New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-07-27
OSCAR WJLDE on CRITICISM.

OSCAR WILDE on CRITICISM.
Mr. Oscar Wilde, having published book
which has offended public taste, shows himself
sensitive to criticism, and in his resentment
writes to "Thc ST. James, Gazette, laying
down what he thinks a critical cancn This Is
20 strange that were Mr. Wilde its sole sponsor
il would perhaps not deserve attention. But
in truth he here speaks for modern school,
which undertakes to determine the scope OF
Art and it, relation 10 morals and it is as the
representative of this school that we propose
to deal with him Speaking of the crtique
on hi, book. he SAYS: "Such an article as you
have published really makes one despair of
the possibility of any general culture in Eng
land. Were | n French author, and my book
brought out in Paris, there is not single
literary critic in France, on any paper of high
standing who would think for moment OF
criticlSng it from an ethical standpoint. II
he did So he would stutify himself not mere
w i'm the eyes of all men Of letters but III the
eyes of n majority of the public" And again
he says: 1t is proper that limitations should
be- placed on action. II i not proper that
limitations should be placed on art. To art
belong all things that are and all things that
are not. and even the editor of a London paper
has no right 10 restrain tho freedom OF art IN
the selection of subject matter" From Mr..
Wilde's point OF view, therefore, no critic OF
literature has any right to consider the moral
aspect Of a book 70 do so is to be guilty OF
Puritanlsm" and Puritanism is never 50
offensive and destructive as when it deals with
art matters
The question Of the relation of art to moral
tho, ,,f,.l. frp-
vcrsy. In France, according 70 Mr. Wilde
that question has been deiimtlvcly settled IN
the form Of a complete divorce between the
two All creation is Art, and all Ar is its own
reason for existcnce-miGht be formulated As
the new doctrine. But II does not happen to
Lc tr1le that France has accepted this radical
view. On the contrary the highest criticism
There distinctly refuses - accept II, and So
with the highest criticism of all other civilized
nations. And this is the clcarcst and the most
important function Of crllclNm-to Distinguish
between the true Art which has il roots III
Ethics and the false Art which inSolenty pre-
TEND, 10 be law unto itself Let H. not
deceive ourselves" says j. ~ oymond>' the
historian OF the Italian Renaissance. Art l.
ndl>>ouby bound up with mans spiritual
forces" Nay, more for true art as in Athens
and Italy. =" j, able t. assert man moral nature
At moments when it seems in other spheres II
nave been paralyzcd or vl,iated.' Art IN III"
abstract. indeed, includes the representation Of
Beauty without reference To- IFS ethical ten
| d.nc,e,. But for this reason il is always liable
70 DEGRADATION. and it becomes false Art when,
pcrceivlng Beauty alone, ii leaves ont OF ac-
co,int Goodness and Truth and thus merely
| .,s,. inc. al, hos la
| - noble conduct And We know not how bet
fer 10 describe the relation Of morality to art
| than i'm the words of the author already quot
| ed: And forlSmuch aS right conduct Is more
prccious to man than either noble pleasure or
| the knowledge and control OF facts, morality
has 10 provide that neither the scientific pur-
| suit of knowledge nor the acSthctlcal supply OF
pleasure shall compromise the rcctltudc OF the
will in action" That regulation and, if ncceS-
sarv restraint of Art, against which Mr. Wilde
and his school protest 50 loudly, Is the normal
function of morality.
NOTHING, indeed, would be easier than the
| corruption of q nation If Mr.. Wilde had his
way. criticism were Silcnced, and every base,
lcvd and evil influence, maSqueradln@ under
the name of Art, were free 10 parade itself
unrebuled, and 70 claim equal rights with pure,
clcvating and wholesome creations. Under
such conditions ethical anarchy would pave the
way to material anarchy, and, the general sense
Of right and wrong being hopclcsSly confused,
truth, justice, mercy and order would diSap-
near from a doomed society. Fortunately for
the cause OF human progress, the Oscar Nldcs
are both few and feeble, nor can the impudcnco
of their pretenslonS disguise the perverSty Of
their logic or the falscncSS of their theory of
Art In truth, they have that word contn-
ually in their mouths without understanding
what it is and what il compartments. Criticism,
fulfilling its highest duties, will, however, eX-
pose and analyzo the pseudo aeStheticiSm which
80 arroglntIy demands the right of way, and
neither in France, England nor America Is
there any ground for apprehension that what
| Mr.. Wilde calls " the ethical standpoint Will
be ignored in reviewing contemporary liter
|