Summary
The St. James's Gazette has reviewed Dorian Gray and placarded London with posters calling it 'Mr. Oscar Wilde's Latest Advertisement: A Bad Case.' Wilde replies that he cannot understand how a work of art can be criticised from a moral standpoint, since art and ethics are 'absolutely distinct and separate', and that the confusion between them gave England Mrs. Grundy. He objects to the word 'advertisement': he is the man in England who least needs one, and the paper's article will sell the magazine far better than he could.
When the Gazette calls that letter his best reply, Wilde writes at length. The reviewer called the characters puppies, and so they are, but Thackeray wrote about puppydom too. Any odd syntax is deliberate, and a passing reference to Suetonius and Petronius is no show of learning. Bad people are 'fascinating studies' for art, the artist's task is 'to invent, not to chronicle', and the public, told the book is wicked, will rush to it and find a moral: Basil Hallward dies for worshipping beauty, Dorian kills himself trying to kill conscience, and Lord Henry learns that those who refuse the battle are the most deeply wounded. The moral, he says, is the book's only error.
The third letter turns to censorship. The Gazette had not proposed that the Government act against the book, Wilde says, but it had suggested it, and an editor who countenances official censorship of literature does not understand what literature is. A Government might as well teach painters to paint. He then gives his own verdict on the book: too crowded with sensational incident, too paradoxical in its dialogue, but not tedious and dull. Puritanism, he says, is never so destructive as when it deals with art, and 'To art belong all things that are and all things that are not.'
In a fourth letter to the Gazette Wilde denies that he sanctioned a publisher's circular praising his story, which a 'London Editor' had mentioned. He has asked Ward and Lock to withdraw it, since no publisher should judge what he publishes. He rejects the word 'novelette' as Fleet Street slang, repeats that the rights of literature are the rights of intellect, and quotes Renan preferring military despotism to the despotism of the Church. A work of art is not a form of action, he says, but 'the highest mode of thought.' He asks for the last word.
To the Daily Chronicle, whose reviewer said he tried to 'vamp up' a moral, Wilde answers that his real trouble was keeping an obvious moral subordinate to the artistic effect, and that he thinks the moral too apparent and hopes to correct it in the book edition. Dorian, he adds, is not cool and calculating but impulsive, romantic and haunted by conscience, and he destroys the picture to be rid of it. The only books the story mentions are well known, and the story itself is 'an essay on decorative art': poisonous, perhaps, but perfect.
The Scots Observer suggested the book was written for the criminal and illiterate classes. Wilde replies that such readers read only newspapers, and that an artist writes for his own pleasure with his eye on the object. The critic has confused the artist with his subject: Keats said Shakespeare had as much delight in creating Iago as Imogen, and to the artist virtue and wickedness are colours on a palette. Dorian's sins are left vague on purpose, since 'Each man sees his own sin in Dorian Gray.' The St. James's used Caliban as its critic; the Scots Observer let Thersites into its pages.
Two last letters answer Charles Whibley, who wrote that it must pain Wilde to be hailed as a moral reformer by Christian papers. Wilde calls it a gratifying tribute: a complete work shows beauty to the artistic and a lesson to the ethical, and each paper found in it what it brought. Of two hundred and sixteen reviews, he says, he has answered only three. He dismisses Mr. Brown's comparison with Zola's La Terre and Mr. Cobban's 'impudent paradox', then confesses that a friend has convinced him the editor wrote the letters signed 'H.' himself. He bows out, asking the editor to put his marionettes back on the shelf.
Chapter by chapter
SummaryWilde answers the St. James's Gazette, which has put up posters calling his story his 'Latest Advertisement: A Bad Case.' He declines to argue its merits, saying art cannot be judged from a moral standpoint and blaming the confusion for Mrs. Grundy. He objects only to the word 'advertisement', since he needs none, and says the paper's article will do more for the magazine's sales than he ever could.
Wilde calls the Gazette's review the most unjustifiable attack on a man of letters in years and takes its charges in turn: puppies, grammar, erudition and danger. He argues that bad people fascinate art and that the artist exists to invent, not to chronicle. He ends by revealing the book's moral, that all excess and all renunciation bring their punishment, and calls it the only error in the book.
Wilde replies that the Gazette may not have proposed Government action against his book, but it plainly suggested it. He protests against any official censorship of imaginative literature and says a critic must judge the work without reference to the author. He names what he himself sees as the book's true faults, too much sensational incident and too much paradox, and calls Puritanism most destructive when it deals with art.
Wilde denies approving a circular in which the proprietors of Lippincott's praised his story, and says he has asked the agents to withdraw it, since no publisher should judge his own books. He objects to the word 'novelette' and to comparison with Mr. Anstey. Asked what rights literature has, he answers that they are the rights of intellect, and he claims the last word in the quarrel.
Wilde answers the Daily Chronicle's reviewer, who said he tried to 'vamp up' a moral. His real difficulty, he says, was keeping the obvious moral in second place, and he thinks it still too apparent. He corrects the reviewer's reading of Dorian as cool and conscienceless, defends the books the story mentions, and calls his story an essay on decorative art: poisonous, perhaps, but perfect.
Wilde answers the Scots Observer's suggestion that he wrote for the criminal and illiterate classes. An artist writes for his own pleasure, he says, and must never be confused with his subject: Keats saw that Shakespeare delighted as much in Iago as in Imogen. Dorian's sins are left vague on purpose, so each reader finds his own. He ends by comparing the paper's critic to Thersites.
Wilde replies to Charles Whibley, who thought it must pain him to be hailed as a moral reformer by Christian papers. He calls it a gratifying tribute: a rich work shows its beauty to the artistic and its lesson to the ethical, because art mirrors the spectator. He lists how each paper read the book and says no critic can see a work from every point of view.
Wilde declines further argument with Mr. Whibley, says he has answered only three of two hundred and sixteen reviews, and disposes of Mr. Brown and Mr. Cobban. He praises Flaubert for answering those who called Madame Bovary immoral. He ends with a mock confession: a friend has persuaded him that the editor invented the correspondents himself, and he asks him to put his marionettes back on the shelf.