Author: aestheticgrandeur

Many critics have interpreted Dorian Gray as an autobiographical novel about artistry and homosexuality during the Victorian Era; however, the evidence that supports their claims exists mostly in “subtle” forms such as coded botanical language and expository dialogue. During the 19^th century, an explicit story about romantic same-sex lovers would have too scandalous for the general population to grip because sodomy was illegal and homosexuality was seen as a crime. Yet, Wilde was sent to prison because lawyers were able to analyze and exploit the revealing dialogue between characters and the thinly veiled Victorian “language of flowers.” Henceforth, Wilde’s art was wielded as a weapon against him and I will be conducting a dialogue analysis in order to emulate the techniques that lawyers may have taken advantage of during the trials.

During the Victorian Era, various types of flowers held specific meanings and could convey emotional sentiments. Interestingly enough, basil is an herb that signified hatred and offence in the 19^th century (138, Engelhardt). Wilde’s choice to name the creator of Dorian Gray’s picture Basil is extremely curious. If the novel of Dorian Gray is meant to mirror the artwork in a metafictional manner through self-exploration and indulgent allusions to itself, then it is safe to presume that Basil, as the main artist, is Wilde’s interpretation of himself. So, why would Wilde name himself after an herb that symbolizes hatred? Perhaps Wilde despised the artwork that Basil created because it revealed far too much information about him.

When prompted to display his artwork, Basil refuses while stating, “I know you will laugh at me, but I really can’t exhibit it. I have put too much of myself into it” (6, Wilde).   After hearing this, Lord Henry calls Basil ”vain” and tells him to get over himself by saying, “Don’t flatter yourself, Basil: you are not in the least like him” (7, Wilde). Basil’s confession reaffirms Wilde’s fear that he has placed too much of himself within the novel, but Lord Henry, as a representation of the general audience, fails to understand his friend’s coded language because he assumes that appearance is the main indicator of likeness. Since Lord Henry dismisses Basil’s statement, the reader is inclined to do the same. However, Basil’s anxieties are so strong that he is determined to convince Henry that he must look beyond the surface of the painting in order to find meaning.

Basil delights in his use of coded language and secrecy as he claims that, “The commonest thing is delightful if one only hides it” (8, Wilde). The painting of Dorian Gray is the same as the novel in the sense that the artist who created it has infused the work with some essence of himself. Similarly, Wilde disperses advice through Lord Henry’s dialogue in which he states, “People are afraid of themselves, nowadays. They have forgotten the highest of all duties, the duty that one owes to one’s self” (23, Wilde).

Since Wilde incorporated so much of what appears to have been his own personal beliefs and anxieties into his novel, I wonder if he was surprised to have been sent to prison or whether he had written Dorian Gray in order to taunt authorities. The idea of Wilde as a supreme troublemaker is extremely alluring and far greater than the notion that Wilde was an accidental criminal who didn’t conceal his identity well enough through covert language.

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

 

Engelhardt, Molly. “The Language of Flowers in the Victorian Knowledge Age.” Victoriographies 3.2 (2013): 136-60. Web.

 

Wilde, Oscar. The Picture of Dorian Gray. New York, NY: Penguin Classics, 1985. Print.

The most curious linguistic oddity within Dracula occurs when Bram Stoker makes the conscious decision to capitalize the first letter in the pronouns ‘He’ or ‘Him’ in reference to Dracula whilst they are not positioned at the beginning of a sentence. This choice would not be considered strange if the capitalization of mid-sentence male pronouns were not intrinsically linked to religious implications. Normally, the capitalization of ‘He’ and ‘Him’ is reserved for references to God or statements about God’s actions. As a result, the pronoun capitalization that Bram Stoker employs in various sections throughout the text is abnormal because it is quite possibly blasphemous. The sporadic pronoun capitalization within Dracula creates an uncertainty between what is asked of him and what is required of Him- By this, I mean to say that the reader is unsure of whether God or Dracula is being addressed within these crucial passages.

 

In the article “Pronoun Capitalisation in the New King James Version: A Style in Translation and Communication,” Ekpenyong states that the Bible utilized capital pronouns (in reference to God) in order to more greatly differentiate between God and man- and to also establish the concept that God should be placed “above everyone else” (Ekpenong, 58). For the reader’s sake, the pronoun capitalization within the Bible eradicated subject ambiguity and distinctly established a division between God and human beings. Ekpenyong suggests that using capital letters (or ‘divine pronouns’) instead of small letters brought “insight to the reader” (Ekpenong, 60). Incongruously, Dracula’s perversion of capital pronouns creates a blurred line between what appears to be divine (God) and what is horrific (Dracula).

If it is true that Dracula is, in fact, a distorted deity, then we must also explore the circumstances in which divine pronouns are ascribed to him in order for us to decode the meaning beneath Stoker’s religious undertones. More specifically, in Dr. Seward’s diary, Renfield describes his eexperience with Count Dracula:

 

“Then the dogs howled, away beyond the dark trees in His house…A dark mass spread over the grass, coming on like the shape of a flame of fire; and then He moved the mist to the right and left, and I could see that these were thousands of rats with their eyes blazing red- like His, only smaller” (298, Stoker).

 

Stoker’s “divine pronoun” usage implies that Dracula is not only magical, but holy in a sense. The relationship between Renfield and the Count is odd because he [Renfield] describes Him [Dracula] with great reverence despite the terror that is associated with the encounter. Perhaps, an argument can be made that Renfield is Dracula’s apprentice and thus treats him with a great deal of respect. The manner in which Renfield speaks, for instance, “I don’t care for the pale people; I like them with lots of blood in them” (Stoker, 299) implies a twisted likeness between both Dracula and Renfield. This godlike pedestal that Renfield places Dracula upon could explain the religious reverence, however, Renfield is not the only character within Dracula to refer to ‘Him’ using capital pronouns.

Comparatively, the Log of the Demeter contains references to Dracula’s presence aboard the ship. The log includes the shipmate’s fears about the Count, but his capital pronoun usage is extremely alarming.

“You had better come too, captain, before it is too late. He is there. I know the secret now. The sea will save me from him…I dared not go below, I dared not leave the helm; so here all night, I stayed, and in the dimness of the night I saw it- Him! God forgive me” (Stoker, 95).

 

With this new discovery, I am led to think that Stoker’s usage of “divine pronouns” is reserved for moments of complete wonderment at the prospect of the Dracula’s unknown powers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Referenced:

 

Ekpenyong, Effiong. “Pronoun Capitalisation in the New King James Version: A Style in Translation and Communication.” Babel Revue Internationale De La Traduction / International Journal of Translation Babel 55.1 (2009): 58-68. University of Uyo. Web.

 

Stoker, Bram. Dracula (Revised Edition). Ed. Maurice Hindle. New York, NY: Penguin Classics, 1993. Print.

 

 

The dynamic between Holmes and Watson instantly transformed from the moment that the directors of CBS’s show “Elementary” decided to cast Lucy Liu, an Chinese-American woman, in the role of Watson. Britney Broyles, author of “From the Opium Den to Partner-in-Crime…Solving: The Chinese Presence in Sherlock Holmes Adaptations,” proposes the idea that BBC’s strict adherence to Conan Doyle’s classic Watson/Holmes white-male dynamic allows “racial essentialism” to creep into the essential plotline whereas CBS’s “looser fidelity to the [text]” allows for “ideological revision” in which the use of binaries are neither fundamental nor significant. (Broyles, 150.)

Perhaps in switching the formulaic aspects of Holmes and Watson’s physical appearances, Elementary can more readily dismiss frequent criticisms about the implicit and explicit sexism and racism that customarily accompany Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories. Sherlock Holmes, as a text, has the ability to indirectly rely on racial themes because the detective must place his confidence in his ability to locate societal patterns and criminal motives whilst remaining pure and incorruptible in the eyes of the reader.

However unintentional and innocent the insertion of foreign criminals may seem, Broyles takes issue with BBC’s astounding amount of “foreign villains” during season one of Sherlock citing “The Great Game” with criminals from the Czech republic and “The Blind Banker” which the evildoers are Chinese and portrayed in a farcical manner. (Broyles, 155-156.)

Naturally, within a detective narrative, the characters are bound to categorize or identify the unknown miscreant with an “othering” trait that separates themselves from the idea of the criminal. Perhaps the detective will keep a level head in regards to the assumption of racial differences or cultural customs, but the subliminal or explicit racism within criminology reports and descriptions by bystanders tend to be less concealed. Within Conan Doyle’s The Adventure of the Speckled Band, Sherlock’s client provides ambiguous information about a speckled band and since she cannot easily make sense of this evidence, she turns to the familiarity of racial discourse in order to identify “gypsies on the plantation” as potential suspects. (Conan Doyle, 45.)

The witness’s practice of pointing out racial and cultural differences to further disassociate with potential criminals is a common device that authors have relied upon within the detective genre. For instance, the plot of Edgar Allen Poe’s The Murders in the Rue Morgue relies heavily upon subjective interpretation of the unknown. Within the tale, witnesses are called upon to provide statements about the peculiar voices of the murderers. In each case, naturally, the witnesses provide contradictory information about the languages and the ethnicities of the potential murderers. Isidore Muset claims that one of the criminals was a Frenchman who was certainly not a woman whilst the second murder certainly spoke in Spanish. Incompatibly, Henri Duval suggests that the murder was definitely a woman whilst the other accomplice spoke in Italian. In both scenarios, the “words” and languages are indistinguishable, but the witnesses still provide information that conveniently distances him or her from any consequence or suspicion.

Naturally, it makes sense to identify qualities that are contradictory to their own traits because they wish to disassociate with horrid criminal acts. For instance, in a more innocent situation, when a driver cuts you off, you are more likely to exclaim, “Come on, lady!” if you identify as male and “Watch where you’re going, man!” if you relate more to a female identity before even seeing the gender of your road-nemesis.

By switching the idea of Watson as a white male figure to the new identity of Watson as a Chinese-American female, the audience of CBS’s Elementary is prompted to view race and “othering” factors in a different manner. Since Watson is presumably “good” and holds traits and values that are admirable, the race and gender issues of Conan Doyle’s classic tails are reconstructed, questioned, and modernized for contemporary viewers.

Sources:

Reference to The Murders in the Rue Morgue

poestories.com/read/murders

Six Great Sherlock Holmes Stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

From the Opium Den to Partner-in-Crime…Solving: The Chinese Presence in  Sherlock Holmes Adaptations by Britney Broyles

During the 19^th century, the British Empire was in a position of immense power with imperialist control over approximately 59 countries. (Victorian School) In the midst of the Victorian Era, the British Empire would sometimes employ select leaders to watch over the people and the land that they had recently annexed in order to ensure that everything remained dandy for Britain. In general, military powers or governmental agents were meant to carry weapons in order to discourage rebellion and to enforce quotas for the production of specific materials for the conquered population to adhere to.

The principles of laissez-faire governing system state that those who were “left to their own devices” are apt to “develop habits of sturdy self-reliance” whilst those who are “supported by the state” are bound to “sink into a mode of dependency.” (Evans, BBC.) I believe that the laissez-faire concept alludes to the fact that Britain was eager to profit off of the lands that they invaded and the people that they had exploited without claiming moral responsibility for the state that they had created when things ended poorly. (Economically or even in relation to declining health amongst the population due to exhaustion.)

Throughout the text, there is ample evidence to suggest that the “white and terrible” Dr. Moreau imposes human characteristics and human thoughts upon the beasts against their will. (36.) Much like imperialists in the Victorian Era, men with guns would omit the culture and the natural inclinations of a native population in order to “civilize” them. However, Prendick acknowledges his ignorance of what is natural for these Beasts and states that he “does not know how far they were yet from the human heritage that [he] ascribes to them.” (40.)

I envision Dr. Moreau as the physical embodiment of laissez-faire principles in which Britain keeps producing more power through the acquisition of land and subjects, but it does not accomplish or produce much beyond the creation of chaos. The population becomes too massive to control and both Britain and Moreau have bitten off more than they can chew since they are overextended and understaffed. The idea that only auditory and visible pain could cause Prendick to care about the creatures is a fascinating statement because it bluntly admits to the ugliness of humanity. (54.) Laissez-faire production justifies the acquisition of land and subjects in bulk because it is hypothetically easy to maintain and it rationalizes the belief that the imperialists are not responsible for the horror that they indirectly create. When Dr. Moreau states that he “always falls short on the things [he] dreams,” I am reminded of the insatiable hunger for victory and conquest during the Victorian Era. (58.)

 

 

 

Sources in addition to Wells:

http://www.victorianschool.co.uk/empire.html (Victorian School)

“Laissez-faire and the Victorians” (Evans, BBC)

By Professor Eric Evans

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/victorian_britain/education_health/laissez_faire_02.shtml