Not
everything worth reading is hot off the press. In this section, we recommend "something old" that is still well worth
reading. "Something old" can mean anything from a venerable and antique
classic to a good book first published five or more years ago.
“OSCAR’S BOOKS” by Thomas
Wright (first published 2008)
As I’ve
remarked once before on this blog, I am sometimes nonplussed as to why new
biographical books are written about people who have already been the subject
of a number of biographies. In most cases, “new” biographies of the same
person, unless they turn up new, important and hitherto undiscovered material,
are simply re-hashes of books that have already been published. Often, indeed,
they are simplifications and rip-offs of earlier books. Sometimes all they have
to offer that is new, is a little stray gossip that earlier biographies haven’t
bothered with.
An example
I’ve already given of this is the number of books that have been written about
Oscar Wilde. I am not a Wilde fanatic but, as it happens, I have on my shelves
six books about Wilde as well as the man’s own collected works. Two of the
books are really memoirs rather than biographies – Anna de Bremont’s Oscar Wilde and His Mother (1914 –
presenting Oscar’s Mum as a forbearing and saintly woman who had to put up with
much); and Frank Harris’s Oscar Wilde
(1916 – in which the old pornographer presents himself as Oscar’s friend and as
the only person who really understood Oscar). These two books are historical
artefacts rather than real biographies. Then there’s Richard Ellmann’s
voluminous Oscar Wilde (1987), which,
for very good reason, is now regarded as the standard and most reliable
biography and is certainly the first book about Wilde you should read. Next to
it is Barbara Belford’s briefer Oscar
Wilde – A Certain Genius (2000), which really approaches rip-off territory,
as it says nothing that Ellmann hadn’t already said first, and better. Finally
there is Neil McKenna’s long piece of gay advocacy The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde (2003), which concentrates so
exclusively on the man’s sex life and the Victorian homosexual underworld that
it gets to be a bit of a bore.
By this stage, you will see that
I think there is little room for a new book on Oscar Wilde. Wilde is one of
those people (like Shakespeare, Dickens, Rimbaud and Franz Kafka) who have been
done to death by biographers even if, in Shakespeare’s case, they have little
primary material to go on.
Is it really possible for anyone
to say anything about Wilde’s life that has not been said before?
Surprisingly, it is, and the
proof is Thomas Wright’s delightful book Oscar’s
Books, the sixth book about Oscar Wilde which I own. It earns its place on
the shelf because it concentrates on one aspect of Wilde’s life that has not
been examined in detail before.
In 1895, when he lost his libel
case against the Marquess of Queensbury and was convicted for “gross
indecency”, Oscar Wilde was faced with two heavy punishments. One was his
prison sentence. The other was the loss of his beloved library of over 2000
volumes, which he had spent more that twenty years acquiring.
To cover legal expenses, the books had to be auctioned. As
Wilde was being taken to prison, the auctioneers dumped the books on the
pavement outside his London residence and sold the lot at knockdown prices to
booksellers, scavengers, and sensation-seekers. The scattered library has never
been reassembled.
As he reveals in his
autobiographical notes, Thomas Wright is a youngish Wilde fanatic who is devoting
his life to reconstructing everything Oscar Wilde would have read in his
lifetime, everything he would have had on his shelves and everything that could
in any way have influenced his writings.
Wright has understood that what a
writer habitually reads will have at least as much influence on his work as
what happens in the other departments of his life. This was particularly true
of a dandyish jackdaw of a writer like Oscar Wilde. As Wright demonstrates
amply, there are echoes of Wilde’s wide reading in all the plays, poems,
stories and essays Wilde penned. In fact, there is occasionally shameless
plagiarism. This gives special point to that famous and much-repeated anecdote
about Wilde hearing somebody saying something witty and remarking to a friend “I wish I’d said that”.
“You will, Oscar, you will,” his friend at once quipped.
A dedicated Wilde-ophile such as
Thomas Wright doesn’t dwell on the thefts, but he can’t avoid noting that much
of Wilde’s work (especially the poetry) comes uncomfortably close to pastiche.
Art imitating art. It’s hard to read his Newdigate Prize-winning poem Ravenna now with a straight face
although, in fairness to Oscar, he did write some surprisingly gutsy sonnets.
Of course, there is a possible
major objection to reconstructing a man’s library as Wright does, and then
drawing conclusions from the books he gave shelf-space. How do we know how
deeply Wilde read all the many books he owned? If you judged me by the books I
give shelf-space, you would assume that I was a universal literary genius. But
then the sad fact is, I have never read many of the books I own, and have only
a passing acquaintance with others. This, I surmise, is true of most of the
people I know who inhabit book-lined studies.
Wisely, Wright confines himself
to those works which Wilde discussed with friends, referred to in his letters,
or scored with his copious marginal comments. And in following this path,
Wright strikes gold, showing how much Wilde’s fairy-tales grew out of the
Celtic tradition his flamboyant and self-dramatizing mother (who signed herself
“Speranza”) bequeathed to him; how much Wilde was influenced by the society
novels of Disraeli and the social panoramas of Balzac; how much he pored over
all homo-erotic aspects of the ancient Greek classics; and how much Dante meant
to him once he was confined to a prison cell. The felon who penned De Profundis and The Ballad of Reading Gaol clearly shared enough of his mother’s
temperament to see himself as going through his private Inferno.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading Oscar’s Books – a feast of erudition and
bibliophilic lore. But I would fault Wright on one thing. I think he
underestimates the influence of Balzac’s brilliant fantasy tale The Wild Ass’s Skin (La Peau de Chagrin) on Wilde’s less
resonant and more imitative The Picture
of Dorian Gray. To refresh your memories, in The Wild Ass’s Skin (written about fifty years before Wilde’s
novel), people who possess the magic skin fulfil their sensual and worldly
desires, but as they do so the skin shrinks and their lives are shortened. In The Picture of Dorian Gray, the
beautiful young man remains beautiful while he leads a life of debauchery and
sin, but the picture that has been painted of him becomes uglier and nastier
until he keels over and dies and is revealed to be old, ugly and nasty. In both
cases, a magic token takes the physical punishment that the sinner should take.
[Robert Louis Stevenson’s short story The
Bottle Imp is a more simplistic variation on this same plot.] Balzac’s
novel has a broader social perspective than the Wilde story, which is confined
to a somewhat precious social set.
However Wright does confirm that
Wilde was Balzac’s number one nineteenth century English-speaking fan. It was
Wilde who wrote:
“The nineteenth century, as we know it, is
largely an invention of Balzac…. We are merely carrying out, with footnotes and
unnecessary additions, the whim or fancy or creative vision of a great novelist.”
Referring
to the hero of Balzac’s Lost Illusions,
Wilde added somewhat preciously, “Who
would care to go out to meet Tompkins, the friend of one’s boyhood, when one
can sit at home with Lucien de Rubempre?”
I
find it charming that Wilde found he had so much in common with a rampant
heterosexual and often hard-headed pragmatist like Balzac, but it does confirm
me in my belief that there was also much of the Romantic to Balzac and he could
always tell a good story.
For
the record of allusion, by the way, when Wilde famously said that in meeting
male prostitutes he was “feasting with
panthers” he was in fact quoting from Balzac where Lucien de Rubempre
speaks of visiting brothels as “feasting
with lions and panthers”. And in a case of life imitating art, Oscar
Wilde’s funeral mass was said at the church of St.Germain-des-Pres before he
was buried in the Pere Lachaise. In Balzac’s Splendeurs et Miseres des Courtisanes Lucien’s funeral is conducted
from the same church and Lucien is buried in the same cemetery – so even after
death Oscar Wilde was imitating one of Honore de Balzac’s fictions just as he
had imitated The Wild Ass’s Skin.
Inevitably
Thomas Wright’s highly original book can’t help recapitulating at least some of
the details of Wilde’s biography that are well known from other sources. Once
again, you get to notice what a fair and decent chap was the enlightened prison
governor who looked after Wilde in jail. Once again, you get the chance to
regret that Wilde had to fall in love with a devious and neurotic little snot
like Lord Alfred Douglas.
But it’s
the unfamiliar that counts here, and in Oscar’s
Books, Thomas Wright has achieved the unlikely feat of saying something new
about somebody who was in danger of being turned into a cliché.
No comments:
Post a Comment