The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde: Ch. 6 - 10
Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:28 am
The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde: Ch. 6 - 10
Quality books. Great conversations.
https://www.booktalk.org/
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 felt rather detached at the whole Sibyl infatuation/marriage proposal/death episode,
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.It had altered already, and would alter more. Its gold would wither into gray. It's red and white roses would die.
http://doriangrayanddianecho.blogspot.com/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.
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.Is he saying that to be an artist one must be willing to, literally, put one's "soul" into it?
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?That there is nothing else that one can love except one's art? Is he saying that watever one loves rules one?
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.Is this empty Dorian what it means to be the animal-human?
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.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.
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?In essence, the assumption by the critics was that art must present the beautiful
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: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 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.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 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?I am afraid I have to disagree with the idea that only the beautiful soul can create true art.
We are the future, PoDG is a century old, has society stopped judging?The question that always provokes in me is "who is going to judge the "unfairly" bit? Posterity?
Oscar Wilde, Picture of Dorian Gray. . .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. . .