Talk:Oscar Wilde/Archive 1

message: I've heard that Wilde was an anarchist. Did he ever write anything political, or does anyone know more about his ideas in this regard? --Tothebarricades.tk 01:46, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think he was exactly an anarchist. He wasn't the most political person, although his politics were definitely on the left (despite his dandyism and social climbing). You might want to look at his essay "The Soul of Man", also known as "The Soul of Man Under Socialism." -- Jmabel | Talk 05:42, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)
It may seem wilful to lead a selection of Oscar Wilde's major critical prose with an essay on left-wing politics, but 'The Soul of Man under Socialism' is more concerned with aesthetics than ethics: Wilde found socialism 'beautiful' because it encouraged freedom and individualism, freeing man to develop his emotional and imaginative lives. Wilde's Utopian scheme, as he admits, is gloriously impractical and contrary to human nature, but that's the point - it's because reforms are based on what is considered practical, rather than what might be possible or even unthinkable, that inequality and suffering persist. His vision of a future in which men dream and absorb Art as vaguely-imagined machines do all the menial work, reads like a delightful lampoon of HG Wells. Favourite Quotations: 'the moment that an artist takes notice of what other people want and tries to supply the demand, he ceases to be an artist and becomes a dull or amusing craftsman, an honest or dishonest tradesman' "Art is the most intense mode of individualism that the world has known.").--Stratofortress 15:47, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Beliefs 

message: I reverted the following recent anonymous change pending a citation "He went under the assumed name of 'Sebastian Melmoth', after Saint Sebastian: "The Cursed Wanderer," as well as the central character of the gothic novel Melmoth the Wanderer." The bolded portion was inserted; I reverted it. If there is any basis for it, it probably should be in the article, but it would be news to me, and on the basis of what I see this seems just as likely to be vandalism as a useful edit. Google search on "Saint Sebastian" + "The Cursed Wanderer" produces nothing. Got a citation? Great, then I'll be glad to see it restored. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:44, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)
:* I think that things have gotten a little mixed here. The Melmoth part of the name, as you state, comes the novel "Melmoth the Wanderer" which was written by Oscar's grand uncle, on his mother's side, the Reverend Charles Maturin. Melmoth was a mysterious, satanic hero who was cursed to roam the earth. The Sebastian comes from Saint Sebastian whose youthful body was pierced with arrows. The most famous painting of him is by Guido Reni, which Wilde saw, and commented on, during his trip to Italy when he was 21. I have never heard Sebastian referred to as the "Cursed Wanderer". He is, however, for a variety of reasons, the favorite saint of the gay community. Yukio Mishima, in his autobiographical novel "Confessions of a Mask", claims to have been greatly effected by this painting as a young man. I mention this because it is one of several things that are interesting to compare and contrast in the lives of these two extraordinary authors. MarnetteD 04:23, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saint Sebastian: "The Cursed Wanderer"? 

message: * Oscar Wilde/Endicia - making footer link for template. -==SV 04:56, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footer 

message: I have reverted the text about the 2004 play because it seems much more credible the way that it was. Often something like that increases ticket sales, and wouldn't Wiki need better sources to explain that kind of censorship in the U.K. MarnetteD | Talk 19:18, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plays About Wilde 

message: Doing some research on oscar wilde, i just found this interesting article,
http://www.struggle.ws/ws98/ws53_wilde.html
It also provides a link to Wilde's essay on socialism (http://www.struggle.ws/hist_texts/wilde_soul.html)
Oscar Wilde's socialism
        Yet all is well; he has but passed
        To Life's appointed bourne:
        And alien tears will fill for him
        Pity's long broken urn
        For his mourners be outcast men,
        And outcasts always mourn. 
Paris has had its fair share of famous people die in it. Most of them have ended up in the Pere La Chaise cemetery and Oscar Wilde is one of them. Of all the people buried there, that was the one grave I had to see when I entered that cemetery on a brisk March morning. I admire him because he was the master of that Irish pastime of extracting the Michael.
He was at first lauded by a society which would later reject him; as much for what he believed as for what he did. He believed his mourners would be outcasts because he never felt part of a society that holds homophobia as an attribute rather than what it really is, a disease.
    "I think I am rather more than a Socialist. I am something of an Anarchist, I believe..."
Oscar Wilde was also inspired by politics. He was not blind to the obvious early failings of modern day society. The poverty he wrote about over a century ago, in 'The soul of man under Socialism', exists on the streets of Dublin today. Throughout this winter I've walked to work past bodies huddled under blankets in St. Stephen's Green, wheezing with bronchitis in the frosty air.
Wilde wrote about the poor in relation to charity "the best amongst them are never grateful. They are ungrateful, discontented, disobedient and rebellious....Man should not be ready to show that he can live like a badly fed animal. He should decline to live like that, and should either steal or go on the rates which is considered a form of stealing".
Wilde was living in a time when an estimated 2 million people were living in poverty in London. The solution would come under socialism, where property would be converted from private into public wealth and society would be restored to "its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism, and insure the well-being of each member of the community." In the meantime for the poor "why should they be grateful with the crumbs that fall from the rich man's table?"
    "If the socialism is authoritarian; if there are governments armed with economic power as they are now with political power; if in a word, we are to have industrial tyrannies, then the last state of man will be worse than the first."
Wilde was certain of what kind of future he wanted for humanity. As the quote above indicates he did not wish to see an industrial tyranny rise in the name of Socialism. "All modes of Government are failures", he maintained, while social democracy is "the bludgeoning of people by the people for the people". His main obsession was with what he termed "individualism". I think it's fair to interpret this as a will for freedom. "Socialism itself will be of value because it will lead to individualism."
He opposed the locking up of people because they had committed crimes against property, arguing "a community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment rather than the occasional occurrence of crime".
He aslo took up the case of possibly the most famous political prisoners of his era. Along with George Bernard Shaw, he signed a petition for the release of the Haymarket martyrs (anarchist trade unionists executed for their role in the 8- hour day movement). He saw through the lies and the rail-roading they were receiving in that court in Chicago.
    "A map of the world that does not include Utopia is not even worth glancing at."
Wilde lived his life never once renouncing his beliefs or his choices. His politics have been hidden over the years since he died in 1900. He wrote his essay on 'The Soul of Man under Socialism' over one hundred years ago, yet the ideas expressed are still vitally relevant. He expressed the idea that we all exist and only some of us really live. Some of us live because we're pushing for a different world to the one that surrounds us. Read him and remember "Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man's original virtue."
by Dermot Sreenan
----
Can some of this content/topic be added?
--Black Dagger 05:41, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oscar Wilde and Anarchism

message: I have a photo I took in 2002 of Wilde's tomb somewhere but I can't find it at the moment. Here is one I did find:
thumb|250px|Oscar Wilde's house in Tite St, Chelsea, London
Adam 02:09, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: An anon recently added this; I took a shot at editing it, but I don't know the piece. My sole reference was  (accessed 26 July  2005), which looks probably solid. If anyone can do better, great. Sounds like it deserves an article of its own: note the remark there about dispute over authorship. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:45, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
*I gave it a shot. I gave some context for the authorship dispute from what I found, although the microfilm you point to offers a counterpoint. Would add it, except would like a heftier source. I think you're right, though, it would make an excellent page.--DNicholls 05:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Burmese Masque'' 

message: On what basis is Wilde included in the category "Christian writers"? He made a deathbed conversion to Roman Catholicism; other than that, I've never heard of him being a practicing Christian. Is there something I'm unaware of, or is this category so broad as to include every writer born into a nominally Christian background (in which case it seems a useless category, probably worthy of deletion). -- Jmabel | Talk 05:50, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Wilde was not mearly a deathbed convert. Catholicism had held a stong emotional pull on him from an early age. He attended Masses thoughout his life and attended audiences with two Popes (Pius IX and Leo XIII). After he was released from prison, he requested a six month spiritual retreat with the Jesuits, but was refused.
Also consider the Christian nature of some of his Childrens' stories. The Fisherman and his Soul, The Selfish Giant, and The Young King all contain overt christian themes. Iron Ghost 10:54, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian? 

message: This is impossible to verify, I think, but an interesting point, anyway - arguably, Wilde at least supervised / assisted with the publication of this pornographic novel in 1893 - although it is clearly the work of several writers. As is also apparent in Dorian Gray, Wilde appears to nurture a synergy between homosociality and the aesthetics of violence (by homosocial I mean the full spectrum of male relations, not only homosexuality). Can this be reconciled with his socialism? And, if we assume this synergy exists, can it be read as part of a wider literary canon inclusive of indebted authors like Saki?--RowanM 11:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teleny 

message: The article says currently: "Although Wilde later claimed to have told the customs officer "I have nothing to declare except my genius", historians and biographers have concluded that this is an embellishment of Wilde's as there is no contemporary evidence that this occurred."
This is not as I've heard the story.  I understood the first known occurrence of the "quote" was in a publication by (??) Frank Harris, not only many years after it was supposed to have been uttered, but after Wilde's own death.  If this is so, then Wilde could never have claimed to have said it.  Is there any documentary evidence that the "quote" was extant in Wilde's lifetime?  JackofOz 22:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a specific answer, but in case you don't know, Harris knew Wilde quite well, and his memoir of Wilde was largely based on their conversations. The exact degree of its accuracy has been questioned, but even though the rampantly heterosexual Harris was not entirely comfortable with Wilde's sexuality, it's probably the closest thing there is to being Wilde's own memoir. No, scratch that: if Wilde had lived long enough to write a memoir, it would almost certainly have been less factual than Harris's. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, but this does not really resolve the point I was making.  I believe that the best we can say is that the phrase is attributed to him, that is, somebody says he said it.  As far as I know, we do not know that it was Wilde himself who claimed to have said it.  Unless there is some evidence of his having claimed to have done so, that I am unaware of.  JackofOz 01:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  In a quick check of the many Wilde biographies that I have in my library it is quoted in all but Vyvyan Holland's 'Son of Oscar Wilde' (which makes sense since he is recording his memories of his father and not his fathers life). This includes works by Frank Harris, H. Montgomery Hyde and Arthur Ransome - all of whom new Wilde while he was alive. Even Merlin Holland quotes it in his book 'The Wilde Album'. While most biographies state the epigram as fact more recent ones have pointed out that no mention of it is made in the New York papers of Jan. 1882 and that this was at a time when they were reporting virtually every movement that Wilde made and every phrase that he uttered. While it is true that legends about historical figures often grow after their deaths I find it hard to believe that so many sources that knew Wilde would spontaneously have attributed it to him after his passing. My own learning about Wilde (which has carried on over 28 years now and includes a healthy dose of understanding that myth and fact blur in both delightful and frustrating ways when researching his life) has found that the phrase in question is most often quoted as being a part of Wilde's 'Reflections on America', which was the name given to the series of informal lectures he gave about his year long tour of America in various parts of Britian in 1883 and 1884. The first place that I encountered it, in a source other than in the existing biographies, was in the Edinburgh libraries newspaper archives in a paper reporting his lecture there, which was published in 1883. Unfortunately, I saw this 25 years ago when I was hitchhiking around Scotland. My interest in Wilde back then was more cursory and did not include keeping a precise bibliography and I did not record which paper it was and I offer my apologies for not being able to be more precise. I understand your concerns Jack of Oz - and I know that my experience may not be a satisfactory explanation to your objection - I wonder whether other wiki members who have an interest in Wilde, and who live in Britian (which I do not) might be able to research their own newspaper archives and give you a more precise source. User:MarnetteD | Talk 20:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the care you took with that reply, MarnetteD.  So it seems the quote was extant in 1883, only a year after it was allegedly uttered.  The plot thickens.  JackofOz 22:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Declaration of Genius

message: It should be noted that Lord Alfred Douglas was over 18 when his affair with Wilde began.  Therefore, Wilde cannot be a pederastic lover. CaveatLector 02:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lord Alfred is not the candidate, but Robbie Ross, who was seventeen and Oscar's first boy. Haiduc 03:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not arguing either way about whether Wilde and Ross (or Douglas) were "pederastic lovers", but according to Niel McKenna's recent biography The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde (2003), it's a persistent myth that Ross was Wilde's first male lover. Wilde was aware of his homosexuality from the moment of his first kiss with another boy at age 16, and lived with male lover Frank Miles (two years his senior) for several years before his marriage in 1884. Why is 18 the cut-off age for pederasty anyway? If it's a legal definition, it's an anachronistic one — there was no homosexual age of consent in Wilde's time. ntennis 03:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sexological definitions have to be used, not legal ones, otherwise it would be impossible to talk about pederasty as anything other than a legal topic, which is clearly not the academic sense of it. As for cut-off age, personally I think it is absurd since human experience does not lend itself to that kind of analysis, but that is what we have to work with at the present time, see Bullough's definition of it at :Category:Pederasty. For a better definition of it, see Wilde's defense at the time of his trial, it is the quintessential "Pederastic Manifesto" because it hinges the relationship on the difference between the lovers, not their equality. I have not yet gotten to McKenna's book, what does he say about the accusation (by the hotel maid) at his trial that he used to bring up street boys to his hotel room, and the sheets would be soiled the next day? Haiduc 12:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually all that fits with Lord Alfred, except he is excused by reason of his advanced chronological age. Here the argument hinges on Ross, and until that is refuted I do not see how you can avoid the issue. Otherwise, I agree with everything you say. Haiduc 12:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

text: As for the cutoff age, see above. As for the ancients, Alexander is a settled matter per the ancients (see article), Caesar arguable and should be argued both ways and removed if consensus calls for it. As for Socrates, I have simply not gotten around to dealing with the objections of another user, but I agree, he needs to be there. Haiduc 12:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Then again...after looking through the log of the last few CfD's on this, I'm of two minds on this issue.  The catagory has some merit in staying, though I feel as though it needs some serious modification and cleaning up.  Modification in the sense that you cannot historically define pederasty as it is defined today (through the age line of 18, as in the case of Wilde.  Having a sexual relationship with a 17 year old is truly picking nits when it comes to labeling someone as pederastic).  I think there needs to be a set standard for inclusion in the catagory that does not include age. I also think that the catagory, short of being renamed, should include an article that mentions this particular aspect of Ancient Greek Culture and the other cultures in which pederasty was socially acceptable.  I also feel as though strong evidence is needed for inclusion (in the case of Alexander, I am not aware of any evidence of this whatsover, and no truly reliable evidence for Julius Caesar's inclusion.  You have to realize that this catagory is also as historically tricky as the LGBT catagory, as it assumes that these groups have some sort of history before the invention of the terms to describe them.  I would object to Socrates being included in the LGBT catagory (which I will check on) because he simply cannot be used as a representitive of what it means to be LGBT today.  It seems to me that this catagory as well as every catagory that deals with sexualities, needs some serious meditation.  CaveatLector 08:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As for the validity of the category, I think the more you study the history, the more you will see that it is unavoidable. As for the age thing, I agree, it is a rough measure. Some relationships with youths over 18 probably should be included, and some with youth below that age should be excluded. But you would have to get into the heads of the people involved, and that cannot be done. The same thing could be argued of all sexual relationships. There are some heterosexual relationships that probably should not be considered as such, despite consummation and/or impregnation, etc, etc. In as much as that relates to your desire to set another standard for inclusion, I would love to do that but only for publication elsewhere because that would be original research and out of place here. But it should be done. I do not understand your "should include an article that mentions this particular aspect of Ancient Greek Culture and the other cultures in which pederasty was socially acceptable" even if I change your "article" to "paragraph." Sounds like an apologia to me, where none is needed. I do agree that all this material requires a great deal of thought and cannot be treated lightly. Unfortunately, until now it has been treated lightly, universally covered up and made to seem something it is not, whether by masking it as heterosexuality or as androphilia. Haiduc 12:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pederastic lovers catagory 

message: This paragraph may be misleading, since Ross seems to claim not that he was the first male that Wilde had had relations with, but the first "boy". Perhaps we do not have to place McKenna in contraposition to the previous material, I see no conflict there. Later, Ross boasted to Lord Alfred Douglas that he was "the first boy Oscar ever had" and there seems to have been much jealousy between them. However, Neil McKenna's more recent biography, The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde (2003), demonstrates convincingly that Wilde was aware of his homosexuality from the moment of his first kiss with another boy at age 16, and had in fact lived with male lover Frank Miles (two years his senior) for several years before his marriage in 1884. Haiduc 12:30, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. I added that content while modifying the page's previous claims that Wilde was introduced to homosexuality by Ross. This version of events has been near-universal until the last few years, but in light of McKenna's evidence, appears to be no longer tenable. I've only read an excerpt, but I think the book might shed some light on whether Ross was indeed the first "boy" Wilde "had". I would like to know the source of Ross's boast. Was it a letter from Ross to Douglas? Or hearsay? If he did say it, did he really mean that Wilde had only had "men" and not "boys" before meeting him? Seems unlikely to me, but certainly possible. Or was Ross mistaken? Does anyone have McKenna's book? ntennis 12:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ross 

message: According to the Center Theatre Group's Performances program for February 2006 that was available at the run of "The Importance of Being Ernest" at the Ahmanson Theatre this year, "Solitary confinement in Reading gaol and eight hours a day on the treadmill soon destroyed Wilde."
Perhaps some elaboration of what Wilde endured in gaol is appropriate for this article?  Or a reference to what the British government considered normal gaol conditions at that time? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.106.233.130 (talk • contribs) 8 March 2006.
: Yes, I think that would be an appropriate addition. - Jmabel | Talk 16:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaol time 

message: Hi, I would like to add an external link to the World of Biography entry
*  probably the most famous portal of biography to this article. Does anybody have any objections?
 please do not add this to the article, and please read the incident report before giving the go-ahead.  This is spam and not link-worthy under WP:EL; the articles contain many distortions, lack citations, and contain nothing that wouldn't fit directly in the wiki article.  a link to worldofbiography has been placed on over 70 talk pages by User:Jameswatt.  thanks.  --He:ah? 20:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: link

message: @Dbiv: I only restored original content that had been removed without explanation in the edit summary or on the talk page. I am the author of it. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 12:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverts 

message: The article refers to A Woman of No Importance as a comedy. While it is in a way, it is also heavy in social commentary and all that drama stuff (sorry, tired, can't write tonight). Perhaps it is worth mentioning that it was not so light as plays such as The Importance of Being Ernest? Russia Moore 06:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, go for it. It has elements of melodrama, for sure. - Jmabel | Talk 23:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Woman of No Importance 

message: I can't seem to find the "Why bother? I know I've got a first" quote being attributed to Oscar Wilde on site but Wikipedia. Also, the wording in "Marriage and Family" make it seem as if Florence Balcome became engaged to Bram Stoker AS A RESULT of Oscar falling in love with her. I find that hard to be true. Shiranweber 31 Dec 2005
: Sounds to me like the quotation should be removed as uncited. I'll do this. As for Balcome, I don't see any problem with the wording, but feel free to edit if you think you could make it clearer. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of citation