• In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde: Ch. 6 - 10

#65: Mar. - April 2009 (Fiction)
User avatar
Chris OConnor

1A - OWNER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 17016
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
21
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 3509 times
Been thanked: 1309 times
Gender:
Contact:
United States of America

The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde: Ch. 6 - 10

Unread post

The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde: Ch. 6 - 10
User avatar
Boheme
Master Debater
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:56 pm
15
Location: Montreal, Canada

These chapters

Unread post

intrigue me. I felt rather detached at the whole Sibyl infatuation/marriage proposal/death episode, and wonder if that is not part of Wilde's ability: the reader reacts (or fails to react) the same way as Dorian did: as an observer, but not really responsible either for emotional responses or their consequences.
User avatar
Suzanne

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Book General
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:51 pm
14
Location: New Jersey
Has thanked: 518 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Detachment

Unread post

Boheme wrote:
I felt rather detached at the whole Sibyl infatuation/marriage proposal/death episode,
I have to agree. I felt the floor drop after she died, I think there was a lot he could have done with the Sibyl character. I reacted, I thought it was cheap! Her death would have been more affective if he had developed her into something more that an avenue for critisim. I think Sibyl represents the death of innocence and goodness. Not only for Sibyl but for Dorian as well. Sibyl, lived in art for Dorian, and when that art disapointed him he felt disgust. Commiting suicide, like Juliet should have gotten her some respect though. I think we were supposed to feel her innocence and purity, and goodness more than her presense, I did.

I have again noticed all the flowers, and now colors are coming into play. Sibyl was always mentioned in connection with white, symbolizing innocence and purity (Great Gatsby 101? decades before it's time?) Dorian is connected to yellow, gold, red, and also many refferences to fire. He is dynamic, passionate, bright, alive.

The picture makes it's first change
It had altered already, and would alter more. Its gold would wither into gray. It's red and white roses would die.
Red would mean love, white innocence, and roses?, roses, lilys, irises, etc., the book is starting to reek with the perfume of the flowers! I have come to the conclusion the flowers represent the only true form of art; nature.

Suzanne
User avatar
Suzanne

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Book General
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:51 pm
14
Location: New Jersey
Has thanked: 518 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Unread post

Boheme:
Wilde uses an almost stream of consciousness style in Sibyl's dialogue only, it is outloud. We see this in the quick transitions of thought, and general incoherency; she goes from thinking of kissing to pleading him not to leave to worrying about her brother's threat to begging for forgiveness. This style of dialogue portrays Sibyl's innocence and purity. There is very little filtering between her thought and her speech. What she feels she expresses. Her inability to think, filter, then speak also portrays her distress and despair. Furthermore, Wilde uses a simile to compare her to "a wounded thing." By dehumanizing Sibyl, he accentuates her sad sad state. Sibyl is also dehumanized in being seen as melodramatic. Dorian had fallen in love with her because of her acting, and it is quite fitting that he now fall out of love with her because of her loss of acting skill. However, Dorian's seeing her as only a character and not an actual person devalues her life and strips her of her humanity. The purpose of Sibyl being characterized in this way is to juxtapose her pathetic state to Dorian's heartlessness. This passage highlights Dorian's
change for the worse. We, the readers, see him turning from a sweet little kid to a disciple of the influential Lord Henry.
http://doriangrayanddianecho.blogspot.com/

Had to google since my last post :oops:

This quote from the above web site makes your observation spot on. Interesting site, I intend to exibit great restraint and not visit it again until I have finished the book.

Suzanne
User avatar
MaryLupin

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
Junior
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:19 pm
15
Location: Vancouver, BC
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Unread post

One of the things that I find fascinating about the fact that Sybil loses her acting ability when she falls in love with Dorian, is that it says that this ability, which I think is akin to a creative force, even a "soul", can be placed somewhere else. Just like Dorian's soul is transferred into the painting, Sybil's soul is transferred to Dorian.

I think about what Wilde is saying here. Is he saying that to be an artist one must be willing to, literally, put one's "soul" into it? That there is nothing else that one can love except one's art? Is he saying that watever one loves rules one?
I've always found it rather exciting to remember that there is a difference between what we experience and what we think it means.
User avatar
Suzanne

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Book General
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:51 pm
14
Location: New Jersey
Has thanked: 518 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Unread post

MaryLupin wrote:
Is he saying that to be an artist one must be willing to, literally, put one's "soul" into it?
I go back to what Basil said in the beginning. He did not want to part from the painting at first because he had put so much of himself into it. Put his "soul" into it. It's interesting that Basil changes his mind so dramatically later.

MaryLupin wrote:
That there is nothing else that one can love except one's art? Is he saying that watever one loves rules one?
To love you must give of yourself to the one you love and what you are given by the one you love will change you. Sybil smiles at the end of the performance. Was Sybil always a bad actress and Dorian never saw it until Harry points it out? She allowed Dorian to inject himself into her, and when she is rejected, she does not feel whole. Isn't that how we feel when we lose someone we love?

Like so many other beautiful things, Dorian couldn't see her, he wanted to show her off to the world, as his own creation, and she was beautiful, but Dorian could not create anything, and couldn't appreciate anything, from an art standpoint and a life standpoint, that would make him souless. Dorian would not change, he was incapable of loving, even himself. He does feel sadness, but again, Harry steps in. Dorian is mesmerized by Harry, Harry who appreciates nothing, but shallow beauty.

"Art is useless", from the preface. Art, life, love, beauty, it's all useless, if it can not be created or appreciated. I don't think love rules you, but, you must be willing, and trustfull to accept the changes that love creates in you.

Suzanne
User avatar
MaryLupin

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
Junior
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:19 pm
15
Location: Vancouver, BC
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Unread post

The thing about art being useless...The aesthetic idea that goes with that statement is that art is not "for" anything. That is, art is for its own sake. Art cannot be conscribed by being something to accomplish something else. It cannot be defined, for example, as something that uplifts us morally. Art cannot be limited in such a way; that was the point of art-for-art's sake aesthetics.

When PoDG was so deeply criticized when it was orginally released in 1890 some of the most common criticisms were that it was ugly, because it was dangerous to youth. In essence, the assumption by the critics was that art must present the beautiful because it is what was good for uplifting "civilization." Part of the point of the book, I think, was to explode this connection between the idea of beauty as judged by society and the moral good. I mean Dorian was beautiful but he wasn't good.

And I think you are right about Dorian being soulless, especially since the story posits that his soul has gone into the painting. So what was walking around in the Dorian-skin? The abyss? Is this empty Dorian what it means to be the animal-human? The "soul" is that what makes us act humanely? I find these deeply seated preconceptions of what it means to be human interesting in Wilde's work.
I've always found it rather exciting to remember that there is a difference between what we experience and what we think it means.
User avatar
Suzanne

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Book General
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:51 pm
14
Location: New Jersey
Has thanked: 518 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Unread post

MaryLupin wrote:
Is this empty Dorian what it means to be the animal-human?
Oh, I don't think Dorian is empty, I think he is overflowing. We need to look at Harry, he is the protaganist of the story. Wilde's perseption of society uzzes out of Harry's mouth and fills Dorian's skin.

MaryLupin wrote:
Part of the point of the book, I think, was to explode this connection between the idea of beauty as judged by society and the moral good.
This answers your previous question. Dorian saw Sybil as beautiful, pristine and loveable until Harry pointed out that she was inferior and flawed. Harry is society. Harry is unforgiving, prejudecial and shallow.

I see the naiveity Wilde once possessed, it saddens me to see that it is gone. The writing of PoDG must have been agonizing for him.(this is riddled with mispellings, please forgive, I do not have luxury of little red line while posting, have to say this restricts me)

MaryLupin wrote:
In essence, the assumption by the critics was that art must present the beautiful
No, only the beautiful can express art. Only a beautiful soul can create beauty in art. Wilde was chastised, his lifestyle was considered evil, ugly. Harry (society) hated him, and Wilde uses Dorian (life) as a canvass to convey his dissenchantment and dissapointment with society and how easy it is to lose one's perseption of one's self if influenced by society, how easy it is to lose one's soul. Dorian was naive, Dorian was beautiful, Dorian was hopeful, Dorian loved, Harry corrupted him. Art for art sake, the point, can someone society sees as ugly creat art, simply for art sake? Or will it be judged unfairly by a society that demands beauty in its creator?

Suzanne
User avatar
MaryLupin

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
Junior
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:19 pm
15
Location: Vancouver, BC
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Unread post

Suzanne wrote:Dorian saw Sybil as beautiful, pristine and loveable until Harry pointed out that she was inferior and flawed. Harry is society. Harry is unforgiving, prejudecial and shallow.
I agree that Harry is a carrier for how Wilde saw society, at least in part. But I think that Wilde also saw himself in Harry. They have many attributes in common - the sense of humor, the aesthetic cultivation. I don't think Harry is simply a bad guy. Wilde was more complicated than that I think, both as a person and as a writer. I mean, of all the characters in the book, I liked Harry the most. Still he was a meany. Not good to be weak around him. Anyway, I don't think we can blame Harry alone for what Dorian does to Sybil. I think both Sybil and Dorian must also take responsibility as well. What Harry does is give Dorian an excuse to act like a willful child who wants a sweety, and then stomps it underfoot when it isn't what he thought it would be. And Sybil, like Princess Diana, when it wasn't what she wanted it to be, she pouted as only a princess can pout. Unfortunately for both Sybil and Dianna it ended up causing their deaths and not their rebirth as emotionally adult women.
Suzanne wrote:No, only the beautiful can express art. Only a beautiful soul can create beauty in art. Wilde was chastised, his lifestyle was considered evil, ugly. Harry (society) hated him, and Wilde uses Dorian (life) as a canvass to convey his dissenchantment and dissapointment with society and how easy it is to lose one's perseption of one's self if influenced by society, how easy it is to lose one's soul. Dorian was naive, Dorian was beautiful, Dorian was hopeful, Dorian loved, Harry corrupted him. Art for art sake, the point, can someone society sees as ugly creat art, simply for art sake? Or will it be judged unfairly by a society that demands beauty in its creator?
I am afraid I have to disagree with the idea that only the beautiful soul can create true art. There is this statue by Bernini called "The Ecstasy of Saint Therese" which is one of the most beautiful pieces of art I have ever experienced yet Bernini was not a "beautiful soul". He was a drunken, violent, guilt ridden artist of great genius.

Does society judge unfairly? The question that always provokes in me is "who is going to judge the "unfairly" bit? Posterity? And who is that but another society that just has different standards. This makes me think of David Hume's theory of art and what it means to be a "true judge" but that is for another post because it would be looooooooooooong.
I've always found it rather exciting to remember that there is a difference between what we experience and what we think it means.
User avatar
Suzanne

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Book General
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:51 pm
14
Location: New Jersey
Has thanked: 518 times
Been thanked: 399 times

Dorian Gray

Unread post

MaryLupin wrote:
I am afraid I have to disagree with the idea that only the beautiful soul can create true art.
I don't agree with it either, this is how I think Wilde see society, how it feels. The best example I can think of would be, to see a beautiful painting, something that touches your heart, how lovely. Then finding out it was painted by a pedophile. I know this is exagerated, but would the painting be as lovely?

Still pondering Harry. Someone had a flower in his lapel, Wilde always had a flower in his lapel. Who is it? I want to say it was Harry, or was it Dorian? Drat, can't find it.

MaryLupin wrote:
The question that always provokes in me is "who is going to judge the "unfairly" bit? Posterity?
We are the future, PoDG is a century old, has society stopped judging?
. . .or a wild longing, it may be, that our eyelids might open some morning upon a world that had been refashioned anew in the darkness for our pleasure, a world in which things would have fresh shapes and colors, and be changed. . .
Oscar Wilde, Picture of Dorian Gray

Suzanne
Post Reply

Return to “The Picture of Dorian Gray - by Oscar Wilde”