Suzanne wrote:do you know where I would find a copy of the original version. I am intriqued.

http://web.uvic.ca/~gifford/eng433/dorian.htm

from there you can download a pdf

Suzanne wrote:What is your take on the flowers. They showed up with the introduction of Sybil Vane, who seems to live in plays, simular to Dorian who lives in a painting. Also, Jim, Sybil's brother reminds me of Basil. They both seem to want to protect, what? Innocence maybe? Do the flowers symbolize innocence?

During Wilde's time there was a thing for using flowers as a kind of coded language. There is a brief article about that here, although this focuses on the Victorian
http://www.prairienet.org/herbsociety/h ... owers.html

Since, according to the article, flowers were one way of secretly communicating between lovers, it may be that the flowers chosen in PoDG were chosen for common symbolic meanings of the time.

Here is one site that lists some meanings, although laburnum isn't on it. http://victorianbazaar.com/meanings.html

Here's another http://www.sydneymarkets.com.au/b-flower-meanings.php
According to it, laburnum means "forsaken."

And this list from wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floriography

This last comes from a book called The Flowers Personified by Grandville with laburnum meaning "blackness."
http://www.earthlypursuits.com/FlwrsPer/FlwrName.htm

Flowers and homosexuality - here is a really interesting article about this. It mentions Wilde http://books.google.com/books?id=L9Mj7o ... #PPA331,M1

It's called "Flowers and Birds."

Hello Mary:

Thanks for everything!

Suzanne

Names are interesting in Wilde's work. A sybil (or sibylla) is a prophetess or seer. A vane - as in weather vane, something that changes direction with the wind. Also its homophone - vain. So, someone who can "see" you (always nice in a partner) but whose attention is directed by another (that is not by you).

I've been rereading the book. The last time I read it was many years ago. I had forgotten how funny the book is. I mean, of the course the story is not funny in and of itself, but some of the things that come out of Lord Henry's mouth are really hilarious if a bit mean.

In chapter 3 there is a narrative stretch that describes Lord Henry at table with Lady Agatha and friends. He is describing the dinner partners. "His own neighbour was Mrs Vandeleur, one of his aunt's oldest friends, a perfect saint amongst women, but so dreadrull dowdy that she reminded one of a badly bound hymn-book." I was in a coffee shop when I read that. I burst out laughing and since I was alone at the table that did garner a few stares. I am just glad I hadn't taken a gulp of coffee just before.

Dunno' if this is helpful to you folks, but I have gone through the audio and online text and done little 'summaries' of the chapters . . .

Also included the first lines of each - just to help with problems keeping the 'tracks' on the audio version lined up . . .

http://wildcity.proboards.com/index.cgi ... 420&page=1

(And yes - I have given the thread here at Book Talk a wee plug there - ain't that nice of me?)

Penelope wrote:PS - I also like looking at little children, because they are beautiful.....and poor old Lewis Caroll was denigrated...because he took photographs of them, when photography was in its infancy.

Honi soit qui mal y pense????

Ahhhh! 'Tis our PennyLopey . . . nice to see you again.

I think the 'homosexuality' part would have been more fascinating at the time of publication than it is now.

And I think that's disgusting the way Lewis was denigrated like that - a couple of years ago I was at a library meeting when some tight-assed old girl came out with something about that - she took it as 'gospel' that the guy was a pedophile.

Some people are just plain busybodies, eh?

But I can imagine people reading Wilde's book in his time - it would have set them back a bit, realizing there was a flavour of AC/DC in there.

My mother loved the movie - she raved about it. I'm surprised - she was always twittering about 'that kind of people' . . . didn't approve at all.

But she sure liked that story. Maybe they don't play on the homosexuality part so heavily in the movie . . . dunno'. I never saw it.

MaryLupin wrote:I've been rereading the book. The last time I read it was many years ago. I had forgotten how funny the book is. I mean, of the course the story is not funny in and of itself, but some of the things that come out of Lord Henry's mouth are really hilarious if a bit mean.

In chapter 3 there is a narrative stretch that describes Lord Henry at table with Lady Agatha and friends. He is describing the dinner partners. "His own neighbour was Mrs Vandeleur, one of his aunt's oldest friends, a perfect saint amongst women, but so dreadrull dowdy that she reminded one of a badly bound hymn-book." I was in a coffee shop when I read that. I burst out laughing and since I was alone at the table that did garner a few stares. I am just glad I hadn't taken a gulp of coffee just before.

Yes, I agree - some of Henry's metaphors were quite funny.

What did you think of his particular philosophies? Did you agree with anything he said.

Boheme wrote:perplexed as well initially by the book. I mean, come on !! Dorian is so taken by anything Henry says, and Basil's art changes completely because of looking at Dorian - how superficial can people be! Of course, more homoerotic references show up near the end of the novel during Basil's final confrontation with Dorian, and the novel did grip my attention after the first little while.

Well now wasn't there something said in the book about the rich having 'idle minds' . . . or Henry said that the poor have idle minds - I've forgotten which.

In my opinion, the working man wouldn't have been influenced by good looks, or art for that matter.

In today's world, it would be different, of course, but back in that time, the working man put in a lot more hours than we do now.

In Basil, Henry and Dorian's time, the rich read books, then blathered on with a lot of tedious twaddle about them. Each was duly impressed with the other's comments, but nobody was interested in 'reality'.

Good looks, in my opinion, can be a 'hindrance' as well, and maybe even moreso than a 'privilege'.

Ever know somebody who's just too 'cool to be true' kinda' thing? Notice how you don't really get to know the 'person'; you are distracted by the looks.

I imagine employers would think twice about hiring somebody that was incredibly good looking - they don't want everybody in the office spending their time looking at him/her.

I once worked in a place where the boss absolutely would not hire a single good looking woman again. Seemed there'd been trouble with one of the fellas . . . she wanted plain ordinary married women.

So I got the job . . . the fellas flirted with me anyway - so?

For all this woman's money, education and self-claimed sophistication, she didn't really know a thing about real life.