Rating: 
Summary: Hopelessly Ambiguous or Unambiguously Hopeful?
Review: Who knows? But right-wing orthodox Catholic monarchist readers will be required to steel themselves through the first two chapters which consist of a drawn-out slap fight between Elton John, Graham Norton and Ian McKellan. Now I like a cat-fight as much as the next guy, but a tussle among effete Brit cats with man parts is just icky. So the narcissistic homo-erotic banter opening the book was significantly under-appreciated by this reader. But after you get through those chapters the book gets much, much better. It is difficult to maintain that the book represents a defense of amoral Aestheticism, since the embodiment of the aesthetic ideal, Dorian Gray, is shown to be a damned man. That is not to say that Wilde embraces Catholicism in the novel, as the narrator often posits confusing opinions on issues of conscience and sin. At times Wilde seems to suggest that only immoderate (quantitatively speaking) behavior is immoral; and yet, at other times, it appears some actions themselves ought to be avoided. Is Wilde acknowledging that there are exceptionless moral norms? And what is the reader to make of rotten Wotton, whose epigrammatic phrases seem so akin to Wilde's? Hallward points out that Wotton's cynicism is a pose. He never says a moral thing, but he never does a wrong thing. So are we to take his Wilde-isms seriously? Are we to take Wilde seriously? Wilde says art is neither moral nor immoral, yet Gray is poisoned by A Rebors, a book by another decadent author who, oddly enough, also converted to Catholicism. And then there's the picture itself, the fruit of Hallward's homosexual obsession, which is clearly cursed, in spite of its initial apparent beauty. Wilde's protests notwithstanding, it is a book with a moral informing the reader that he cannot escape his conscience, that he cannot reject nature and nature's God, and that the wages of sin are death. But therein lies hope, for if God is to be believed regarding the wages of sin, then why should we doubt Him regarding our Redemption? Unfortunately, this message is made ambiguous by an author who, rather than unintentionally creating a distorted image of an idea that cannot be fully represented, intentionally peppers the novel with paradox for the sake of cuteness. But the Truth is not cute. He's terrifying, and Wilde knows better. Therefore the book is best left to the orthodox or the decadent. The lukewarm will simply be confused.
Rating:
Summary: Hopelessly Ambiguous or Unambiguously Hopeful?
Review: Who knows? But right-wing orthodox Catholic monarchist readers will be required to steel themselves through the first two chapters which consist of a drawn-out slap fight between Elton John, Graham Norton and Ian McKellan. Now I like a cat-fight as much as the next guy, but a tussle among effete Brit cats with man parts is just icky. So the narcissistic homo-erotic banter opening the book was significantly under-appreciated by this reader. But after you get through those chapters the book gets much, much better. It is difficult to maintain that the book represents a defense of amoral Aestheticism, since the embodiment of the aesthetic ideal, Dorian Gray, is shown to be a damned man. That is not to say that Wilde embraces Catholicism in the novel, as the narrator often posits confusing opinions on issues of conscience and sin. At times Wilde seems to suggest that only immoderate (quantitatively speaking) behavior is immoral; and yet, at other times, it appears some actions themselves ought to be avoided. Is Wilde acknowledging that there are exceptionless moral norms? And what is the reader to make of rotten Wotton, whose epigrammatic phrases seem so akin to Wilde's? Hallward points out that Wotton's cynicism is a pose. He never says a moral thing, but he never does a wrong thing. So are we to take his Wilde-isms seriously? Are we to take Wilde seriously? Wilde says art is neither moral nor immoral, yet Gray is poisoned by A Rebors, a book by another decadent author who, oddly enough, also converted to Catholicism. And then there's the picture itself, the fruit of Hallward's homosexual obsession, which is clearly cursed, in spite of its initial apparent beauty. Wilde's protests notwithstanding, it is a book with a moral informing the reader that he cannot escape his conscience, that he cannot reject nature and nature's God, and that the wages of sin are death. But therein lies hope, for if God is to be believed regarding the wages of sin, then why should we doubt Him regarding our Redemption? Unfortunately, this message is made ambiguous by an author who, rather than unintentionally creating a distorted image of an idea that cannot be fully represented, intentionally peppers the novel with paradox for the sake of cuteness. But the Truth is not cute. He's terrifying, and Wilde knows better. Therefore the book is best left to the orthodox or the decadent. The lukewarm will simply be confused.
Rating: 
Summary: Overflowing with insights and quotations
Review: Wilde's only novel contains some of the greatest dialogue of any literature written in the english language. There are few books that could be considered more quotable, and even fewer that could be considered more insightful. The novel is enjoyable even upon a cursory reading, but its splendor is revealed only when it is studied. Wilde reveals so much of himself in his art, and through reading of Wilde's biographies, plays, and the literature that inspired him, the reader becomes intimate with Oscar, and is able to understand him more throughly than most authors would allow from a study of their work. This is a piece I have truly enjoyed, and continues to be one of the premier pieces of English literature.
| 
