<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#400810">
<div><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875);
-webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469);
-webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); ">No
dia 06/04/2013, às 00:36, Ross Arlen Tieken <<a
href="mailto:ross.a.tieken@gmail.com">ross.a.tieken@gmail.com</a>>
escreveu:</span><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>When I spoke of the Catholic modernists, I should have been
more precise. The modernists all have weird spiritual
proclivities. Eliot wasn't technically a Catholic either. I
should have clarified what I meant: They all have a mystical
bent, believe in strong authority, and are inspired by myth,
myths, and mythic worldviews, and the middle ages. This leads to
the accusation of fascism (correct in Pound's case, dubious in
Eliot and Tate's, completely inappropriate in the case of
Tolkien and Lewis) and to the strong stroke of nationalism and
ethnic myth-making in these authors. Wolfe definitely shares
these preoccupations. See <a
href="http://www.thenightland.co.uk/MYWEB/wolfemountains.html">http://www.thenightland.co.uk/MYWEB/wolfemountains.html</a>;
an essay on the importance of Tolkien which begins with the
sentence "There is one very real sense in which the Dark Ages
were the brightest of times, and it is this: that they were
times of defined and definite duties and freedoms." In this, he
echoes a Chestertonian defense of the Middle Ages and Catholic
civilization. I also see in Wolfe an implicit defense of
Neo-Feudalism and a strongly relgion-centric worldview.
<div>Pound was a bad fascist; he didn't understand that it
depended upon the same assumptions that modernity did, and
paid the price for it--he failed to see the 'real' problem on
which his contemporaries easily picked up; not just any mythos
is good enough, there has to be real sticking power and it has
to based in some kind of transcendent truth/experience and
allow also for the intuitive human good. Fascism of course
fails utterly at providing this, but Tolkien & Eliot's
strong ethnic (non-racial) Traditionalism and mystical
monarchism worked fine.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Interesting. Do you analyze Evola as well?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div> This is what I'm writing on for my dissertation, and I
thought about including Wolfe although he's a little out of
the time period. It's coming back though, these mystical
traditional neo-feudal myth-making monarchist distributist
Catholic artists. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On Dan'l Danehy-Oakes note: Distributism is the Catholic
economic theory; Marxism's assumptions about "the way stuff
works" are absolutely not compatible with the Catholic vision
of humanity--nor is fascism, or hyper-capitalism for that
matter. Both depend on a pseudo-scientific reading of
humans--Catholics sort of aren't up for that.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Precisely (whether one admits to the pseudo or not, which I do
of course). </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div> Distributism (championed by Chesterton and Belloc, later
by Eliot and the Southern Agrarians in America) fulfills the
requirements of Catholic anthropology while seeking to correct
the culture-killing nature of transnational corporate
capitalism. Look it up, tell me what you think. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also, Wolfe is probably aware of Distributism and is a
Catholic in good standing with the Church. <a
href="http://ironicalcoincidings.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/inheriting-tolkien-pt-2-gene-wolfe/">http://ironicalcoincidings.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/inheriting-tolkien-pt-2-gene-wolfe/</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thank you for the link. </div>
</body>
</html>