What do you think?
Rate this book
Father Brown #1
袩褉芯褋褌芯写褍褕懈械褌芯 薪邪 芯褌械褑 袘褉邪褍薪
袪邪蟹泻邪蟹懈褌械, 锌芯斜褉邪薪懈 褌褍泻 褋邪 胁泻谢褞褔械薪懈 胁 锌褗褉胁懈褟 褋斜芯褉薪懈泻 芯褌 褑懈泻褗谢邪 蟹邪 芯褌械褑 袘褉邪褍薪 懈 胁泻谢褞褔胁邪褌 "小邪锌褎懈褉械薪懈褟褌 泻褉褗褋褌", "孝邪泄薪邪褌邪 谐褉邪写懈薪邪", "袥械褌褟褖懈褌械 蟹胁械蟹写懈", "袧械胁懈写懈屑懈褟褌 褔芯胁械泻", "效械褋褌褌邪 薪邪 袠蟹褉邪械谢 袚芯褍", "小褌褉邪薪薪懈褌械 褋褌褗锌泻懈", "袧械锌芯写褏芯写褟褖邪褌邪 褎芯褉屑邪" 懈 "小褔褍锌械薪邪褌邪 褕锌邪谐邪".
183 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1911
2430 people are currently reading
15916 people want to read
About the author
G.K. Chesterton
4,320听books5,549听followersGilbert Keith Chesterton was an English writer, philosopher, lay theologian, and literary and art critic.
He was educated at St. Paul鈥檚, 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.鈥檚 Weekly.
Chesterton was equally at ease with literary and social criticism, history, politics, economics, philosophy, and theology.
He was educated at St. Paul鈥檚, 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.鈥檚 Weekly.
Chesterton was equally at ease with literary and social criticism, history, politics, economics, philosophy, and theology.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,548 reviews
May 29, 2019
Originally published in 1911 these ten Father Brown Stories are perfect examples of short stories. They all pose a mystery, a crime or a murder which is solved by Father Brown's deductions and observations in under 20 pages. Unlike the Sherlock Holmes stories, written at around the same time, they rely less on clues and action but more on rational thought and Father Brown's experience of life as observed through the many sins of his flock. Instead of a Watson at his side, he has Flambeau - initially a clever master thief, sometimes outwitted by Brown, but later reformed by him to use his clever mind for good, he has grown to become Brown's friend and companion and a clever private investigator. The stories cover a range of scenes - locked room murders, murders made to look like suicides, Indian fakirs, sword fights to the death and jewel thefts from under the owner's nose. Still very readable more than 100 years later!
August 7, 2022
El Padre Brown es un cura cat贸lico con grandes dotes de observaci贸n y con mucho conocimiento de la conducta humana. Combina estos dones para ir resolviendo misterios, asesinatos, dudas hist贸ricas y otro tipo de situaciones.
Es una inteligencia al nivel de Sherlock Holmes, pero sin usar tantos datos cient铆ficos. Solo con la observaci贸n de la escena de los hechos y con el conocimiento de los participantes resuelve con ingenio los casos que se le presentan.
En esta novela, Flambeau (ex-ladr贸n y detective de oficio) es el hilo conductor de los casos ya que siempre se encuentran juntos, aunque siempre es el Padre Brown qui茅n resuelve los entuertos.
Son casos sencillos en los cuales siempre se encuentran envueltos de manera indirecta tanto Flambeau como el Padre Brown, pero resueltos de manera brillante.
----------------------------
Father Brown is a Catholic priest with great powers of observation and a great knowledge of human behaviour. He combines these gifts to solve mysteries, murders, historical doubts and other situations.
It is an intelligence on the level of Sherlock Holmes, but without using so much scientific data. Just by observing the scene of the events and with the knowledge of the participants, he ingeniously solves the cases that are presented to him.
In this novel, Flambeau (a former thief and detective by trade) is the common thread of the cases, as they always meet together, although it is always Father Brown who solves the puzzles.
They are simple cases in which both Flambeau and Father Brown are always indirectly involved, but brilliantly solved.
Es una inteligencia al nivel de Sherlock Holmes, pero sin usar tantos datos cient铆ficos. Solo con la observaci贸n de la escena de los hechos y con el conocimiento de los participantes resuelve con ingenio los casos que se le presentan.
En esta novela, Flambeau (ex-ladr贸n y detective de oficio) es el hilo conductor de los casos ya que siempre se encuentran juntos, aunque siempre es el Padre Brown qui茅n resuelve los entuertos.
Son casos sencillos en los cuales siempre se encuentran envueltos de manera indirecta tanto Flambeau como el Padre Brown, pero resueltos de manera brillante.
----------------------------
Father Brown is a Catholic priest with great powers of observation and a great knowledge of human behaviour. He combines these gifts to solve mysteries, murders, historical doubts and other situations.
It is an intelligence on the level of Sherlock Holmes, but without using so much scientific data. Just by observing the scene of the events and with the knowledge of the participants, he ingeniously solves the cases that are presented to him.
In this novel, Flambeau (a former thief and detective by trade) is the common thread of the cases, as they always meet together, although it is always Father Brown who solves the puzzles.
They are simple cases in which both Flambeau and Father Brown are always indirectly involved, but brilliantly solved.
July 22, 2010
Chesterton was a contemporary of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle; and though he created his principal fictional sleuth, Father Brown, after Doyle had written the bulk of the Holmes canon, he can also claim a formative role (though not nearly so important as Doyle's) in the shaping of the genre. Father Brown is the first --but not the last!-- in a tradition of men and women of the cloth who solve traditional mysteries, the lineal ancestor of such figures as Father Dowling and Brother Cadfael, and the first series sleuth who's an amateur, rather than a professional, detective. Arising and set in the same late Victorian/Edwardian British milieu, the two characters, Brown and Holmes, have some similarities. Both are extremely smart, and have a capacity for minute observation and mental analysis of small but significant details that others tend to overlook. Flambeau, the continuing character in most of these stories, who under Brown's benign influence transitions from thief to honest detective, comes to serve as a Watson-like foil (though not narrator) for the priest detective. The latter even occasionally smokes a pipe -and more rarely (like Chesterton himself, though not like Holmes) a cigar. Like the mysteries of the Holmes canon, these stories are demanding intellectual puzzles, requiring a rationality of which the Neoclassicists would have heartily improved; but they're also steeped in the Romantic tradition, with any number of macabre, exotic or even Gothic elements: the spooky gloom of a Scottish castle as the storm wind howls, a swordfight to the death, a sinister Hindu fakir, a beheaded corpse, a religious cult, madness.
There are also, however, significant differences. Most importantly, Father Brown relies much more on intuition than Holmes does; in this respect, Chesterton sometimes seems influenced more by Henry James than by Doyle. :-) But Brown's intuition is grounded in his understanding of the dark side of human nature, gleaned as a confessor and a moral theologian, just as his knowledge of criminal techniques comes from years in the confessional in crime-ridden urban slum parishes. His priestly calling is thus not incidental to his sleuthing; and it's often the vehicle for serious observations about philosophical and spiritual truth, which are lacking or much less prominent in the Holmes canon (where both Holmes and Doyle have convictions much less definite than Chesterton's, and Brown's). Both men like the intellectual challenge of solving mysteries; but Brown isn't a hired detective, and his main interest is pastoral --he wants the reformation of the offender, not necessarily punishment, and he never takes his knowledge to the police for that reason. (He does usually encourage the culprits to confess -- with mixed success.) Holmes extends a similar mercy in "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle," but it's not his normal operating procedure. Where Holmes is assertive, flamboyant, and proud of his abilities (though not vain), Brown is mild-mannered, humble, and self-effacing. Chesterton's prose is something the reader is much more conscious of than Doyle's: fulsome, orotund, rich in metaphor and similie; and his much more vivid and lovingly detailed descriptions of the world around him are those of a writer who takes actual joy in the creation, founded in an appreciation of its Creator.
The dozen stories here were all written in 1910-1911; most take place in or near Chesterton's native London. A bare majority (seven) are murder mysteries; two actually turn out to involve no crime at all, and the others are daring thefts or attempted thefts. "The Secret Garden" is a noteworthy example of the first group, in that it involves an early variant on the locked-room mystery: the victim was dispatched in a garden attached to a house (belonging to the Paris chief of police, no less!), with no access save through the house, and the house has only one continuously guarded door --so how did the victim get there? A couple of cases turn on the mental inability of the class-conscious British gentry of that era to notice servants/menials as anything more than part of the furniture --a feature that Agatha Christie no doubt borrowed from Chesterton in her Poirot story "The Yellow Irises."
The particular edition I read has extensive annotations by Chesterton scholar Martin Gardner; hence, it's titled The Annotated Innocence of Father Brown (first published in 1988 by Oxford Univ. Press). These are a mixed blessing. Some of them provide interesting background matter, explanations of Edwardian terms, and textual variants, etc.; too many others explain the obvious, and some critical comments miss the boat. I don't agree with Gardner's negative view of "The Wrong Shape" or the reason for it; and while I agree that the reference to "one fat Chinese sneer" in "The Three Tools of Death" is racially insensitive and deplorable, I don't find a similar problem with any other language here. (The successful Jewish hotel owner in "The Queer Feet" isn't portrayed negatively because he's successful; if Chesterton had never mentioned that a character was Jewish, we'd no doubt hear complaints that Jews are "invisible" in his work! And the bracketing of Jews with country squires, in a passing reference in "The Flying Stars" to groups that can be seen as distinct, is no more disparaging to Jews than to country squires --a group Chesterton, given his social thought, probably more admired than the reverse.) For readers interested in Chesterton scholarship, the value of this edition is enhanced by such features as a printing history of the stories here, and an over 20-page comprehensive bibliography of critical works on Chesterton in general and the Father Brown canon in particular.
There are also, however, significant differences. Most importantly, Father Brown relies much more on intuition than Holmes does; in this respect, Chesterton sometimes seems influenced more by Henry James than by Doyle. :-) But Brown's intuition is grounded in his understanding of the dark side of human nature, gleaned as a confessor and a moral theologian, just as his knowledge of criminal techniques comes from years in the confessional in crime-ridden urban slum parishes. His priestly calling is thus not incidental to his sleuthing; and it's often the vehicle for serious observations about philosophical and spiritual truth, which are lacking or much less prominent in the Holmes canon (where both Holmes and Doyle have convictions much less definite than Chesterton's, and Brown's). Both men like the intellectual challenge of solving mysteries; but Brown isn't a hired detective, and his main interest is pastoral --he wants the reformation of the offender, not necessarily punishment, and he never takes his knowledge to the police for that reason. (He does usually encourage the culprits to confess -- with mixed success.) Holmes extends a similar mercy in "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle," but it's not his normal operating procedure. Where Holmes is assertive, flamboyant, and proud of his abilities (though not vain), Brown is mild-mannered, humble, and self-effacing. Chesterton's prose is something the reader is much more conscious of than Doyle's: fulsome, orotund, rich in metaphor and similie; and his much more vivid and lovingly detailed descriptions of the world around him are those of a writer who takes actual joy in the creation, founded in an appreciation of its Creator.
The dozen stories here were all written in 1910-1911; most take place in or near Chesterton's native London. A bare majority (seven) are murder mysteries; two actually turn out to involve no crime at all, and the others are daring thefts or attempted thefts. "The Secret Garden" is a noteworthy example of the first group, in that it involves an early variant on the locked-room mystery: the victim was dispatched in a garden attached to a house (belonging to the Paris chief of police, no less!), with no access save through the house, and the house has only one continuously guarded door --so how did the victim get there? A couple of cases turn on the mental inability of the class-conscious British gentry of that era to notice servants/menials as anything more than part of the furniture --a feature that Agatha Christie no doubt borrowed from Chesterton in her Poirot story "The Yellow Irises."
The particular edition I read has extensive annotations by Chesterton scholar Martin Gardner; hence, it's titled The Annotated Innocence of Father Brown (first published in 1988 by Oxford Univ. Press). These are a mixed blessing. Some of them provide interesting background matter, explanations of Edwardian terms, and textual variants, etc.; too many others explain the obvious, and some critical comments miss the boat. I don't agree with Gardner's negative view of "The Wrong Shape" or the reason for it; and while I agree that the reference to "one fat Chinese sneer" in "The Three Tools of Death" is racially insensitive and deplorable, I don't find a similar problem with any other language here. (The successful Jewish hotel owner in "The Queer Feet" isn't portrayed negatively because he's successful; if Chesterton had never mentioned that a character was Jewish, we'd no doubt hear complaints that Jews are "invisible" in his work! And the bracketing of Jews with country squires, in a passing reference in "The Flying Stars" to groups that can be seen as distinct, is no more disparaging to Jews than to country squires --a group Chesterton, given his social thought, probably more admired than the reverse.) For readers interested in Chesterton scholarship, the value of this edition is enhanced by such features as a printing history of the stories here, and an over 20-page comprehensive bibliography of critical works on Chesterton in general and the Father Brown canon in particular.
May 25, 2019
My dad is currently watching the BBC series of Father Brown and after jokingly telling him how terrible the show seemed (which it really didn't at all) I decided to pick up Chesterton's first Father Brown collection to see how the stories compare to the show and because I love to sink my teeth into a good mystery tale occasionally. The Innocence of Father Brown is a collection of interesting and sometimes surprising mystery short stories set in the early twentieth century. The main character is the priest Father Brown who tries his hand as an amateur detective occasionally. He doesn't really care about the true consequences of the law and often tries to figure out these crimes so he can save people in this world before they move on to the next. The only other recurring character is Hercule Flambeau who is a world-famous thief turned private detective and he became a good friend of Father Brown after their paths crossed numerous times. Each of these tales takes about 20 minutes to complete often concluding with a Sherlock Holmes-esque this is what really happened speech by the priest. A good set of stories to dip into and I will check out the next collection asap.
February 21, 2023
This first collection of stories of Father Brown was a disappointment. Being my first exposure to Chesterton, I didn't know what to expect. But, given the popularity of clergyman/detective Father Brown, I certainly expected a better outcome. There, I was disappointed.
In my opinion, these first twelve short stories, wherein Father Brown "solves" both present and past crimes, don't serve as a good introduction to the series. The majority of them are uninteresting with mediocre crimes/mysteries, and Father Brown's precise knowledge of how each crime was committed was a bit too fantastic and thus, unconvincing.
The introduction in the audiobook I listened to, along with the text, compares Father Brown to Sherlock Holmes, and I couldn't agree less. Such a comparison is unfair to both of them. Nevertheless, I've heard that the later collections of this series are far better than the first one, so I will not form any definite opinion on the Father Brown series until I have read some of the later ones.
In my opinion, these first twelve short stories, wherein Father Brown "solves" both present and past crimes, don't serve as a good introduction to the series. The majority of them are uninteresting with mediocre crimes/mysteries, and Father Brown's precise knowledge of how each crime was committed was a bit too fantastic and thus, unconvincing.
The introduction in the audiobook I listened to, along with the text, compares Father Brown to Sherlock Holmes, and I couldn't agree less. Such a comparison is unfair to both of them. Nevertheless, I've heard that the later collections of this series are far better than the first one, so I will not form any definite opinion on the Father Brown series until I have read some of the later ones.
July 4, 2022
Gilbert Keith Chesterton (1874-1936) is an English writer and polemicist, who ventured into different literary genres, poems, books (nearly 80!), Theater etc. Today we will focus on the character of the priest detective he created in 1910, Father Brown.
More or less, Chesterton's hero may be in Sherlock Holmes's lineage with Conan Doyle, who predates him. With a highly developed sense of observation, reflection takes precedence over action, reasoning wins over immediate logic, and Father Brown dismantles criminal scenarios with a mastery that leaves you speechless. Only slight criticism, each investigation being the subject of only about thirty pages, the resolution of the puzzles is swift. I would have preferred that Chesterton / Brown had more time to get us to the goal. On the other hand, unlike Conan Doyle, there is a lot more humour in the turn of phrase, and there I find a very slight parallel with Wodehouse, the unforgettable creator of Jeeves.
This book, The Innocence of Father Brown, compiles twelve surveys of the ecclesiastic among the fifty he was the hero and collected in five collections between 1911 and 1935. I advise you not to read them in a row because they do not extend over very long pages and quite quickly, as I have written above. The writer's "tips" and Father Brown's reasoning can become dull or repetitive, so it would be a mess because it is about an excellent book, after all.
More or less, Chesterton's hero may be in Sherlock Holmes's lineage with Conan Doyle, who predates him. With a highly developed sense of observation, reflection takes precedence over action, reasoning wins over immediate logic, and Father Brown dismantles criminal scenarios with a mastery that leaves you speechless. Only slight criticism, each investigation being the subject of only about thirty pages, the resolution of the puzzles is swift. I would have preferred that Chesterton / Brown had more time to get us to the goal. On the other hand, unlike Conan Doyle, there is a lot more humour in the turn of phrase, and there I find a very slight parallel with Wodehouse, the unforgettable creator of Jeeves.
This book, The Innocence of Father Brown, compiles twelve surveys of the ecclesiastic among the fifty he was the hero and collected in five collections between 1911 and 1935. I advise you not to read them in a row because they do not extend over very long pages and quite quickly, as I have written above. The writer's "tips" and Father Brown's reasoning can become dull or repetitive, so it would be a mess because it is about an excellent book, after all.
December 6, 2010
Chesterton is perhaps best known for his Father Brown stories, so I was deeply disappointed to find that they represent him at his preachy, intolerant worst. If I鈥檇 started here, instead of with the wonderfully weird and delightfully dark and , I would have had no desire to pick up anything by Chesterton again. All of these stories seem to revolve around the irritatingly smug Father Brown proving that some type of non-Christian is wrong wrong WRONG about everything, the poor, deluded, and occasionally murderous souls.
Aside from being pious, preachy, and at times outright racist, these tales also just aren鈥檛 very good from the detective story standpoint, either. The Sherlock Holmes stories continue to be fascinating because Holmes is, because his relationship with Watson is, because the way he interacts with the world is. Father Brown鈥檚 character has less color than his name, and although Chesterton makes the occasional attempt at providing him with a sidekick, he鈥檚 never truly given anyone to confide in or bounce off of, as Holmes has in Watson. Father Brown is lost without his Boswell. And he can stay there, as far as I鈥檓 concerned.
Aside from being pious, preachy, and at times outright racist, these tales also just aren鈥檛 very good from the detective story standpoint, either. The Sherlock Holmes stories continue to be fascinating because Holmes is, because his relationship with Watson is, because the way he interacts with the world is. Father Brown鈥檚 character has less color than his name, and although Chesterton makes the occasional attempt at providing him with a sidekick, he鈥檚 never truly given anyone to confide in or bounce off of, as Holmes has in Watson. Father Brown is lost without his Boswell. And he can stay there, as far as I鈥檓 concerned.
July 22, 2019
The Innocence of Father Brown (Father Brown #1), G.K. Chesterton
Father Brown is a fictional Roman Catholic priest and amateur detective who is featured in 53 short stories published between 1910 and 1936 written by English novelist G. K. Chesterton. Father Brown solves mysteries and crimes using his intuition and keen understanding of human nature. Chesterton describes Father Brown as a short, stumpy Roman Catholic priest, with shapeless clothes, a large umbrella, and an uncanny insight into human evil. In "The Head of Caesar" he is "formerly priest of Cobhole in Essex, and now working in London". He makes his first appearance in the story "The Blue Cross" published in 1910 and continues to appear throughout fifty short stories in five volumes, with two more stories discovered and published posthumously, often assisted in his crime-solving by the reformed criminal M. Hercule Flambeau.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 亘蹖鬲 賵 丿賵賲 賲丕賴 噩賵賱丕蹖 爻丕賱 2005 賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 氐賱蹖亘 丌亘蹖 賵 卮卮 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿蹖诏乇: 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳 讴卮蹖卮 讴丕乇丌诏丕賴貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 诏蹖賱亘乇 鬲 讴蹖鬲 趩爻鬲乇鬲賵賳貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 讴丕賵賴 賲蹖乇毓亘丕爻蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 胤乇丨 賳賵貙 1382貨 丿乇 197 氐貨 卮丕亘讴: 9647134991貨 賲賵囟賵毓: 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 讴賵鬲丕賴 讴丕乇丌诏丕賴蹖 丕夭 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕蹖蹖 - 爻丿賴 20 賲
賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄貙 讴卮蹖卮蹖 讴丕鬲賵賱蹖讴貙 賵 丿爻鬲 賵 倬丕 趩賱賮鬲蹖 賵 禺倬賱賴 丕爻鬲貨 讴賴 亘賴鈥� 乇睾賲 爻丕丿賴 賱賵丨蹖 馗丕賴乇卮貙 丕夭 賴賵卮 賵 匕讴丕賵鬲 倬賱蹖爻蹖 亘乇禺賵乇丿丕乇 丕爻鬲 .丕蹖卮丕賳 丿乇 丕蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏ж� 丕夭 賲毓賲丕賴丕蹖蹖 倬乇丿賴 亘乇賲蹖鈥屫ж辟嗀� 讴賴 亘爻蹖丕乇 倬蹖趩蹖丿賴 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖鈥屫必迟嗀� 丕賲丕 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 鬲賵囟蹖丨蹖 亘蹖 賳賴丕蹖鬲 爻丕丿賴 丿丕乇賳丿. 丕氐賱蹖鈥屫臂屬� 賵蹖跇诏蹖 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄 禺乇丕賮賴 爻鬲蹖夭蹖貙 賵 禺乇丿亘丕賵乇蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳爻鬲. 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 芦氐賱蹖亘 丌亘蹖禄 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丕蹖賳 賲噩賲賵毓賴 丕爻鬲貨 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 倬賱蹖爻蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 芦賵丕賱丕賳鬲賳禄 丿乇 噩爻鬲噩賵蹖 芦賮賱丕賲亘賵禄貙 爻丕乇賯 亘蹖賳鈥屫з勝呝勝勠� 丕爻鬲. 丕賲丕 芦賮賱丕賲亘賵禄貙 讴賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 丿乇 讴爻賵鬲 讴卮蹖卮 丿乇丌賵乇丿賴貙 賴賲爻賮乇 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 丿乇 胤賵賱 爻賮乇 賵 诏賮鬲诏賵 亘丕 讴卮蹖卮貙 亘丕 丕賳鬲賯丕丿 丕夭 毓賯賱丕賳蹖鬲貙 賲丕賴蹖鬲 禺賵蹖卮 乇丕貙 丌卮讴丕乇 賲蹖鈥屫池ж藏�. 亘毓丿賴丕 賴賲蹖賳 賲噩乇賲 鬲賵亘賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丿乇 賲賯丕賲 氐賲蹖賲蹖鈥屫臂屬� 丿賵爻鬲 賵 賴賲讴丕乇 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄貙 倬乇丿賴 丕夭 賲毓賲丕賴丕蹖 倬賱蹖爻蹖 亘乇賲蹖鈥屫ж必�. 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
Father Brown is a fictional Roman Catholic priest and amateur detective who is featured in 53 short stories published between 1910 and 1936 written by English novelist G. K. Chesterton. Father Brown solves mysteries and crimes using his intuition and keen understanding of human nature. Chesterton describes Father Brown as a short, stumpy Roman Catholic priest, with shapeless clothes, a large umbrella, and an uncanny insight into human evil. In "The Head of Caesar" he is "formerly priest of Cobhole in Essex, and now working in London". He makes his first appearance in the story "The Blue Cross" published in 1910 and continues to appear throughout fifty short stories in five volumes, with two more stories discovered and published posthumously, often assisted in his crime-solving by the reformed criminal M. Hercule Flambeau.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 亘蹖鬲 賵 丿賵賲 賲丕賴 噩賵賱丕蹖 爻丕賱 2005 賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 氐賱蹖亘 丌亘蹖 賵 卮卮 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿蹖诏乇: 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳 讴卮蹖卮 讴丕乇丌诏丕賴貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 诏蹖賱亘乇 鬲 讴蹖鬲 趩爻鬲乇鬲賵賳貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 讴丕賵賴 賲蹖乇毓亘丕爻蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 胤乇丨 賳賵貙 1382貨 丿乇 197 氐貨 卮丕亘讴: 9647134991貨 賲賵囟賵毓: 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 讴賵鬲丕賴 讴丕乇丌诏丕賴蹖 丕夭 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕蹖蹖 - 爻丿賴 20 賲
賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄貙 讴卮蹖卮蹖 讴丕鬲賵賱蹖讴貙 賵 丿爻鬲 賵 倬丕 趩賱賮鬲蹖 賵 禺倬賱賴 丕爻鬲貨 讴賴 亘賴鈥� 乇睾賲 爻丕丿賴 賱賵丨蹖 馗丕賴乇卮貙 丕夭 賴賵卮 賵 匕讴丕賵鬲 倬賱蹖爻蹖 亘乇禺賵乇丿丕乇 丕爻鬲 .丕蹖卮丕賳 丿乇 丕蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏ж� 丕夭 賲毓賲丕賴丕蹖蹖 倬乇丿賴 亘乇賲蹖鈥屫ж辟嗀� 讴賴 亘爻蹖丕乇 倬蹖趩蹖丿賴 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖鈥屫必迟嗀� 丕賲丕 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 鬲賵囟蹖丨蹖 亘蹖 賳賴丕蹖鬲 爻丕丿賴 丿丕乇賳丿. 丕氐賱蹖鈥屫臂屬� 賵蹖跇诏蹖 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄 禺乇丕賮賴 爻鬲蹖夭蹖貙 賵 禺乇丿亘丕賵乇蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳爻鬲. 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 芦氐賱蹖亘 丌亘蹖禄 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丕蹖賳 賲噩賲賵毓賴 丕爻鬲貨 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 倬賱蹖爻蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 芦賵丕賱丕賳鬲賳禄 丿乇 噩爻鬲噩賵蹖 芦賮賱丕賲亘賵禄貙 爻丕乇賯 亘蹖賳鈥屫з勝呝勝勠� 丕爻鬲. 丕賲丕 芦賮賱丕賲亘賵禄貙 讴賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 丿乇 讴爻賵鬲 讴卮蹖卮 丿乇丌賵乇丿賴貙 賴賲爻賮乇 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 丿乇 胤賵賱 爻賮乇 賵 诏賮鬲诏賵 亘丕 讴卮蹖卮貙 亘丕 丕賳鬲賯丕丿 丕夭 毓賯賱丕賳蹖鬲貙 賲丕賴蹖鬲 禺賵蹖卮 乇丕貙 丌卮讴丕乇 賲蹖鈥屫池ж藏�. 亘毓丿賴丕 賴賲蹖賳 賲噩乇賲 鬲賵亘賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丿乇 賲賯丕賲 氐賲蹖賲蹖鈥屫臂屬� 丿賵爻鬲 賵 賴賲讴丕乇 芦倬丿乇 亘乇丕賵賳禄貙 倬乇丿賴 丕夭 賲毓賲丕賴丕蹖 倬賱蹖爻蹖 亘乇賲蹖鈥屫ж必�. 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
October 16, 2010
Reading this reminded me all over again why I hate the Agatha Christie style of whodunnit where people commit bizarrely complicated murders for equally bizarre reasons. Let's take the second story in the collection.
M. Valentin is the Chief of Police and also an atheist. He hears a rumor that an American millionaire is going to donate his fortune to the Church of France. Since he is a rabid atheist he sets out to murder the man before he can amend his will. Let's pass over that central absurdity and focus on the method of murder.
Valentin's plan is to
1. Host a dinner party of a dozen people and invite the American to it.
2. Steal the head of recently executed criminal and take it home.
3. Murder the American by decapitation.
4. Switch heads even though his deputy was at the execution and the dinner party.
5. ???
6. Get away with it.
The stories also filled with the usual kind of "the garden had unscalable walls so no one could have got in!" (Ladders apparently hadn't been invented.)
M. Valentin is the Chief of Police and also an atheist. He hears a rumor that an American millionaire is going to donate his fortune to the Church of France. Since he is a rabid atheist he sets out to murder the man before he can amend his will. Let's pass over that central absurdity and focus on the method of murder.
Valentin's plan is to
1. Host a dinner party of a dozen people and invite the American to it.
2. Steal the head of recently executed criminal and take it home.
3. Murder the American by decapitation.
4. Switch heads even though his deputy was at the execution and the dinner party.
5. ???
6. Get away with it.
The stories also filled with the usual kind of "the garden had unscalable walls so no one could have got in!" (Ladders apparently hadn't been invented.)
August 23, 2018
韦慰 蟺蟻蠋蟿慰 委蟽蠅蟼 尾喂尾位委慰 蟿慰蠀 G. K. Chesterton 蟺慰蠀 未蔚谓 渭慰蠀 蟿伪委蟻喂伪尉蔚. 螌蟽慰 蔚蠀蠁蠀蔚委蟼 魏喂 伪谓 蔚委谓伪喂 蟽蟿畏 蟽蠉位位畏蠄萎 蟿慰蠀蟼 慰喂 渭喂魏蟻苇蟼 喂蟽蟿慰蟻委蔚蟼 蟺慰蠀 蟽魏维蟻蠅蟽蔚 蟺蟻慰魏蔚喂渭苇谓慰蠀 谓伪 蔚蟺喂尾蔚尾伪喂蠅胃慰蠉谓 慰喂 喂魏伪谓蠈蟿畏蟿蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟺伪蟿苇蟻伪 螠蟺蟻维慰蠀谓 蟽蟿畏 未喂伪位蔚蠉魏伪谓蟽畏 魏维胃蔚 位慰纬萎蟼 蔚纬魏位畏渭维蟿蠅谓, 蟽蟿慰 蟿苇位慰蟼 蟿畏蟼 渭苇蟻伪蟼 苇谓喂蠅胃蔚蟼 谓伪 未喂伪尾维味蔚喂蟼 蟿慰 委未喂慰 伪魏蟻喂尾蠋蟼 蟺蟻维纬渭伪, 尉伪谓维 魏伪喂 尉伪谓维. 危伪谓 蟽蠉谓慰位慰 未喂畏纬畏渭维蟿蠅谓 蟽伪蠁蠋蟼 蠀蟺慰未蔚苇蟽蟿蔚蟻慰 伪蟺蠈 蟿慰 鈥樷€�. 韦蟻委伪 伪蟽蟿苇蟻喂伪, 位委伪谓 蔚蟺喂蔚喂魏蠋蟼.
September 18, 2010
If you haven't come across the Father Brown stories (I'm surprised how few reviews there are), then they are worth reading. G.K. Chesterton is much more entertaining than your average Christian apologist, and if only the basic assumption of these books actually were true then I would feel a lot more sympathetic towards the Christian Church.
Chesterton doesn't just want to convince you that Christianity is different from superstition; in his universe, it's the opposite of superstition! The idea in each story is always the same. Something happens (most often, a murder), and there is some plausible-looking account which appeals to people's love of the supernatural or the inexplicable. "Ah yes!" everyone is saying. "Sometimes things are beyond our understanding, but you know... you just know!" Then dumpy, prosaic Father Brown comes in, and finds a common-sense way of looking at the facts which explains everything without any supernatural drama.
To give you a taste, the one I remember best is "The Oracle of the Dog". The rich old guy has been mysteriously stabbed. No one can figure out how it could have happened; there appears to be neither weapon nor opportunity. But there is this strange thing with the dog. Just about at the moment when his master would have died, the dog was playing down on the beach, running after sticks that one of the guests was throwing for him, and then he lets out this weird, unearthly howl. Supernatural explanation! The uncanny bond between dog and master! Chesterton sets up the red herring with great skill, and I certainly fell for it.
But Father Brown is a clearer thinker, and knows what really tends to freak dogs out. In fact, the guy on the beach is disposing of the murder weapon, a sword-stick. The dog howls because he can't retrieve it; he's never seen a stick get thrown at the water and just sink! It's amazing how often Chesterton manages to get you, even once you know what the twist is going to be and you're looking out for it. He was a smart guy.
Chesterton doesn't just want to convince you that Christianity is different from superstition; in his universe, it's the opposite of superstition! The idea in each story is always the same. Something happens (most often, a murder), and there is some plausible-looking account which appeals to people's love of the supernatural or the inexplicable. "Ah yes!" everyone is saying. "Sometimes things are beyond our understanding, but you know... you just know!" Then dumpy, prosaic Father Brown comes in, and finds a common-sense way of looking at the facts which explains everything without any supernatural drama.
To give you a taste, the one I remember best is "The Oracle of the Dog". The rich old guy has been mysteriously stabbed. No one can figure out how it could have happened; there appears to be neither weapon nor opportunity. But there is this strange thing with the dog. Just about at the moment when his master would have died, the dog was playing down on the beach, running after sticks that one of the guests was throwing for him, and then he lets out this weird, unearthly howl. Supernatural explanation! The uncanny bond between dog and master! Chesterton sets up the red herring with great skill, and I certainly fell for it.
But Father Brown is a clearer thinker, and knows what really tends to freak dogs out. In fact, the guy on the beach is disposing of the murder weapon, a sword-stick. The dog howls because he can't retrieve it; he's never seen a stick get thrown at the water and just sink! It's amazing how often Chesterton manages to get you, even once you know what the twist is going to be and you're looking out for it. He was a smart guy.
August 23, 2012
Oh, Gilbert Keith, I adore you and you are wonderful.
I read this collection of short stories in between deadlines, a story or two at a time first thing in the morning to help myself wake up. As far as I am concerned, a Father Brown short story is a perfect amuse bouche for the mental faculties. I guessed almost all of the answers before the big reveals, and many of them were ludicrously far-fetched, but that doesn't matter. That wasn't why I was reading it.
Father Brown is a fantastic main character, who occasionally comes out with absolute gems. He's religious, and clearly a vehicle for Chesterton's religious views. Fortunately, he's also marvellous:
"How in blazes do you know all these horrors?" cried Flambeau.
The shadow of a smile crossed the round, simple face of his clerical opponent.
"Oh, by being a celibate simpleton, I suppose," he said. "Has it never struck you that a man who does next to nothing but hear men's real sins is not likely to be wholly unaware of human evil? But, as a matter of fact, another part of my trade, too, made me sure you weren't a priest."
"What?" asked the thief, almost gaping.
"You attacked reason," said Father Brown. "It's bad theology."
Father Brown, as many people have pointed out, is an excellent counterpoint to my other favourite detectives, Poirot and Holmes, who deal in deduction and Cold Hard Facts. These are stories with a heart and a lot of strong morality. They don't preach, but the morality is just the foundation of the whole premise, and I found that very interesting, especially in contrast with the Fact!fetishising of other classic detectives.
Plus, the turn of phrase, oh my goodness:
Flambeau had stocked [his boat] with such things as his special philosophy considered necessary. They reduced themselves, apparently, to four essentials: tins of salmon, if he should want to eat; loaded revolvers, if he should want to fight; a bottle of brandy, presumably in case he should faint; and a priest, presumably in case he should die.
These stories are utterly, unashamedly absurd, not too taxing and fantastic fun to follow. There is duelling and pantomime and messing about in boats and jewel theft. I need them in my life. Gilbert Keith, I adore you, don't ever change.
I read this collection of short stories in between deadlines, a story or two at a time first thing in the morning to help myself wake up. As far as I am concerned, a Father Brown short story is a perfect amuse bouche for the mental faculties. I guessed almost all of the answers before the big reveals, and many of them were ludicrously far-fetched, but that doesn't matter. That wasn't why I was reading it.
Father Brown is a fantastic main character, who occasionally comes out with absolute gems. He's religious, and clearly a vehicle for Chesterton's religious views. Fortunately, he's also marvellous:
"How in blazes do you know all these horrors?" cried Flambeau.
The shadow of a smile crossed the round, simple face of his clerical opponent.
"Oh, by being a celibate simpleton, I suppose," he said. "Has it never struck you that a man who does next to nothing but hear men's real sins is not likely to be wholly unaware of human evil? But, as a matter of fact, another part of my trade, too, made me sure you weren't a priest."
"What?" asked the thief, almost gaping.
"You attacked reason," said Father Brown. "It's bad theology."
Father Brown, as many people have pointed out, is an excellent counterpoint to my other favourite detectives, Poirot and Holmes, who deal in deduction and Cold Hard Facts. These are stories with a heart and a lot of strong morality. They don't preach, but the morality is just the foundation of the whole premise, and I found that very interesting, especially in contrast with the Fact!fetishising of other classic detectives.
Plus, the turn of phrase, oh my goodness:
Flambeau had stocked [his boat] with such things as his special philosophy considered necessary. They reduced themselves, apparently, to four essentials: tins of salmon, if he should want to eat; loaded revolvers, if he should want to fight; a bottle of brandy, presumably in case he should faint; and a priest, presumably in case he should die.
These stories are utterly, unashamedly absurd, not too taxing and fantastic fun to follow. There is duelling and pantomime and messing about in boats and jewel theft. I need them in my life. Gilbert Keith, I adore you, don't ever change.
November 18, 2020
These twelve tales of murder and theft, written in 1910 and 1911, introduce G.K. Chesterton's Father Brown, a short, humble, unprepossessing Catholic priest and amateur detective, whose method is informed by what he has learned about criminal motives and means during many years in the confessional.
Chief of the Paris Police Department Aristide Valentin and master criminal Hercule Flambeau both appear in the first story, The Blue Cross; their paths take surprising turns. Another surprise to me is the frequency with which the good Father prioritizes the spiritual development of a repentant criminal he's caught over the technicalities of reporting him to the authorities.
Although these stories were completed about a decade before Chesterton's famous conversion to Catholicism in 1922, assisted by Father John O'Connor, upon whom he based Father Brown, they already reflect his strong views on the superiority of Catholic faith, inferiority of all other faiths, and other prejudices.
Chief of the Paris Police Department Aristide Valentin and master criminal Hercule Flambeau both appear in the first story, The Blue Cross; their paths take surprising turns. Another surprise to me is the frequency with which the good Father prioritizes the spiritual development of a repentant criminal he's caught over the technicalities of reporting him to the authorities.
Although these stories were completed about a decade before Chesterton's famous conversion to Catholicism in 1922, assisted by Father John O'Connor, upon whom he based Father Brown, they already reflect his strong views on the superiority of Catholic faith, inferiority of all other faiths, and other prejudices.
December 30, 2016
唳囙唳班唳溹 唳膏唳灌唳む唳� 唳唳ム唳唳曕 唳呧Ω唳距Ξ唳距Θ唰嵿Ο 唳曕唳涏 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳夃Κ唳灌唳� 唳︵唳唰囙唰囙イ 唳膏唳� 唰оЛ唰� 唳唳� 唳嗋唰� 唳忇Α唳椸唳� 唳呧唳唳侧唳� 唳鈥權Π 唳灌唳� 唳оΠ唰� 唳忇Σ唰� 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳嗋Η唰佮Θ唳苦 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳膏 唳呧唳距Ω唰嵿Δ唰� 唳︵唳唳唳� (唳︵ 唳唳班唳∴唳班Ω 唳囙Θ 唳︵唳 唳班 唳Π唰嵿), 唳唳ㄠ 唳唳曕唳む唳唳︵唳唳� 唳唳班Ο唳监唳椸 唳忇唰囙Π 唳Π 唳忇 唳膏唳む唳� 唳膏唳溹唳唰� 唳班唳む唳Δ唰� 唳唳溹唳炧唳ㄠ唳� 唳夃Κ唳距Ο唳监 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳膏Ξ唳距Η唳距Θ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ啷� 唳忇Π唳� 唳唳班唳 唳呧Π唰嵿Η唳多Δ 唳唳� 唳Π 唳膏唳唳� 唳嗋Π唰嵿Ε唳距Π 唳曕唳ㄠ唳� 唳∴Ο唳监唳� 唳膏唳粪唳熰 唳曕Π唳侧唳� 唳む唳佮Π 唳呧Ξ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳多唳班唳侧 唳灌唳Ω, 唳 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳膏唳灌唳む唳唳� 唳唳ㄠΖ唳｀唳� 唳灌唳膏唳 唳唳多唳唳曕Ν唳距Μ唰� 唳嗋 唳唳熰唳唳熰 唳膏唳唳曕唳むイ 唳嗋 唳呧Μ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳囙唳班唳溹 唳唳粪唳 唳Δ 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳膏唳灌唳む唳� 唳班唳苦Δ 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏, 唳夃Σ唰嵿Σ唰囙唰嵿Ο唳唳椸唳� 唳唳班唳 唳唳班Δ唳苦唳� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π唰囙Π唳� 唳む唳侧Θ唳� 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳膏唳ム啷� 唳Ω唰嵿Δ唰佮Δ, 唳む唳侧Θ唳距Π 唳忇 唳嗋Σ唰嬥唳ㄠ唳熰唳� 唳曕唳粪唳む唳班Μ唳苦Χ唰囙Ψ唰� 唳ㄠ唳班唳о唳班Γ 唳曕Π唰� 唳︵唳 唳嗋Σ唰嬥唰嵿Ο 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距唳� 唳曕Δ唳熰 唳膏Λ唳�! 唳唳唳膏鈥權Π 唳熰唳 唳膏唳班唳溹唳� 唳曕Σ唰嵿Ο唳距Γ唰� 唳唳唰囙Π 唳唳犩唰囙Π 唳忇 唳唳粪Γ 唳嗋唳距Σ唰囙Π 唳︵唳ㄠ 唳唳佮Π 唳多唳班唳侧 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳ㄠ唳 唳多唳ㄠΜ唳距Π 唳曕Ε唳� 唳ㄠΟ唳�, 唳む唳ㄠ唳� 唳︵唳唳 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Κ唰嵿Π唳Π唰囙Π 唳呧Θ唰佮Π唳曕唳� 唳灌Θ, 唳む唳佮Π 唳呧Θ唰佮Ω唳班Γ唰囙 唳呧Θ唰囙唳熰, 唳嗋Χ唳唳多唳� 唳唳ㄠ唳粪Ζ唰囙Π 唳唳澿 唳唳侧唳� 唳ㄠ唳唳む唳む 唳曕唳炧唳氞唳� 唳氞唳栢 唳︵唳粪唳熰 唳灌唳ㄠ唳�, 唳曕Ε唳� 唳曕Θ啷� 唳多唳班唳侧 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧 唳多唳о唳唳む唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳呧Ω唳距Η唳距Π唳� 唳Π唰嵿Ο唳唳曕唳粪Γ 唳曕唳粪Ξ唳む唳� 唳唳班Ζ唳班唳多Γ唰€唳� 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο唳� 唳唳栢唳唳� 唳ㄠΟ唳监イ 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳曕唳灌唳ㄠ 唳侧唳栢Μ唳距Π 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳唳曕唳粪Ξ 唳夃Κ唳距Ο唳监唳�, 唳膏Ξ唳唰囙Π 唳Π唰€唳曕唳粪唳 唳 唳嗋唳� 唳唳� 唳唳侧 唳ㄠΞ唰嵿Μ唳� 唳唳唰� 唳唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳唳, 唳む 唳∴Ο唳监唳侧唳� 唳呧Μ唳︵唳ㄠイ 唳忇 唳⑧唳唰� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳唳唳� 唳曕Π唳唳� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π唳熰唳� 唳氞唳唰� 唳⑧唳� 唳曕唳粪唳｀Μ唰佮Ζ唰嵿Η唳苦Π 唳曕唳� 唳忇唳溹Θ, 唳唳ㄠ 唳ㄠ唳溹唳� 唳膏唳ム 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Κ唰嵿Π唳Π唰囙Π 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳灌Δ唳距Χ唳距唳ㄠ 唳唳班唳ム唰嵿Ο唳熰 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳唳佮唰� 唳唳佮唰� 唳椸唳佮唰� 唳︵唳唰� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳Χ唳距Ο唳监唳� 唳栢唳膏 唳唳溹唳苦唰� 唳唳溹唳炧唳唳� 唳曕Π唳唳� (唳呧Θ唰囙唳熰 唳唳Θ 唳嗋Ξ唳班 唳膏唳ㄠ唳唳 唳唳� 唳ㄠ唳唳曕唳� 唳唳多 唳む唳佮Π 唳氞唳唰� 唳唳佮唰�, 唳曕Ξ 唳膏唳︵Π唰嵿Χ唳� 唳唳班唳多唳Θ唳距Ο唳监唳曕 唳︵唳栢啷� 唳ㄠ唳�-唳椸唳ㄠ 唳む唳ㄠ 唳栢唳� 唳曕Ξ 唳呧Κ唳熰 唳ㄠΘ, 唳むΜ唰� 唳む 唳ㄠ唳唳苦唳距Π 唳班唳氞唳Δ唰� 唳ㄠΟ唳�, 唳む唳佮Π 唳ㄠ唳� 唳椸唳ㄠ 唳唳唳� 唳ㄠ唳唳苦唳距Π 唳氞唳唰� 唳唳佮唰�, 唳曕Ξ 唳膏唳︵Π唰嵿Χ唳� 唳夃Κ唳ㄠ唳唳苦唳距イ 唳灌唳� 唳 唳氞唳侧唳む唳� 唳唳班唳多唳Θ唳距Ο唳监 唳栢唳� 唳曕Ξ 唳唳� 唳ㄠ, 唳むΜ唰� 唳唳� 唳唳侧唳ㄠ唳� 唳膏唳ム 唳曕唳ㄠΞ唳む唳� 唳唳班 唳夃唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ)啷� 唳灌锟斤拷锟洁Ω唰囙Π 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳撪Ο唳监唳熰Ω唳�, 唳多Π唳︵唳ㄠ唳︵唳� 唳唳唳唰囙Χ唰囙Π 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳呧唳苦Δ, 唳膏Δ唰嵿Ο唳溹唳む唳� 唳唳侧唳︵唳� 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳む唳Ω唰�, 唳班唳膏唳� 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Π唳距唰嵿唰€ 唳曕唳班唳膏唳熰唳� 唳忇Π唳曕唳� 唳唳唳距Π唰嬧€權Π 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳灌唳膏唳熰唳傕Ω-唳忇唳︵唳� 唳溹Μ唳距Θ唰€唳む唳� 唳嗋Ξ唳班 唳唳佮Π 唳唳佮Π 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π唰囙Π 唳曕唳班唳む唳椸唳佮Ε唳� 唳Α唳监唳涏啷� 唳膏唳曕唳班唳︵唳� 唳膏唳ム 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Ζ唰囙Π 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳唳距唳距唳む唳� 唳唳班唳� 唳︵唳栢 唳嗋Μ唳距Π 唳唳 唳Ω唳唳� 唳ㄠ 唳撪Ο唳监唳熰Ω唳�, 唳呧唳苦Δ, 唳む唳Ω唰� 唳曕 唳灌唳膏唳熰唳傕Ω 唳灌唳唳� 唳嗋Κ唳ㄠ唳�-唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳曕Π唰嵿Ξ! 唳Θ唰� 唳班唳栢Μ唰囙Θ 唳曕唳班唳曕唳粪唳む唳班唳� 唳Ο唳监Ζ唳距Θ唰� 唳唳距Μ唰€唳� 唳呧Π唰嵿唰佮Θ唰囙Π 唳班Δ唰嵿Ε唰囙Π 唳膏唳班Ε唰€ 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏唳侧唳� 唳唳唳� 唳多唳班唳曕唳粪唳� 唳膏唳Ο唳监啷�
唳︵唳唳唳�, 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳溹Θ唳唳班唳唳む唳� 唳о唳班唳唳灌唳曕Δ唳距Ο唳� 唳溹 唳曕 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唰оН唰оЕ 唳膏唳侧 唳膏唳粪唳熰 唳曕Π唳侧唳� 唳む唳佮Π 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ啷� 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳夃Σ唰嵿唰嬥Π唳� 唳忇 唳唳︵唳 唳唳︵唳班 唳Χ唳距Ο唳监唳苦イ 唳唳︵唳班唳� 唳唳多唳熰唳� 唳Σ唰� 唳︵唳 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰� 唳Ε唰囙唰嵿唳距唳距Π唰€ 唳ㄠΘ 唳唳班唳夃Θ啷� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳膏唳� 唳膏唳� 唳氞唳班唳む唳班唳� 唳唳多唳粪唳熰唳唳Σ唰€, 唳 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰€唳 唳︵唳粪唳熰唳む 唳唳粪Γ 唳︵唳粪唳�, 唳む唳� 唳曕唳ㄠ唳熰唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳唳澿 唳唳唳ㄠΘ唳距イ 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳曕唳曕唳� 唳膏唳Θ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ, 唳む唳ㄠ 唳呧唳傕唳距Π唰€ 唳ㄠΘ, 唳呧Θ唳苦Ο唳监Ξ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ, 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳侧Α唳监唳囙Ο唳监 唳呧Κ唳班唰� 唳む唳氞唳涏唰嵿唳距Θ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ鈥︹€︵唳班唳ム唰�, 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唳唳む唳� 唳唳о唳粪唳犩唳班唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳栢唳班唳粪唳熰唳� 唳呧Μ唳む唳� 唳唳多唳粪イ 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳� 唳唳班 唳唳多唳粪Δ 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ-唳唳班唳距Π唳� 唳灌Ο唳监唳� 唳 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳�, 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ 唳囙Δ唰嵿Ο唳距Ζ唳� 唳唳粪Ο唳监唰� 唳唳多唳� 唳唳む唳む 唳ㄠ 唳︵唳唳� 唳唳粪Γ 唳唳︵唳о唳唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唳曕唰嵿Ψ 唳灌唳唳� 唳唳 唳む 唳唳班Ξ唳距Γ 唳曕Π唳距 唳曕 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳ㄠ唳� 唳侧唰嵿Ψ唰嵿Ο 唳涏唳侧? 唳Ω唰嵿Δ唰佮Δ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧唳� 唳唳澿 唳唳� 唳忇唳熰 anti-唳灌唳Ω 唳Π唳苦Μ唰囙Χ 唳侧唰嵿Ψ唰嵿Ο 唳曕Π唳� 唳唳啷� 唳忇唳距唳距Π唳� 唳椸Α唳监Θ唰囙Π 唳⑧唳唳權 唳灌唳Ω 唳唳班Ο唳监唳溹Θ唰� 唳Σ唳唳班Ο唳监唳椸 唳唳涏 唳灌唳む唳ㄠΘ唳� (唳灌唳Ω 唳多唰囙Π 唳唳粪唳熰唳唳︵唳о 唳涏唳侧唳�), 唳曕唳ㄠ 唳膏唳ㄠ 唳嗋唰嵿Θ唰囙Ο唳监唳膏唳む唳班 唳唳Μ唳灌唳� 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ, 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳膏唳苦唳膏唳� 唳膏唳膏Μ 唳Ε 唳曕唳ㄠ 唳唳∴唳距Θ唳ㄠ啷� 唳唳︵唳班唳� 唳膏唳︵唳唳熰 唳唳多唳曕 唳涏唳む 唳灌唳む 唳唳佮唰� 唳栢唳熰 唳忇 唳唳ㄠ唳�, 唳唳佮唰� 唳︵唳栢 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ν唰嵿Π唳� 唳夃Ζ唰嵿Π唰囙唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ν唳距Μ唳ㄠ 唳ㄠ唳む唳ㄠ唳む 唳曕Ξ, 唳忇Ξ唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳む唳班 唳曕Π唰� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳灌唳Ω唳曕 唳唳� 唳忇 唳灌唳� 唳ㄠ唳む 唳氞唳唰囙唳苦Σ唰囙Θ 唳唳� 唳曕Π唳�!
唳灌唳Ω 唳嗋Π 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳Α唳� 唳唳班唳ム唰嵿Ο唳熰 唳呧Θ唰嵿Ο 唳溹唳唳椸唳啷� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳曕Π唰嵿Ξ唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む 唳灌Σ唰� deductive, 唳唳曕唳む 唳膏唳溹唳唰� 唳膏唳溹唳唰� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳膏Ξ唳距Η唳距Θ 唳曕Π唳距イ 唳呧Κ唳班Ζ唳苦唰�, 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む 唳灌Σ唰� intuitive, 唳呧Π唰嵿Ε唳距 唳曕唳ㄠ, 唳 唳︵唳栢Δ唰� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰�, 唳灌唳佮唰�-唳氞Σ唰� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰�, 唳∴唳曕唳� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰�, 唳む 唳灌唳佮Ω 唳ㄠΟ唳监Δ唰� 唳嗋Π 唳曕? (唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳Δ唳距唳� 唳膏唳夃唰嵿唰� 唳о唳班Γ 唳曕Π唳� 唳唳佮Ζ唰囙Π 唳唳班Η唳距Θ 唳多唳班唳唳∴唳�, 唳む唳佮Ζ唰囙Π 唳唳多唳班Ν唳距唰囙Π 唳唰嵿Δ唳唳 唳曕 唳忇Ξ唳�?)啷� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳呧Μ唳多唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳忇Ξ唳� intuitive 唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む唳� 唳唳唳栢唳 唳︵唳唰囙唰囙Θ啷� 唳︵唳班唳樴唳距Σ 唳唳︵唳班唳� 唳唳多唳� 唳膏唳ム 唳溹Α唳监唳� 唳ム唳曕唳� 唳曕唳班Γ唰� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唳曕 唳唳班唰佮Π 唳唳ㄠ唳粪唳� confession 唳多唳ㄠΔ唰� 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏, 唳Σ唰� 唳唳ㄠΜ 唳Θ唰囙Π 唳呧Θ唰嵿Η唳曕唳� 唳呧Σ唳�-唳椸Σ唳苦唰佮Σ唰� 唳ㄠ唳曕 唳む唳佮Π 唳唳� 唳氞唳ㄠ 唳灌Ο唳监 唳椸唳涏啷� 唳む唳� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰� 唳︵唳栢Σ唰囙 唳Π唳苦唳苦Δ 唳涏唳佮唰� 唳Ω唳苦Ο唳监 唳班唳膏唳Ν唰囙Ζ 唳曕Π唰� 唳ㄠ唳� 唳む唳ㄠ啷� 唳溹唳Θ 唳唳Θ唰囙Π 唳оΠ唳� 唳ム唳曕 唳多唳班 唳曕Π唰� 唳曕Π唰嵿Ξ唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む 唳Π唰嵿Ο唳ㄠ唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳Π唰€唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳曕Π唰� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唳曕 唳膏唳粪唳熰 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ啷� 唳曕唳班 唳曕唳班 唳Θ唰� 唳ㄠ唳多唳氞Ο唳监 唳忇Ω唳� 唳曕唳班Γ唰� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳唳多唳� 唳班唳栢唳唳� 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ, 唳むΜ唰� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳唰嵿Ψ唰� 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳Α唳� 唳膏唳唳囙唳� 唳椸唳唰囙唰囙Θ 唳栢唳 唳呧Κ唰嵿Π唳む唳唳多唳� 唳忇唳溹Θ 唳唳ㄠ唳粪 唳囙Δ唳距Σ唰€唳 唳唳班唳曕唳� 唳むΔ唰嵿Δ唰嵿Μ唳唳� 唳嗋Θ唰嵿Δ唳ㄠ唳� 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳苦イ 唳膏唳膏唳曕唳� 唳 唳呧Θ唰佮Ξ唳距Θ唰囙Π 唳撪Κ唳� 唳Π 唳曕Π唰� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距唳苦Π唳� 唳曕Π唳唳� 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳む唳班唳� 唳む 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ唳�, 唳忇 唳︵唳 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳灌唳Ω唳曕 唳ㄠ唳む唳ㄠ唳む 鈥樴Μ唳距Σ唳栢唳侧唳€� 唳� 鈥樴Ζ唳距Ξ唰嵿Ν唳苦鈥� (pretentious little boy) 唳唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳涏唳∴唰囙唰囙Θ啷� 唳忇唳唳傕Χ 唳多Δ唳距Μ唰嵿Ζ唰€唳む 唳︵唳佮Α唳监唳唰� 唳唳班唳曕唳膏Κ唳ㄠ唳ム 唳曕唳夃唰� 唳栢唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳膏唳ㄠ唳班 唳︵唳栢唳ㄠ (唳忇Μ唳� 唳︵唳栢Μ唳距Π 唳曕唳班Γ唳� 唳唳多唳� 唳唳囙Θ唳�!) 唳むΜ唰� 唳囙Δ唳距Σ唰€唳� 唳唳唳膏唳膏唳� 唳膏Π唳曕唳班唳� 唳唳班唳︵唳о 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳苦Π 唳膏唳椸唳班唳唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳熰 唳溹唳ㄠΣ唰� 唳む唳佮Π 唳唳班Δ唳� 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ξ唳距Θ 唳溹唳椸Μ唰囙啷� 唳忇唳距Π 唳唳� 唳溹唳侧 唳唳氞唳涏唳�, 唳多Π唰€唳班 唳о唳班Γ 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ 唳呧Ξ唳距Θ唰佮Ψ唳苦 唳呧Δ唰嵿Ο唳距唳距Π啷� 唳唳� 唳涏唳∴唳� 唳唳�, 唳むΔ唳︵唳ㄠ 唳︵唳佮Δ 唳Α唳监 唳椸唳唰囙唰�, 唳Π唳苦Κ唳距唰嵿Δ唳ㄠ唳む唳班唳� 唳唳灌唳� 唳︵Χ唳距イ 唳むΠ唳� 唳栢唳︵唳� 唳涏唳∴唳� 唳嗋Π 唳曕唳涏 唳栢唳む 唳唳班Δ唰囙Θ唳ㄠ啷� 唳忇Ν唳距Μ唰� 唳о唳佮唰� 唳о唳佮唰囙 唳唳む唳� 唰К 唳唳� 唳Ο唳监唳膏 唳唳班 唳唳� 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳苦イ
唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳�-唳唳多唳唳� 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳唰嵿Δ唳︵唳� 唳唳澿 唳嗋Σ唰嬥唳ㄠ唳� 唳曕Ξ唳む 唳ㄠ唳囙イ 唳灌唳Ω唳曕 唳唳侧Δ 唳呧唰嵿唰囙Ο唳监Μ唳距Ζ唰€ 唳оΠ唰� 唳ㄠ唳唳� 唳灌Ο唳监イ 鈥樴Ζ唳� 唳ㄠ唳唳� 唳熰唳班唳熰鈥� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳忇唳熰 唳夃唰嵿Δ唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳嗋Ω唰嵿Δ唳苦唳む 唳唳班Ξ唳距Γ唰� 唳唳班唰佮Π 唳唳Μ唳灌唳� 唳灌Ο唳监 唳ム唳曕啷� 唳忇唳距Θ唰� 唳膏唳熰唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳︵唳班唳Σ 唳呧Θ唰佮Μ唳距Ζ 唳溹唳∴唰� 唳︵唳侧唳
唳呧Π唰嵿Ε唳距, 唳灌唳Ω 唳唳ム唳唳む 唳呧Θ唰嵿Ο唳距Ο唳�-唳呧Μ唳苦唳距Π-唳︵唳粪唳熰唳� 唳唳班Μ唳� 唳唳班Δ唳距Κ 唳︵唳栢 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳班 唳唳多唳唳� 唳班唳栢Δ唰� 唳Π唳膏 唳唳ㄠΘ唳�, 唳Θ唰囙 唳灌Ο唳监Θ唳� 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳� 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ζ唰囙Π 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳︵唳︵Γ唰嵿Α唳� 唳唳唳�, 唳曕唳ㄠ唳む, 唳忇唳囙Ω唳距Ε唰�, 唳唳ム唳唳� 唳膏唳ㄠ唳︵Π唰嵿Ο唰嵿Ο唰囙Π 唳曕Ε唳� 唳唳 唳灌唳Ω 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ν唳Δ 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳佮Α唳� 唳ㄠ唳膏唳む唳曕 唳灌Ο唳监 唳唳む 唳唳班唰囙Θ唳ㄠ! 唳Σ唳距Μ唳距唰佮Σ唰嵿Ο, 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳忇Ω唳� 鈥樴唳距Μ唰嵿Ο唳苦鈥� 唳膏唳多Ο唳监唳� 唳侧唳多Ξ唳距Δ唰嵿Π 唳呧Ω唰嵿Δ唳苦Δ唰嵿Μ 唳ㄠ唳囙イ
唳嗋Π 唳膏Μ 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Π 唳Δ唰� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π唳� 唳忇唳溹Θ 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳嗋唰囙Θ, 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 (Flambeau), 唳唳ㄠ 唳忇唳膏Ξ唳 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳唳� 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳о唳班唳� 唳呧Κ唳班唳о 唳涏唳侧唳ㄠイ 唳む唳曕唳粪唳� 唳唳︵唳о唳оΠ 唳Π唳距Ω唰€ 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳栢唳侧唳 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳灌唳� 唳唳ㄠ 唳呧Δ唰€唳む唳� 唳唳唳氞唳班唰� 唳溹Σ唳距唰嵿唳侧 唳︵唳唰� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳多唳粪唳� 唳灌Ο唳监 唳唳ㄠイ 唳栢唳曕唳� 唳唳唳唳班唳� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥鈥權Π 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳 唳ㄠΞ唰佮Θ唳� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳︵唳侧唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧唳む (唳呧Κ唳班唳о 唳灌唳膏唳唳� 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 唳忇Π 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳唳氞唳� 唳灌唳�, 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰€唳 唳Π唳多Κ唳距Ε唳班唳� 唳涏唳佮Ο唳监唳 唳む唳ㄠ 唳唳� 唳唳班唳多唳Θ唳距Ο唳监 唳Θ唰� 唳椸唳侧唳�, 唳む唳� 唳∴Ο唳监唳侧唳� 唳︵唳栢唳ㄠ 唳Ε唰� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Π 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳灌唳膏唳 唳む唳佮Π 唳唳︵唳о 唳忇Ξ唳ㄠ唳� 唳曕Ξ唰� 唳唳 唳膏唳む 唳溹唳ㄠ 唳曕Ε唳�!) 唳む唳む 唳む唳佮唰� 唳栢唳� 唳溹唳� 唳唳∴唳距Δ唰� 唳涏唳唳佮唳∴唳� 唳氞唳� 唳Θ唰� 唳灌Δ唰� 唳唳班, 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳唳� 唳膏Μ 唳︵唳多唳� 唳唳侧唳多唳� 唳氞唳栢 唳о唳侧 唳︵唳唰� 唳唳∴唳距Θ唰� 唳嗋Θ唰嵿Δ唳班唳溹唳む唳� 唳Π唰嵿Ο唳距Ο唳监唳� 唳о唳班Θ唰嵿Η唳� 唳曕唳涏唳む唳� 唳Θ唰� 唳灌Ο唳� 唳ㄠ啷� 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 唳膏Δ唰嵿Ο唳苦 唳呧Δ唳熰 唳唳︵唳о 唳оΠ唳侧 唳膏 唳膏Ξ唳唰囙Π 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳唳� 唳唳侧唳� 唳唳灌唳ㄠ唳椸唳侧 唳む唳佮Ζ唰囙Π 唳扳€嵿唳唳多Θ唰� 唳栢唳︵唳� 唳灌唳膏唳 唳樴唳� 唳唳む唳� 唳曕唳ㄠ 唳膏 唳唳唳唳班 唳膏Θ唰嵿Ζ唰囙 唳灌Ο唳� (唳膏 唳膏Θ唰嵿Ζ唰囙 唳呧Μ唳多唳� 唳唳� 唳囙Θ唰嵿Ω唳唳曕唳熰Π 唳侧唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳曕唳侧唳苦Θ唳距Π唳� 唳曕Π唳む 唳ㄠ 唳唳班 唳多唳班唳侧 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳多Π唳｀唳Θ唰嵿Θ 唳灌Δ唰囙Θ 唳む唳� 唳膏唳曕唳侧唳唳ㄠ唳� 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳∴Ω 唳ㄠ唳唰囙 唳灌Δ唰�!)啷�
唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唳曕 唳唳佮唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳唳灌唳む 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳班唳膏唳唳侧唳唰佮Σ唰� 唳侧唳栢, 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳溹Ο唳监唳距Θ 唳椸唳囙Μ唳距Π 唳夃Ζ唰嵿Ζ唰囙Χ唰嵿Ο唰� 唳唳多唳班Ν唳距 唳曕唳粪唳む唳班唳� 唳溹唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳膏Ξ唳距Η唳距Θ 唳曕Π唰� 唳︵唳唳� 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏啷� 唳膏唳曕唳侧唰€唳Θ唰� 唳唳粪Γ 唳唳班唳侧唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳︵唳粪唳熰 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳夃Ζ唳距唳班Γ 唳︵唳唰� 唳唳澿唳ㄠ 唳唳曕
唳膏Ν唰嵿Ο唳溹Θ 唳唳む唳班唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳熰唳� 唳ㄠ唳傕Π唳距Ξ唰嬥Δ唰� 唳多唳夃Π唰� 唳夃唳唳�, 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ο唳� 唳多唳�-唳多唳唳ㄠ唳む 唳灌Ο唳监Δ唰� 唳曕唳涏 唳曕Ξ 唳曕Π唳唳ㄠΘ唳�! 唳唳ㄠ唳�, 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唳距Κ唰嵿Δ唳� 唳嗋唳班唳粪Θ唰€唳, 唳むΜ唰� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳熰唳む 唳曕唳� 唳唳曕唳む唳曕Δ唳� 唳ㄠ唳�, 唳膏唳班唳� 唳唳� 唳膏唳∴唳膏唳∴唳苦Π 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο唳� 唳溹唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳唳侧唳唰� 唳︵唳唳距イ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳о唳佮唳� 唳忇Ξ唳ㄠ啷� 唳ㄠ唳膏唳む唳曕唳� 唳唳� 唳оΠ唳苦Ο唳监 唳︵唳唳� 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳Ε唰� 唳灌唳佮唰� 唳犩唳� 唳忇Ξ唳ㄠ 唳灌唳膏唳唳� 唳唳 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唳距Κ唰嵿Δ唳� 唳熰唳ㄠ唳涏唳ㄠイ 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳氞Σ唰囙唰� 唳ㄠ唳灌唰�-唳� 唳膏Π唳� 唳班唳栢 唳оΠ唰�; 唳夃Κ唳膏唳灌唳� 唳唳侧唳む 唳唳班唳唳垛€嬥Ο唳监 "唳ㄠ唳"唳む "唳嗋唰佮Σ" 唳氞Σ唰� 唳椸唳唰囙唰� 唳呧Θ唰囙唳熰 唳呧Μ唳о唳班唳むΝ唳距Μ唰囙啷�
唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唳曕 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳膏Π唰嵿Μ唳唳� 唳む唳唳唳ㄠ唳ㄠ唳� 唳涏唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳侧唳栢唳涏唳� 唳唳佮唳熰 唳唳唰囙イ 鈥樴Ζ唰嵿Ο唳� 唳囙Θ唰嬥Ω唰囙Θ唰嵿Ω 唳呧Λ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ鈥� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳忇 唳唳佮唳熰唳� 唳唳班Ε唳唳苦イ 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳膏唳椸唳班唰� 唳唳佮唳熰 唳唳� 唳嗋唰�, 唳忇唳熰 唳呧唳｀唳� 唳膏唳膏唳曕Π唳� 唳灌唳膏唳啷� 唳撪Ο唳监唳班唳∴Ω唳撪Ο唳监唳班唳� 唳曕唳侧唳唳膏唳曕Ω 唳ム唳曕 唳唳班唳距Χ唳苦Δ 唳忇 唳呧唳｀唳� 唳膏唳膏唳曕Π唳｀唳� 唳唳唳曕唳 唳∴唳唳� 唳膏唳熰唳唳距Π唰嵿 唳∴唳唳� 唳侧唳栢唳涏唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳Π唳Π唰嵿Δ唰€ 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳︵唳曕唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧唳� 唳Δ唰� 唳呧Δ 唳膏唳溹Θ唳多唳� 唳ㄠΟ唳� 唳忇Μ唳� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳侧Δ 唳膏唳膏Μ 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰� 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰€唳 唳� 唳ㄠ唳む唳� 唳多唳曕唳粪唳� 唳班Ω唰� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳溹唳侧唳 唳唳溹唳涏唳ㄠイ 唳囙Θ唰嬥Ω唰囙Θ唰嵿Ω 唳呧Λ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳唳熰唳む 唳膏唳曕Σ唳苦Δ 唳唳班唳熰唳� 唳唳澿 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳嗋唳熰 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳灌Δ唳距Χ唳距唳ㄠ唳班唳� 唳唳多 唳膏Ξ唳 唳侧唳椸唳唰� 唳Α唳监Μ唳距Π 唳Π 唳∴唳唳膏唳� 鈥樴唳� 唳膏唳溹Θ唳多唳� 唳ㄠΟ唳尖€� 唳Δ唳熰 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳Θ唰� 唳Θ唰� 唳⑧唳佮 唳椸唳侧唳苦Σ唳距Ξ 唳唳粪Γ啷� 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳唳唰囙 唳� 唳灌唳� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳Π唰� 唳曕 唳灌Μ唰�? 唳唳犩 唳灌唳膏唳 唳灌Δ唳距Χ唳� 唳む 唳涏唳侧唳�, 唳むΜ唰� 唳⑧唳佮 唳椸唳侧唳� 唳曕唳班Γ唳熰 唳唳ㄠ唳ㄠイ 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳唳ㄠ 唳嗋Η唰囙 唳唳侧-唳膏唳� 唳唳熰唳� 唳灌唳€權Π 唳班唰嵿Δ唳氞唰嵿Ψ唰� 唳忇Α唳监唳唰� 唳む唳佮Π 唳︵唳栢唳唰� 唳︵唳唳� 唳唳椸唳侧 唳夃Κ唰囙唰嵿Ψ唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳嗋唳� 唳唳粪唳犩唳� 唳⑧唳夃Ω 唳唳熰 唳曕唳ㄠΜ唳距Π 唳Σ唳距Λ唳� 唳多唳粪Δ唳� 唳むΜ唰� 唳忇? 唳膏唳傕Ω唳距Π唳苦 唳嗋Π 唳︵Χ唳熰 唳唳溹唳� 唳曕Π唳む 唳椸唳唰� 唳ㄠ唳唳唳む 唳曕唳 唳灌唰嵿唳�, 唳Π唳膏唳� 唳膏唳� 唳唳� 唳忇Μ唳距Π 唳侧唳權唳椸 唳唳班 唳︵唳侧啷� 唳忇Ξ唳� misadventure 唳灌Σ唰� 唳唳唳灌唳� 唳唳班唳� 唳唳む唳班唳� 唳溹唳ㄠ唳� 唳唳Π唰€唳� 唳︵唳� 唳灌Δ唰� 唳嗋唰嵿Π唳Γ唳熰 唳曕唳唳 唳嗋Ω唳, 鈥�唳嗋Ξ唳� 唳む 唳嗋唰囙 唳溹唳ㄠΔ唳距Ξ...鈥� 唳呧Π唰嵿Ε唳距, 唳膏唳� intuition啷� 唳唳距Ξ唳む 唳堗Χ唳唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳Δ唰嬥 唳椸唳熰 唳� 唳唳唰囙Π 唳多唳粪唳� 唳忇唳熰 鈥榤oral鈥� 唳唳侧唳� 唳むΜ唰�, 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π intuition 唳Ζ唳� 唳 唳夃Α唳监唳唰� 唳︵唳唳� 唳唳, 唳膏唳む唳班唳班唳� 唳曕Ν唰� 唳ㄠΟ唳�!
唳� 唳唳唰囙Π唳夃Σ唰嵿Σ唰囙唰嵿Ο唳唳椸唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳� The Wrong Shape, The Sins of Prince Saradine, The Hammer of God, The Eye of Apollo, The Sign of the Broken Sword 唳� The Three Tools of Death
唳︵唳唳唳�, 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳溹Θ唳唳班唳唳む唳� 唳о唳班唳唳灌唳曕Δ唳距Ο唳� 唳溹 唳曕 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唰оН唰оЕ 唳膏唳侧 唳膏唳粪唳熰 唳曕Π唳侧唳� 唳む唳佮Π 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ啷� 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳夃Σ唰嵿唰嬥Π唳� 唳忇 唳唳︵唳 唳唳︵唳班 唳Χ唳距Ο唳监唳苦イ 唳唳︵唳班唳� 唳唳多唳熰唳� 唳Σ唰� 唳︵唳 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰� 唳Ε唰囙唰嵿唳距唳距Π唰€ 唳ㄠΘ 唳唳班唳夃Θ啷� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳膏唳� 唳膏唳� 唳氞唳班唳む唳班唳� 唳唳多唳粪唳熰唳唳Σ唰€, 唳 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰€唳 唳︵唳粪唳熰唳む 唳唳粪Γ 唳︵唳粪唳�, 唳む唳� 唳曕唳ㄠ唳熰唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳唳澿 唳唳唳ㄠΘ唳距イ 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳曕唳曕唳� 唳膏唳Θ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ, 唳む唳ㄠ 唳呧唳傕唳距Π唰€ 唳ㄠΘ, 唳呧Θ唳苦Ο唳监Ξ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ, 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳侧Α唳监唳囙Ο唳监 唳呧Κ唳班唰� 唳む唳氞唳涏唰嵿唳距Θ 唳曕Π唰囙Θ 唳ㄠ鈥︹€︵唳班唳ム唰�, 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唳唳む唳� 唳唳о唳粪唳犩唳班唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳栢唳班唳粪唳熰唳� 唳呧Μ唳む唳� 唳唳多唳粪イ 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳� 唳唳班 唳唳多唳粪Δ 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ-唳唳班唳距Π唳� 唳灌Ο唳监唳� 唳 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳�, 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ 唳囙Δ唰嵿Ο唳距Ζ唳� 唳唳粪Ο唳监唰� 唳唳多唳� 唳唳む唳む 唳ㄠ 唳︵唳唳� 唳唳粪Γ 唳唳︵唳о唳唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唳曕唰嵿Ψ 唳灌唳唳� 唳唳 唳む 唳唳班Ξ唳距Γ 唳曕Π唳距 唳曕 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳ㄠ唳� 唳侧唰嵿Ψ唰嵿Ο 唳涏唳侧? 唳Ω唰嵿Δ唰佮Δ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧唳� 唳唳澿 唳唳� 唳忇唳熰 anti-唳灌唳Ω 唳Π唳苦Μ唰囙Χ 唳侧唰嵿Ψ唰嵿Ο 唳曕Π唳� 唳唳啷� 唳忇唳距唳距Π唳� 唳椸Α唳监Θ唰囙Π 唳⑧唳唳權 唳灌唳Ω 唳唳班Ο唳监唳溹Θ唰� 唳Σ唳唳班Ο唳监唳椸 唳唳涏 唳灌唳む唳ㄠΘ唳� (唳灌唳Ω 唳多唰囙Π 唳唳粪唳熰唳唳︵唳о 唳涏唳侧唳�), 唳曕唳ㄠ 唳膏唳ㄠ 唳嗋唰嵿Θ唰囙Ο唳监唳膏唳む唳班 唳唳Μ唳灌唳� 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ, 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳膏唳苦唳膏唳� 唳膏唳膏Μ 唳Ε 唳曕唳ㄠ 唳唳∴唳距Θ唳ㄠ啷� 唳唳︵唳班唳� 唳膏唳︵唳唳熰 唳唳多唳曕 唳涏唳む 唳灌唳む 唳唳佮唰� 唳栢唳熰 唳忇 唳唳ㄠ唳�, 唳唳佮唰� 唳︵唳栢 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ν唰嵿Π唳� 唳夃Ζ唰嵿Π唰囙唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ν唳距Μ唳ㄠ 唳ㄠ唳む唳ㄠ唳む 唳曕Ξ, 唳忇Ξ唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳む唳班 唳曕Π唰� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳灌唳Ω唳曕 唳唳� 唳忇 唳灌唳� 唳ㄠ唳む 唳氞唳唰囙唳苦Σ唰囙Θ 唳唳� 唳曕Π唳�!
唳灌唳Ω 唳嗋Π 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳Α唳� 唳唳班唳ム唰嵿Ο唳熰 唳呧Θ唰嵿Ο 唳溹唳唳椸唳啷� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳曕Π唰嵿Ξ唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む 唳灌Σ唰� deductive, 唳唳曕唳む 唳膏唳溹唳唰� 唳膏唳溹唳唰� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳膏Ξ唳距Η唳距Θ 唳曕Π唳距イ 唳呧Κ唳班Ζ唳苦唰�, 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む 唳灌Σ唰� intuitive, 唳呧Π唰嵿Ε唳距 唳曕唳ㄠ, 唳 唳︵唳栢Δ唰� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰�, 唳灌唳佮唰�-唳氞Σ唰� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰�, 唳∴唳曕唳� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰�, 唳む 唳灌唳佮Ω 唳ㄠΟ唳监Δ唰� 唳嗋Π 唳曕? (唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳Δ唳距唳� 唳膏唳夃唰嵿唰� 唳о唳班Γ 唳曕Π唳� 唳唳佮Ζ唰囙Π 唳唳班Η唳距Θ 唳多唳班唳唳∴唳�, 唳む唳佮Ζ唰囙Π 唳唳多唳班Ν唳距唰囙Π 唳唰嵿Δ唳唳 唳曕 唳忇Ξ唳�?)啷� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳呧Μ唳多唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳忇Ξ唳� intuitive 唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む唳� 唳唳唳栢唳 唳︵唳唰囙唰囙Θ啷� 唳︵唳班唳樴唳距Σ 唳唳︵唳班唳� 唳唳多唳� 唳膏唳ム 唳溹Α唳监唳� 唳ム唳曕唳� 唳曕唳班Γ唰� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唳曕 唳唳班唰佮Π 唳唳ㄠ唳粪唳� confession 唳多唳ㄠΔ唰� 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏, 唳Σ唰� 唳唳ㄠΜ 唳Θ唰囙Π 唳呧Θ唰嵿Η唳曕唳� 唳呧Σ唳�-唳椸Σ唳苦唰佮Σ唰� 唳ㄠ唳曕 唳む唳佮Π 唳唳� 唳氞唳ㄠ 唳灌Ο唳监 唳椸唳涏啷� 唳む唳� 唳灌唳佮Ω唰囙Π 唳Δ唰� 唳︵唳栢Σ唰囙 唳Π唳苦唳苦Δ 唳涏唳佮唰� 唳Ω唳苦Ο唳监 唳班唳膏唳Ν唰囙Ζ 唳曕Π唰� 唳ㄠ唳� 唳む唳ㄠ啷� 唳溹唳Θ 唳唳Θ唰囙Π 唳оΠ唳� 唳ム唳曕 唳多唳班 唳曕Π唰� 唳曕Π唰嵿Ξ唳Ζ唰嵿Η唳む 唳Π唰嵿Ο唳ㄠ唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳Π唰€唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π 唳曕Π唰� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唳曕 唳膏唳粪唳熰 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ啷� 唳曕唳班 唳曕唳班 唳Θ唰� 唳ㄠ唳多唳氞Ο唳监 唳忇Ω唳� 唳曕唳班Γ唰� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳唳多唳� 唳班唳栢唳唳� 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ, 唳むΜ唰� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳唰嵿Ψ唰� 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳Α唳� 唳膏唳唳囙唳� 唳椸唳唰囙唰囙Θ 唳栢唳 唳呧Κ唰嵿Π唳む唳唳多唳� 唳忇唳溹Θ 唳唳ㄠ唳粪 唳囙Δ唳距Σ唰€唳 唳唳班唳曕唳� 唳むΔ唰嵿Δ唰嵿Μ唳唳� 唳嗋Θ唰嵿Δ唳ㄠ唳� 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳苦イ 唳膏唳膏唳曕唳� 唳 唳呧Θ唰佮Ξ唳距Θ唰囙Π 唳撪Κ唳� 唳Π 唳曕Π唰� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距唳苦Π唳� 唳曕Π唳唳� 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳む唳班唳� 唳む 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ唳�, 唳忇 唳︵唳 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳灌唳Ω唳曕 唳ㄠ唳む唳ㄠ唳む 鈥樴Μ唳距Σ唳栢唳侧唳€� 唳� 鈥樴Ζ唳距Ξ唰嵿Ν唳苦鈥� (pretentious little boy) 唳唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳涏唳∴唰囙唰囙Θ啷� 唳忇唳唳傕Χ 唳多Δ唳距Μ唰嵿Ζ唰€唳む 唳︵唳佮Α唳监唳唰� 唳唳班唳曕唳膏Κ唳ㄠ唳ム 唳曕唳夃唰� 唳栢唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳膏唳ㄠ唳班 唳︵唳栢唳ㄠ (唳忇Μ唳� 唳︵唳栢Μ唳距Π 唳曕唳班Γ唳� 唳唳多唳� 唳唳囙Θ唳�!) 唳むΜ唰� 唳囙Δ唳距Σ唰€唳� 唳唳唳膏唳膏唳� 唳膏Π唳曕唳班唳� 唳唳班唳︵唳о 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳苦Π 唳膏唳椸唳班唳唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳熰 唳溹唳ㄠΣ唰� 唳む唳佮Π 唳唳班Δ唳� 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ξ唳距Θ 唳溹唳椸Μ唰囙啷� 唳忇唳距Π 唳唳� 唳溹唳侧 唳唳氞唳涏唳�, 唳多Π唰€唳班 唳о唳班Γ 唳曕Π唰囙唰囙Θ 唳呧Ξ唳距Θ唰佮Ψ唳苦 唳呧Δ唰嵿Ο唳距唳距Π啷� 唳唳� 唳涏唳∴唳� 唳唳�, 唳むΔ唳︵唳ㄠ 唳︵唳佮Δ 唳Α唳监 唳椸唳唰囙唰�, 唳Π唳苦Κ唳距唰嵿Δ唳ㄠ唳む唳班唳� 唳唳灌唳� 唳︵Χ唳距イ 唳むΠ唳� 唳栢唳︵唳� 唳涏唳∴唳� 唳嗋Π 唳曕唳涏 唳栢唳む 唳唳班Δ唰囙Θ唳ㄠ啷� 唳忇Ν唳距Μ唰� 唳о唳佮唰� 唳о唳佮唰囙 唳唳む唳� 唰К 唳唳� 唳Ο唳监唳膏 唳唳班 唳唳� 唳椸唳班唳Ω唳苦イ
唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳�-唳唳多唳唳� 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳唰嵿Δ唳︵唳� 唳唳澿 唳嗋Σ唰嬥唳ㄠ唳� 唳曕Ξ唳む 唳ㄠ唳囙イ 唳灌唳Ω唳曕 唳唳侧Δ 唳呧唰嵿唰囙Ο唳监Μ唳距Ζ唰€ 唳оΠ唰� 唳ㄠ唳唳� 唳灌Ο唳监イ 鈥樴Ζ唳� 唳ㄠ唳唳� 唳熰唳班唳熰鈥� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳忇唳熰 唳夃唰嵿Δ唳� 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳嗋Ω唰嵿Δ唳苦唳む 唳唳班Ξ唳距Γ唰� 唳唳班唰佮Π 唳唳Μ唳灌唳� 唳灌Ο唳监 唳ム唳曕啷� 唳忇唳距Θ唰� 唳膏唳熰唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳︵唳班唳Σ 唳呧Θ唰佮Μ唳距Ζ 唳溹唳∴唰� 唳︵唳侧唳
鈥溹Ο唰佮唰嵿Δ唳苦Π 唳唳班Ο唳监唳椸唳� 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳氞唳唰� 唳嗋Π 唳曕唳ム唳� 唳唳多 唳侧唳椸唳ㄠ啷� (唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰� 唳唳多唳唳膏) 唳唳曕唳む唳唳︵ 唳唳む唳班唳� 唳唳曕唳む唳む唰嵿 唳︵唳唰� 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唳曕 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳多唳︵唳� 唳唳溹唳炧唳� 唳唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳涏唳∴唰囙Θ啷� 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳Θ唰� 唳灌Ο唳�, 唳唳多唳唳椸Δ唰囙Π 唳膏Μ 唳唳班唳｀唳� 唳︵唳栢Ν唳距Σ 唳曕Π唳唳� 唳唰� 唳愢Χ唰嵿Μ唳班唳� 唳椸唳｀唳� 唳唳侧唳� 唳膏唳ㄠ唳︵Π唰嵿Ο唰嵿Ο唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳忇Ω唰� 唳ムΞ唳曕 唳Α唳监啷� 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ζ唰囙Π 唳栢唳︵, 唳唳膏Θ唳�, 唳曕唳粪Ξ唳む唳� 唳嗋唳距唰嵿唰嵿Ψ唳� 唳忇Ω唳� 唳曕唳涏唳� 唳Ω唰嵿Δ唰佮Δ 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ζ唰囙Π 唳呧Ω唰嵿Δ唳苦Δ唰嵿Μ唰囙Π 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο 唳唳粪Γ 唳唳班Ο唳监唳溹Θ啷� 唳曕唳ㄠ唳む 唳忇 唳 唳椸唳侧唳唳� 唳膏唳ㄠ唳︵Π唰嵿Ο唰嵿Ο, 唳忇Π 唳椸Θ唰嵿Η, 唳班, 唳忇唰佮Σ唰� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳唳∴唳む, 唳忇 唳呧Σ唳權唳曕唳班唳� 唳ㄠ 唳灌Σ唰囙 唳氞Σ唳む啷� 唳忇 唳唳∴唳む 唳膏唳ㄠ唳︵Π唰嵿Ο唰嵿Ο唳熰 唳嗋Ω唳侧 (唳膏唳班Ψ唰嵿唳距Π?) 唳唳む唳む唳唳班 唳唳苦唳唳班唳距Χ啷� 唳む唳� 唳Σ唳�, 唳唳Θ唳距Π 唳栢唳班唳� 唳唳侧唳� 唳曕唳涏唳� 唳栢唳� 唳曕Ξ 唳曕唳涏 唳ㄠ唳団€�!
唳呧Π唰嵿Ε唳距, 唳灌唳Ω 唳唳ム唳唳む 唳呧Θ唰嵿Ο唳距Ο唳�-唳呧Μ唳苦唳距Π-唳︵唳粪唳熰唳� 唳唳班Μ唳� 唳唳班Δ唳距Κ 唳︵唳栢 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳班 唳唳多唳唳� 唳班唳栢Δ唰� 唳Π唳膏 唳唳ㄠΘ唳�, 唳Θ唰囙 唳灌Ο唳监Θ唳� 唳堗Χ唰嵿Μ唳� 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ζ唰囙Π 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳︵唳︵Γ唰嵿Α唳� 唳唳唳�, 唳曕唳ㄠ唳む, 唳忇唳囙Ω唳距Ε唰�, 唳唳ム唳唳� 唳膏唳ㄠ唳︵Π唰嵿Ο唰嵿Ο唰囙Π 唳曕Ε唳� 唳唳 唳灌唳Ω 唳膏Ξ唰嵿Ν唳Δ 唳忇唰囙Μ唳距Π唰� 唳唳佮Α唳� 唳ㄠ唳膏唳む唳曕 唳灌Ο唳监 唳唳む 唳唳班唰囙Θ唳ㄠ! 唳Σ唳距Μ唳距唰佮Σ唰嵿Ο, 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳忇Ω唳� 鈥樴唳距Μ唰嵿Ο唳苦鈥� 唳膏唳多Ο唳监唳� 唳侧唳多Ξ唳距Δ唰嵿Π 唳呧Ω唰嵿Δ唳苦Δ唰嵿Μ 唳ㄠ唳囙イ
唳嗋Π 唳膏Μ 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Π 唳Δ唰� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π唳� 唳忇唳溹Θ 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳嗋唰囙Θ, 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 (Flambeau), 唳唳ㄠ 唳忇唳膏Ξ唳 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳唳� 唳膏Μ唳氞唳唰� 唳о唳班唳� 唳呧Κ唳班唳о 唳涏唳侧唳ㄠイ 唳む唳曕唳粪唳� 唳唳︵唳о唳оΠ 唳Π唳距Ω唰€ 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳栢唳侧唳 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳曕唳涏 唳灌唳� 唳唳ㄠ 唳呧Δ唰€唳む唳� 唳唳唳氞唳班唰� 唳溹Σ唳距唰嵿唳侧 唳︵唳唰� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳多唳粪唳� 唳灌Ο唳监 唳唳ㄠイ 唳栢唳曕唳� 唳唳唳唳班唳� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥鈥權Π 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳 唳ㄠΞ唰佮Θ唳� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳︵唳侧唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧唳む (唳呧Κ唳班唳о 唳灌唳膏唳唳� 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 唳忇Π 唳唳︵唳о唳� 唳唳氞唳� 唳灌唳�, 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰€唳 唳Π唳多Κ唳距Ε唳班唳� 唳涏唳佮Ο唳监唳 唳む唳ㄠ 唳唳� 唳唳班唳多唳Θ唳距Ο唳监 唳Θ唰� 唳椸唳侧唳�, 唳む唳� 唳∴Ο唳监唳侧唳� 唳︵唳栢唳ㄠ 唳Ε唰� 唳椸唳唰囙Θ唰嵿Ζ唳距Π 唳膏唳曕唳班 唳灌唳膏唳 唳む唳佮Π 唳唳︵唳о 唳忇Ξ唳ㄠ唳� 唳曕Ξ唰� 唳唳 唳膏唳む 唳溹唳ㄠ 唳曕Ε唳�!) 唳む唳む 唳む唳佮唰� 唳栢唳� 唳溹唳� 唳唳∴唳距Δ唰� 唳涏唳唳佮唳∴唳� 唳氞唳� 唳Θ唰� 唳灌Δ唰� 唳唳班, 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳唳� 唳膏Μ 唳︵唳多唳� 唳唳侧唳多唳� 唳氞唳栢 唳о唳侧 唳︵唳唰� 唳唳∴唳距Θ唰� 唳嗋Θ唰嵿Δ唳班唳溹唳む唳� 唳Π唰嵿Ο唳距Ο唳监唳� 唳о唳班Θ唰嵿Η唳� 唳曕唳涏唳む唳� 唳Θ唰� 唳灌Ο唳� 唳ㄠ啷� 唳唳侧唳唳Μ唰嬥 唳膏Δ唰嵿Ο唳苦 唳呧Δ唳熰 唳唳︵唳о 唳оΠ唳侧 唳膏 唳膏Ξ唳唰囙Π 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳唳� 唳唳侧唳� 唳唳灌唳ㄠ唳椸唳侧 唳む唳佮Ζ唰囙Π 唳扳€嵿唳唳多Θ唰� 唳栢唳︵唳� 唳灌唳膏唳 唳樴唳� 唳唳む唳� 唳曕唳ㄠ 唳膏 唳唳唳唳班 唳膏Θ唰嵿Ζ唰囙 唳灌Ο唳� (唳膏 唳膏Θ唰嵿Ζ唰囙 唳呧Μ唳多唳� 唳唳� 唳囙Θ唰嵿Ω唳唳曕唳熰Π 唳侧唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳曕唳侧唳苦Θ唳距Π唳� 唳曕Π唳む 唳ㄠ 唳唳班 唳多唳班唳侧 唳灌唳Ω唰囙Π 唳多Π唳｀唳Θ唰嵿Θ 唳灌Δ唰囙Θ 唳む唳� 唳膏唳曕唳侧唳唳ㄠ唳� 唳囙Ο唳监唳班唳∴Ω 唳ㄠ唳唰囙 唳灌Δ唰�!)啷�
唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唳曕 唳唳佮唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳唳灌唳む 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳班唳膏唳唳侧唳唰佮Σ唰� 唳侧唳栢, 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳溹Ο唳监唳距Θ 唳椸唳囙Μ唳距Π 唳夃Ζ唰嵿Ζ唰囙Χ唰嵿Ο唰� 唳唳多唳班Ν唳距 唳曕唳粪唳む唳班唳� 唳溹唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳膏Ξ唳距Η唳距Θ 唳曕Π唰� 唳︵唳唳� 唳灌Ο唳监唳涏啷� 唳膏唳曕唳侧唰€唳Θ唰� 唳唳粪Γ 唳唳班唳侧唳� 唳忇唳熰 唳︵唳粪唳熰 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳夃Ζ唳距唳班Γ 唳︵唳唰� 唳唳澿唳ㄠ 唳唳曕
唳溹Θ唰堗唳� 唳多唳曕唳粪唳曕唳� 唳呧Θ唰囙 唳班唳� 唳呧Μ唰嵿Ζ唳� 唳涏唳む唳班唰� 唳唳班唳囙Ν唰囙 唳Α唳监唳唰� 唳樴Α唳监唳� 唳︵唳曕 唳む唳曕唳唰� 唳膏Ξ唳唰囙Π 唳唳唳唳班 唳灌唳佮Χ 唳灌Σ唰嬥イ 唳呧Δ 唳班唳む 唳涏唳む唳班唰� 唳唳∴唰€ 唳氞Σ唰� 唳唳む 唳Σ唳� 唳氞Σ唰囙Θ唳距イ 唳む唳� 唳唳班Ω唰嵿Δ唳距Μ 唳︵唳侧唳� 唳む唳佮Π 唳膏唳ム 唳班唳む唳� 唳ム唳曕 唳唳む啷� 唳涏唳� 唳涏唳侧, 唳唳涏 唳班唳む 唳Ο唳� 唳唳, 唳む唳� 唳多唳曕唳粪唳曕 唳涏唳む唳班唰� 唳膏唳ム 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳樴唳唳侧唳ㄠイ 唳膏唳距Σ唰� 唳夃唰� 唳多唳曕唳粪唳曕 唳涏唳む唳班唰� 唳溹唳溹唳炧唳� 唳曕Π唳侧唳� 唳む唳 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ο唳� 唳班唳む 唳椸唳佮Δ唰� 唳︵唳氞唳涏唳侧 唳曕唳�? 唳涏唳む唳班唳� 唳夃Δ唰嵿Δ唳�, 鈥樴唳 唳ㄠ唳唳む 唳嗋唰嵿唰佮Σ 唳班唳栢 唳樴唳唳む 唳唳侧唳唳膏鈥權イ 唳多唳曕唳粪唳曕 唳Σ唳侧唳�, 唳む唳 唳唳熰 唳ㄠ唳 唳唳唰� 唳撪唳� 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳ㄠ唳 唳ㄠΟ唳�! 鈥樴唳Θ唳� 唳唳熰 唳嗋唰嵿唰佮Σ 唳唳唰囙Θ, 唳膏唳熰唳� 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳嗋唰嵿唰佮Σ 唳ㄠΟ唳�!鈥�-唳涏唳む唳班唳� 唳夃Δ唰嵿Δ唳班イ
唳膏Ν唰嵿Ο唳溹Θ 唳唳む唳班唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳熰唳� 唳ㄠ唳傕Π唳距Ξ唰嬥Δ唰� 唳多唳夃Π唰� 唳夃唳唳�, 唳嗋Ξ唳距Ο唳� 唳多唳�-唳多唳唳ㄠ唳む 唳灌Ο唳监Δ唰� 唳曕唳涏 唳曕Ξ 唳曕Π唳唳ㄠΘ唳�! 唳唳ㄠ唳�, 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唳距Κ唰嵿Δ唳� 唳嗋唳班唳粪Θ唰€唳, 唳むΜ唰� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳熰唳む 唳曕唳� 唳唳曕唳む唳曕Δ唳� 唳ㄠ唳�, 唳膏唳班唳� 唳唳� 唳膏唳∴唳膏唳∴唳苦Π 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο唳� 唳溹唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳唳侧唳唰� 唳︵唳唳距イ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳о唳佮唳� 唳忇Ξ唳ㄠ啷� 唳ㄠ唳膏唳む唳曕唳� 唳唳� 唳оΠ唳苦Ο唳监 唳︵唳唳� 唳溹Θ唰嵿Ο 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰囙Π 唳Ε唰� 唳灌唳佮唰� 唳犩唳� 唳忇Ξ唳ㄠ 唳灌唳膏唳唳� 唳唳 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳膏Ξ唳距Κ唰嵿Δ唳� 唳熰唳ㄠ唳涏唳ㄠイ 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳氞Σ唰囙唰� 唳ㄠ唳灌唰�-唳� 唳膏Π唳� 唳班唳栢 唳оΠ唰�; 唳夃Κ唳膏唳灌唳� 唳唳侧唳む 唳唳班唳唳垛€嬥Ο唳监 "唳ㄠ唳"唳む "唳嗋唰佮Σ" 唳氞Σ唰� 唳椸唳唰囙唰� 唳呧Θ唰囙唳熰 唳呧Μ唳о唳班唳むΝ唳距Μ唰囙啷�
唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唳曕 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳膏Π唰嵿Μ唳唳� 唳む唳唳唳ㄠ唳ㄠ唳� 唳涏唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳侧唳栢唳涏唳� 唳唳佮唳熰 唳唳唰囙イ 鈥樴Ζ唰嵿Ο唳� 唳囙Θ唰嬥Ω唰囙Θ唰嵿Ω 唳呧Λ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ鈥� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳忇 唳唳佮唳熰唳� 唳唳班Ε唳唳苦イ 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳膏唳椸唳班唰� 唳唳佮唳熰 唳唳� 唳嗋唰�, 唳忇唳熰 唳呧唳｀唳� 唳膏唳膏唳曕Π唳� 唳灌唳膏唳啷� 唳撪Ο唳监唳班唳∴Ω唳撪Ο唳监唳班唳� 唳曕唳侧唳唳膏唳曕Ω 唳ム唳曕 唳唳班唳距Χ唳苦Δ 唳忇 唳呧唳｀唳� 唳膏唳膏唳曕Π唳｀唳� 唳唳唳曕唳 唳∴唳唳� 唳膏唳熰唳唳距Π唰嵿 唳∴唳唳� 唳侧唳栢唳涏唳� 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π 唳Π唳Π唰嵿Δ唰€ 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳︵唳曕唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳椸唳侧唳� 唳Δ唰� 唳呧Δ 唳膏唳溹Θ唳多唳� 唳ㄠΟ唳� 唳忇Μ唳� 唳氞唳膏唳熰唳班唳� 唳唳侧Δ 唳膏唳膏Μ 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰� 唳оΠ唰嵿Ξ唰€唳 唳� 唳ㄠ唳む唳� 唳多唳曕唳粪唳� 唳班Ω唰� 唳班唳膏唳唳� 唳溹唳侧唳 唳唳溹唳涏唳ㄠイ 唳囙Θ唰嬥Ω唰囙Θ唰嵿Ω 唳呧Λ 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ 唳唳熰唳む 唳膏唳曕Σ唳苦Δ 唳唳班唳熰唳� 唳唳澿 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳嗋唳熰 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳灌Δ唳距Χ唳距唳ㄠ唳班唳� 唳唳多 唳膏Ξ唳 唳侧唳椸唳唰� 唳Α唳监Μ唳距Π 唳Π 唳∴唳唳膏唳� 鈥樴唳� 唳膏唳溹Θ唳多唳� 唳ㄠΟ唳尖€� 唳Δ唳熰 唳ㄠ唳唰� 唳Θ唰� 唳Θ唰� 唳⑧唳佮 唳椸唳侧唳苦Σ唳距Ξ 唳唳粪Γ啷� 唳唳班Ε唳� 唳唳唰囙 唳� 唳灌唳� 唳灌Σ唰� 唳Π唰� 唳曕 唳灌Μ唰�? 唳唳犩 唳灌唳膏唳 唳灌Δ唳距Χ唳� 唳む 唳涏唳侧唳�, 唳むΜ唰� 唳⑧唳佮 唳椸唳侧唳� 唳曕唳班Γ唳熰 唳唳ㄠ唳ㄠイ 唳嗋Ξ唳距Π 唳唳ㄠ 唳嗋Η唰囙 唳唳侧-唳膏唳� 唳唳熰唳� 唳灌唳€權Π 唳班唰嵿Δ唳氞唰嵿Ψ唰� 唳忇Α唳监唳唰� 唳む唳佮Π 唳︵唳栢唳唰� 唳︵唳唳� 唳唳椸唳侧 唳夃Κ唰囙唰嵿Ψ唳� 唳曕Π唰� 唳嗋唳� 唳唳粪唳犩唳� 唳⑧唳夃Ω 唳唳熰 唳曕唳ㄠΜ唳距Π 唳Σ唳距Λ唳� 唳多唳粪Δ唳� 唳むΜ唰� 唳忇? 唳膏唳傕Ω唳距Π唳苦 唳嗋Π 唳︵Χ唳熰 唳唳溹唳� 唳曕Π唳む 唳椸唳唰� 唳ㄠ唳唳唳む 唳曕唳 唳灌唰嵿唳�, 唳Π唳膏唳� 唳膏唳� 唳唳� 唳忇Μ唳距Π 唳侧唳權唳椸 唳唳班 唳︵唳侧啷� 唳忇Ξ唳� misadventure 唳灌Σ唰� 唳唳唳灌唳� 唳唳班唳� 唳唳む唳班唳� 唳溹唳ㄠ唳� 唳唳Π唰€唳� 唳︵唳� 唳灌Δ唰� 唳嗋唰嵿Π唳Γ唳熰 唳曕唳唳 唳嗋Ω唳, 鈥�唳嗋Ξ唳� 唳む 唳嗋唰囙 唳溹唳ㄠΔ唳距Ξ...鈥� 唳呧Π唰嵿Ε唳距, 唳膏唳� intuition啷� 唳唳距Ξ唳む 唳堗Χ唳唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唰囙Π 唳Δ唰嬥 唳椸唳熰 唳� 唳唳唰囙Π 唳多唳粪唳� 唳忇唳熰 鈥榤oral鈥� 唳唳侧唳� 唳むΜ唰�, 唳唳︵唳� 唳唳班唳夃Θ唰囙Π intuition 唳Ζ唳� 唳 唳夃Α唳监唳唰� 唳︵唳唳� 唳唳, 唳膏唳む唳班唳班唳� 唳曕Ν唰� 唳ㄠΟ唳�!
唳� 唳唳唰囙Π唳夃Σ唰嵿Σ唰囙唰嵿Ο唳唳椸唳� 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ唳� The Wrong Shape, The Sins of Prince Saradine, The Hammer of God, The Eye of Apollo, The Sign of the Broken Sword 唳� The Three Tools of Death
June 20, 2020
鈥淭he criminal is the creative artist; the detective only the critic [鈥鈥�
Is there something like an artistic crime? And if there is, might some of the stories included in G.K. Chesterton鈥檚 collection The Innocence of Father Brown not be counted as very examples of such artistic crimes? Crimes in the line of imposture and sleight of hand, to be more precise.
What would you think of In little doses, stories like these may be entertaining, but they may surely make you stop reading more often than not and ask yourself whether the author is not trying too hard to impress and amaze, and this is how these stories become more like the somersaults of an especially pert and hyperactive neighbour鈥檚 child 鈥� it鈥檚 never your own offspring, for sure 鈥� who is attempting to get some adult admiration. I could definitely hear the shrill 鈥淟ook here! Look here! See what I can do!鈥� in the background of many a Father Brown story.
What also makes these stories way inferior to the one and only Sherlock Holmes adventures is the figure of Father Brown and his methods. First of all, the man is an annoyingly smug and self-complacent person, who hardly ever refrains from making snide remarks on Calvinists and atheists in particular, and anybody non-Catholic in general. This is probably a bit Chesterton himself speaking, since the author was born a Unitarian and then later on converted to Catholicism, and now he seems to feel under the obligation of thrusting down everybody鈥檚 throat the superiority of this newly-embraced creed [1]. In a way, Chesterton seems like one of those ex-smokers who now lose no opportunity of expatiating on the dangers of their former vice and start coughing meaningfully whenever they see somebody walk by with a cigarette in their mouth on the other side of the street. You can also bet that the murderer will be either a Calvinist, or an atheist, or a Methodist, but a murderous Catholic appears to be a phenomenon beyond the range of the author鈥檚 imagination. Saying that, I also found it very unusual for a detective story鈥檚 narrative voice to give us exhaustive information on every single character鈥檚 answer to the Gretchenfrage. This made me ask myself the question whether a foot fetishist, if he were to write a novel, would also obsessively tell us every character鈥檚 shoe size.
The other thing I did not like particularly about Brown was that he remains extremely vague as a character. He is not anything like Sherlock Holmes, who always comes over as a real person to me, but more like a completely shadowy Columbo, without this latter inspector鈥檚 endearing features. He also does what Holmes was always loath to, namely build the most daring theories on very little evidence so that his conclusions would never ever hold water in court. Then there was a last little thing that annoyed me without end, although it is but a tiny detail: Father Brown is always on the scene of a crime, happening to walk into the place whenever a murder or a robbery is committed. It might work in one or two cases, but how likely is it for a normal person, not somebody who is consulted on a case and has made the detection of crime his business, like Holmes, to witness one crime 鈥� let alone 49? If I ever met Father Brown in the street, I would immediately turn tail and run because chances I should get killed with his being around would definitely explode.
And yet, there is something good that can be said for the Father Brown stories, and this is so much of an advantage that I might go on reading some other of his stories: Chesterton is surely a master of witty and interesting language. But not really a master of detective stories as I like them.
[1] Don鈥檛 get me wrong! I myself sometimes toy with the thought of becoming Catholic, but purely from an agnostic鈥檚 view, thinking that if I should profess my belief in God, I would also want to have the Mother of God, transsubstantiation and a lot of incense to go with it.
Is there something like an artistic crime? And if there is, might some of the stories included in G.K. Chesterton鈥檚 collection The Innocence of Father Brown not be counted as very examples of such artistic crimes? Crimes in the line of imposture and sleight of hand, to be more precise.
What would you think of In little doses, stories like these may be entertaining, but they may surely make you stop reading more often than not and ask yourself whether the author is not trying too hard to impress and amaze, and this is how these stories become more like the somersaults of an especially pert and hyperactive neighbour鈥檚 child 鈥� it鈥檚 never your own offspring, for sure 鈥� who is attempting to get some adult admiration. I could definitely hear the shrill 鈥淟ook here! Look here! See what I can do!鈥� in the background of many a Father Brown story.
What also makes these stories way inferior to the one and only Sherlock Holmes adventures is the figure of Father Brown and his methods. First of all, the man is an annoyingly smug and self-complacent person, who hardly ever refrains from making snide remarks on Calvinists and atheists in particular, and anybody non-Catholic in general. This is probably a bit Chesterton himself speaking, since the author was born a Unitarian and then later on converted to Catholicism, and now he seems to feel under the obligation of thrusting down everybody鈥檚 throat the superiority of this newly-embraced creed [1]. In a way, Chesterton seems like one of those ex-smokers who now lose no opportunity of expatiating on the dangers of their former vice and start coughing meaningfully whenever they see somebody walk by with a cigarette in their mouth on the other side of the street. You can also bet that the murderer will be either a Calvinist, or an atheist, or a Methodist, but a murderous Catholic appears to be a phenomenon beyond the range of the author鈥檚 imagination. Saying that, I also found it very unusual for a detective story鈥檚 narrative voice to give us exhaustive information on every single character鈥檚 answer to the Gretchenfrage. This made me ask myself the question whether a foot fetishist, if he were to write a novel, would also obsessively tell us every character鈥檚 shoe size.
The other thing I did not like particularly about Brown was that he remains extremely vague as a character. He is not anything like Sherlock Holmes, who always comes over as a real person to me, but more like a completely shadowy Columbo, without this latter inspector鈥檚 endearing features. He also does what Holmes was always loath to, namely build the most daring theories on very little evidence so that his conclusions would never ever hold water in court. Then there was a last little thing that annoyed me without end, although it is but a tiny detail: Father Brown is always on the scene of a crime, happening to walk into the place whenever a murder or a robbery is committed. It might work in one or two cases, but how likely is it for a normal person, not somebody who is consulted on a case and has made the detection of crime his business, like Holmes, to witness one crime 鈥� let alone 49? If I ever met Father Brown in the street, I would immediately turn tail and run because chances I should get killed with his being around would definitely explode.
And yet, there is something good that can be said for the Father Brown stories, and this is so much of an advantage that I might go on reading some other of his stories: Chesterton is surely a master of witty and interesting language. But not really a master of detective stories as I like them.
[1] Don鈥檛 get me wrong! I myself sometimes toy with the thought of becoming Catholic, but purely from an agnostic鈥檚 view, thinking that if I should profess my belief in God, I would also want to have the Mother of God, transsubstantiation and a lot of incense to go with it.
May 12, 2017
I had watched and loved the 2013 BBC adaptation of the Father Brown stories. Since then, I have wanted to read these books. In the first book of the collection, The Innocence of Father Brown, we are introduced to the dumpy, bigoted, narrow-minded, but ultimately smart priest, who goes around solving mysteries that flummoxes everyone else. We are also introduced to the master thief, Flambeau, who is a reformed criminal, and now helps the good Father in his crime solving.
I loved these stories. They are wild, improbable, and what I call completely cosy. There is no romance whatsoever (thank goodness!) and the setting is as quaint as any Agatha Christie book. So yes, I did like the book.
But the bigotry in the book was horrendous. At some points, it almost appears as if the author has written the book in order to promote Catholicism and not just to entertain. There is a lot of stupid spouting of Catholic "reason" and the wildness and badness of other religions. Yeah, whatever. Hahaha! Atheists are roundly abused as being impractical and fanatic. Hahaha! And good gosh, that malevolent Hindu man, how dare he sully your pure British homes? *eyeroll* Yeah, and thanks for writing out women completely. There are hardly any women of note in these books. The only one of any importance stands out in The Sins of Prince Saradine.
So thanks for the lovely setting and stuff, but no thanks. You only get three stars from me. I'd rather just watch the show again, which has attempted to modernise these attitudes, which have become more than outdated. They are offensive. Read at your own risk.
I loved these stories. They are wild, improbable, and what I call completely cosy. There is no romance whatsoever (thank goodness!) and the setting is as quaint as any Agatha Christie book. So yes, I did like the book.
But the bigotry in the book was horrendous. At some points, it almost appears as if the author has written the book in order to promote Catholicism and not just to entertain. There is a lot of stupid spouting of Catholic "reason" and the wildness and badness of other religions. Yeah, whatever. Hahaha! Atheists are roundly abused as being impractical and fanatic. Hahaha! And good gosh, that malevolent Hindu man, how dare he sully your pure British homes? *eyeroll* Yeah, and thanks for writing out women completely. There are hardly any women of note in these books. The only one of any importance stands out in The Sins of Prince Saradine.
So thanks for the lovely setting and stuff, but no thanks. You only get three stars from me. I'd rather just watch the show again, which has attempted to modernise these attitudes, which have become more than outdated. They are offensive. Read at your own risk.
October 18, 2024
鈥淒o you think people dislike cheerfulness?"
"People like frequent laughter," answered Father Brown, "but I don't think they like a permanent smile. Cheerfulness without humour is a very trying thing."
I possess mingled feelings about these small-sized detective tales, as there is a lot to like and dislike at the memory of the spit-fire wording of Sir G.K. Chesterton. Yet, to be clear, I still love him, and I sense that the figure of Father Brown is one to devour distance and defy time. In fact, the character of Father Brown is so entirely entertaining, to the point of being comic, and popular, in such a manner as to be almost legendary, figure. That is high and splendid, and the heart of the matter is that that is really something that I have been overjoyed about.
"People like frequent laughter," answered Father Brown, "but I don't think they like a permanent smile. Cheerfulness without humour is a very trying thing."
I possess mingled feelings about these small-sized detective tales, as there is a lot to like and dislike at the memory of the spit-fire wording of Sir G.K. Chesterton. Yet, to be clear, I still love him, and I sense that the figure of Father Brown is one to devour distance and defy time. In fact, the character of Father Brown is so entirely entertaining, to the point of being comic, and popular, in such a manner as to be almost legendary, figure. That is high and splendid, and the heart of the matter is that that is really something that I have been overjoyed about.
June 16, 2020
I adore G.K. Chesterton, and he annoys the hell out of me.
He was an incredibly smart thinker, and a writer of enormous talents, but he seems to have a knack of rubbing me up the wrong way. His Father Brown stories are a perfect case in point. They are detective stories with almost no action, in which everything is told not shown - typically, our eponymous investigator arrives at the scene of a crime and, usually after the police have jumped the obvious, and wrong, conclusion, he elucidates the facts of the case that he has gleaned through a mixture of observation and encyclopaedic knowledge, in a way which would make Sherlock Holmes seem both naive and modest.
However, while the intricate puzzle-game of the crime is, as was the fashion in early- and mid-20th century mystery fiction, part of it, the point of these stories isn鈥檛 really the mystery. As with all of Chesterton鈥檚 writing, it is a discussion of ethics and spirituality - and I do mean very much a discussion, as Chesterton is the frighteningly intelligent old man sitting with his cigar and brandy, speaking aloud his thoughts as he ponders.
This is, I think, one of the things that leads to my annoyance. He is prone to contradiction - at one point he has Father Brown refer to atheists as being more intellectually honest than many Christians, and in the next tale almost the precise opposite. He makes statements that are utterly nonsensical - 鈥渆very man who sleeps believes in God鈥�, he writes (what?) and at one point the detective鈥檚 reasoning is that a man is not a Catholic as he claimed as 鈥渘o Catholic would behave in that way鈥�.
Such idiocies makes me want to throw the book across the room - at least partly as I am fairly certain Chesterton knows exactly what he鈥檚 saying. It would be perfectly possible to put contradictory statements in the voices of other characters, rather than his own mouthpiece of the priest, but the author seems perfectly happy to own his statements with full knowledge of their failings. Or perhaps I give him too much credit.
There are other problems; At first I wasn鈥檛 sure if I鈥檇 accuse Chesterton of misogyny as much as barely being aware that women exist. In the only story in this collection in which women feature, The Eye of Apollo, he is very disparaging of feminism and of women鈥檚 minds, however.
The overarching theme of the stories is redemption. This is set out in the first story, The Blue Cross - also the most action packed, where the great French detective Valentin is pursuing his arch-nemesis, the master criminal Flambeau, across London in a chase reminiscent of The Man Who Was Thursday, which actually sets up at arc that runs through the series, but redemption also features in several other individual tales.
So I get a lot out of reading Chesterton, even if some of that is exasperation. I guess that means he鈥檚 making me engage my brain. Let鈥檚 see how the next four collections go.
He was an incredibly smart thinker, and a writer of enormous talents, but he seems to have a knack of rubbing me up the wrong way. His Father Brown stories are a perfect case in point. They are detective stories with almost no action, in which everything is told not shown - typically, our eponymous investigator arrives at the scene of a crime and, usually after the police have jumped the obvious, and wrong, conclusion, he elucidates the facts of the case that he has gleaned through a mixture of observation and encyclopaedic knowledge, in a way which would make Sherlock Holmes seem both naive and modest.
However, while the intricate puzzle-game of the crime is, as was the fashion in early- and mid-20th century mystery fiction, part of it, the point of these stories isn鈥檛 really the mystery. As with all of Chesterton鈥檚 writing, it is a discussion of ethics and spirituality - and I do mean very much a discussion, as Chesterton is the frighteningly intelligent old man sitting with his cigar and brandy, speaking aloud his thoughts as he ponders.
This is, I think, one of the things that leads to my annoyance. He is prone to contradiction - at one point he has Father Brown refer to atheists as being more intellectually honest than many Christians, and in the next tale almost the precise opposite. He makes statements that are utterly nonsensical - 鈥渆very man who sleeps believes in God鈥�, he writes (what?) and at one point the detective鈥檚 reasoning is that a man is not a Catholic as he claimed as 鈥渘o Catholic would behave in that way鈥�.
Such idiocies makes me want to throw the book across the room - at least partly as I am fairly certain Chesterton knows exactly what he鈥檚 saying. It would be perfectly possible to put contradictory statements in the voices of other characters, rather than his own mouthpiece of the priest, but the author seems perfectly happy to own his statements with full knowledge of their failings. Or perhaps I give him too much credit.
There are other problems; At first I wasn鈥檛 sure if I鈥檇 accuse Chesterton of misogyny as much as barely being aware that women exist. In the only story in this collection in which women feature, The Eye of Apollo, he is very disparaging of feminism and of women鈥檚 minds, however.
The overarching theme of the stories is redemption. This is set out in the first story, The Blue Cross - also the most action packed, where the great French detective Valentin is pursuing his arch-nemesis, the master criminal Flambeau, across London in a chase reminiscent of The Man Who Was Thursday, which actually sets up at arc that runs through the series, but redemption also features in several other individual tales.
So I get a lot out of reading Chesterton, even if some of that is exasperation. I guess that means he鈥檚 making me engage my brain. Let鈥檚 see how the next four collections go.
July 11, 2021
Father Brown's cases are my favourite crime mysteries right now. Mind you, I could be described as something quite the opposite of a Roman Catholic, but I do love Father Brown's kindness and wisdom.
Chesterton said, 'I feel I am cheated when the last chapter hints for the first time that the vicar had a curate...', meaning that the reader should have all the cards to figure out the mystery. Most of the time I'm just enjoying the story and not trying to figure it out, but I do appreciate the attitude.
Fabourite quote: 'The most incredible thing about miracles is that they happen.'
That said, the situations described are very often grotesque. This does not subtract from the enjoyment, because the psychology is all correct.
Also, there is always a touch of humour, and I do love to have something to at least smile at in a book.
Looking forward to ;)
Chesterton said, 'I feel I am cheated when the last chapter hints for the first time that the vicar had a curate...', meaning that the reader should have all the cards to figure out the mystery. Most of the time I'm just enjoying the story and not trying to figure it out, but I do appreciate the attitude.
Fabourite quote: 'The most incredible thing about miracles is that they happen.'
That said, the situations described are very often grotesque. This does not subtract from the enjoyment, because the psychology is all correct.
Also, there is always a touch of humour, and I do love to have something to at least smile at in a book.
Looking forward to ;)
May 3, 2020
lovely book. still
April 18, 2014
Alas, Chesterton! Why must you be so frustrating? Such a beautiful prose for such an insubstantial fare! Chesterton's style is so pleasant to read that I want, I really want to like these stories. I'm certainly very fond of passages like this:
Or this:
If only the plots lived up to the way they are written! I don't understand why Chesterton is considered an authority of the detective story. There are some clever ideas, but cleverness is no substitute for logical sense. His stories rely heavily on contrivance and unbelievable circumstances; his criminal masterminds consistently fail to think their schemes through; his great sleuths resort to methods that have no business working, yet they do.Perhaps I'm seeing this the wrong way? Perhaps this is not how these stories should be appreciated? Granted, my only other contact with the genre has been through Sherlock Holmes, but I can attest that even the worst Holmes story is better plotted than mostly anything in this volume. Also, Arthur Conan Doyle made the wise move of making Holmes's rational approach fallible, whereas Father Brown's often baseless intuitions end up being proven right every time. Many a mystery is solved by his miraculously noticing something that has been miraculously overlooked by everyone else. Perhaps he gets help from the Holy Ghost?
I say that only half-jokingly, as the religious apologetics is all-pervasive. Father Brown misses no chance to expound on the superiority of Catholicism, or, more annoyingly, on the evils of pretty much everything that is not Catholicism. He is supposed to be a mild-mannered, unassuming priest, yet he often comes across as rather smug and even positively bigoted. This is not necessarily a bad thing in a literary character: again, Sherlock Holmes has some unsavory flaws too. The difference is that Holmes has Watson to call him out on those. No one calls Father Brown out when he quaintly claims, for example, that the Scottish favoring Calvinism rather than Catholicism is somehow related to the alleged fact that their ancestors worshipped demons. Or consider this passage, more beautiful prose, but this time in the service of less than beautiful notions:
Whenever Sherlock Holmes lets his prejudices cloud his judgement, he fails. In "A Scandal in Bohemia," . Contrast this with "The Secret Garden," where Father Brown reasons that , and the author heartily agrees. In Chesterton's literary universe you may be a good, well-meaning person, but if you're not Catholic then you're a potential homicide. At the very least, you are suspicious enough to serve as a red herring. Because man's heart is wicked, you know, and only the Church's discipline can prevent him from going over to the devil. This is not just how Father Brown sees other characters: it's how Chesterton writes them. He doesn't acknowledge the faults of his protagonist because he shares them and considers them virtues. As a creator, G. K. Chesterton has shaped a world after the likeness of his prejudice and sent forth Father Brown to spread his word upon it.
There is in the world a very aged rioter and demagogue who breaks into the most refined retreats with the dreadful information that all men are brothers, and wherever this leveller went on his pale horse it was Father Brown's trade to follow.
Or this:
The vessel was just comfortable for two people; there was room only for necessities, and Flambeau had stocked it with such things as his special philosophy considered necessary. They reduced themselves, apparently, to four essentials: tins of salmon, if he should want to eat; loaded revolvers, if he should want to fight; a bottle of brandy, presumably in case he should faint; and a priest, presumably in case he should die.
If only the plots lived up to the way they are written! I don't understand why Chesterton is considered an authority of the detective story. There are some clever ideas, but cleverness is no substitute for logical sense. His stories rely heavily on contrivance and unbelievable circumstances; his criminal masterminds consistently fail to think their schemes through; his great sleuths resort to methods that have no business working, yet they do.Perhaps I'm seeing this the wrong way? Perhaps this is not how these stories should be appreciated? Granted, my only other contact with the genre has been through Sherlock Holmes, but I can attest that even the worst Holmes story is better plotted than mostly anything in this volume. Also, Arthur Conan Doyle made the wise move of making Holmes's rational approach fallible, whereas Father Brown's often baseless intuitions end up being proven right every time. Many a mystery is solved by his miraculously noticing something that has been miraculously overlooked by everyone else. Perhaps he gets help from the Holy Ghost?
I say that only half-jokingly, as the religious apologetics is all-pervasive. Father Brown misses no chance to expound on the superiority of Catholicism, or, more annoyingly, on the evils of pretty much everything that is not Catholicism. He is supposed to be a mild-mannered, unassuming priest, yet he often comes across as rather smug and even positively bigoted. This is not necessarily a bad thing in a literary character: again, Sherlock Holmes has some unsavory flaws too. The difference is that Holmes has Watson to call him out on those. No one calls Father Brown out when he quaintly claims, for example, that the Scottish favoring Calvinism rather than Catholicism is somehow related to the alleged fact that their ancestors worshipped demons. Or consider this passage, more beautiful prose, but this time in the service of less than beautiful notions:
"[...] Don't you ever feel that about Eastern art? The colours are intoxicatingly lovely; but the shapes are mean and bad鈥攄eliberately mean and bad. I have seen wicked things in a Turkey carpet."
"Mon Dieu!" cried Flambeau, laughing.
"They are letters and symbols in a language I don't know; but I know they stand for evil words," went on the priest, his voice growing lower and lower. "The lines go wrong on purpose鈥攍ike serpents doubling to escape."
Whenever Sherlock Holmes lets his prejudices cloud his judgement, he fails. In "A Scandal in Bohemia," . Contrast this with "The Secret Garden," where Father Brown reasons that , and the author heartily agrees. In Chesterton's literary universe you may be a good, well-meaning person, but if you're not Catholic then you're a potential homicide. At the very least, you are suspicious enough to serve as a red herring. Because man's heart is wicked, you know, and only the Church's discipline can prevent him from going over to the devil. This is not just how Father Brown sees other characters: it's how Chesterton writes them. He doesn't acknowledge the faults of his protagonist because he shares them and considers them virtues. As a creator, G. K. Chesterton has shaped a world after the likeness of his prejudice and sent forth Father Brown to spread his word upon it.
June 25, 2023
The Innocence of Father Brown is a collection of short stories featuring the title character, who is a priest that solves mysteries. In most cases, the mystery involves a murder. In addition to Father Brown, you also have Flambeau, who starts out a criminal before becoming Father Brown's right-hand man, though you can argue that Flambeau ends up doing most of the detective work. The Innocence of Father Brown has been viewed as inspiration for future detectives, such as Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple, as well as Ellery Queen. These books are driven by the mystery, though, where as Father Brown's stories are driven by its messages, namely the use of allegory and theology that Chesterton is trying to share through his use of the mystery genre. Chesterton is known most for his philosophies and essays pertaining to Christian Orthodoxy, which later was simply a conversion into Catholicism.
My copy of The Innocence of Father Brown was 102 pages of 12 short stories, each less than 10 pages, but this is by no means light reading. The content is very dense and will take time to properly get through. Where these stories succeed are with its use of allegory and incorporation of theology. I was especially amazed with the literal and figurative incorporations in "The Eye of Apollo." Where these stories lacked were in the characters and story. The characters were very one-dimensional and I felt that Father Brown could have been more prominent throughout the stories. Flambeau was also very inconsistent, particular in this storyline and lacking a bridge between being a criminal to being on the good side. These are not stories where you can play along as detective, for they are very heavy and you have characters being thrown at you, but not enough time to sort out their situations.
The Innocence of Father Brown is interesting enough to look into and rich enough to think about. Perhaps it is even worth rereading. If you are looking for a mystery where you are primarily thinking about the story, playing the detective, or simply something cozy, this is not for you. This would be like looking for comfort food and settling for Cottage cheese with nothing in it.
My copy of The Innocence of Father Brown was 102 pages of 12 short stories, each less than 10 pages, but this is by no means light reading. The content is very dense and will take time to properly get through. Where these stories succeed are with its use of allegory and incorporation of theology. I was especially amazed with the literal and figurative incorporations in "The Eye of Apollo." Where these stories lacked were in the characters and story. The characters were very one-dimensional and I felt that Father Brown could have been more prominent throughout the stories. Flambeau was also very inconsistent, particular in this storyline and lacking a bridge between being a criminal to being on the good side. These are not stories where you can play along as detective, for they are very heavy and you have characters being thrown at you, but not enough time to sort out their situations.
The Innocence of Father Brown is interesting enough to look into and rich enough to think about. Perhaps it is even worth rereading. If you are looking for a mystery where you are primarily thinking about the story, playing the detective, or simply something cozy, this is not for you. This would be like looking for comfort food and settling for Cottage cheese with nothing in it.
October 29, 2019
蟹邪屑械褔邪褌械谢褜薪褘械 写械褌械泻褌懈胁褘 鈥� 薪邪 屑芯泄 胁泻褍褋, 泻褍写邪 懈薪褌械褉械褋薪械械 褔褌芯 袛芯泄谢褟, 褔褌芯 袣褉懈褋褌懈. 胁芯-锌械褉胁褘褏, 效械褋褌械褉褌芯薪 胁械褋褜屑邪 懈蟹芯斜褉械褌邪褌械谢械薪 胁 褋褞卸械褌邪褏; 泻芯薪械褔薪芯, 懈褋泻褍褕褢薪薪褘泄 褋芯胁褉械屑械薪薪褘泄 褔懈褌邪褌械谢褜 谐写械-褌芯 褉邪蟹谐邪写邪械褌 褍斜懈泄褑褍 鈥� 薪芯 谐写械-褌芯 懈 薪械褌.
薪芯 胁邪卸薪械械 褌芯, 褔褌芯 褉邪褋褋泻邪蟹褘 锌褉芯 芯褌褑邪 袘褉邪褍薪邪 鈥� 褝褌芯 薪械 褌芯谢褜泻芯 写械褌械泻褌懈胁褘. 锌芯褔褌懈 胁 泻邪卸写芯屑 械褋褌褜 薪械泻邪褟 屑褘褋谢褜, 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎褋泻邪褟 懈谢懈 褋芯褑懈邪谢褜薪邪褟 懈写械褟, 褉邪褋泻褉褘褌懈械 薪械泻芯械谐芯 褍蟹薪邪胁邪械屑芯谐芯 褌懈锌邪卸邪. 懈褏 屑芯卸薪芯 褔懈褌邪褌褜 懈 泻邪泻 锌褉芯褋褌芯 薪芯胁械谢谢褘, 锌芯褔褌懈 锌褉懈褌褔懈.
写邪 懈 褋邪屑 芯褌械褑 袘褉邪褍薪 鈥� 薪械褌懈锌懈褔薪褘泄 写械褌械泻褌懈胁. 褋 芯写薪芯泄 褋褌芯褉芯薪褘, 芯薪 屑懈谢 懈 褌褉芯谐邪褌械谢械薪 胁 褋胁芯褢屑 邪蟹邪褉褌薪芯屑 卸械谢邪薪懈懈 褉邪蟹谐邪写褘胁邪褌褜 蟹邪谐邪写泻懈; 褋 写褉褍谐芯泄 卸械 鈥� 薪邪锌褉芯褔褜 谢懈褕褢薪 屑褋褌懈褌械谢褜薪芯褋褌懈, 卸械褋褌芯泻芯褋褌懈 懈 褋邪屑芯谢褞斜懈褟. 蟹邪褔邪褋褌褍褞 芯薪 芯褌锌褍褋泻邪械褌 锌褉械褋褌褍锌薪懈泻邪, 邪 械褖褢 效械褋褌械褉褌芯薪 薪械 褍锌褍褋泻邪械褌 胁芯蟹屑芯卸薪芯褋褌懈 锌褉懈 泻邪卸写芯屑 褍写芯斜薪芯屑 褋谢褍褔邪械 锌芯写褔械褉泻薪褍褌褜, 褔褌芯 芯褌械褑 袘褉邪褍薪 褋芯斜谢褞写邪械褌 褌邪泄薪褍 懈褋锌芯胁械写懈: 泻芯谐写邪 械屑褍 懈褋锌芯胁械写褍褞褌褋褟, 胁 褌械泻褋褌械 褉邪褋褋泻邪蟹邪 屑褘 薪懈泻芯谐写邪 薪械 褍蟹薪邪褢屑, 褔褌芯 锌褉懈 褝褌芯屑 谐芯胁芯褉懈谢芯褋褜.
胁 芯斜褖械屑, 泻邪卸械褌褋褟, 薪懈泻褌芯 薪械 锌懈褋邪谢 写械褌械泻褌懈胁褘 鈥� 卸邪薪褉 锌褉芯懈蟹胁械写械薪懈泄 锌褉芯 褌褢屑薪褘械 褋褌芯褉芯薪褘 褔械谢芯胁械褔械褋泻芯泄 薪邪褌褍褉褘, 锌褉械褋褌褍锌谢械薪懈褟 胁褋褟泻懈械 褌邪屑 懈 褍斜懈泄褋褌胁邪 鈥� 褌邪泻 褋胁械褌谢芯 懈 褔械谢芯胁械泻芯谢褞斜懈胁芯. 褏芯褌褟 锌褉芯 锌芯褔褌邪谢褜芯薪芯胁 屑薪械 锌芯泻邪蟹邪谢芯褋褜 薪邪褌褟薪褍褌芯!
薪芯 胁邪卸薪械械 褌芯, 褔褌芯 褉邪褋褋泻邪蟹褘 锌褉芯 芯褌褑邪 袘褉邪褍薪邪 鈥� 褝褌芯 薪械 褌芯谢褜泻芯 写械褌械泻褌懈胁褘. 锌芯褔褌懈 胁 泻邪卸写芯屑 械褋褌褜 薪械泻邪褟 屑褘褋谢褜, 褎懈谢芯褋芯褎褋泻邪褟 懈谢懈 褋芯褑懈邪谢褜薪邪褟 懈写械褟, 褉邪褋泻褉褘褌懈械 薪械泻芯械谐芯 褍蟹薪邪胁邪械屑芯谐芯 褌懈锌邪卸邪. 懈褏 屑芯卸薪芯 褔懈褌邪褌褜 懈 泻邪泻 锌褉芯褋褌芯 薪芯胁械谢谢褘, 锌芯褔褌懈 锌褉懈褌褔懈.
写邪 懈 褋邪屑 芯褌械褑 袘褉邪褍薪 鈥� 薪械褌懈锌懈褔薪褘泄 写械褌械泻褌懈胁. 褋 芯写薪芯泄 褋褌芯褉芯薪褘, 芯薪 屑懈谢 懈 褌褉芯谐邪褌械谢械薪 胁 褋胁芯褢屑 邪蟹邪褉褌薪芯屑 卸械谢邪薪懈懈 褉邪蟹谐邪写褘胁邪褌褜 蟹邪谐邪写泻懈; 褋 写褉褍谐芯泄 卸械 鈥� 薪邪锌褉芯褔褜 谢懈褕褢薪 屑褋褌懈褌械谢褜薪芯褋褌懈, 卸械褋褌芯泻芯褋褌懈 懈 褋邪屑芯谢褞斜懈褟. 蟹邪褔邪褋褌褍褞 芯薪 芯褌锌褍褋泻邪械褌 锌褉械褋褌褍锌薪懈泻邪, 邪 械褖褢 效械褋褌械褉褌芯薪 薪械 褍锌褍褋泻邪械褌 胁芯蟹屑芯卸薪芯褋褌懈 锌褉懈 泻邪卸写芯屑 褍写芯斜薪芯屑 褋谢褍褔邪械 锌芯写褔械褉泻薪褍褌褜, 褔褌芯 芯褌械褑 袘褉邪褍薪 褋芯斜谢褞写邪械褌 褌邪泄薪褍 懈褋锌芯胁械写懈: 泻芯谐写邪 械屑褍 懈褋锌芯胁械写褍褞褌褋褟, 胁 褌械泻褋褌械 褉邪褋褋泻邪蟹邪 屑褘 薪懈泻芯谐写邪 薪械 褍蟹薪邪褢屑, 褔褌芯 锌褉懈 褝褌芯屑 谐芯胁芯褉懈谢芯褋褜.
胁 芯斜褖械屑, 泻邪卸械褌褋褟, 薪懈泻褌芯 薪械 锌懈褋邪谢 写械褌械泻褌懈胁褘 鈥� 卸邪薪褉 锌褉芯懈蟹胁械写械薪懈泄 锌褉芯 褌褢屑薪褘械 褋褌芯褉芯薪褘 褔械谢芯胁械褔械褋泻芯泄 薪邪褌褍褉褘, 锌褉械褋褌褍锌谢械薪懈褟 胁褋褟泻懈械 褌邪屑 懈 褍斜懈泄褋褌胁邪 鈥� 褌邪泻 褋胁械褌谢芯 懈 褔械谢芯胁械泻芯谢褞斜懈胁芯. 褏芯褌褟 锌褉芯 锌芯褔褌邪谢褜芯薪芯胁 屑薪械 锌芯泻邪蟹邪谢芯褋褜 薪邪褌褟薪褍褌芯!
November 11, 2016
After all the reading I have been doing about the Detection Club, and the fact that I have had one volume or other of Father Brown on my to-read list since 2010, it is about time I met this unusual detective! He is Sherlock Holmes meets Miss Marple...and it works in a charming way. The mysteries lack shocking twists but more than make up for it with good fun and memorable characters. I really liked Hercule Flambeau. Couples are brought together, criminals experience justice (some by repenting, others by suicide), and everywhere he goes, Father Brown clears up confusion and provides common sense by simply being himself. I especially liked The Invisible Man, The Eye of Apollo and the Three Tools of Death though almost all the stories involve unique (and over the top) twists and set ups.
Highly recommended! Father Brown would make a great read out loud.
Highly recommended! Father Brown would make a great read out loud.
October 19, 2018
Bravo! A good fast read! now i am hooked. This was such a great, easy and creative book. i was hooked after the first page.
The characters were easy to fall in love with and follow, along with the story. the author made the mental visions so easy and vivid of the surroundings and the characters actions felt so real.
i would highly recommend this author and this book.
The characters were easy to fall in love with and follow, along with the story. the author made the mental visions so easy and vivid of the surroundings and the characters actions felt so real.
i would highly recommend this author and this book.
July 29, 2023
This particular volume includes the stories that made up the first of the five books of the Father Brown series, which have some connections between stories but are more or less independent of each other. Included in this volume are twelve stories with Father Brown. Some of the stories feature recurring characters, most notably the reformed thief Flambeau, but Father Brown is at the center of all of them.
July 30, 2007
Really awful Christian propaganda posing as murder mysteries. I was poised to like Chesterton, based solely on a few of his quotes I鈥檇 stumbled upon and Neil Gaiman鈥檚 good opinion. It鈥檚 true that the mysteries themselves are quite interesting. Unfortunately, Chesterton has a narrowness of view. In the first story of the collection, the clever police chief Valentin is the main character. I quite liked him, and looked forward to more interactions between him (an atheist) and Father Brown (a saintly priest). Unfortunately, Chesterton had no intention of writing a debate of any kind鈥攊n the very next story, Father Brown says,鈥漋alentin is an honest man, if being mad for an arguable cause is honesty. But did you never see in that cold, grey eye of his that he is mad! He would do anything, anything, to break what he calls the superstition of the Cross. He has fought for it and starved for it, and now he has murdered for it.鈥� And thence, Valentin kills himself, unable to deal with The Truth of Christianity. Father Brown鈥檚 incessant saintliness in all the stories is bad enough, but a few stories later he meets a "Hindoo." This conversation ensues,
鈥�"It's very beautiful," said the priest in a low, dreaming voice; "the colours are very beautiful. But it's the wrong shape."
"What for?" asked Flambeau, staring.
"For anything. It's the wrong shape in the abstract. Don't you ever feel that about Eastern art? The colours are intoxicatingly lovely; but the shapes are mean and bad-- deliberately mean and bad. I have seen wicked things in a Turkey carpet."
"Mon Dieu!" cried Flambeau, laughing.
"They are letters and symbols in a language I don't know; but I know they stand for evil words," went on the priest, his voice growing lower and lower. "The lines go wrong on purpose鈥攍ike serpents doubling to escape."
"What the devil are you talking about?" said the doctor with a loud laugh.
Flambeau spoke quietly to him in answer. "The Father sometimes gets this mystic's cloud on him," he said; "but I give you fair warning that I have never known him to have it except when there was some evil quite near."
"Oh, rats!" said the scientist.
"Why, look at it," cried Father Brown, holding out the crooked knife at arm's length, as if it were some glittering snake.
"Don't you see it is the wrong shape? Don't you see that it has no hearty and plain purpose? It does not point like a spear. It does not sweep like a scythe. It does not look like a weapon. It looks like an instrument of torture."鈥�
And if *that鈥檚* not bad enough, shortly thereafter the 鈥渟cientist鈥� is proven to be a murderer, and commits suicide, complete with a suicide note that says Father Brown and Christianity were right about everything all along.
The author pounds home the Anglo Christians=good, everyone else=bad message pretty hard. Not a story goes by without religion playing a major part, and there鈥檚 racism every single time a character of color pops up. (Note that the Asian man-servant has a 鈥渉acking鈥� and 鈥渄readful鈥� accent, and 鈥渉is slits of eyes almost faded from his face in one fat Chinese sneer.鈥� The other characters feel an instinctive revulsion against him, 鈥淢erton felt an almost bodily sickness at the sight of him; and he muttered to Gilder: "Surely you would take Miss Armstrong's word against his?"鈥� A better person might have leavened his character鈥檚 racism with an authorial tone that condemned or mocked their stance; instead, Chesterton clearly agrees.)
Dear Chesterton: I have better things to do with my life than read your bigotry.
鈥�"It's very beautiful," said the priest in a low, dreaming voice; "the colours are very beautiful. But it's the wrong shape."
"What for?" asked Flambeau, staring.
"For anything. It's the wrong shape in the abstract. Don't you ever feel that about Eastern art? The colours are intoxicatingly lovely; but the shapes are mean and bad-- deliberately mean and bad. I have seen wicked things in a Turkey carpet."
"Mon Dieu!" cried Flambeau, laughing.
"They are letters and symbols in a language I don't know; but I know they stand for evil words," went on the priest, his voice growing lower and lower. "The lines go wrong on purpose鈥攍ike serpents doubling to escape."
"What the devil are you talking about?" said the doctor with a loud laugh.
Flambeau spoke quietly to him in answer. "The Father sometimes gets this mystic's cloud on him," he said; "but I give you fair warning that I have never known him to have it except when there was some evil quite near."
"Oh, rats!" said the scientist.
"Why, look at it," cried Father Brown, holding out the crooked knife at arm's length, as if it were some glittering snake.
"Don't you see it is the wrong shape? Don't you see that it has no hearty and plain purpose? It does not point like a spear. It does not sweep like a scythe. It does not look like a weapon. It looks like an instrument of torture."鈥�
And if *that鈥檚* not bad enough, shortly thereafter the 鈥渟cientist鈥� is proven to be a murderer, and commits suicide, complete with a suicide note that says Father Brown and Christianity were right about everything all along.
The author pounds home the Anglo Christians=good, everyone else=bad message pretty hard. Not a story goes by without religion playing a major part, and there鈥檚 racism every single time a character of color pops up. (Note that the Asian man-servant has a 鈥渉acking鈥� and 鈥渄readful鈥� accent, and 鈥渉is slits of eyes almost faded from his face in one fat Chinese sneer.鈥� The other characters feel an instinctive revulsion against him, 鈥淢erton felt an almost bodily sickness at the sight of him; and he muttered to Gilder: "Surely you would take Miss Armstrong's word against his?"鈥� A better person might have leavened his character鈥檚 racism with an authorial tone that condemned or mocked their stance; instead, Chesterton clearly agrees.)
Dear Chesterton: I have better things to do with my life than read your bigotry.
February 5, 2024
"When will people understand that it is useless for a man to read his Bible unless he also reads everybody else's Bible?"
Is binge-reading what people did before binge-watching was a thing? Back in the days of 鈥攊n which the Father Brown stories do actually feature. The dozen stories in this collection are absolutely bingeable鈥攆ormulaic (comfortably familiar) but full of variety as well as atmosphere鈥攕ometimes to the detriment of the mystery. The settings are always excellently drawn and Father Brown (of course) always happens to be conveniently nearby. Chesterton is not always interested in the brilliance of a crime, but rather in what is reveals about the state od society or about human nature. Father Brown is as happy to save a soul as to unravel a mystery, and he's often accompanied by the pretty much useless Frenchman, Flambeau.
The Blue Cross - 4
The Secret Garden - 4
The Queer Feet - 4
The Flying Stars - 4
The Invisible Man - 4
The Honor of Israel Gow - 5
The Wrong Shape - 3
The Sins of Prince Saradine - 4
The Hammer of God - 3
The Eye of Apollo - 3
The Sign of the Broken Sword - 5
The Three Tools of Death - 4
May 12, 2022
I don't know whether it was because the stories were written in the early 1900s or because the author's prose was quite lyrical and flowery but this offering wasn't really my cup of 馃珫.
March 8, 2011
I have, at this point, gone through the first nine of this collection of twelve stories, and I am now fully convinced that Chesterton was not only a man of a brilliant mind, but of a very singular mind. His paradox is well known, his way of looking at things in an entirely novel light, his self-deprecation, his humor and wit and sheer genius are all legendary, but these stories are a glimpse into the workings of his mind when he decided to amuse himself with a train of thought, and are fascinating.
They are mysteries, a la Sherlock Holmes, but the protagonist is a small, unremarkable priest with a tremendous knowledge of the depths of human nature and an almost obtuse optimism that, combined with the sacred and private nature of confession, allows him not only to solve the crime but to save the criminal. As character studies, they are astonishing. I once commented of a Cormac McCarthy novel that I had met half of his characters. The same and often more is true of these: not only have I met these characters, these lovable cynics, tunnel-visioned atheists and abstruse agnostics, but I have been and am them more often than I would care to admit.
And the crimes? The crimes committed are fantastic, impossible; crimes that defy every imagination's attempts to reconcile them with reality save that singular mind of Chesterton's which can see in reality nothing but the fantastic and impossible, and thusly marries the two with uncanny ease. This has several times caused me to utter ejaculations with a sound, as Wodehouse puts it, of Chesterton falling on a sheet of tin due to the incurably shy simplicity that would reveal itself to none but the lovable Priest.
They are mysteries, a la Sherlock Holmes, but the protagonist is a small, unremarkable priest with a tremendous knowledge of the depths of human nature and an almost obtuse optimism that, combined with the sacred and private nature of confession, allows him not only to solve the crime but to save the criminal. As character studies, they are astonishing. I once commented of a Cormac McCarthy novel that I had met half of his characters. The same and often more is true of these: not only have I met these characters, these lovable cynics, tunnel-visioned atheists and abstruse agnostics, but I have been and am them more often than I would care to admit.
And the crimes? The crimes committed are fantastic, impossible; crimes that defy every imagination's attempts to reconcile them with reality save that singular mind of Chesterton's which can see in reality nothing but the fantastic and impossible, and thusly marries the two with uncanny ease. This has several times caused me to utter ejaculations with a sound, as Wodehouse puts it, of Chesterton falling on a sheet of tin due to the incurably shy simplicity that would reveal itself to none but the lovable Priest.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,548 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.