The Picture of Dorian Gray Comments & Questions I finished…
0 reactions
The Picture of Dorian Gray Comments & Questions
I finished this book yesterday (2 days ago?) and I absolutely loved it! The only other piece of Victorian-era literature that I had read up to this point had been Dracula. After reading that, I kind of assumed good endings weren't invented by the Victorian era (sorry, good book otherwise 🤷) but I was happy to be proven wrong.
Going into the book, I was keen to see what Wilde thought of as 'virtuous.' In the introduction, when Wilde wrote his miniature essay on aesthetitism (and more so when I was trying to understand that whole movement), I was a little confused. How can a novel written about moral degradation avoid the question of what it means and doesn't mean to be moral? Thankfully, if avoiding the question was Wilde's intention, he did a remarkably bad job. Later, I'll get into how I recontextualized his preface after finishing the book, but for now,
What does it mean to be moral? What does a life (devoid) of virtue entail?
We are told, but mostly indirectly. In fact, most of his portrait's (and soul's) degradation takes place off screen, in (the infamous) chapter 11. Here, we are told that years have passed, and he engaged in extensive debauchery. However all that we can say for certain about that period in his life was that he liked music and tapestry (the horror!). What we do learn about the context surrounding these years, with which I will mention Sibyl Vane's tragedy as the spark and immediate predecessor, is how he regards people. Vane was entertainment, other women were presumably toys, Alan Campbell was to be involved in his cover up, (I'm curious what other people think of his character? The scene where he tried to stand up to Dorian might be my favorite in the whole book), James Vane a piece of collateral, and Basil became a pest, then his warden. That all of these people, at one point, cared about him, and felt it worth sharing their life with his, was never a consideration. The hearts he broke, the lies he told, even the deaths attributed to him, were not his gravest failings;
\*\*Dorian was most corrupted as soon as he accepted that other people were expendable.\*\*
That is until we are presented with an equally large element of his downfall: his refusal to acknowledge himself and his actions. The internal conflict of Dorian asked if he could be accountable to himself. Both times when that question was posed, he decided he resolutely could not be. His struggle with Sibyl Vane's death was real, but in the end he refused to accept it as anything more than an unfortunate piece of art, not worth dwelling over. The second, and last, time he was confronted with this question was at the end of the book, when he pledged to be good. His first act of saintliness was rejecting Hetty Merton, and from then on he planned to live a more boring life wherein he doesn't play with those around him. Even here, we still see his refusal to accept the humanity of those he's hurt, like James, Basil, or even Hetty. If those were people who were hurt, it was, at least, not his fault (symbolically, Wilde pushes back on this; his portrait shows us, unequivocally, his responsibility for everything he's done, and continues its descent). This all culminates in his staunchest answer to that question with his ultimate refusal to accept the face of everything he's done by stabbing the portrait. From this action's consequence I think we are given the most profound lesson the story offers to Dorian:
\*\*he is inextricably and inescapably linked with that portrait Basil drew of him, including all of this sins it has come to represent. They are that which he cannot escape by denial.\*\*
But, but, what can we blame Lord Henry for?
Not very much.
Absolutely as an enabler, but by the end of the story, his disbelief in his ideas becomes pretty clear. "To take back my youth I would do anything in the world, except take exercise, get up early, or be respectable." Evidently, Henry never takes himself (or any of his ideas) much too seriously, and Dorian's problem is that he takes him quite seriously. (I also read one article that mentioned how clearly upset Henry was about his divorce. I didn't pick up on that, but that would also contradict his aforementioned views on women and affection). Though philosophically justified by Henry, Dorian is markedly alone in how far he allowed his debauchery to take him, and how much he accepted statements about vice and vanity.
So when Wilde wrote his preface about 'art for art's sake,' I hypothesize that it was more about his attempt to divorce himself from the actions of the characters, rather than rejecting any of the beliefs which may have leaked into the story. It's all just too thematically consistent for that to make any sense to me.
#entertainment
source
I finished this book yesterday (2 days ago?) and I absolutely loved it! The only other piece of Victorian-era literature that I had read up to this point had been Dracula. After reading that, I kind of assumed good endings weren't invented by the Victorian era (sorry, good book otherwise 🤷) but I was happy to be proven wrong.
Going into the book, I was keen to see what Wilde thought of as 'virtuous.' In the introduction, when Wilde wrote his miniature essay on aesthetitism (and more so when I was trying to understand that whole movement), I was a little confused. How can a novel written about moral degradation avoid the question of what it means and doesn't mean to be moral? Thankfully, if avoiding the question was Wilde's intention, he did a remarkably bad job. Later, I'll get into how I recontextualized his preface after finishing the book, but for now,
What does it mean to be moral? What does a life (devoid) of virtue entail?
We are told, but mostly indirectly. In fact, most of his portrait's (and soul's) degradation takes place off screen, in (the infamous) chapter 11. Here, we are told that years have passed, and he engaged in extensive debauchery. However all that we can say for certain about that period in his life was that he liked music and tapestry (the horror!). What we do learn about the context surrounding these years, with which I will mention Sibyl Vane's tragedy as the spark and immediate predecessor, is how he regards people. Vane was entertainment, other women were presumably toys, Alan Campbell was to be involved in his cover up, (I'm curious what other people think of his character? The scene where he tried to stand up to Dorian might be my favorite in the whole book), James Vane a piece of collateral, and Basil became a pest, then his warden. That all of these people, at one point, cared about him, and felt it worth sharing their life with his, was never a consideration. The hearts he broke, the lies he told, even the deaths attributed to him, were not his gravest failings;
\*\*Dorian was most corrupted as soon as he accepted that other people were expendable.\*\*
That is until we are presented with an equally large element of his downfall: his refusal to acknowledge himself and his actions. The internal conflict of Dorian asked if he could be accountable to himself. Both times when that question was posed, he decided he resolutely could not be. His struggle with Sibyl Vane's death was real, but in the end he refused to accept it as anything more than an unfortunate piece of art, not worth dwelling over. The second, and last, time he was confronted with this question was at the end of the book, when he pledged to be good. His first act of saintliness was rejecting Hetty Merton, and from then on he planned to live a more boring life wherein he doesn't play with those around him. Even here, we still see his refusal to accept the humanity of those he's hurt, like James, Basil, or even Hetty. If those were people who were hurt, it was, at least, not his fault (symbolically, Wilde pushes back on this; his portrait shows us, unequivocally, his responsibility for everything he's done, and continues its descent). This all culminates in his staunchest answer to that question with his ultimate refusal to accept the face of everything he's done by stabbing the portrait. From this action's consequence I think we are given the most profound lesson the story offers to Dorian:
\*\*he is inextricably and inescapably linked with that portrait Basil drew of him, including all of this sins it has come to represent. They are that which he cannot escape by denial.\*\*
But, but, what can we blame Lord Henry for?
Not very much.
Absolutely as an enabler, but by the end of the story, his disbelief in his ideas becomes pretty clear. "To take back my youth I would do anything in the world, except take exercise, get up early, or be respectable." Evidently, Henry never takes himself (or any of his ideas) much too seriously, and Dorian's problem is that he takes him quite seriously. (I also read one article that mentioned how clearly upset Henry was about his divorce. I didn't pick up on that, but that would also contradict his aforementioned views on women and affection). Though philosophically justified by Henry, Dorian is markedly alone in how far he allowed his debauchery to take him, and how much he accepted statements about vice and vanity.
So when Wilde wrote his preface about 'art for art's sake,' I hypothesize that it was more about his attempt to divorce himself from the actions of the characters, rather than rejecting any of the beliefs which may have leaked into the story. It's all just too thematically consistent for that to make any sense to me.
#entertainment
source
| 3,000 mlx | |
| 3 | |
| 0 |