Dublin: One City, One Book

[Niamh]

Every April for the last five years Dublin has selected one Irish book and encouraged the population to read that book over the month. The City goes a bit nuts and hangs banners and flags each year displaying the years choice for all to see.
The first ever book selected in 2006 was At Swim two Birds by Flann O' Brien. Then in 2007 it was A Long Long Way by Sebastian Barry. 2008 was Gullivers Travels by Jonathan Swift and Last year it was Dracula by Bram Stoker. This years choice, probably encouraged by the movie adaptation last year is A Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde.
So seeing as its April, I think it would be great to get into the spirit of Dublin: One city, One Book and get a reading group going.
So who is up for reading this years book and getting into a discussion? :D

[LitNetIsGreat]

Ha, ha - Dublin (and the whole of Ireland) is such a grand place - full of most noble and wise people, delightful choice and idea. :)

[Dark Muse]

Sounds like it could be a fun idea, haha to bad it is a month too soon for me. I acutally had planed to start reading Dorian Gray in May.

[Niamh]

can you not bring the reading forward! :D

[Dark Muse]

I do not think I can fit it in, my reading schedule for April is already booked.

[dfloyd]

Joyce's classic set of short stories, Dubliners. This would seem to me to be choice #1.

[Quark]

I might post once or twice, but I'm spread a little thin right now.


Joyce's classic set of short stories, Dubliners. This would seem to me to be choice #1.

That might be too on the nose.

[Scheherazade]

I have always wanted to read The Third Policeman.

[Niamh]

the third policeman is a fantastic novel!

The Dubliners might pop up another year. I however think there are better novels and stories to have come out of this city than Dubliners.

So do i have any takers in reading A Picture of Dorian Gray?

[Scheherazade]

As much as I like Dorian, I don't think I am in the mood to read again.

[LitNetIsGreat]

the third policeman is a fantastic novel!

The Dubliners might pop up another year. I however think there are better novels and stories to have come out of this city than Dubliners.

So do i have any takers in reading A Picture of Dorian Gray?

Of course, it goes without saying. I would be afraid of taking over and ranting, but I promise to be on best behaviour and sit back a little like a good boy. :hat:

Just as long as everybody loves it and praises Wilde constantly I'm sure that they'll be no need for mass murder of any kind...:reddevil:

(Seriously though I won't rant.)

Come on people, I'm immensely interested in hearing views on the particulars of this work - throw your other books out of the window and read this one. :)

[Niamh]

I'll hold you to that one Neely! :p

Anyone else wanting to join?

[Virgil]

That sounds great and I would join if I didn't have som many complications going on in my life right now. Some other time Niamh.

[Niamh]

well there will be another book next year...

[LitNetIsGreat]

well there will be another book next year...

Don't give up so easily. The other book next year will not be by a certain individual...

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_03/OscarWildeREX_228x319.jpg

"Come on Lit Netters, read my work of genius."

[Niamh]

hahaha! Thats is true. I'm not even a fan of Wilde, as most people on this forum know, but it thought it would be a nice idea to get an international chat going for something that is becoming part of my cities tradition! :) there is still the rest of the month to go so hopefully a couple of others will join in. Kilted Exile said he would, so thats definitely three of us! :p

[Rores28]

I might be down. Upon readin this thread I went to the book store last night and read through the first couple pages and really enjoyed it. I am extremely cheap, however, and would need to now buy the book, (I dont buy books from the library because I have the compulsive need to write in them). I'm also reading some other things at the moment, but the first few pages definitely got my attention and I'm going to try to read this in the next three weeks.

[caspian]

Count me in. I'll try to read it. It's in my list any way. Why not now? I just finished Steinbeck. so can start Dorian Gray.
I'm trying to make up for March reading-Steppenwolf-I'm reading it online, since I'm already late, i can strech it out one more month. I've April -christie reading for my lunch break. I'm too chicken to read detectives before bedtime, so Dorian Gray'll be my bed time book. And there's new Dickens book club I don't want miss out. I guess I'm done for April.:D



That sounds great and I would join if I didn't have som many complications going on in my life right now. Some other time Niamh.
Sorry, to hear that, Virgil. I hope, everything in you life will be fine soon.

[Niamh]

that makes five of us! Great! :D I'll have to pick up the book from work tomorrow. :nod:

[LitNetIsGreat]

Excellent, see I told you there is always the chance of some fine fellows poping up and they have done.


I might be down. Upon readin this thread I went to the book store last night and read through the first couple pages and really enjoyed it. I am extremely cheap, however, and would need to now buy the book, (I dont buy books from the library because I have the compulsive need to write in them). I'm also reading some other things at the moment, but the first few pages definitely got my attention and I'm going to try to read this in the next three weeks.

That's fantastic. It's great to know that from reading this thread someone has purposely gone out and looked for the book.

So get reading now, come on, chop chop. :)

From chapter 2:

But the bravest man amongst us is afraid of himself.
The mutilation of the savage has its tragic survival in the
self-denial that mars our lives. We are punished for our refusals.
Every impulse that we strive to strangle broods in the mind
and poisons us. The body sins once, and has done with its sin,
for action is a mode of purification. Nothing remains then
but the recollection of a pleasure, or the luxury of a regret.
The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.
Resist it, and your soul grows sick with longing for the things
it has forbidden to itself, with desire for what its monstrous
laws have made monstrous and unlawful. It has been said
that the great events of the world take place in the brain.
It is in the brain, and the brain only, that the great sins
of the world take place also. You, Mr. Gray, you yourself,
with your rose-red youth and your rose-white boyhood, you have had
passions that have made you afraid, thoughts that have fined you
with terror, day-dreams and sleeping dreams whose mere memory might
stain your cheek with shame--"
...

Music had stirred him like that. Music had troubled him many times.
But music was not articulate. It was not a new world, but rather
another chaos, that it created in us. Words! Mere words!
How terrible they were! How clear, and vivid, and cruel! One could
not escape from them. And yet what a subtle magic there was in them!
They seemed to be able to give a plastic form to formless things,
and to have a music of their own as sweet as that of viol or of lute.
Mere words! Was there anything so real as words?

:thumbsup:

[Rores28]

Well I'm currently 40 pages in and really enjoying the book. As I mentioned earlier I compulsively mark up books when I find a particularly striking passage The problem is this book is so replete with witty aphorisms that my pages are now swimming in blue ink.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Well I'm currently 40 pages in and really enjoying the book. As I mentioned earlier I compulsively mark up books when I find a particularly striking passage The problem is this book is so replete with witty aphorisms that my pages are now swimming in blue ink.

:yesnod: Ha, ha yes - you'll be covering the whole book! Wilde used to write in his books in the same manner.

Glad you are enjoying it.

[Niamh]

I still have to pick up the book. they have the Dublin: One City, One Book edition in work. seems fitting! :)

[Niamh]

I'm currently on chapter two. Henrys speachs makes me think of some of the stuff i've read on here. :p
Anyway. onwards and onwards...

[LitNetIsGreat]

Ha, I hope you are not implying that half the things I say come from Wilde...surely it is more like 50% of things...

I love chapter two, it's probably my favourite chapter of the book actually, there's so much in there - there's so much in all of it though of course, delicious, how I envy the first time reader of this book, though it still yields things after 7 or 8 reads or beyond.

[Niamh]

Ha, I hope you are not implying that half the things I say come from Wilde...surely it is more like 50% of things...


Isnt half and 50% not the same :p

By here i ment here on litnet. :p

[LitNetIsGreat]

Have we still got at least five wonderful people reading this wonderful book?

Maybe we could talk a little about the preface tomorrow if so. We don't have to wait until everyone has finished the book after all do we?

The preface was written in response to critics who, well, criticised the first edition of Dorian Gray pretty harshly, mostly on moral grounds. The first edition of Dorian Gray was a little shorter, by six chapters I think, and appeared in Lippincott's magazine in 1890. The full version of Dorian Gray which is now widely read, appeared in 1891 and as well as sporting the extra chapters and the preface, included a few "toned down" wordings which the publishers, Ward, Lock & Co, forced Wilde to change. The overwhelming consensus however is that the 1891 edition is vastly superior to its shorter original, both because of the extra chapters and because of the subtle revisions.

The preface was also published separately in Frank Harris's journal Fortnightly Review (Frank Harris was a good friend of Oscar Wilde's ) which had the duel affect of hitting back at the critics immediately and advertising the forth coming revision of the book you are reading today. It also featured as a sort of platform for Wilde's aesthetic views on art and life as well.

The preface to Dorian Gray is of course a wonderful series of epigrams which really overwhelm the reader and critic I feel, not only with sheer brilliance but in the manner in which they are penned. The preface even makes an appearance in the Norton Anthology of Literature and Criticism, which is I’m pretty certain the only entry that made it in by Wilde (I think so at least, I can’t be bothered to move two metres to check, if it is not so I’ll say so tomorrow with an edit, possibly one of his essays made it in too, I don’t know?)

Anyway, do you lot want to discuss the preface tomorrow or in the next few days or so a little? I can post it up and spill a few thoughts if necessary?

Are you still reading the book and enjoying it at least? At least please don't leave me here all alone with this wonderful book talking to nothing but my Michelangelo frescos while going slowly insane...:smilewinkgrin:

[Niamh]

I got the understanding of why he wrote the preface, but i still cant help but feel that it is quite moralistic. Then again if the writer insisted that is not, then who are we to argue?

(yes it currently looks like its just you and me for now!)

I'm still reading it... its just taking me a bit longer than usual to read. I do like Henrys character so far.

[Nightshade]

I love wilde and I am so p-ed off I need a good book fix will probably read it tomoorow today I am attacking the house with a tooth brush (literally)!

[Kafka's Crow]

I started it a while back and am about to finish it. I always thought that this was a thoroughly, thoroughly 'London book' not a Dublin book. I was, actually, in Grosvenor Square the other day wondering whether Dorian had walked in those streets on his way back from late-night debaucheries.

[Niamh]

Dublin: one city one book is about the writers who were born or lived in the city. Wilde was born here in Dublin city hence the selection of his work.

[Quark]

I got the understanding of why he wrote the preface, but i still cant help but feel that it is quite moralistic.

Below are spoilers:

Yeah, it's quite moralistic. It's almost parable-like. The story gradually builds up its heroes dissolute lifestyle, and then slowly unravels him. Often it feels like the story is just about refuting Dorian and his ilk. Yet it gets much more complicated than that when we consider the preface and Wilde's own choices. Either this is a complete refutation of everything that Wilde himself believed and lived, or something else is going on. Some have argued that the story is about the excesses of Dorian, rather than his actual beliefs--that Dorian overreaches. This reading makes the milder epicurean Henry the hero. But, it's difficult to glorify him too much in the novel. After all, his wife eventually leaves him. In fact, it seems like everyone leaves him. In the end, he may be likable, but he's no hero. So if Dorian's excesses lead to death and Henry's moderation leads to isolation, then what? It's hard to pin down a moral to the story--even though it reads like it should have a moral. In that sense, it's moralistic, but it doesn't really have a moral.

[Niamh]

Right so i'm just at the part where Dorian has made Henry promise that he and Basil with attend the theatre with him the following evening to see Sybil. There have been many time up until this point in the book where i couldnt help but chuckle at Wildes writing and thoughts projected through Henry. He really does use him as a tool to express his opinions of the British aristocracy and the stuck up self centred upper and middle class ideals.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yes there is much of Wilde in Lord Henry at times. I am glad you are enjoying it, more is to come - enjoy. I have been meaning to post about morality and the preface following on from Quark etc, but have been busy with a few family issues and stuff. I will post at a later stage. No rush all round, just enjoy the book.

[Rores28]

I just finished the chapter where the three of them go to see Sibyl.

Henry's endless paradox's are both endlessly hilarious and endlessly frustrating.

One quote that really hit home with me (and I dont have the book by me so I may butcher this)
"People who seek to exhaust a subject only succeed in exhausting their audience"

I often feel this thought running through my girlfriend's head as I delve into excruciating detail over a subject (typically of a fairly simple variety) to make sure that she knows exactly what I mean. Its like I can't stand there to be any sort of knowledge or experience gap when I explain something to her, and as in the paradox I actually produce the opposite of my intended effect.

[caspian]

I got CD Book first, so listened to 1st disc halfway while i was busy in the kitchen. Easy listening. I stopped where Dorian enters the picture. Now I have book too.It shouldn't take me long to finish it.
Thank you for preface information. That's helpful. I've already used a quote from the preface in another topic.

"There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all."
He didn't live to see Henry Miller's prose and Jack Kerouac's "On the road" . If he did. He would agree that "There're immoral well written books.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I don’t have long (I’m going out dining at the finest restaurant my money can’t buy and I have even been working, ish) but I promised to throw a few thoughts out there.

Firstly, I’m glad that people are reading and enjoying this, some of them for the first time, that’s great, keep sharing your thoughts, but don’t feel rushed to read it, I was only being impatient - that is my manner sometimes.

In terms of morality, which is a very interesting and detailed subject, Quark's right, it might seem moralistic in tone but I would strongly argue that there is no overall moral, or at least, that the moral is entirely subservient to the work itself or an accidental product – as it should be. I first brought up morality I think, in talking about his wonderful preface which he purposefully wrote intending to hit back at critics who criticised it, amongst other things, for immorality, namely of its allusions to homosexuality and its at times, effeminate prose style (effeminate to Victorian readers that is). Take even the first two paragraphs:


The studio was filled with the rich odour of roses, and when the light summer wind stirred amidst the trees of the garden, there came through the open door the heavy scent of the lilac, or the more delicate perfume of the pink-flowering thorn.

From the corner of the divan of Persian saddle-bags on which he was lying, smoking, as was his custom, innumerable cigarettes, Lord Henry Wotton could just catch the gleam of the honey-sweet and honey-coloured blossoms of a laburnum, whose tremulous branches seemed hardly able to bear the burden of a beauty so flamelike as theirs; and now and then the fantastic shadows of birds in flight flitted across the long tussore-silk curtains that were stretched in front of the huge window, producing a kind of momentary Japanese effect, and making him think of those pallid, jade-faced painters of Tokyo who, through the medium of an art that is necessarily immobile, seek to convey the sense of swiftness and motion.

To many stern contemporary Victorians, the sensuality and sort of decadent feel of this prose would have been a bit of a tut tut to say the least. Today we would merely say this is wonderful, beautiful prose, but of course, put this together with the strong allusions to homosexuality or the suggested eroticism and we have the reason why some critics, most critics in fact, considered this work “immoral” in nature. Also note the interest in Japanese art which was popular at the time, particularly with aesthetes/decadents etc. To quote some remarks:



The puzzle is that a young man of decent parts, [Oscar Wilde] who enjoyed (when he was at Oxford) the opportunity of associating with gentlemen, should put his name (such as it is) to so stupid and vulgar a piece of work. Let nobody read it in the hope of finding witty paradox or racy wickedness.
From the St James’s Gazette, June 1890.


It is a tale spawned from the leprous literature of the French Decadents – a poisonous book, the atmosphere of which is heavy with mephitic odours of moral and spiritual putrefaction – a gloating study of the mental and physical corruption of a fresh, fair and golden youth, which might be horrible and fascinating but for its effeminate frivolity, its studied insincerity, its theatrical cynicism, its tawdry mysticism, its flippant philosophisings, and the contaminating vulgarity.
From the Daily Chronicle.


So Wilde hits back with his preface, and in particular the line quoted by the good fellow above,
"There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all" also perhaps of importance here from the preface:



The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium.

Whether or not Dorian is breaking codes of morality (by Victorian standards) it is of no interest to the artist, it merely adds another colour to his “imperfect” palette.


No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.

Here once again with Wilde he places creativity above realism in literature or even that of science or anything fact based. Art is above everything else.


Vice and virtue are to the artist materials for an art.

Again, whether Dorian or anybody else is involved in “vice” it is of little interest to the artist, it is just another colour, because:


The artist can express everything.

*Potential Spoilers*
(There is a section further down completely free from potential spoiling.)





In terms of the actual moral or lack of the moral within the story, there is an interesting letter from Wilde to Arthur Conan Doyle (Doyle had published his second Sherlock Holmes story“The Sign of Four” in the same magazine ) on the matter, which I’ll quote in part:


I do aim at making a work of art, and I am really delighted that you think my treatment subtle and artistically good. The newspapers seem to me to be written by the prurient for the Philistine. I cannot understand how they can treat Dorian Gray as immoral. My difficultly was to keep the inherent moral subordinate to the artistic and dramatic effect, and it still seems to me that the moral is too obvious. Wilde April 1891.


Wilde writes in response to Doyle’s defence of Dorian Gray. It is interesting that Wilde says that the “moral is too obvious” however, it is very important to keep in mind that it would seem that Doyle was entirely misreading the moral within Dorian Gray and that Wilde was merely going along with Doyle a little here or speaking at cross purposes. I suspected, independently of one of my tutors, who thought the same that Doyle read the moral in terms laid out by Quark, namely that Dorian is punished due to his immoral behaviour. As already detailed above it is all but unthinkable that Wilde would go along with this as the moral of the story. No, if there is a moral within the story it has to do, for me, with Dorian polluting art (life) with that of crime, “all crime is vulgar” says Lord Henry, or with not following the ideal aesthetic to the full. It is after all, only when Dorian tries to have a conscience that he is ultimately punished. What is certain is that Wilde intended the portrait to be a symbolic representation of Dorian’s conscience, so that would at least tally with that particular reading, though overall I prefer no moral, despite of what Wilde claims here.

*Potential spoilers end*






Also of interest within the preface, well one more thing that I want to pull out, is in Wilde’s last line:


All art is quite useless.


I believe that this isn’t originally Wilde’s, I think it comes from Gautier first, but that is of little importance. What Wilde means here is not literally that art is useless, heaven forbid, :eek6: quite the opposite. The importance of art to Wilde should never be underestimated (I’m writing a dissertation on part of this aspect) what Wilde is referring to is that, like in his preface, “It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.” Art in itself merely causes the reflection. I’ll quote from one of Wilde’s letters on the matter:


My dear Sir, Art is useless because its aim is simply to create a mood. It is not meant to instruct, or to influence action in any way. It is superbly sterile, and the note of its pleasure is sterility. [...]
A work of art is useless as a flower is useless. A flower blossoms for its own joy. We gain a moment of joy by looking at it. That is all that is to be said about our relations to flowers. Of course man may sell the flower, and so make it useful to him, but his has nothing to do with the flower. April 1891.

The letter in question is to a R. Clegg who is an unidentified person. He was obviously asking Wilde what he meant by the phrase “All art is useless”.


Anyway, to lunch...keep reading, chop, chop. :cheers2:

[Quark]

No, if there is a moral within the story it has to do, for me, with Dorian polluting art (life) with that of crime, “all crime is vulgar” says Lord Henry, or with not following the ideal aesthetic to the full. It is after all, only when Dorian tries to have a conscience that he is ultimately punished. What is certain is that Wilde intended the portrait to be a symbolic representation of Dorian’s conscience, so that would at least tally with that particular reading, though overall I prefer no moral, despite of what Wilde claims here.

Again, Beware of Spoilers!

It's interesting that you see art and life as synonymous in this novel. I had always taken Lord Henry's point about crime to show that those two terms are opposites. Henry says something like (I don't have the novel in front of me) crime is the ugly art of the impoverished or the lower class. I had taken that to mean that the social and material exigencies of life--which the poor are the most subject to--are what ruins art. In that sense, it's essentially life which hurts art.

Spoilers Finished!

Anyway, I'm curious what people think of the violence in this book. The death by jewel-encrustation is a little funny, but there are some other rather gruesome images in the work. I'm thinking of something particularly graphic toward the end.

[LitNetIsGreat]

*Potential Spoilers*

Yes I very much see life and art as synonymous in the novel, and in fact, throughout Wilde’s life and work. Take for example Lord Henry’s insistence of living life like an art form, this is for me part of what Dorian tries to do during the course of his life and essentially comes through Wilde from the likes of Pater – “to burn always with this hard, gem-like flame, to maintain this ecstasy, is success in life” as echoed in Wilde’s work all over in the “drifting with every passion” which pops up frequently. This is a sense of what Dorian tries to do from Lord Henry’s insistence, to “be always searching for new sensations” and it is with that which he and Wilde push life as the ultimate art form. Take this from one of Wilde’s early lectures:

Love art for its own sake, and then all things that you need will be added to you.

This devotion to beauty and to the creation of beautiful things is the test of all great civilized nations. Philosophy may teach us to bear with equanimity the misfortunes of our neighbours, and science resolve the moral sense into a secretion of sugar, but art is what makes the life of each citizen a sacrament and not a speculation, art is what makes the life of the whole race immortal.

It is more than just valuing art highly, it is as if he is using art as the ultimate guide to life, as if the distinction between what is art and life is completely blurred (think of the obvious relationship between Dorian and his portrait, literally they are one and the same.) It is the art of living, art and life as synonymous together.

Yes Lord Henry talks of crime being an art form, but it is a low art form and as such probably only fit for the lower classes who can do no better, which is why he can’t believe Dorian would commit crime; it is beneath him.

(Don’t think however that Wilde/Lord Henry is particularly “elitist” in the sense which he speaks of the “lower orders” he, Wilde, was much more open minded about blurring the distinction between social classes than the vast majority of Victorian society, he doesn’t mean to speak derogatory to anyone, he is just being matter of fact.)

[caspian]

Is anyone else annoyed by Lord Henry's views on women and marriage? and how easily he convinces Dorian to kill his conscience. isn't he evil?
I was beginning to feel bored with male friendship. But things turned interesting with Sybil's appearance.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Is anyone else annoyed by Lord Henry's views on women and marriage? and how easily he convinces Dorian to kill his conscience. isn't he evil?
I was beginning to feel bored with male friendship. But things turned interesting with Sybil's appearance.

Ha ha, no I am quite amused by Lord Henry's views on women and marriage, though I can see how others might be annoyed. Is Lord Henry evil? Do you think so?

I think that Dorian is very much under Lord Henry's spell, so I'm not surprised how Dorian is able to kill his conscience relatively easily.

[JuniperWoolf]

Neely's enthusiasm is infectious. I'll be picking up a copy of Dorian Gray tomorrow (from either the library or a friend) and will start re-reading it immediately (only the second time for me).

[Niamh]

Wow neely and Quark! Amazing! I've had to take a little hiatus from the book (moving + college assignments!) I'll be back to it next week to give my 2 cents worth!
But i will say this... I find Dorians character flat and irritating. I think Henry is fantastic!

[caspian]

Below are spoilers:

Yeah, it's quite moralistic. It's almost parable-like. The story gradually builds up its heroes dissolute lifestyle, and then slowly unravels him. Often it feels like the story is just about refuting Dorian and his ilk. Yet it gets much more complicated than that when we consider the preface and Wilde's own choices. Either this is a complete refutation of everything that Wilde himself believed and lived, or something else is going on. Some have argued that the story is about the excesses of Dorian, rather than his actual beliefs--that Dorian overreaches. This reading makes the milder epicurean Henry the hero. But, it's difficult to glorify him too much in the novel. After all, his wife eventually leaves him. In fact, it seems like everyone leaves him. In the end, he may be likable, but he's no hero. So if Dorian's excesses lead to death and Henry's moderation leads to isolation, then what? It's hard to pin down a moral to the story--even though it reads like it should have a moral. In that sense, it's moralistic, but it doesn't really have a moral.

Yes, it's complicating if you consider Wilde himself said the main characters were reflections of himself: "Basil Hallward is what I think I am: Lord Henry is what the world thinks me: Dorian is what I would like to be—in other ages, perhaps"
I wonder if Wilde relied on strong Faustian theme of the book saying "moral is too obvious"
Lord Henry plays evil role. After all his cynical, hedonistic wordview & his French poisonous book destroys Dorian.
Another thing, we don't learn much about Dorian's sins. we're aware there were drugs, prostitutes, murder crime. Wilde made interesting statement : "Each man sees his own sin in Dorian Gray. What Dorian Gray's sins are no one knows. He who finds them has brought them."
Any ideas for Dorian's possible sins? :confused5:

[Quark]

It's been a while since I've looked in on this thread. Sorry about that. I was trying to get another thread going on Our Mutual Friend, and things got busy. I wasn't even sure the discussion was still going until caspian just posted.


Yes I very much see life and art as synonymous in the novel, and in fact, throughout Wilde’s life and work. Take for example Lord Henry’s insistence of living life like an art form, this is for me part of what Dorian tries to do during the course of his life and essentially comes through Wilde from the likes of Pater

That's certainly the ideal for Wilde, but the text seems to show how distant that ideal is. One can't combine art and life successfully in The Picture of Dorian Gray. If they could, you would think Lord Henry or Dorian would have done it. Unfortunately, the ugly and mundane of everyday life infringes on Dorian. I think this is a problem that Wilde explores in "The Soul of Man Under Socialism." It's been a while since I read that, but I remember Wilde pointing out how human necessities and the carking cares of life prevent certain segments of the population from achieving the aesthete lifestyle. I wonder whether we're getting some of that argument infused into The Picture of Dorian Gray.


Wilde made interesting statement : "Each man sees his own sin in Dorian Gray. What Dorian Gray's sins are no one knows. He who finds them has brought them."
Any ideas for Dorian's possible sins? :confused5:

Here Be Spoilers

Well, he "ruins" some women, crushes a tortoise, stabs someone, takes drugs, gets a friend hopelessly in debt. Those are some sins that come to mind. Wilde does leave room for the imagination to invent, though. There could be so much more Dorian is doing--at least, that's what Wilde wants us to think.

[LitNetIsGreat]

*Potential spoilers throughout* I suppose.



That's certainly the ideal for Wilde, but the text seems to show how distant that ideal is. One can't combine art and life successfully in The Picture of Dorian Gray. If they could, you would think Lord Henry or Dorian would have done it. Unfortunately, the ugly and mundane of everyday life infringes on Dorian. I think this is a problem that Wilde explores in "The Soul of Man Under Socialism." It's been a while since I read that, but I remember Wilde pointing out how human necessities and the carking cares of life prevent certain segments of the population from achieving the aesthete lifestyle. I wonder whether we're getting some of that argument infused into The Picture of Dorian Gray.

Yes that’s certainly an interesting point. Wilde failed to combine art and life too, as did Dorian. (I’m talking about living life as the ultimate form of art, living through passion, experience, as per Pater and Lord Henry’s call for a sort of new ideal based on the Greek model - which Wilde was so fond of.) I don’t think that Dorian necessary fails due to the mundane of everyday life, I think he fails because he begins to develop a conscious and perhaps it is impossible to live this way without combining life with crime, but it is certainly a possibility none-the-less. It’s quite a large area of thinking.

Yes “The Soul of Man Under Socialism” deals with such issues indeed, though it could really be seen as a utopian text whereby this particular breed of socialism/communism is seen as a potential towards true expressive individualism. Machines will do with ugly jobs of the future so that mankind can be truly free to create beautiful things and live out beautiful, artistic lives. Of course it is never touched upon how this utopianism will come about, but still, no map that doesn’t feature Utopia is not a map at all...


Yes, it's complicating if you consider Wilde himself said the main characters were reflections of himself: "Basil Hallward is what I think I am: Lord Henry is what the world thinks me: Dorian is what I would like to be—in other ages, perhaps"

I wonder if Wilde relied on strong Faustian theme of the book saying "moral is too obvious"

Lord Henry plays evil role. After all his cynical, hedonistic wordview & his French poisonous book destroys Dorian.
Another thing, we don't learn much about Dorian's sins. we're aware there were drugs, prostitutes, murder crime. Wilde made interesting statement : "Each man sees his own sin in Dorian Gray. What Dorian Gray's sins are no one knows. He who finds them has brought them."
Any ideas for Dorian's possible sins?

Yes they are certainly important quotes from Wilde on the novel. Wilde’s certainly plainly aware of Faust in that sense and no doubt influenced by that mode one way or another.

I find it interesting that you say Lord Henry is evil or plays an evil role. Certainly his words could be seen as poisonous, but do we consider him evil because of it, or does he merely reflect what is evil or corrupt within us?

Yes Wilde used that last quote against moral criticisms of the novel and it is a good way to get out of the idea of the book being a corruptive influence, but really it also functions again as a mirror to reflect the “sins” of the reader or the constraints of Victorian or indeed modern society.

[Rores28]

I thought this book was good on the whole, though I felt it to be missing a particular element I can't quite put my finger on. Its as if it was on the precipice of being a great novel for me but for some inexpressible reason fell into the "simply good" classification.

For me the novels strong points were the ambiguous ending and Lord Henry's inexhaustible wit and it's concomitant social commentary on the high classes. I think a problem chapter for me was the one filled with obscure allusion (at least to me) after obscure allusion.

Towards the end of the novel I wondered if Freud was a fan of Wilde as I was constantly reminded of his theory on Id, Ego, and Superego, in relation to Lord Henry, Dorian, and Basil.

I had read somewhere also that at the end of his life Wilde had written a letter lamenting the degree to which his life was led hedonistically and as a result caused him to fail to consider others well-being. This letter was written after the publication of this book though and so I wondered what sort of contrasts there were between his attitudes on the initial composition of the book and his reflection on it years later?

[Quark]

I find it interesting that you say Lord Henry is evil or plays an evil role. Certainly his words could be seen as poisonous, but do we consider him evil because of it, or does he merely reflect what is evil or corrupt within us?

Towards the end of the novel I wondered if Freud was a fan of Wilde as I was constantly reminded of his theory on Id, Ego, and Superego, in relation to Lord Henry, Dorian, and Basil.

You guys are much harder on Lord Henry than I am. I always took him to represent some kind of balance between decadence and responsibility. It's Dorian who spins out of control. Henry does persuade Dorian into doing many of the things he does, but it seems like Dorian is reinterpreting Henry as much as he is following him.

[Rores28]

Yes sorry the ordering of the names and terms is confusing. I actually see Lord Henry more as the Ego, and Dorian as the Id. While Dorian feels remorse occasionally it always proves exceptionally fleeting and shallow.

Lord Henry on the other hand seems to epitomize talking the talk but not walking the walk. I felt like Dorian is what Lord Henry wishes he could be but doesn't have the balls so to speak. He already idealizes Dorian for his beauty and the only way he could get better if he were to embody and execute Henry's ideals. I felt like both he and Basil were vying for a behavior of which they respectively approved so that they could live vicariously through this perfect shell of a man.

[LitNetIsGreat]

You guys are much harder on Lord Henry than I am. I always took him to represent some kind of balance between decadence and responsibility. It's Dorian who spins out of control. Henry does persuade Dorian into doing many of the things he does, but it seems like Dorian is reinterpreting Henry as much as he is following him.

No, I'm not criticising Lord Henry, I'm merely playing devil's advocate - I was just interested in what the other guy said about Lord Henry. Personally I find him quite fascinating, quite delicious, but I would be interested, as always, if someone wanted to argue that he was an evil character - I certainly try not to close any doors!


I thought this book was good on the whole, though I felt it to be missing a particular element I can't quite put my finger on. Its as if it was on the precipice of being a great novel for me but for some inexpressible reason fell into the "simply good" classification.

For me the novels strong points were the ambiguous ending and Lord Henry's inexhaustible wit and it's concomitant social commentary on the high classes. I think a problem chapter for me was the one filled with obscure allusion (at least to me) after obscure allusion.

Towards the end of the novel I wondered if Freud was a fan of Wilde as I was constantly reminded of his theory on Id, Ego, and Superego, in relation to Lord Henry, Dorian, and Basil.

I had read somewhere also that at the end of his life Wilde had written a letter lamenting the degree to which his life was led hedonistically and as a result caused him to fail to consider others well-being. This letter was written after the publication of this book though and so I wondered what sort of contrasts there were between his attitudes on the initial composition of the book and his reflection on it years later?

Thanks for that. I thought that a fair summing up of the novel actually, I mean that you said it was good, bordering on great but something missing. Personally, I think that the novel form is not Wilde's strongest - regardless as to how much I do love the novel - I think Wilde is stronger in drama and short story, but strongest of all in conversation, of course, in person, but we'll never have that option I'm afraid - no matter how much I hope for it to happen - I just have to settle for meeting him in my head!

The chapter that is filled with allusion sounds like it is most likely Dorian's love of the yellow book (ch 9) which is based mostly on A Rebours by JK Huysmans. It is the chapter where Dorian becomes fascinated by the character of the novel and follows his addiction of expensive jewells and rich gowns etc, and I think that the chapter works in relation to this.

Yes the Freud stuff is certainly an interesting angle and certainly worth looking into I think.

I think that the letter you are talking about is De Profundis (from the depths) which was published after Wilde's death in 1905, well the edited version was and written near the end of Wilde's time in prison, 1897. This was the long letter which was written to Douglas but is really much more than a letter of course, it is a work of art in itself, some actually consider it to be one of Wilde's best work, certainly perhaps his most moving. Yes there is a sort of out-pouring of grief in this brilliant piece where as you say Wilde does lament his actions in a way, but he is more angry with himself for not breaking with Douglas which directly lead to his own downfall than anything else. I think that if you read the letter (which you really should) you can't fail to notice that Wilde is a broken man, or almost a broken man at this point, so that the tone and mood which Wilde writes is immediately contrasted with anything Wilde ever wrote previously. One thing that comes through in the full letter certainly though is Wilde's position to art, something that I am personally very interested in. It is clear that Wilde's devotion to art is unfaltering and is as strong as it was previous to his downfall - in this respect nothing has changed. Again he is angry with himself for allowing his own art to be ruined by Douglas's influence - which was undoubtedly bad and certainly stopped Wilde producing more written work. One of the problems that Wilde had was not creativity, he was buzzing with all sorts of incredible stories, it was actually being bothered or focused to putting the things down on paper and whenever Douglas was with him he hardly ever had the time to do so, Douglas was always insistent that they live life to the full and dine everywhere (on Wilde's money as always). Anyway, I'm just rambling now - in short, yes there is a difference in tone between Dorian Gray '91 and De Profundis '97 certainly, and many regrets of all kinds, but still Wilde's devotion to art was as unfaltering as ever. Though there are many, many things in the letter, you need to read it, one thing is for sure he was clearly pained that he would never see his children again which must have been quite unbearable- I find the whole piece very, very moving indeed as do all Wilde fans I think.

[lallison]

I've wanted to read that book for a while now, but its not so easy to come by in Jakarta, although I did just pick of a book of his fairy tales.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Oh excellent they are wonderful, enjoy. Can't you get DG through Amazon.com?

[lallison]

I've never tried Amazon, but I've heard shipping to Indonesia through Amazon is a pretty expensive and the shipping cost is usually much more than the book. Plus it can take a quite a while to get here. Then there are the concerns about using the local postal system with anything expensive. Since I've got enough reading to keep me busy until I go back to the US in July, I'll probably just wait until then and buy it. There are plenty of great books to choose from out here, but its hard to pick out one book in particular to go buy unless its a recent best seller or you get lucky and chance upon it.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Oh right, I see. As long as you have enough to be reading, and certainly you will enjoy Wilde's short stories, then that's OK, excellent.

[Niamh]

try ebay. :)

[LitNetIsGreat]

Hello. Has everybody read the book who had started it at the beginning of this thread? I was just interested in hearing your overall thoughts on it either way. I am very interested in what people say about my favourite little novel, good or bad, it doesn't matter. Honestly I won't bite. It is just that you can never get that first reading experience again and I like to see what others think of it you see.

Aside from that have we any more thoughts we want to open up about this work? Anything we want to push forward? Is there anything you want to raise in regards to Wilde's little extended prose project.

OK one question to those new to the novel at least, what did you think of the Sybil Vane episode?

[caspian]

My approach to "Dorian Grey" is more "faustian approach". So it's kind of natural if I see in Lord Henry evil Mephistopheles.
We don't know how much Lord Henry is involved in Dorian Grey's sins. We know he doesn't know about Dorian's prime -murder crime. But he knows about his other possible sins. Ruined innocent girls? He's fine with that -"nothing dreadful". He keeps encouraging Dorian to seek pleasure without regard for others.
Well, maybe I'm hard on him, I never got a chance to read the book, I listned to CD book. Dialogs are big part of the book, so actually it's nicer to listen to them than reading. I don't think that I missed out something.
__________________
It was very interesting "reading". Thank you, Neely.:)

[Niamh]

Neely are really prepared for my honesty? I could not finish it. This is my second time reading the book and although i finished it the first time i just could not do it this time. As much as i admired the witticisms Wilde voiced through the character Henry, I just found the story tiresome. I think i'll stick with Dr Faustus which is by far the more superior of the two stories.
I saying that i have really enjoyed reading the discussion going on and hopefully next years Dublin: one city one book will appeal to me more and i really hope some of you will join in again next April. :) I'll see if i can get some inside info from the Irish Times before next Aprils is announced. :)

[LitNetIsGreat]

My approach to "Dorian Grey" is more "faustian approach". So it's kind of natural if I see in Lord Henry evil Mephistopheles.
We don't know how much Lord Henry is involved in Dorian Grey's sins. We know he doesn't know about Dorian's prime -murder crime. But he knows about his other possible sins. Ruined innocent girls? He's fine with that -"nothing dreadful". He keeps encouraging Dorian to seek pleasure without regard for others.
Well, maybe I'm hard on him, I never got a chance to read the book, I listned to CD book. Dialogs are big part of the book, so actually it's nicer to listen to them than reading. I don't think that I missed out something.
__________________
It was very interesting "reading". Thank you, Neely.:)

Excellent, thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed it. There is a small discussion going on about Dorian Gray here which you might be interested in:
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?p=895380#post895380

It is more connected to Lord Henry but it might be of interest to you :) especially as the Faustian thing has been mentioned.

That's OK Niamh, at least you had read it previous then. I started To The Lighthouse last month but had to put it on hold because it takes too much time and concentration then I have at present, though I am a fan of Woolf generally, she demands a lot from her readers certainly!

I've never fully read the Fautus myself as of yet, though I am fully aware of it through secondary material of course, though that is not like me I have usually read the primary text first, but I can be expected to have read everything. :biggrin5:

[Niamh]

I must say i'm quite surprised you havent read it Neely! Better put it on your to read list. I think its fantastic! Marlowe was a genius!

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yes, I've read other Marlowe work such as Edward II, and it's duly ordered to be read very soon. Really though I'm struggling to read anything much these past couple of weeks, I'm feeling quite stressed and I can't concentrate on anything more than simple (but brilliant) stuff like Wodehouse - it's not like me.