You have questions—we try to answer them. So join David, Heidi, and Tim as they discuss such things as the degree to which Basil deserves blame in Dorian’s fall, whether Wilde wants us to sympathize with his protagonist, whether Lord Henry is a good “villain,” and much more. Happy listening!
More Ethics of Beauty, speaking about iconography:
“The problem with preconceived images. When you were trying to produce some thing beautiful in art, or architecture is that these images may lead you to a dead repetition of earlier instances of the Form, rather than towards the creation of a living offering or to a participation in the archetype of Beauty itself in just the way demanded by your concrete condition. Adhering slavishly to a blueprint…usually means that what you are making, will not be truly and completely sensitive to the exact situation in which it is being made.
... because what you were actually after as an artist of any kind is a participation in the form that will be unique to you right now in this place in time – a marriage of universality and particularity. And to do that, you have to leave images and preconceptions behind, or at least hold onto them in a more personal way.
That is why, when he true iconography are copies, an archetype, he, or she is so carefully devoted to the life of prayer. Something new is being born here.”
Is Basil’s painting a sort of evil icon? He is truly inspired but by mortal beauty rather than the divine. He creates new paintings of old forms, but his first painting of Dorian is simply a portrait and “completely sensitive to the exact situation in which it is being made”. Basil puts something of himself into the painting, participate in it, and Dorian utters a prayer - influenced by the evil temptation LORD Henry - and something new is born, or rather torn, Horcrux-like in Dorian’s soul.
“In the case of the artist or iconographer, this co-crucifixion is experienced as the death of his passions; nothing of himself remains in the art, except what is completely personal between him and others and Christ. Nothing of his ‘general human nature’ remains in the work, except that part of this nature that is now completely caught up in an utterly personal expression. This is a paradox – the work becomes personal only if the ego is removed. And so, despite the copy’s fidelity to the prototype through this ‘death,’ some resurrection is granted – this new icon will be not only faithful to its prototype, but also unique to the life and skill of its painter.”
Such a thoughtful discussion as always. I really was intrigued by some of the questions asked (the woman being Sybil Vane’s ghost blew my mind). Thanks for answering my question, you all articulated some really thoughtful and helpful points (ex. Redemption sufficient to the darkness portrayed, nihilistic world view being more problematic in some ways than violence/swearing, the importance of having community to help discern these questions, what may be tempting/too much for one person different than another, the canon having a conversation about morality the wider world is no longer interested in). I have two little ones right now who love being read a loud to, and I’ve been thinking more and more about the books on my shelf that are waiting for them, and what I should or shouldn’t be weeding out for them in the future, so I really appreciated the fellow parents perspective/the peek into where I’ll be down the line!
Heidi, is it the painting that divides Dorian’s soul, or is it his prayer? I think the question if the painting is intrinsically evil IS important because of this point. It is not the source - not even the means, that we know of - of the division of his soul. Yes, Basil is at fault, but it’s Dorian’s own volition and desire that ultimately takes him down the road to his demise, not just once but continually.
That's what I thought, too. I think it was Dorian's wish to never change. The painting could have held no influence without Dorian's vanity and hunger for the flattery of his "friends."
More Ethics of Beauty, speaking about iconography:
“The problem with preconceived images. When you were trying to produce some thing beautiful in art, or architecture is that these images may lead you to a dead repetition of earlier instances of the Form, rather than towards the creation of a living offering or to a participation in the archetype of Beauty itself in just the way demanded by your concrete condition. Adhering slavishly to a blueprint…usually means that what you are making, will not be truly and completely sensitive to the exact situation in which it is being made.
... because what you were actually after as an artist of any kind is a participation in the form that will be unique to you right now in this place in time – a marriage of universality and particularity. And to do that, you have to leave images and preconceptions behind, or at least hold onto them in a more personal way.
That is why, when he true iconography are copies, an archetype, he, or she is so carefully devoted to the life of prayer. Something new is being born here.”
Is Basil’s painting a sort of evil icon? He is truly inspired but by mortal beauty rather than the divine. He creates new paintings of old forms, but his first painting of Dorian is simply a portrait and “completely sensitive to the exact situation in which it is being made”. Basil puts something of himself into the painting, participate in it, and Dorian utters a prayer - influenced by the evil temptation LORD Henry - and something new is born, or rather torn, Horcrux-like in Dorian’s soul.
“In the case of the artist or iconographer, this co-crucifixion is experienced as the death of his passions; nothing of himself remains in the art, except what is completely personal between him and others and Christ. Nothing of his ‘general human nature’ remains in the work, except that part of this nature that is now completely caught up in an utterly personal expression. This is a paradox – the work becomes personal only if the ego is removed. And so, despite the copy’s fidelity to the prototype through this ‘death,’ some resurrection is granted – this new icon will be not only faithful to its prototype, but also unique to the life and skill of its painter.”
YES!!!!!!!
There are no longer books censored by the Catholic Church.
Was that an Airplane reference I caught, David?
Such a thoughtful discussion as always. I really was intrigued by some of the questions asked (the woman being Sybil Vane’s ghost blew my mind). Thanks for answering my question, you all articulated some really thoughtful and helpful points (ex. Redemption sufficient to the darkness portrayed, nihilistic world view being more problematic in some ways than violence/swearing, the importance of having community to help discern these questions, what may be tempting/too much for one person different than another, the canon having a conversation about morality the wider world is no longer interested in). I have two little ones right now who love being read a loud to, and I’ve been thinking more and more about the books on my shelf that are waiting for them, and what I should or shouldn’t be weeding out for them in the future, so I really appreciated the fellow parents perspective/the peek into where I’ll be down the line!
Reading to my children and gathering valuable books for them has been one of my favorite parts of mothering (4 kids 9th, 7th, 5th, & 2nd)
My take on Lord Henry -- he is like the prototypical SEC frat boy who stumbles into a state Legislature gig.
Heidi, is it the painting that divides Dorian’s soul, or is it his prayer? I think the question if the painting is intrinsically evil IS important because of this point. It is not the source - not even the means, that we know of - of the division of his soul. Yes, Basil is at fault, but it’s Dorian’s own volition and desire that ultimately takes him down the road to his demise, not just once but continually.
That's what I thought, too. I think it was Dorian's wish to never change. The painting could have held no influence without Dorian's vanity and hunger for the flattery of his "friends."