The Picture of Dorian Gray

Guillermo Maynez definiu-o bem: "esta é uma história (i) do eterno desejo humano de juventude perene, (ii) de vaidade e frivolidade, (iii) dos perigos de se brincar com as leis da vida. O mundano Wilde compôs esta obra-prima com um grande senso de humor negro. Eis uma visão irônica da vaidade e dos desejos supérfluos. Gray é um homem destruído pela própria beleza, a quem um poder mágico desconhecido deu a chance de contemplar no próprio retrato todos os seus vícios pessoais. Amor vira luxúria carnal; paixão se torna crime. A sagacidade e o sarcasmo de Wilde estão em pleno esplendor, garantindo-nos que o mundo é perigoso para a alma quando as suas regras não são seguidas. Mas não se trata de uma fábula moralizante. show more Wilde jamais seria um moralista. Trata-se de uma exposição feroz e não reprimida dos lados mais feios dos seres humanos quando não controlados pela natureza. Ser rico, bonito e eternamente jovem é o caminho certo para o inferno. Ir ao teatro e, em seguida, a uma orgia é o caminho certo para não envelhecer em paz... (Levado ao palco em 1936) show less

Dorian Gray! I don’t even know where to start! I love his character to bits and pieces and he’s definitely one of the most intriguing book characters I ever had the pleasure to read about. It left me speechless. This book is exquisite; it is an exploration into the human soul, the power of vanity and the problems of living a life with not a single consequence for your actions. It’s truly powerful stuff.

Hadn't ever read this because, already knowing the premise and punch line, there seemed little need. But this book is wicked fun. It's Oscar Wilde's only novel, and he is a stylist as well as a wiseacre. He presents a feast of moments worth savoring. Besides many of his most famous epigrams, there are intriguing sentences and word choices everywhere. It's like, uh,watching a master painter at work. Plus, it's a good yarn. But wouldn't you know, the book got terrible reviews when it came out; no shortage of offended Victorian sensibilities. But Wilde was definitely ahead of his time. Maybe he still is.

How can one rate a classic? If a book was written for an audience staying in a particular type of society, under the moral code of the day, in a particular time frame, how can a person reading it 130 years later have the temerity to judge it for controversial statements or misogynistic ideas? It won’t be right. So all I can do is present my experience with the writing and the plot.

Our eponymous hero, Dorian Gray, is an orphaned rich and naïve twenty year old. He is the subject of a painting by artist Basil Hallward who seems to have fallen very strongly for Dorian’s physical appeal (only hinted at in the book, not explicitly mentioned.) Basil pours his heart out into the painting and gifts it to Dorian, who exclaims how unfair it show more would be to have a permanent reminder of his youthful beauty while he grows old and wrinkled. This idea partly germinated in his head due to a new influence over him, that of Sir Henry Wotton, a man fond of spouting philosophical epigrams. The rest of the story builds up on these 4 main characters: Dorian, Basil, Henry, and the painting.

Each of these characters is quite intriguing. The painting, as everyone knows, seems to have a life of its own. It provides a mirror into Dorian’s soul. Dorian is a gullible fool who uses his ears and eyes more than his brains. He comes across as very impressionable and selfish. His is an utterly egoistic character till the very end. Basil is the good soul, the concerned friend, the one with a secret crush that can’t ever come out in the open, the person who tries his best to maintain peace with his friends while not necessarily agreeing with their opinions. His is the only voice of reason among the three leads.

I found Henry Wotton the most intriguing. In terms of morality, he is right between Dorian and Basil. I’m sure we all know at least one person similar to Wotton. Henry keeps giving his "expert advice" to everyone around, whether they want to hear it or not. He considers himself above everyone else and his thoughts deserving of merit. The aesthete in him prefers beauty over morality. He seems to be a thorough misogynist, and puts down women and marriage at every chance he gets. Though he is quite clever, he uses his wit to disparage rather than develop, his cynical nature bursting forth in almost every declaration. However, all this is mere “preaching”. In practice, he seems to be living a life quite the opposite of whatever he proclaims. It would have been so easy to get exasperated and irritated at that character but I felt as if Wilde was trying to take a sarcastic dig at his peers through Wotton, and even used that character to voice his own secret views on the English mentality. Needless to say, Henry has the best one-liners in the book.

The writing style is typical of that literary era. There is a lot of detail in the narration, with entire paragraphs containing a single sentence at times. If you are fond of classics, these hurdles won’t restrict you but allow you to marvel at the beauty of the writing. Unfortunately, contemporary writing has spoiled us and it takes time to get into the spirit of the book. The initial part is a little slow, then the story picks up at a decent enough pace until about Chapters 10-11, which are tedious and longwinded. This will be the biggest hurdle for the modern reader unused to classic reading. Once you go beyond these 2 chapters, the story whooshes ahead with a splendid and unexpected plot turn and you will be engrossed to know what happens next.

What is essential to understand is that the most common version of this novel is not how Oscar Wilde had written it. His original 1890 version contained 13 chapters, the contents of which were deemed to be quite controversial by its publisher. He was asked to tone down the homosexual content, which was quite sacrilegious for the prevalent social mores. A revised and expanded edition was published in April 1891. For this version, Wilde divided the final chapter into two chapters, and added six entirely new chapters, including the ones with James Vane, a character not present in the original version. While this revised version did work on reducing the “homoerotica”, the publisher was still not satisfied and cut down a further 500 words (without informing Wilde) before publishing the book. Wilde never wrote a full-length novel again. And I understand why.

I read the 20 chapter version, and then took a quick glimpse through the original 13 chapter version (labelled as “The uncensored version”). I feel that the writing is indeed much more structured and superior in the original. The revised version seems to meander many times, probably due to the “Fill in the Blanks” that Wilde was compelled to undertake. I am a hundred per cent sure that I would have enjoyed the book even more if I had known about and read the 13 chapter version. If I ever reread this book, that’s the version I’ll go for.

In the meantime, I leave you with a few of Wotton’s thought-provoking quotes from the book. I don’t agree with all of them, but they are quite a food for thought nonetheless. show less

This is one of the greats of literature, IMHO.

Lyrical, Witty, and shameless in how it utterly lambasts the Late Victorian period of England, it is primarily a tale of base moral degradation housed in a pretty shell, rising above its own wit to show us a lot more about what is within us all and scour us just as much as it did the English period.

Wow, right?

Let me go one step further. I can't exactly tell if this is the first time that the idea that moral turpitude was supposed to be reflected upon ugly visages, but I'm willing to point at it as the most popular expression of it. More so than Rob Stevenson's [b:The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde|51496|The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde|Robert Louis show more Stevenson|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1318116526s/51496.jpg|3164921]. But things are not so simple, of course. Since we're dealing with the mirror of the painting and Basil's (the painter) preoccupation with ART being a reflection of reality, the whole question becomes one of seeming versus reality, art versus life.

When you take on Erasmus's mantle and Praise Folly in order to remain youthful and wise, taking it to the full hedonistic conclusion, everyone loves you but you lose yourself. Oscar gives us deep thoughts and a massively cautionary tale that serves as a straight horror.

(See what I did there? A "straight" horror?) Oh, nevermind. lol, Oscar was put on trial in for indecency charges shortly after this novel. He really shocked the shit out of folks.

Beyond even all this, the tale manages to mightily entertain us as we see such a pure soul get so muddy... for nothing entertains us more than seeing the mighty fall.

Should we blame Basil, the Painter, who was the author and the architect of this horror? Or Lord Henry who hand-held Dorian down into his greatest shames and gave him every justification (the world). Or Dorian himself, who is the very mirror of ourselves, wishing for eternal youth and the ability to have every single one of our wishes come true, with no restriction or force behind his moral compass?

Dorian is the epitome of 'do as thou wilt'. Who is at fault here?

This is what makes this great literature. It's bright, wicked, and corrupt, but we are the ones who give it this power. show less

I knew the story and I've seen several movies about Dorian Gray, but I'd never read the book. I'm glad I finally decided to to do. I love the language and wit that Oscar Wilde uses to tell the story of his doomed friend, Dorian Gray , who gives over his soul to have everlasting youth and beauty. I say friend because it is thought that Mr. Wilde considered himself to be the character of Lord Henry Wootton in real life. And, if Dorian is the vain innocent that chooses a life of debauchery over virtue, then Lord Henry is surely the devil that tempted him along that path. The story is classic and the lesson it teaches is worth reflecting on. Does anything worth having come without a price? Probably not.

On mornings like this, where the Walla Walla sky looks like it’s been smudged with the world’s most complete palate of gray, I like to curl up with a book that reminds me I’m not nearly as messed up as fictional people can be. The Picture of Dorian Gray, Oscar Wilde’s poisonous love letter to vanity, moral decay, and the dangerous idea that mirrors should mind their own business.

Dorian is that guy who starts out looking like he’s just stepped out of a cologne ad, all cheekbones and promise, and ends up proving that eternal youth is best left to dermatologists and plastic surgeons. Meanwhile, his portrait does all the heavy lifting, aging harder than a rock star on a 50th anniversary farewell tour.

Wilde knew secrets of show more humanity's vanity like a serious therapist and knew exactly when to stick the blade in. Every line is like a straight razor, every aphorism full of truth and venom. The man didn’t waste words.

What I love most is how Dorian Gray asks a question we’re too afraid to say out loud: If we could hide all our sins somewhere out of sight, behind a locked door, under a coat of varnish, would we behave any better? Spoiler: humanity doesn’t fare well in that hypothetical. We can barely be trusted with smartphones.

This isn’t just a novel. It’s a moral Rorschach test dipped in decadence. You don’t read it. You inhale it, choke a bit, and feel weirdly grateful for the experience. Like drinking absinthe in a room where the wallpaper is judging you. And it sticks with you like a mouth full of peanut butter - thick, persistent, and impossible to swallow without making strange faces.

If your mood or soul currently leans toward gray-scale introspection, pour yourself something warming (I recommend a highland Scotch), settle in, and let Wilde remind you that the real monsters aren’t in the portrait—they’re the parts of ourselves we hope no one sees. I only gave this 4 stars because the damned story won't leave me alone, even years later. show less