Thoughts on Dorian Gray

The Picture of Dorian Gray, what a complex novel. It truly embodies the artist as portrayed by Wilde. It is a once a novel that on the surface is ludicrous bordering on comical, with all its epigrams and melodrama. On the other hand it can be read as a “symbol” and wild warns “those who read the symbol do so at their peril.” In fact the preface sums up the themes of the novel in a way. The novel is the “surface “and “symbol” referred to in the preface and the materials used for its emplotment are vice and virtue. Its hard to tell form reading the novel alone whether or not Wilde was intentionally using the unconscious and the conscious theme, and whether that can be placed into dialogue with Freud and Lacan. I would have to look that up, though it would contradict Wilde’s idea of art for art’s sake alone. I get the impression that his art was to be valued and interpreted without his biographical information being involved.

            Another point of interest that I have yet to fully understand is the constant imagery of flowers and plants. One reason is that they create an unreal surrounding, as professor Garret explained that it was not possible for certain flowers to bloom in the same season.  The symbolism behind them is interesting; I would like to study it more closely, like why does he refer to herbaceous plants in some scenes and aromatic ones in others? Is there a Romantic aspect to the Garden, when it seems to restore his humanity after Sibyl’s death? Does that romantic contrast exist in the novel between the garden and the city as a corruptor? The other thing I wonder about is Basil’s name and the possible symbolism there, not to mention Sibyl. Moreover was Wilde intending to make these associations and does it matter? That is the beauty of Wilde’s writing, he is very much Lord Henry sparking our curiosity and stepping back to let figure out whatever meanings we wish to find in his art. Curiosity it a major driving force for Dorian Gray, the curiosity of life and the fear of realism. Always wanting to live vicariously but never truly. It is escapism at its best. The real is subverted and made unreal through romanticism and the unreal is relished as reality.

            I couldn’t help but think of the Flanneur and the Man of the Crowd while reading this novel. After being introduced to Harry Dorian seems to thrive on the crowd. He seeks it out more and more and his expression becomes more and more like that of the man of the crowd. Even the mirror like quality of the portrait is like the man looking through the glass or at himself. The other part about this intertextuality is that Dorian is an observer; he looks and extracts information but does not wish to reciprocate that exchange of information. He conceals the portrait at all costs. He is also more obviously the Flanneur then any other character in any other novel we have read this quarter. His gaze is another thing that must be studied in more depth, because he has two if we include the changing gaze of the portrait.