for vain reasons not passion or the undying spirit that connects self to the divine.

Chesterton brings unique insights and his voice is his own. His attacks in this book had much to do with killing a false Idol of futurism and future worship; his futuristic utopia is a unique mocking jest. His wit and aphorisms supported by a large allegory knock at a truer self, real and spiritual. But the format here was at times hard to swallow. Even many people with good sense of humor may find this a little much. Tech advances don't equate more giggles necesarily. Chesterton saw much in tradition, his message is often confussing to me. But he is like interpreting a poet or a piece of music the intent of the work is in the eye of the beholder an executor of opinions may just obfuscate an understanding; and it is safe to say that Chesterton's fiction is widely interpreted.

I thought he was on to something, just not as well crafted as A Man Who was Thursday.

To Arms! - Written in Chesterton's lively, witty and nigh on inimitable style, this book is at once profound, fun, thrilling, quirky, and thought-provoking. It tells the story of a nation's political apathy taken to an outlandish but not illogical conclusion, in which England's king is selected at random on the theory that by virtue of his despotism, the despot's power will be limited. However, they are still bound by law to obey the man, and when the latest king is chosen he reimagines London's neighborhoods as individual cities with varied rich and ficticious histories, bestowing them with arms and colors and provosts. No one can quite figure out if he's having a laugh or is simply mad, but they are bound to obey him. The quite sensible people put up with the nonsense and try to go on being quite sensible, trying to build some public works program, when they hit a snag -- the one person who takes it all seriously, the man referred to in the title. From there it proceeds into some of the most exciting battle scenes I've read, and better than a great many I've seen in film, and despite the relatively pedestrian external cause for battle, it becomes clear that the battle truly being fought is completely worth fighting for.

I love Chesterton for his wit and his unique way of seeing the world with wonder, and my mind has been expanded by every single work of his I've read, but this one has outdone them all, even his magnum opus The Everlasting Man, in impacting me. The book had me on the edge of my seat by the end, making gasps and exclamations and recommending it to anyone who happened to be nearby. It's simply mindblowing in the best possible way. Chesterton has a habit of ending his stories highly philosophically that could seem a bit out of place, but just slow your pace down a bit and let it sink in and you'll see what I mean. I have recommended this book to many different people and for many different reasons - it is simply that rich. Absolute stunner of a book.