Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-30
EsrHErlCIsn, wuAr Is IT.

The announcement made by telegraph
that Oscar Wilde. the celebrated apostle
Of esthsticism. has sailed from England
for the United States, and that he pro-
poses to lecture throughout the country
on ..Esthsticism." has excited the curl.
osity Of our people somewhat, and many
ask, what Is estheticism?
To answer this question. extracts from
an editorial article publishsd in the Sac
ramsnto Record Union on the 9th in.
slant are given below. The Record. Union
says:
The origin Of estheticism may fairly
be assumed to be due to discomfort with
the sordid and inartistic standards Of So
cisty generally. It was an attempt to
popularizs art, and to discard the ma.
tsrisl and gross surroundings Of the per.
iod. It was to rsbuks Shoddyism and
Plutocracy. Il was to revive simplicity
and true culture together. II was to
lift men and women ont Of the old stolid
habits. and to teach them Q new and
higher line Of thought and action.
Unfortunately for the Esthstic school II
made shipwreck upon the Interpretation
Of Art. It was 80 determined to have
nothing 10 do with the old theories that
It resolved to invent principles and
standards for itself. II was deeply
tinged with the feshy mysticism OF the
Swinburne school, and 1t sought its
ideas consequently In the wrong direc'
ton. The Esthstics thus developed 9
completely and increasingly unnatural
theory OF life. II was to be Earnest,
but without any OF the purposes to which
ssrnestness may 30 ftly applied. 1t wal
to be Grave, but without any OF the
reasons which render gravity respscta'
bic. II was to be Enthusiastic, bull only
in regard to things which the world has
Justly branded as fantastic. 1t was 10
be full Of Symbolism. but the symbols
must be OF things alike unint.llieibls
and void OF Importance.
An English journal says OF 1t that
when it's extravsgancs and affec'ation
arc swept away. IL will be found to have
affected much the beauty Of art, and thai
its apostles and votaries deserve
thanks" We cannot sgree with this
opinion. We do not think that Esthst.
icism has really done much to extend
the realm Of true Art. We think. on
the contrary. that 1t has done much to
inculcats wholly false and vicious and
maudlin views Of Art. II has
become responsible for an infinite guam
tity Of unmitigstsd usliness. 1t has
thrust the incongruities Of Japanese ar'
into intolerabls juxtsposition With the
outcome Of Anglo-SaIon civilization. II
has revived the tssteless tawdriness oi
Queen Anns's reign. II has outraged
every true artistic feeling BY adopting
the most vulgar and fsring flowers In
Nature for it, symbols.
Against all this. what is to be setP we
confess our inability to see. The Es'
thetic School has. as II appears to US.
done nothing but TO hinder Intellectual
progress by misleading q great many
people into o by-way which terminates
in a cul.ds-sac. In fact Estheticism seems
10 us as completely false and mischiev'
Gus in its way % was that dramatic con-
ve~utionalism which in Gsrrick's time
costumed Julius Caesar in q Families
wig, and compelled Coriolanus to wea'
silk breeches and an embroidered velvet
coat Of the latest mode.