Answer TWO of the following:
Q1: Many of Lord Henry’s witticisms echo—or even
reproduce—Wilde’s Preface from the beginning of the book. Consider ones such as
“Scepticism is the beginning of faith,” or “we can have in life but one great experience, and the secret of life is to
reproduce that experience as often as possible.” With this in mind, how are we
supposed to read his character? Is he the voice of ‘reason’ of wisdom in the
novel? Or is he another unreliable narrator, just as flawed and corrupt as
Dorian?
Q2: When Dorian Gray ventures into the opium dens of the
East End of London, he meets with various racial stereotypes: Malays with “white
teeth,” “squat misshapen figures” (also Malay, or Chinese), and low-class women
with “crooked smile[s] like a Malay crease.” Are these a sign of Wilde’s upper
class racial prejudices (like the narrator in “Olalla”)? Or is he seeing the
world through Dorian’s eyes, who sees things in terms of “race” and degeneracy?
Q3: At the very end of the novel, Dorian lays the blame of
his crime at Basil’s feet: “It was the living death of his own soul that
troubled him. Basil had painted the portrait that has marred his life. He could
not forgive him that. It was the portrait that had done everything” (185). This
sounds curiously like the Creature and Victor: the Creature blaming his
creator (Basil) and the Creator blaming his creation (the painting). How should
we read Dorian—as Victor or the Creature? Is he made “evil” or does he turn
things “evil” himself?
Q4: Lord Henry, in defense of the book that Dorian claims
has “corrupted” him, says that “Art has no influence upon action. It
annihilates the desire to act. It is superbly sterile. The books that the world
calls immortal are books that show the world its own shame” (183). Do you think
Wilde believes this? Is art merely a mute mirror of our own imagination and
sensibilities? Or can art itself shape and guide our sensibilities? Why might
this question be important to the reading/interpreting the novel?
No comments:
Post a Comment