Selected Poetry of D.H. Lawrence edited by Keith Sagar (1985)

Far-off
at the core of space
at the quick
of time
beats
and goes still
the great swan upon the waters of all endings

Lawrence is famous, or notorious, for his novels, but he also wrote poetry throughout his career. At three important phases of Lawrence’s life, poetry became his primary form of writing:

  • in the first year of his relationship with Frieda von Richthofen (1913), resulting in the volume Look! We have come through!
  • the two years he sent in Sicily (1920 to 1922): Birds, Beasts and Flowers
  • in the last year of his life: More Pansies and Last Poems

The complete works runs to just short of 1,000 poems. The common view is that a large number of these are not really successful. He was very hit and miss as a poet and hit and miss within individual poems. In this Penguin edition, Keith Sagar selected 150 ‘really successful, achieved poems’. He thinks they justify the claim that Lawrence was not just a good but a great poet.

Lawrence’s published books of poetry were:

  • Love Poems and others (1913)
  • Amores (1916)
  • Look! We have come through! (1917)
  • New Poems (1918)
  • Bay: a book of poems (1919)
  • Tortoises (1921)
  • Birds, Beasts and Flowers (1923)
  • The Collected Poems of D.H. Lawrence (1928)
  • Pansies (1929)
  • Nettles (1930)
  • Last Poems (1932)

A scholarly overview would mention how he started off in the 1910s writing traditional, rhymed verse, cast in regular stanzas, in a manner influenced by Thomas Hardy; to this format he added his own knowledge of the West Midlands vernacular.

But his most striking, popular and anthologised poems are from much later, when he had developed an extremely flexible style based on free verse. This meant his lines are not cramped into regular quatrains, or end with predictable rhymes, but each line is as long as it needs to be to express its thought or image.

Dialect poem: Violets

For me the chief pleasure of poetry is nothing to do with the subject matter – I don’t care whether it’s about love or death or model railways – the pleasure is in the vivid use of language, in phrases which leap off the page and expand your mind. And this is something to do with the speed with which the phrases course and flow through into the mind, detonating little bombs of pleasure. Here’s the opening of one of his dialect poems, Violets.

Sister, tha knows while we was on th’ planks
Aside o’ t’ grave, an’ th’ coffin set
On th’ yaller clay, wi’ th’ white flowers top of it
Waitin’ ter be buried out o’ th’ wet?

An’ t’ parson makin’ haste, an’ a’ t’ black
Huddlin’ up i’ t’ rain,
Did t’ ’appen ter notice a bit of a lass away back
Hoverin’, lookin’ poor an’ plain?

— How should I be lookin’ round!
An’ me standin’ there on th’ plank,
An’ our Ted’s coffin set on th’ ground,
Waitin’ to be sank!

In my opinion, the effort required in deciphering Lawrence’s dialect poems completely prevents the speed and leaping-out quality I’ve described. (The same goes for the dialect poetry of one of his heroes, Robbie Burns, which I’ve never related to.) They leave me completely cold. If I’m going to decipher something before I really understand it, I’d rather spend my time on Anglo-Saxon or Middle English poetry.

Transitional: The Hands of The Betrothed

Here he is writing in standard English, and in four-square quatrains (stanzas of four lines, rhyming a, b, a, b). The thing I notice about this poem are the cramped contrivance of the rhymes (‘heart is / mart is’). But I suppose more obvious is its smutty subject matter (her hand resting on his knee, then sinking into his flesh and bone and ‘foraging’ him – does he mean she was rummaging in his trousers?)

Her tawny eyes are onyx of thoughtlessness,
Hardened they are like gems in time-long prudery;
Yea, and her mouth’s prudent and crude caress
Means even less than her many words to me.

Except her kiss betrays me this, this only
Consolation, that in her lips her blood at climax clips
Two hard, crude paws in hunger on the lonely
Fruit of my heart, ere down, rebuked, it slips.

I know from her hardened lips that still her heart is
Hungry for love, yet if I lay my hand in her breast
She puts me away, like a saleswoman whose mart is
Endangered by the pilferer on his quest.

Though her hands are still the woman, her large, strong hands
Heavier than mine, yet like leverets caught in steel
When I hold them; my spent soul understands
Their dumb confession of what her blood must feel.

For never her hands come nigh me but they lift
Like heavy birds from the morning stubble, to settle
Upon me like sleeping birds, like birds that shift
Uneasily in their sleep, disturbing my mettle.

How caressingly she lays her hand on my knee!
How strangely she tries to disown it, as it sinks
In my flesh and bone, and forages into me!
How it stirs like a subtle stoat, whatever she thinks!

And often I see her clench her fingers tight
And thrust her fists suppressed in the folds of her skirt;
And sometimes, how she grasps her arms with her bright
Big hands, as if surely her arms did hurt.

And I have seen her stand all unaware
Pressing her spread hands over her breasts, as she
Would crush their mounds on her heart, to kill in there
The pain that is her simple ache for me.

She makes her hands take my part, the part of a man
To her; she crushes them into her bosom deep
Where I should lie, and with her own strong span
Closes her arms, that should fold on me in sleep.

Ah, and she puts her hands upon the wall,
Presses them there, and kisses her big dark hands,
Then lets her black hair loose, the darkness fall
About her from her maiden-folded bands.

And sits in her own dark night of her bitter hair
Dreaming — God knows of what, for to me she’s the same
Betrothed young lady who loves me, and takes good care
Of her maidenly virtue and of my good name.

This poem displays several other Lawrence qualities. For a start it’s too long to be a simple lyric, in fact it feels too long, full stop. But as it goes on you become aware of one of Lawrence’s central characteristics, which is his relentlessness. He won’t stop. He has got an idea and is going to approaches it from different angles, again and again, relentlessly describing it. He doesn’t let the reader off the hook. This was an enduring characteristic through his career, of both the prose and poetry. His best animal poems are great but almost all too long.

And the third thing is the uncompromising honesty of the content. Lots of people who don’t know much about poetry associate it with rarefied and lovely sentiments expressed in elegant or shapely phrases. As you can see, Lawrence is having none of this. He is going to bluntly tell you the unvarnished truth in its entirety, whether or not it breaches conventions of good manners and etiquette and politeness. I smiled at the description of the beloved’s ‘large, strong hands/Heavier than mine’.

Another thing going on here is connected to the contrived and dodgy rhymes, which is the strong sense that he is trying to break free of the constraint of traditional structures. The power of the thought continually stretches the structure, straining it at the seams, making the rhymes creak to contain them. How long, you wonder, will he put up with being constricted by traditional late-Victorian poetic convention?

Plus, as Sagar bluntly puts it, he wasn’t so great at the traditional thing, anyway:

Lawrence’s instinct, at this stage of his career, worked fitfully, and there was little craftsmanship to fall back on. He had no ear for formal rhythm or rhyme, and when he attempted them was usually inept.

Liberation: Birds, Beasts and Flowers (1923)

Sagar thinks Lawrence came of age in his verse when he did as a person i.e. when he eloped with another man’s wife, Frieda von Richthofen, at the end of 1912. The emotional completion, turmoil, anguish this caused is recorded in his collection Look! We have come through! published in 1917.

But I don’t agree. The Look! poems have shed some of the Victorian inheritance but not enough. And we know it’s not enough when we compare any of them with any of the poems in Birds, Beasts and Flowers, which represent the discovery of a completely new world or worlds. So instead of citing something from Look! We have come through! I’ll skip straight to the beasts. Take the sequence of poems about tortoises which are something utterly new. Here’s the start of Tortoise Shout.

I thought he was dumb,
I said he was dumb,
Yet I’ve heard him cry.

First faint scream,
Out of life’s unfathomable dawn,
Far off, so far, like a madness, under the horizon’s dawning rim,
Far, far off, far scream.

Tortoise in extremis.

This is from a new planet. It’s the result of two things, two breakthroughs. In Look! We have come through! he describes the intense emotions of his stormy relationship with Fried with what feels like great honesty and candour – fine, good, well done. But oh my God the tedium of yet another book of poems about the problems of love, love love love. And some of the phraseology, and some of the thinking, the conceptualisation, still feels lamely Victorian, reflected in the persistence of rhymes, sometimes very contrived rhymes. Here’s the start of one of the memorable ones (because it has boobs in it), Song of a Man Who is Loved:

Between her breasts is my home, between her breasts.
Three sides set on me space and fear, but the fourth side rests
Sure and a tower of strength, ’twixt the walls of her breasts.

Having known the world so long, I have never confessed
How it impresses me, how hard and compressed
Rocks seem, and earth, and air uneasy, and waters still ebbing west.

All things on the move, going their own little ways, and all
Jostling, people touching and talking and making small
Contacts and bouncing off again, bounce! bounce like a ball!

Sensitive readers, men or women, may thrill to the envisioning of boobs and their psychological comfort, from each sex’s point of view. Fine. What strikes me is the dullness that results from having to repeat the rhyme three times in each stanza! The sense that he chooses an end rhyme in the first line of each stanza and then the meaning has to be twisted and bent to fit whatever two words he can find to rhyme with it for the end of the succeeding two lines. Contorted and contrived.

Compare and contrast this with the total breakthrough of Birds, Beasts and Flowers. Now not only are there the long lines of free verse, but his entire conceptualisation of what a poem can be has been smashed to pieces. It doesn’t have to labour over a sequence of well-worked conceits: it can fly free. It can be fantastical. It can be so elliptical it has little at first sight to do with the subject. Or to put it another way, he can have one wild elliptical insight, throw out an oblique conceit, and then run with it. Thus ‘Humming Bird‘. Thus the brilliance of setting his poem about humming birds in the prehistoric world.

I can imagine, in some otherworld
Primeval-dumb, far back
In that most awful stillness, that only gasped and hummed,
Humming-birds raced down the avenues.

Before anything had a soul,
While life was a heave of Matter, half inanimate,
This little bit chipped off in brilliance
And went whizzing through the slow, vast, succulent stems.

The Look! poems are boring because they’re about tortured relations between a man and woman (yawn), the threadbare subject of so many poems for such a long time, for literally thousands of years. But seeing a humming bird as a window into the Mesozoic era? How many poems have been written on this subject, anywhere, in any culture, in all human history? None. It is something completely new, something wild.

I believe there were no flowers, then,
In the world where the humming-bird flashed ahead of creation.
I believe he pierced the slow vegetable veins with his long beak.

Probably he was big
As mosses, and little lizards, they say were once big.
Probably he was a jabbing, terrifying monster.
We look at him through the wrong end of the long telescope of Time,
Luckily for us.

Real genius – both for the flash of insight, the conceit, the idea – and then not restricting the insight in laboured rhymes but letting it express itself in free verse, each line as long as it needs to be to make its point.

Witty conceit: Mosquito

As to form, Lawrence persists with quatrains because they’re always handy. But you can also just have a phrase and that’s it. You don’t need to slave away at a four-line quatrain with studied rhymes working through a full description of the thing in question. Instead, you’re free to deploy quick stabs, throwaway but inspired images, which give you a sense of huge imaginative power and confidence. Thus the brilliant opening of The Mosquito.

When did you start your tricks,
Monsieur?

What a brilliant conceit, to address the tiny buzzing insect formally, but with the formality of another language as there are no mosquitoes in England. French because it instantly creates a sense of droll Parisian courtesy, think of Poirot politely skewering his victims, with just one word – Monsieur – given a line to itself, conjuring Parisian wit and style. And it’s funny. What lovely humour.

When did you start your tricks,
Monsieur?

What do you stand on such high legs for?
Why this length of shredded shank,
You exaltation?

Is it so that you shall lift your centre of gravity upwards
And weigh no more than air as you alight upon me,
Stand upon me weightless, you phantom?

Note the way the direct address continues – Monsieur is echoed by ‘You exaltation’ and ‘You phantom’. The lovely light and airy sense of humour continues in this sly stanza.

I heard a woman call you the Winged Victory
In sluggish Venice.
You turn your head towards your tail, and smile.

‘Sluggish Venice’ – how Lawrence is not surrendering to the middle-class groupthink about that smelly polluted mausoleum! How his tiny mosquito hears a posh woman make a clever comparison, but just turns and smiles. Mosquito just smiles at ladies who lunch. So many dynamics in just three lines! Thomas Hardy was still alive when ‘Mosquito’ was published (he didn’t die till 1928) but this is from another universe than Hardy’s gloomy, rhymey Victorian gravestones.

So it is that around page 80 of this 250-page selection we finally hit pay-dirt. The poems that came before this breakthrough, Sagar may justify with this or that scholarly explanation, but Birds, Beasts and Flowers is a wormhole into a different dimension, an entirely new way of thinking about what a poem can be.

Lawrence and Ted Hughes: Fish

And in a flash I realised where Ted Hughes gets so much of his supernatural animal poetry from. Compare and contrast Lawrence’s poem about a fish with Hughes’s famous poem about a pike. Here’s Lawrence in 1922:

I have waited with a long rod
And suddenly pulled a gold-and-greenish, lucent fish from below,
And had him fly like a halo round my head,
Lunging in the air on the line.

Unhooked his gorping, water-horny mouth.
And seen his horror-tilted eye,
His red-gold, water-precious, mirror-flat bright eye;
And felt him beat in my hand, with his mucous, leaping life-throb.

And my heart accused itself
Thinking: I am not the measure of creation.
This is beyond me, this fish.
His God stands outside my God.

And the gold-and-green pure lacquer-mucus comes off in my hand,
And the red-gold mirror-eye stares and dies,
And the water-suave contour dims.

But not before I have had to know
He was born in front of my sunrise.
Before my day.

He outstarts me.
And I, a many-fingered horror of daylight to him,
Have made him die.

And the Ted Hughes in 1960:

A pond I fished, fifty yards across,
Whose lilies and muscular tench
Had outlasted every visible stone
Of the monastery that planted them –

Stilled legendary depth:
It was as deep as England. It held
Pike too immense to stir, so immense and old
That past nightfall I dared not cast

But silently cast and fished
With the hair frozen on my head
For what might move, for what eye might move.
The still splashes on the dark pond…

Obviously the phrasing is different, Lawrence is more obsessed with himself, Hughes is more objective, and they’re both mighty works. But they have a very similar feel for the otherness of the cold underwater world. And they’re both in quatrains – no longer restricted by metre or rhymes, but there’s something about the four-line stanza which is enduringly useful.

Brushstrokes: Eagle In New Mexico

It’s not just that he’s broken free of the need for regular lines with a fixed metre i.e. the same number of beats in each line (tum-ti-tum-ti-tum-ti-tum) or the use of lines of alternating beats. It’s not just that he’s adopted the freedom of having some lines of exorbitant length, 20, 30, 40 words, more like paragraphs than lines, contrasted with some lines of just one word. That’s all a big shift, a massive break.

But the fundamental change is a complete and drastic change in the concept of what a poem is. No longer do the words serve the dictates of the form i.e. you need rhyme words, and a particular number of beats in specific lines. No longer are the words subordinate to the rhyme scheme and stanza structure.

And once you’ve flown free of those restrictions, instead of the words being subordinate to the requirements of the form, it’s the words, and the requirements of each phrase, which dictate the form. Each little bloc of lines or each individual line can become as purely expressive as you want. Unrestricted by those constraints, the words, and lines, can become purely expressive. Like brushstrokes. It becomes word painting. There are lots of examples in Birds, Beasts and Flowers. Here’s a section of Eagle In New Mexico which particularly demonstrates what I mean, made up of a series of short brushstrokes.

Sun-breaster,
Staring two ways at once, to right and left;
Masked-one
Dark-visaged
Sickle-masked
With iron between your two eyes;
You feather-gloved
To the feet;
Foot-fierce;
Erect one;
The god-thrust entering you steadily from below.

No rhyme, no regular scansion (number of beats) just word painting. Obviously the use of short two- or three-word phrases creates a structure of its own, in this little section. But you see how the words don’t have to comply with any rules but are as free as individual brushstrokes on a painting, as visible, as prominent as the brushstrokes on Cézanne or Van Gogh.

The Poetry of the Present

Lawrence himself describes the effect in an essay, The Poetry of the Present, which was published as a preface to the American edition of his New Poems (1920). It’s so important I’m going to quote it at length:

Free verse is, or should be direct utterance from the instant, whole man. It is the soul and the mind and body surging at once, nothing left out.

They speak all together. There is some confusion, some discord. But the confusion and the discord only belong to the reality, as noise belongs to the plunge of water.

It is no use inventing fancy laws for free verse, no use drawing a melodic line which all the feet must toe. Free verse toes no melodic line, no matter what drill-sergeant.

Whitman pruned away his clichés – perhaps his clichés of rhythm as well as of phrase. And this is about all we can do, deliberately, with free verse. We can get rid of the stereotyped movements and the old hackneyed associations of sound or sense. We can break down those artificial conduits and canals through which we do so love to force our utterance. We can break the stiff neck of habit.

We can be in ourselves spontaneous and flexible as flame, we can see that utterance rushes out without artificial foam or artificial smoothness.

The past and the future are the two great bournes of human emotion, the two great homes of the human days, the two eternities. They are both conclusive, final. Their beauty is the beauty of the goal, finished, perfected. Finished beauty and measured symmetry belong to the stable, unchanging eternities. But in free verse we look for the insurgent naked throb of the instant moment.

Free verse has its own nature… is neither star nor pearl, but instantaneous like plasm. It has no goal in either eternity. It has no finish. It has no satisfying stability, satisfying to those who like the immutable. None of this. It is the instant; the quick; the very jetting source of all will-be and has-been. The utterance is like a spasm, naked contact with all influences at once. It does not want to get anywhere. It just takes place.

Whitman

Note the references to the American poet, Walt Whitman (1819 to 1892). I don’t know a lot about Whitman, just the general idea that he popularised free verse in English and associated it with the democratic freedom of the United States.

Lawrence has obviously swallowed Whitman whole. He namechecks him a couple of times in actual poems, notably in the poem about the dog, Bibbles. If you turn to his prose, you discover that Lawrence wrote a chapter-length essay about Whitman which he included in ‘Studies in Classic American Literature’, but his name also crops up in a number of other essays about poetry. Whitman was a pioneer of free verse, he made the big heave, he broke the chains.

Declarative: Cypresses

And not only this, not being constrained by structure, form, rhyme schemes and whatnot means Lawrence can spit it out. If there’s a concept or idea behind the poem, he can just state it straight out. The poems become more declarative. Take the brilliant poem Cypresses, the idea is that the tall, dark cypress trees growing in clumps in northern Italy, symbolise the lost civilisation of the Etruscans and in some sense keep their secrets. Rather than dress this idea up in metaphor and crabbed metre and the requirements of rhyme, he can address it as he likes, still in a fanciful mode, still fancifully skipping round the idea, but with much more freedom

Folded in like a dark thought
For which the language is lost,
Tuscan cypresses,
Is there a great secret?
Are our words no good?

The undeliverable secret,
Dead with a dead race and a dead speech, and yet
Darkly monumental in you,
Etruscan cypresses.

A symptom of this is the freedom to drop into almost prose speech, to use known phrases and proverbs from prose or speech, unconstrained by metre, falling as naturally as in speech.

They say the fit survive,
But I invoke the spirits of the lost.
Those that have not survived, the darkly lost,
To bring their meaning back into life again,
Which they have taken away
And wrapt inviolable in soft cypress-trees,
Etruscan cypresses.

You see it even more (the use of quite prosey, everyday proverbial statements) in the domestic poem about the pet dog, Bibbles, who attached herself to Lawrence in Taos. The poem mocks the dog’s ‘infidelity’, lack of loyalty, always looking for a new lap to snuggle up in.

Not that you’re merely a softy, oh dear me no.
You know which side your bread is buttered.
You don’t care a rap for anybody.
But you love lying warm between warm human thighs, indiscriminate,
And you love to make somebody love you, indiscriminate,
You love to lap up affection, to wallow in it,
And then turn tail to the next comer, for a new dollop.

And start prancing and licking and cuddling again, indiscriminate.

Oh yes, I know your little game.

See how the deployment of so many homely phrases (‘dear me no’, ‘your little game’), the common vocabulary (a ‘dollop’) are all chosen to indicate the homely, cosy, domestic atmosphere of Lawrence’s attitude towards his little pet dog.

Animal lectures

In case it’s not obvious, many of Lawrence’s best poems are the animal poems in Birds, Beasts and Flowers. I’ve mentioned Ted Hughes. Lawrence has something very like Hughes’s breath-taking ability to inhabit animals, to make us see the animal and see the world from the animal’s point of view. He is Hughes’s godfather. It feels like he invented an entire new perspective and technique, which Hughes then went on to purify and supercharge.

Many of Lawrence’s animal moments are astonishing but there’s generally something else mixed in with it, which is his discursive aspect. As well as describing the animal and getting into its soul, Lawrence very often gets into its character by making a point, by attributing to it an idea. Often the idea starts out feeling random or irrelevant and only slowly do you come round to realising how it’s an angle, a chink a way to get into the subject.

But the ideas sometimes come to dominate, become explicit, become pedagogic. Take the emergence of his strong anti-Roman animus in Cypresses, a verse equivalent of the anti-Roman sentiments found throughout his book on the Etruscans, Etruscan Places. Or the long poem Elephant, which has lots of lovely descriptions of elephants but is really about the visit of the Prince of Wales to Ceylon.

Take his hatred of traffic pollution as expressed in In The City, his ridiculing of modern science in Anaxagoras. More typically Lawrentian is the kvetching about sex in Tortoise Shout or the anti-human polemic of Mountain Lion, which describes the gap between man and nature which recurs in many of the poems. Not always but very often he’s making a point over and above the marvellous animal-inhabiting. The lecturer, the pedagogue. it gives them an energy, but personally, I feel they detract from the purity of the effect.

Diversifying: Pansies

In 1929 he published a volume of shorter poems which he called Pansies. The idea is they encapsulate an idea in a pithy way. He explained himself in an introduction:

These poems are called ‘Pansies’ because they are rather ‘Pensées’ than anything else. Pascal or La Bruyère wrote their ‘Pensées’ in prose, but it has always seemed to me that a real thought, a single thought, not an argument, can only exist easily in verse, or in some poetic form. There is a didactic element about prose thoughts which makes them repellent, slightly bullying…

Back in 1915 Lawrence had been included in Some Imagist Poets: An Anthology. The general idea was to produce very short poems which used free verse, non-rhyme, visual elements like indentation, common speech rhythms, to produce hard, clear ‘images’. Some of the Pansies seem like a kind of reversion to that earlier mode, the short ones like Lizard.

Lizard ran out on a rock and looked up, listening
no doubt to the sound of the spheres.
And what a dandy fellow! the right toss of a chin for you
and swirl of a tail!

If men were as much men as lizards are lizards
they’d be worth looking at.

The brevity and the sting in the tail reminded me of the epigrams of the Roman poet Martial, which I’ve reviewed. In my review I cite the Academy of American Poets’ definition of an epigram: ‘An epigram is a short, pithy saying, usually in verse, often with a quick, satirical twist at the end. The subject is usually a single thought or event’ so I wondered what the difference is between an epigram and Lawrence’s pansies.

One thing is for sure, that they allow the lecturer, the preacher, the pedagogue in Lawrence to come out into plain sight.

To make self-preservation and self-protection the first law of existence
Is about as scientific as making suicide the first law of existence,
And amounts to very much the same thing.

At moments like these he comes close to sounding like Exasperated of Tunbridge Wells.

Lecturing: A Sane Revolution

The key point about the Pansies is that they’re not all the pithy little Imagist gems I was imagining. Quite a few of them ramble on. They really are just excuses for lecturing. Here’s one in full to give you the flavour. The thought is nice, but the striking thing is the lack of artistic mediation. It’s perilously close to a bloke at a party getting you into a corner and letting rip with his hobby horse.

If you make a revolution, make it for fun,
don’t make it in ghastly seriousness,
don’t do it in deadly earnest,
do it for fun.

Don’t do it because you hate people,
do it just to spit in their eye.

Don’t do it for the money,
do it and be damned to the money.

Don’t do it for equality,
do it because we’ve got too much equality
and it would be fun to upset the apple-cart
and see which way the apples would go a-rolling.

Don’t do it for the working classes.
Do it so that we can all of us be little aristocracies on our own
and kick our heels like jolly escaped asses.

Don’t do it, anyhow, for international Labour.
Labour is the one thing a man has had too much of.
Let’s abolish labour, let’s have done with labouring!
Work can be fun, and men can enjoy it; then it’s not labour.
Let’s have it so! Let’s make a revolution for fun!

Note how run-on lines no longer start with capitals, the kind of complete informality which e.e. cummings developed earlier in the decade. On the whole I didn’t like them, the Pansies. Many are worthy but boring, like We Are Transmitters. Fine sentiments, very quotable but fireless. The volume contains a few animal poems like the Swan series and I liked these. Not so much the lectures.

Last poems: Death and God

The poems of his last years, 1929 and 1930 (he died on 2 March 1930) are obsessed with death, death and religion, obviously not the Christian religion, his own ideas of what a religion should be, poems with titles like We Die Together, The Gods! The Gods!, Name the Gods!, There Are No Gods, God is Born, Lucifer. You get the picture. It’s a shame that, as he entered the final stage of his illness, so many of Lawrence’s poems reverted to Christian motifs. Now admittedly he only mentions all of these Christian stories in order to undermine and reject them, to replace them with his belief in life, the force of life and nature. But the real breaking-free would be not to have mentioned them at all but to have used other imagery.

Still, maybe he was exhausted by illness and the miasma of death around him, as the doctors prognosticated and he was moved to a hospice for the dying and reaching the end of his tether, as described in Shadow:

I fall in sickness and in misery
my wrists seem broken and my heart seems dead
and strength is gone, and my life
is only the leavings of a life…

Maybe it was just less effort, for a man exhausted by a terminal illness, to revert to the imagery of the Christian chapel and church of his boyhood. Hence a poem as Christian-based as the Lord’s Prayer. I recognise that it moves, after a few gestures towards the Christian prayer, away from Christianity and towards the natural world – but I prefer him when he doesn’t need the Christian props but simply rejoices in his natural milieu, in his own values and insights, above all celebrating the world of flowers, which he knew so much about. For example, ‘Gladness of Death’.

I have always wanted to be as the flowers are
so unhampered in their living and dying,
and in death I believe I shall be as the flowers are.
I shall blossom like a dark pansy, and be delighted
there among the dark sun-rays of death.

Last lectures

These last poems are better than the Pansies but not as good as the Birds and Beasts. Those were pure whereas Lawrence’s last poems have the voice of the lecturer firmly at their core, lecturing and hectoring. He is angry that Lady Chatterley’s Lover was banned (1928), that the exhibition of his paintings was raided by the police (1929), that his religious poems are called blasphemous – and so writes a series of poems mocking the English and their oh-so-nice bourgeois hypocrisy.

But none of them really rise to the occasion and the occasion is newspapers and bitterness, like his bitterness about the despoliation of England by industrialisation, and the destruction of cities and towns by traffic pollution (‘In The Cities’).

All this desperate last-minute lecturing about the importance of living feels hurried. It lacks the blithe freedom of the eagle in the desert, the mating tortoises, the snake at the water trough, from earlier in the decade. Although there are still sudden patches of florescence, lines which leap out.

There is no god
apart from the poppies and the flying fish,
men singing songs, and women brushing their hair in the sun.

And at the end he celebrates peace, rest after stormy seas.

All that matters is to be at one with the living God
to be a creature in the house of the God of Life.

Like a cat asleep on a chair
at peace, in peace
and at one with the master of the house, with the mistress,
at home, at home in the house of the living,
sleeping on the hearth, and yawning before the fire.

Sleeping on the hearth of the living world
yawning at home before the fire of life
feeling the presence of the living God
like a great reassurance
a deep calm in the heart
a presence
as of the master sitting at the board
in his own and greater being,
in the house of life.

At which point it has almost ceased to be poetry and become prayer. It’s better by far than his satire on the Lord’s Prayer, because purely his own thing and vision from start to finish. And there are the two poems which both use the phrase ‘Life is for delight and bliss’ (‘Anaxagoras’ and ‘Kissing and Horrid Strife’), the method of repetition he used from the start of his career.

Long or short

In his introduction to the Penguin selection, Keith Sagar mentions an important fact. In 1928 an edition of Lawrence’s Collected Poems was published and he put in a lot of effort into correcting, tweaking and, in some cases, rewriting a lot of them. Sagar has taken the decision not to use the revised 1928 versions but in every instance to use the versions as first published.

Does this explain why a lot of his poems, when I look them up online, are drastically shorter than Sagar’s book versions? For example, the online version of Kangaroo clocks in at 45 lines while Sagar’s version has 50. Did Lawrence shorten them when he revised them? Or did the owners of the poetry website trim it? Needs someone with more time and scholarship than I have to clarify.


Credit

‘Selected Poetry of D.H. Lawrence’ edited by Keith Sagar was first published by Penguin Books in 1972. Page references are to the 1986 revised Penguin paperback edition.

Related links

Related reviews

The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde (1891)

‘There is something fatal about a portrait. It has a life of its own.’
Dorian to the painter Basil Hallward, page 129)

His only novel, The Picture of Dorian Gray is one of Wilde’s most famous productions. It was originally published in novella length of 13 chapters in the July 1890 issue of the American periodical Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine. A longer book version, in 20 chapters, was published 9 months later in April 1891.

The original magazine version scandalised book reviewers for its alleged immorality. Basically, an innocent young man is corrupted and led astray by an older one. Some critics noted the homoerotic descriptions of young Dorian and suggested Wilde should be prosecuted for corrupting public morals. Why is Lord Henry so concerned that Dorian is handsome? Why does Dorian blush and pout like a young maiden?

He was certainly wonderfully handsome, with his finely curved scarlet lips, his frank blue eyes, his crisp gold hair. There was something in his face that made one trust him at once. All the candour of youth was there, as well as all youth’s passionate purity…

Dorian Gray stepped up on the dais with the air of a young Greek martyr, and made a little moue of discontent to Lord Henry, to whom he had rather taken a fancy…

How charming he had been at dinner the night before, as with startled eyes and lips parted in frightened pleasure he had sat opposite to him at the club, the red candleshades staining to a richer rose the wakening wonder of his face. Talking to him was like playing upon an exquisite violin. He answered to every touch and thrill of the bow…

Alongside this the book contains a welter of epigrams and repartee which rips to shred Victorian shibboleths like conventional morality, religion, the concepts of sin and redemption, the sanctity of marriage and fidelity, you name it Wilde’s lead character, Lord Henry Wotton, mocks and ridicules it.

‘What have you or I to do with the superstitions of our age? No: we have given up our belief in the soul.’

These criticisms prompted Wilde to justify himself in the press, arguing for the moral autonomy of the artist i.e. loudly denying the need to truckle to conventional ‘morality’ and asserting the artist’s right to use whatever subject matter is needed to create a mood and an effect.

In long essays published the same year, such as The Soul of Man under Socialism, he argued that whenever the philistine British decried an artwork as ‘immoral’, all it meant was that it was new and extended the subject matter of art and they consequently didn’t understand it. Seen from this perspective, accusations of ‘immorality’ should be worn as a badge of pride.

When the longer, book version was published, Wilde defiantly prefaced it with a page of witty aphorisms defending the right of the artist to complete autonomy over his subject matter, lines partly based on the defences of the novel he’d published in the press the previous year. (In fact the preface had been published as a standalone article in the March 1891 issue of the Fortnightly Review.) The content, style, and presentation of the preface made it famous in its own right, as a literary and artistic manifesto, although its more taunting statements were to come back and haunt Wilde at his trial.

Nonetheless, despite all this brave talk, in the book version Wilde toned down some of the original homoerotic passages, as well as boosting the main characters’ heterosexual backstories. He added no fewer than six chapters to the book’s original 13, all of which (regrettably) steered it towards conventional Victorian melodrama. It is to be remembered that Dorian’s love interest in the novel is very prominently made to be a young woman.

Short synopsis

Fashionable Society artist Basil Hallward is painting a full-length portrait of the ravishingly beautiful young man, Dorian Gray. He is infatuated by his ‘find’ and convinced that Dorian’s beauty is responsible for the new feeling in his art.

Lord Henry Wotton

He describes all this to his friend, witty aesthete and man-about-town Lord Henry Wotton, the Wilde figure in the book, the exponent of Wilde’s doctrine that the meaning of life is complete self-expression, that there are no such things as morality or sins, that one should give in to every temptation in order to expiate it (pages 23, 28).

The pact

Structurally if not in character, Wotton plays the part of Mephistopheles the Tempter to Dorian’s Faust, delivering a long speech which hammers away at the idea that Dorian’s beauty is due to his youth, which will pass away and be lost forever and leave him only regrets.

It is under the influence of these arguments that, when Dorian views Basil’s finished portrait, he laments that it will remain young and ravishing for all time while he, the real Dorian, is condemned to grow old and withered. In a fateful moment, Dorian declares he would give his soul if only he could remain as young and virile as he is at that moment and the portrait age instead of him (p.31).

The devil doesn’t actually appear, but someone or something hears Dorian’s wish and grants it. His physical person will remain eerily preserved and perfect as the years pass, and while he is lured deeper and deeper into a life of ‘sin’ by Lord Henry, who he soon surpasses in immorality and debauchery – and all the while the portrait of himself which he keeps up in his attic will rot and age and display every moment of degradation and corruption which he has experienced. Dorian will remain timeless. His portrait will become a ‘loathesome record of sin and debauchery’.

Eternal youth, infinite passion, pleasures subtle and secret, wild joys and wilder sins — he was to have all these things. The portrait was to bear the burden of his shame…

Sibyl Vane

Dorian first realises this as a result of the Sibyl Vane storyline. Inspired by Lord Henry to seek out new sensations, Dorian wanders into a seedy theatre in the East End where he is astonished to see a girl performer, Sibyl Vane, barely 17 years-old, give stunning performances of Shakespeare’s female characters. he bombards his friends with praise for her and then astonishes them by announcing he is getting engaged to her. Unfortunately, as he woos her and she falls in genuine love with the man she refers to as ‘Prince Charming’, she loses her acting ability: she no longer finds pleasure in portraying fictional love as she is now experiencing real love in her life. In effect she has sacrificed her art and hopes of a career and her family’s ambitions, all for him. This becomes clear on the embarrassing night when Dorian finally persuades Harry and Basil to accompany him to the little theatre. She is as wooden as a chest of drawers and his friends embarrassingly make their excuses and leave.

Dorian goes backstage to see Sybil, who is head over heels in love with him. But he deliberately, cruelly crushes her, telling her he is no longer interested in her, she’s become just a third-rate actress, she humiliated him in front of his friends. Although she throws herself at his feet and begs him to stay, he simply walks out never to see her again.

The portrait changes

He wanders the streets in a daze but when he returns home at dawn he catches sight of the portrait and realises it has changed. A subtle new expression of cruelty hover around the lips.

Was there some subtle affinity between the chemical atoms that shaped themselves into form and colour on the canvas and the soul that was within him? Could it be that what that soul thought, they realized? — that what it dreamed, they made true? Or was there some other, more terrible reason? He shuddered, and felt afraid… (pages 106 and 118)

But there’s more. Overnight Dorian regrets his harshness and vows to repent, to return to Sibyl and to marry. But later that day Lord Henry arrives with the shocking news that Sibyl has killed herself. The die is cast; Dorian can’t go back…

Sibyl’s family

Originally, all the story needed was the character of Sibyl. But in the extended version Wilde added to her backstory. He gave her a worn-out single mother who had herself been an actress, had had an affair with a handsome man who got her pregnant then dumped her, in the classic style. It is a comic touch but also a serious point that this woman likes to adopt histrionic poses with her troubled daughter, constantly imagining herself being watched, as if on the stage.

More importantly, Wilde gives Sibyl a brother, James ‘Jim’ Vane, who’s even younger than she is, just 16. The old Jew (see section on Antisemitism at the end of this review) who runs the East End theatre where Sibyl performs has been ‘kind’ to the family (Mrs Vane explains to her daughter, rather ominously) and has paid for young Jim to go to sea as an apprentice.

On the afternoon of the fateful evening when Dorian takes Lord Henry and Basil to see Sibyl and she completely fails to perform and Dorian then cruelly casts her off, the night which triggers his moral decline – that afternoon Jim and Sibyl had gone for a last walk (in Hyde Park) and he had questioned her about this new aristocratic admirer, full of (justified) suspicion. He is an angry impetuous boy and, despite all Sibyl’s naive insistence that she is in love and her admirer could never hurt her, Jim makes a vow that if any harm comes to Sibyl, he will personally track down and kill the admirer.

Two points: 1) This is the second vow or promise in the book, a sort of echo of Dorian’s central one.

2) Crucially, Sibyl doesn’t know Dorian’s name but has referred to him throughout their little courtship as ‘Prince Charming’. Prince Charming is all she can tell Jim, but he remembers the name, they eventually catch an omnibus back to their squalid digs on Euston Road and we hear no more of Jim, presumed set sail to the ends of the earth. Until he suddenly pops up in Chapter 16, wanting revenge…

Decline

Like all versions of the Faust story, the narrative has two key moments: when the protagonist sells his soul and then, years later, when the devil comes to collect his debt. In between these two cardinal moments the narrative has to flesh out and demonstrate what Dorian’s decline and fall mean in practice. Initially he follows the suggestions of the charismatic hedonist Lord Henry but, as Basil remarked early in the book, Lord Henry may pose as a cynic and sybarite, he may talk a good game of decadence and corruption, but he himself rarely practices it. Soon Dorian has gone past his master in excess:

‘I have never searched for happiness. Who wants happiness? I have searched for pleasure.’

and all the while the portrait records every step of his moral degeneration:

Hour by hour, and week by week, the thing upon the canvas was growing old. It might escape the hideousness of sin, but the hideousness of age was in store for it. The cheeks would become hollow or flaccid. Yellow crow’s feet would creep round the fading eyes and make them horrible. The hair would lose its brightness, the mouth would gape or droop, would be foolish or gross, as the mouths of old men are. There would be the wrinkled throat, the cold, blue-veined hands, the twisted body, that he remembered in the grandfather who had been so stern to him in his boyhood.

Beneath its purple pall, the face painted on the canvas could grow bestial, sodden, and unclean. What did it matter? No one could see it. He himself would not see it. Why should he watch the hideous corruption of his soul? He kept his youth — that was enough.

When I first read the book at school I was hungry for details of Dorian’s descent into ‘corruption’ and ‘infamy’, hoping to learn how to become ‘decadent’ myself – but as with most supposedly ‘decadent’ literature, I was sorely disappointed.

Huysmans Against Nature

Dorian’s naughty activities can be grouped under two headings. 1) First, Dorian comes under the influence of a powerful book which Lord Henry loans him and leads him into a fascination with jewels and rare manuscripts and decadent perfumes etc. Wilde confirmed to various interviewers that this was based on Joris-Karl Huysmans’s 1884 novel À rebours (which I immediately went off and read). In fact it isn’t so much ‘based on’ as, for 20 pages, a shameless plagiarism of that book, copying the hero’s obsession with rare jewels, precious perfumes and then accounts of Renaissance cruelty and imperial Roman debauchery.

Twenty years later

The second way Dorian’s ‘fall’ into a life of debauchery is suggested is via the four or five page long speech delivered by Basil when he comes round to see Dorian before leaving for Paris. (In chapter 16 we learn that 18 years have passed since Sibyl Vane’s death, so he must have been 20 at the time of the famous vow.

So the 20 or so pages describing the Huysman decadence have helped us skip 18 years of time.

Basil’s list of accusations

Basil turns up late one foggy night because he’s going to Paris for some months to paint but, before he goes, he needs Dorian to deny the dreadful things Basil’s been hearing about him. In all those 20 years Basil has retained his naive and trusting friendship with Dorian but he proceeds to rattle off an impressive list of wicked behaviour which is widely attributed to him. Or, to be more precise, rumours of wicked behaviour which manifest themselves in Dorian being shunned at clubs, refused invitations, people walking out of rooms when he enters and denouncing him. The list goes on and on because, the reader realises, it’s doing the main task of conveying Dorian’s decline and degeneration. A the end of an impressive list of hints and rumours, Basil asks Dorian to deny it all.

Seized by a perverse whim, Dorian tells him he keeps a diary in the attic and he’ll take him to see it. And so he leads Basil up the dark and spooky staircase to the dusty attic where he flings off the cover to show him the (by now) horrifying painting of a depraved bloated sodden man whose sins are marked in crimson across his degenerate face. Basil is suitably horrified, can’t believe it, but Dorian reminds him of the vow he made in his studio all those years ago, how it has magically come true, so that Basil slowly does come to believe it, cries out in horror, is appalled to realise that Dorian has been much worse than the worst rumours about him etc. Basil pleads with Dorian to pray with him:

‘It is too late, Basil,’ he faltered.
‘It is never too late, Dorian. Let us kneel down and try if we cannot remember a prayer. Isn’t there a verse somewhere, ‘Though your sins be as scarlet, yet I will make them as white as snow’?’
‘Those words mean nothing to me now.’
‘Hush! Don’t say that. You have done enough evil in your life. My God! Don’t you see that accursed thing leering at us?’

But when Dorian also looks at the painting the narrative implies that its evil spirit enters him and suddenly fills him with blind fury at Basil for making the painting which ruined his life.

Dorian Gray glanced at the picture, and suddenly an uncontrollable feeling of hatred for Basil Hallward came over him, as though it had been suggested to him by the image on the canvas, whispered into his ear by those grinning lips.

He sees a knife shining in the moonlight through the casement and, in a surprisingly blunt and crude scene, Dorian sneaks up behind Basil, thrusts his face down onto the table where he’s sitting and stabs him in the neck again and again while Basil throws up his arms to fend of the blows then crumples into a gurgling bloody mess… Dorian has crossed a grotesque Rubicon.

Complications: getting rid of the body

First Dorian has to get rid of the body. He sends for one of the young men mentioned in Basil’s list of shame whose life he is supposed to have ruined. As usual we get absolutely no sense of what it was that divided them.

This man, Alan Campbell, is a scientist who researches the human body by dissecting cadavers etc. Dorian confesses that he murdered Basil and then asks Alan to dispose of the body in the attic. Campbell is stern, moral, disapproving and refuses to do it until Dorian writes a name on a piece of paper and pushes it across the table to him. Campbell goes pales. Dorian says he has a letter written and ready to be sent unless he does this thing. Campbell coldly agrees. Dorian sends a servant to Campbell’s lodgings with a list of equipment, which is promptly brought back, and the two men mount to the attic where Dorian lets Campbell in, hastily covers the painting with its thick purple and gold hanging, not bringing himself to look at the cold white body sprawled over the table with its neck torn open.

Five long hours later Campbell comes down to Dorian’s study and says it is done. Dorian goes to the attic and finds no trace whatsoever of the body but a smell of nitric acid. Presumably Campbell chopped it up and dissolved it in acid.

The thoughtful reader might remember Basil’s sense of doom right from the start of the book: ‘we shall all suffer for what the gods have given us, suffer terribly.’

The power of the unstated

Presumably Dorian was threatening to send a letter to some innocent woman which would reveal the immoral or illegal behaviour of someone and so shatter her illusions? Maybe to Campbell’s wife describing his immoral activities? We don’t know, Wilde doesn’t tell us.

And this made me think three things:

1) Wilde can’t put a name to most of the awful immoral things Dorian has done because it was illegal to describe anything to do with sex (the state censor would have forbidden the book from being published).

2) Quite possibly the lack of detail about Dorian’s activities in the long, elliptical list Basil Hallward iterates, maybe it was the lack of detail, which made it worse. Because contemporary readers could project their own worst imaginings into the vague hints and maybe a lot of readers’ imaginings were actually worse, more sordid, than even Wilde intended. Not specifying what he meant made the book feel even more ‘immoral’ because every single reader filled the gaps with the worst they could imagine. In this respect, its vagueness perfectly fits one of the epigrams in the preface. The vague hints and dire rumours of Dorian’s misdeeds allowed the reader to project onto it their worst imaginings which promptly triggered ‘the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass’.

3) The obvious thought that if Wilde had specified Dorian’s misdeeds, they would have aged and dulled. Did he mean luring young men into homosexual practices or taking drugs? Did the young women whose reputations he ruined simply have premarital affairs with him? Not much along these lines would shock a 2024 readership. Keeping the details of all Dorian’s misdoings is one of the things that gives the book its timeless, fairy tale effect.

Chapter 16: Opium dens and James Vane

Dorian needs to obliterate all this from his memory so he dresses in disguise and, late at night, takes a cab far out East, down to the remote squalid docks. He enters a low drinking den and bumps into Adrian Singleton, one of the many young men, it is implied, who he has ‘ruined’ i.e. reduced to hanging round in the roughest pubs with slatternly whores.

As he leaves the pub one of the whores drunkenly yells at him, calling him by his ironic pseudonym, ‘Prince Charming’. Like a bolt of lightning up sits one of the drunks slumped at the bar for it is, of course, James Vane, now a 36-year-old grizzled old merchant seaman. He asks the whores to explain and they tell him the man who just left is a byword for corruption and depravity who they all know by his nickname ‘Prince Charming’.

Correctly thinking this must be the same privileged user who caused his sister’s death, Vane blunders out into the foggy night and follows Dorian down black backstreets eventually catching up with him down some dark back alley and thrusting him against the wall by his throat. He pulls out a pistol and is about to finish Dorian who, in his wild panic, has a brainwave and tells Vane to pull him over to a nearby streetlight and look at his face.

When he does so, Vane, of course, sees that Dorian is a young, innocent pretty boy. No way does he look like the middle-aged degenerate he ought to be. Puzzled and then scared that he nearly shot an innocent man, Vane staggers back and lets go Dorian, who gives him a smart aristocratic reprimand then departs into the night.

But the incident isn’t over. One of the whores had followed Vane and now asks him why he didn’t finish Dorian off? When Vane explains that he’s only a boy, the whore laughs and says it’s 18 years since he turned her into what she is (i.e. a prostitute). And out of the mouth of this prostitute comes the simple explanation that ‘he has sold his soul to the devil for a pretty face’ (p.211). Vane realises his mistake and rushes out into the street but Dorian has disappeared in the London fog. But this storyline isn’t over.

Chapter 17

In a really vivid example of the book’s deliberate use of dualities, the next chapter switches from the fog and squalid drinking dens of the East End back to the purlieus of the rich, in this case the conservatory at Selby Royal, the main country estate Dorian inherited from his grandfather. On the face of it, from the poor to the posh, although Wilde gives it a twist by making it the setting for a quite sustained attack on the English character by Lord Henry:

‘You don’t like your country, then?’ she asked.
‘I live in it.’
‘That you may censure it the better.’
‘Would you have me take the verdict of Europe on it?’ he inquired.
‘What do they say of us?’
‘That Tartuffe has emigrated to England and opened a shop.’
‘Is that yours, Harry?’
‘I give it to you.’
‘I could not use it. It is too true.’
‘You need not be afraid. Our countrymen never recognize a description.’
‘They are practical.’
‘They are more cunning than practical. When they make up their ledger, they balance stupidity by wealth, and vice by hypocrisy.’
‘Still, we have done great things.’
‘Great things have been thrust on us.’
‘We have carried their burden.’
‘Only as far as the Stock Exchange.’
She shook her head. ‘I believe in the race,’ she cried.
‘It represents the survival of the pushing.’

Obviously the word ‘burden’ rings bells for anyone familiar with Kipling’s 1899 poem, The White Man’s Burden, and is a kind of pre-emptive mockery of it.

Lord Henry and the Duchess of Monmouth exchange epigrams like characters in an Oscar Wilde play for half a dozen pages before they hear a cry and a thud, and rush to find Dorian fainted on the conservatory floor. He reassures everyone he is OK, dresses for dinner and is gaiety itself at table, but all the time, in the manner of the best Victorian melodrama / horror story:

Now and then a thrill of terror ran through him when he remembered that, pressed against the window of the conservatory, like a white handkerchief, he had seen the face of James Vane watching him.

Chapter 18

Stuff like this is what Peter Ackroyd (who supplied an introduction to the 1985 Penguin Classic edition of Dorian which I read) means when he talks about Wilde’s tendency to high Victorian melodrama:

The next day he did not leave the house, and, indeed, spent most of the time in his own room, sick with a wild terror of dying, and yet indifferent to life itself. The consciousness of being hunted, snared, tracked down, had begun to dominate him. If the tapestry did but tremble in the wind, he shook. The dead leaves that were blown against the leaded panes seemed to him like his own wasted resolutions and wild regrets. When he closed his eyes, he saw again the sailor’s face peering through the mist-stained glass, and horror seemed once more to lay its hand upon his heart.

Anyway, the Vane threat is quickly dealt with. Next day there is a shooting party on Dorian’s estate and even as he’s chatting to one of the guests, the duchess of Monmouth’s brother, Sir Geoffrey Clouston, he spots a hare jumping up and running towards a copse and fires at it – only for them all to hear a human shout. On investigation the man is found to be dead.

Lord Henry assures him it is just a ghastly accident afflicting the lower classes and he should forget about it but Dorian, of course, as he has to since the novel is reaching its climax, feels oppressed by a sense of doom and foreboding, expressed in some of Wilde’s most overripe prose:

‘I feel as if something horrible were going to happen to some of us. To myself…I have no terror of death. It is the coming of death that terrifies me. Its monstrous wings seem to wheel in the leaden air around me…’

But that is not quite all. For that evening the head-keeper comes to Dorian to report on the corpse. Dorian is preparing to sign a check for the man’s family when the head-keeper says he wasn’t one of their staff, in fact no-one knows who he was. Seems he was a sailor from the tattoos on his arms. Dorian leaps up. Could it be…the sailor brother of Sibyl Vane whose face he thought he saw through the conservatory window? With Lorna Doone-style bodice-ripping adventure style he rushes to the stables and leaps onto a horse to gallop down to the outhouses where the body is being kept.

In less than a quarter of an hour, Dorian Gray was galloping down the long avenue as hard as he could go. The trees seemed to sweep past him in spectral procession, and wild shadows to fling themselves across his path. Once the mare swerved at a white gate-post and nearly threw him. He lashed her across the neck with his crop. She cleft the dusky air like an arrow. The stones flew from her hoofs.

At the outhouse he gets a servant to remove the covering from the corpse’s face and sees that it is none other than James Vane! A wholly inappropriate cry of joy escapes his lips. He is safe!

Chapter 19

Dorian tells Harry he is going to reform. He had been seeing a country peasant girl off and on and was due to run away with her in order, in the usual way, to deflower her then chuck her, but at the last minute he didn’t show at their assignation. He is going to turn over a new leaf. He is going to reform. (The reader can’t help wondering if this is what Dorian’s ‘wickedness’ amounted to? Seducing country girls like every other second-rate rake?)

Anyway the entire chapter consists of Dorian swearing he is going to reform and Lord Henry rattling off epigram after epigram, apothegms about art and life and sincerity and whatnot till Dorian and the reader are quite exhausted. Specifically, Dorian blames him for poisoning him with the book he lent him (the one Wilde freely admitted to being based on ‘Against Nature’), to which Lord Henry gives a characteristically aesthetic reply:

‘As for being poisoned by a book, there is no such thing as that. Art has no influence upon action. It annihilates the desire to act. It is superbly sterile. The books that the world calls immoral are books that show the world its own shame. That is all.’

Lord Henry invites him to go with him to the club but Dorian cries off saying it is 11pm and he is tired, so puts his coat on and sets off to walk home (evidently they have been at Lord Henry’s rooms).

Chapter 20

The short final chapter. Anyone reading a hard copy knows they are at the end of the story. In a world-weary mood Dorian arrives home at his apartment reflecting on the strange tale of his life. Suddenly he wonders whether his good deed of the last few days i.e. not running off with the country virgin, might possibly start to cleanse the portrait. Maybe a sustained period of moral living could heal it. In an optimistic mood Dorian climbs the stairs to the attic but, when he takes the cover off the portrait is appalled to see that the blood on its hands seems to have spread and there is a new look of cunning and hypocrisy in its eyes. Was he deceiving himself when he spared the country lass or was it, as Lord Henry suggested, just a new kind of sensation for an inveterate sensation seeker?

Suddenly he is sickened and disgusted by the portrait which has ruined his life. Once more he sees the knife with which he murdered Basil Hallward, which he has washed and cleaned many times, lying to hand. He picks it up and stabs the portrait in its wicked heart and…feels the impact in his own heart, staggers, collapses and dies! His cry of agony is heard by the servants and by passersby out in the square.

After some confabulation, the servants creep up to the long-locked attic and discover there the body of a horribly bloated, withered, agèd old man (Dorian) lying dead with a knife through his heart in front of Basil Hallward’s portrait, which has been magically restored to its pristine beauty.

In a sense the best thing about the book is the way it ends there with no explanation or moralising or clever sayings, no funeral, no eulogy from Lord Henry, nothing. It needs nothing more. It is perfect as it is. It has the perfection of a thousands fairy stories and legends behind it, indeed Dorian has a claim to be Wilde’s best fairy story.

Commentary

The Picture of Dorian Gray is a brilliant fable, a retelling of the ancient Faust legend but with a lightness and delicacy which connects it with Wilde’s lovely fairy stories. It says something so profound about life that it feels like it – the story – ought to have happened. And so the fable, and the name, have become a permanent part of the culture because it speaks to some deep truth in all of us. In his own lifetime Wilde knew he had written a classic and he was correct.

A book of dualities

He himself could not help wondering at the calm of his demeanour, and for a moment felt keenly the terrible pleasure of a double life. (p.192)

Sexual hypocrisy

It is a cliché that the late-Victorian high society led a double life riven with hypocrisy. Victorian bourgeois men in particular heartily endorsed a rhetoric of strict public morality but in private, provided the market for the largest population of prostitutes of any European city.

Dual life of a gay man

Wilde also partook of this double life, in public a successful writer and man about town, husband of a society beauty and father of two lovely children – all the while living a secret life as a gay man and using sex workers, or rent boys as we used to call them back in the day, as much as the famously hypocritical bourgeoisie used London’s vast population of female prostitutes.

London a city of extremes

London was famous for the duality between its rich and poor. At one extreme it was a city of dazzling opulence, led by the pomp and circumstance surrounding the Royal family, the aristocracy, the House of Lords, gentlemen’s clubs, great public shindigs like the Lord Mayor’s Show etc. At the other extreme were the East End slums pullulating with poverty and the docks seething with foreign seamen, opium dens, the roughest type of prostitution etc. See my review of Arthur Morrison’s 1896 novel A Child of the Jago.

The doppelgänger

The theme of characters having doubles or doppelgängers, of consciously or unconsciously leading double lives, had been a major theme in literature since the Romantic revolution of the early 1800s. In a text like Gray it reaches a kind of apotheosis, with the stark binary contrast between the man and his portrait, the one leading a charmed life, the other accumulating all the signs of ‘sin’ which should, by rights, have been marking the mortal. Probably the acme of the literature of doubles is Robert Louis Stevenson’s Gothic novella, The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, published just four years before Wilde began Dorian.

Two styles

This duality is reflected by the way the book has two completely different styles, 1) the deliberately drawling and nonchalant superficiality of the drawing room comedy and 2) the florid emotions and over-ripe style of Victorian melodrama.

I noted in my review of Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime how easily Wilde slips into very purple melodrama, all wailing about Fate and Destiny and Tragedy. There is a duality in the text between these two modes which reflects the different psychologies and moods of the different worlds or scenes.

Quotable lines

DORIAN: ‘You cut life to pieces with your epigrams.’

I like cutting and pasting quotes into lists like this because 1) it makes me linger over them that little bit longer. Also 2) it makes you realise that the Lord Henry parts of the novel are as much a bombardment of bon mots as the plays are. And 3) makes you realise just how many of these lines were lifted wholesale from his earlier essays and/or were to be recycled wholesale into the plays.

Unless otherwise stated, all the lines are spoken by the Wilde avatar, Lord Henry Wotton:

‘The Academy is too large and too vulgar. Whenever I have gone there, there have been either so many people that I have not been able to see the pictures, which was dreadful, or so many pictures that I have not been able to see the people, which was worse.’

‘There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.’

‘You never say a moral thing, and you never do a wrong thing. Your cynicism is simply a pose.’ ‘Being natural is simply a pose, and the most irritating pose I know,’ cried Lord Henry, laughing.

‘As for believing things, I can believe anything, provided that it is quite incredible.’

‘I choose my friends for their good looks, my acquaintances for their good characters, and my enemies for their good intellects. A man cannot be too careful in the choice of his enemies.’

‘Those who are faithful know only the trivial side of love: it is the faithless who know love’s tragedies.’

‘The aim of life is self-development. To realize one’s nature perfectly—that is what each of us is here for. People are afraid of themselves, nowadays. They have forgotten the highest of all duties, the duty that one owes to one’s self.’

‘Nothing can cure the soul but the senses, just as nothing can cure the senses but the soul.’

‘People say sometimes that beauty is only superficial. That may be so, but at least it is not so superficial as thought is. To me, beauty is the wonder of wonders. It is only shallow people who do not judge by appearances.’

‘Always! That is a dreadful word. It makes me shudder when I hear it. Women are so fond of using it. They spoil every romance by trying to make it last for ever. It is a meaningless word, too. The only difference between a caprice and a lifelong passion is that the caprice lasts a little longer.’

‘I adore simple pleasures,’ said Lord Henry. ‘They are the last refuge of the complex.’

‘I wonder who it was defined man as a rational animal. It was the most premature definition ever given. Man is many things, but he is not rational.’

‘What a fuss people make about fidelity!’ exclaimed Lord Henry. ‘Why, even in love it is purely a question for physiology. It has nothing to do with our own will. Young men want to be faithful, and are not; old men want to be faithless, and cannot: that is all one can say.’

LORD FERMOR: ‘Young people, nowadays, imagine that money is everything.”
‘Yes,’ murmured Lord Henry, settling his button-hole in his coat, ‘and when they grow older they know it.’

LORD FERMOR: ‘Examinations, sir, are pure humbug from beginning to end. If a man is a gentleman, he knows quite enough, and if he is not a gentleman, whatever he knows is bad for him.’

LORD FERMOR: ‘Why can’t these American women stay in their own country? They are always telling us that it is the paradise for women.’
Lord Henry: ‘It is. That is the reason why, like Eve, they are so excessively anxious to get out of it.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

‘I always like to know everything about my new friends, and nothing about my old ones.’

‘Philanthropic people lose all sense of humanity. It is their distinguishing characteristic.’

‘When America was discovered,’ said the Radical member — and he began to give some wearisome facts. Like all people who try to exhaust a subject, he exhausted his listeners.

‘But they are so unhappy in Whitechapel,’ continued Lady Agatha.
‘I can sympathize with everything except suffering,’ said Lord Henry, shrugging his shoulders. ‘I cannot sympathize with that. It is too ugly, too horrible, too distressing. There is something terribly morbid in the modern sympathy with pain. One should sympathize with the colour, the beauty, the joy of life. The less said about life’s sores, the better.’
‘Still, the East End is a very important problem,’ remarked Sir Thomas with a grave shake of the head.’
‘Quite so,’ answered the young lord. ‘It is the problem of slavery, and we try to solve it by amusing the slaves.’ (recycled from The Soul of Man Under Socialism)

‘Ah! Lord Henry, I wish you would tell me how to become young again.’
He thought for a moment. ‘Can you remember any great error that you committed in your early days, Duchess?’ he asked, looking at her across the table.
‘A great many, I fear,’ she cried.
‘Then commit them over again,’ he said gravely. ‘To get back one’s youth, one has merely to repeat one’s follies.’
‘A delightful theory!’ she exclaimed. ‘I must put it into practice.’

Lord Henry’s wife, Victoria, Lady Wotton:

She was a curious woman, whose dresses always looked as if they had been designed in a rage and put on in a tempest. She was usually in love with somebody, and, as her passion was never returned, she had kept all her illusions. She tried to look picturesque, but only succeeded in being untidy. Her name was Victoria, and she had a perfect mania for going to church.

LADY WOTTON: ‘I like Wagner’s music better than anybody’s. It is so loud that one can talk the whole time without other people hearing what one says. That is a great advantage, don’t you think so, Mr. Gray?’

LADY WOTTON: ‘You have never been to any of my parties, have you, Mr. Gray? You must come. I can’t afford orchids, but I spare no expense in foreigners. They make one’s rooms look so picturesque.’

LORD HENRY: ‘Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.’ (recycled in Lady Windermere’s Fan)

‘Never marry at all, Dorian. Men marry because they are tired; women, because they are curious: both are disappointed.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

‘My dear boy, no woman is a genius. Women are a decorative sex. They never have anything to say, but they say it charmingly. Women represent the triumph of matter over mind, just as men represent the triumph of mind over morals.’

‘As long as a woman can look ten years younger than her own daughter, she is perfectly satisfied.’

‘My dear boy, the people who love only once in their lives are really the shallow people. What they call their loyalty, and their fidelity, I call either the lethargy of custom or their lack of imagination. Faithfulness is to the emotional life what consistency is to the life of the intellect — simply a confession of failure.’

‘When one is in love, one always begins by deceiving one’s self, and one always ends by deceiving others. That is what the world calls a romance.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

DORIAN: ‘The Jew wanted to tell me her history, but I said it did not interest me.’
LORD HENRY: ‘You were quite right. There is always something infinitely mean about other people’s tragedies.’

‘Basil, my dear boy, puts everything that is charming in him into his work. The consequence is that he has nothing left for life but his prejudices, his principles, and his common sense. The only artists I have ever known who are personally delightful are bad artists. Good artists exist simply in what they make, and consequently are perfectly uninteresting in what they are. A great poet, a really great poet, is the most unpoetical of all creatures. But inferior poets are absolutely fascinating. The worse their rhymes are, the more picturesque they look. The mere fact of having published a book of second-rate sonnets makes a man quite irresistible. He lives the poetry that he cannot write. The others write the poetry that they dare not realize.’

Experience Is of no ethical value. It Is merely the name men gave to their mistakes. (recycled in Lady Windermere’s Fan)

Children begin by loving their parents; as they grow older they judge them; sometimes they forgive them. (Recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

‘Whenever a man does a thoroughly stupid thing, it is always from the noblest motives.’

‘Are you serious?’
‘Quite serious, Basil. I should be miserable if I thought I should ever be more serious than I am at the present moment.’

‘I never approve, or disapprove, of anything now. It is an absurd attitude to take towards life. We are not sent into the world to air our moral prejudices. I never take any notice of what common people say, and I never interfere with what charming people do. If a personality fascinates me, whatever mode of expression that personality selects is absolutely delightful to me.’

‘You know I am not a champion of marriage. The real drawback to marriage is that it makes one unselfish. And unselfish people are colourless. They lack individuality. Still, there are certain temperaments that marriage makes more complex. They retain their egotism, and add to it many other egos. They are forced to have more than one life. They become more highly organized, and to be highly organized is, I should fancy, the object of man’s existence. Besides, every experience is of value, and whatever one may say against marriage, it is certainly an experience.’

‘Pleasure is Nature’s test, her sign of approval. When we are happy, we are always good, but when we are good, we are not always happy.’ (recycled from The Soul of Man under Socialism)

‘You must have a cigarette. A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want?’ (recycled in The Critic as Artist)

‘I love acting. it is so much more real than life.’

‘It is not good for one’s morals to see bad acting.’

‘There are only two kinds of people who are really fascinating—people who know absolutely everything, and people who know absolutely nothing.’

‘Good heavens, my dear boy, don’t look so tragic! The secret of remaining young is never to have an emotion that is unbecoming.’

There is always something ridiculous about the emotions of people whom one has ceased to love. Sibyl Vane seemed to him to be absurdly melodramatic. Her tears and sobs annoyed him.

There is a luxury in self-reproach. When we blame ourselves, we feel that no one else has a right to blame us. It is the confession, not the priest, that gives us absolution.

‘One should never make one’s début with a scandal. One should reserve that to give an interest to one’s old age.’

‘My dear Dorian,’ answered Lord Henry, taking a cigarette from his case and producing a gold-latten matchbox, ‘the only way a woman can ever reform a man is by boring him so completely that he loses all possible interest in life.’

‘Good resolutions are useless attempts to interfere with scientific laws. Their origin is pure vanity. Their result is absolutely nil. They give us, now and then, some of those luxurious sterile emotions that have a certain charm for the weak.’

DORIAN: ‘Don’t talk about horrid subjects. If one doesn’t talk about a thing, it has never happened. It is simply expression, as Harry says, that gives reality to things.’

DORIAN: ‘It is only shallow people who require years to get rid of an emotion. A man who is master of himself can end a sorrow as easily as he can invent a pleasure. I don’t want to be at the mercy of my emotions. I want to use them, to enjoy them, and to dominate them…To become the spectator of one’s own life, as Harry says, is to escape the suffering of life.’

‘The husbands of very beautiful women belong to the criminal classes,’ said Lord Henry, sipping his wine.

‘Lord Henry, I am not at all surprised that the world says that you are extremely wicked.’
‘But what world says that?’ asked Lord Henry, elevating his eyebrows. ‘It can only be the next world. This world and I are on excellent terms.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

‘It is perfectly monstrous,’ he said, at last, ‘the way people go about nowadays saying things against one behind one’s back that are absolutely and entirely true.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

‘When a woman marries again, it is because she detested her first husband. When a man marries again, it is because he adored his first wife. Women try their luck; men risk theirs.’

‘Women love us for our defects. If we have enough of them, they will forgive us everything, even our intellects.’

LADY NARBOROUGH: ‘Nowadays all the married men live like bachelors, and all the bachelors like married men.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

LADY NARBOROUGH: ‘Don’t tell me that you have exhausted life. When a man says that one knows that life has exhausted him.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

‘I like him,’ said Lord Henry. ‘A great many people don’t, but I find him charming. He atones for being occasionally somewhat overdressed by being always absolutely over-educated.’ (recycled in The Importance of Being Earnest)

‘The man who could call a spade a spade should be compelled to use one. It is the only thing he is fit for.’ (reworked in The Importance of Being Earnest)

‘Ugliness is one of the seven deadly virtues…You, as a good Tory, must not underrate them. Beer, the Bible, and the seven deadly virtues have made our England what she is.’

‘Every effect that one produces gives one an enemy. To be popular one must be a mediocrity.’

‘The only horrible thing in the world is ennui, Dorian. That is the one sin for which there is no forgiveness.’

‘Of course, married life is merely a habit, a bad habit. But then one regrets the loss even of one’s worst habits. Perhaps one regrets them the most. They are such an essential part of one’s personality.’

‘Crime belongs exclusively to the lower orders. I don’t blame them in the smallest degree. I should fancy that crime was to them what art is to us, simply a method of procuring extraordinary sensations.’

‘The things one feels absolutely certain about are never true. That is the fatality of faith, and the lesson of romance.’

‘To get back my youth I would do anything in the world, except take exercise, get up early, or be respectable.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

Antisemitism

The fact that Wilde is a martyr to the LGBTIQA+ movement sometimes masks unfortunate aspects of his work less acceptable to modern sensibilities. He was, after all, a man of his times. I called out unacceptable antisemitic tropes in the work of Saki and do so here.

DORIAN: ‘I went out and wandered eastward, soon losing my way in a labyrinth of grimy streets and black grassless squares. About half-past eight I passed by an absurd little theatre, with great flaring gas-jets and gaudy play-bills. A hideous Jew, in the most amazing waistcoat I ever beheld in my life, was standing at the entrance, smoking a vile cigar. He had greasy ringlets, and an enormous diamond blazed in the centre of a soiled shirt. ‘Have a box, my Lord?’ he said, when he saw me, and he took off his hat with an air of gorgeous servility. There was something about him, Harry, that amused me. He was such a monster…

…There was a dreadful orchestra, presided over by a young Hebrew who sat at a cracked piano, that nearly drove me away, but at last the drop-scene was drawn up and the play began.’

This Jew, the manager of the East End theatre where Sibyl performs, turns out to have been very charitable to Sibyl’s mother, taken on all their debts, and is financing her son, Jim, to go to sea. There are half a dozen more, consistently disparaging, references to him in the Vane subplot. A little disturbing…

But then the book is made up of stereotypes, starting with its basis in the Faust legend, going on to stereotype all its characters, such as:

  • the insouciant aesthete
  • the earnest artist
  • the innocent young virgin
  • the vengeful brother
  • the haggard single mother

all the way through to the servants, and the tradesman – Mr Hubbard, ‘the celebrated frame-maker of South Audley Street’ is ‘a florid, red-whiskered little man’.

They’re all stereotypes and clichés, which is one of the main things which makes the book more like a fairy story than a serious novel. And, of course, the book is simply crammed with stereotyped men and women spouting stereotypical epigrams about men and women, the woes of marriage etc (see below).

But modern (2024) culture is (rightly) more sensitive to the negative stereotyping of Jews wherever it occurs than these other paradigms which is why I am highlighting it here.

Sexism

Ditto his attitudes to women which, for someone posing as a refined dandy and an aesthete, can be surprisingly insulting. The comments the Wilde avatar, Sir Henry, are definitely sexist but do they go so far as to be misogynist? I suppose one defence is that these are the opinions of characters in a novel; but identical sentiments are expressed by the Wilde-type figures in all four plays, as well as by characters in his dialogue-essays, so… It’s a consistent, and consistently negative, attitude to women found across all Wilde’s work.

LORD HENRY: ‘Women have no appreciation of good looks; at least, good women have not.’

LORD HENRY: ‘Always! That is a dreadful word. It makes me shudder when I hear it. Women are so fond of using it. They spoil every romance by trying to make it last for ever.’

LORD HENRY: ‘My dear boy, no woman is a genius. Women are a decorative sex. They never have anything to say, but they say it charmingly. Women represent the triumph of matter over mind, just as men represent the triumph of mind over morals…

LORD HENRY: ‘There are only two kinds of women, the plain and the coloured. The plain women are very useful. If you want to gain a reputation for respectability, you have merely to take them down to supper. The other women are very charming. They commit one mistake, however. They paint in order to try and look young. Our grandmothers painted in order to try and talk brilliantly. Rouge and esprit used to go together. That is all over now. As long as a woman can look ten years younger than her own daughter, she is perfectly satisfied. As for conversation, there are only five women in London worth talking to, and two of these can’t be admitted into decent society…’

DORIAN: ‘Ordinary women never appeal to one’s imagination. They are limited to their century. No glamour ever transfigures them. One knows their minds as easily as one knows their bonnets. One can always find them. There is no mystery in any of them. They ride in the park in the morning and chatter at tea-parties in the afternoon. They have their stereotyped smile and their fashionable manner. They are quite obvious.’

Women defend themselves by attacking, just as they attack by sudden and strange surrenders.

‘Being adored is a nuisance. Women treat us just as humanity treats its gods. They worship us, and are always bothering us to do something for them.’
‘I should have said that whatever they ask for they had first given to us,’ murmured the lad gravely. ‘They create love in our natures. They have a right to demand it back.’
‘That is quite true, Dorian,’ cried Hallward.
‘Nothing is ever quite true,’ said Lord Henry.
‘This is,’ interrupted Dorian. ‘You must admit, Harry, that women give to men the very gold of their lives.’
‘Possibly,’ he sighed, ‘but they invariably want it back in such very small change. That is the worry. Women, as some witty Frenchman once put it, inspire us with the desire to do masterpieces and always prevent us from carrying them out.’

Besides, women were better suited to bear sorrow than men. They lived on their emotions. They only thought of their emotions. When they took lovers, it was merely to have someone with whom they could have scenes. Lord Henry had told him that, and Lord Henry knew what women were.

‘That awful memory of woman! What a fearful thing it is! And what an utter intellectual stagnation it reveals! One should absorb the colour of life, but one should never remember its details. Details are always vulgar…

‘The one charm of the past is that it is the past. But women never know when the curtain has fallen. They always want a sixth act, and as soon as the interest of the play is entirely over, they propose to continue it. If they were allowed their own way, every comedy would have a tragic ending, and every tragedy would culminate in a farce. They are charmingly artificial, but they have no sense of art…

‘Ordinary women always console themselves. Some of them do it by going in for sentimental colours. Never trust a woman who wears mauve, whatever her age may be, or a woman over thirty-five who is fond of pink ribbons. It always means that they have a history. Others find a great consolation in suddenly discovering the good qualities of their husbands. They flaunt their conjugal felicity in one’s face, as if it were the most fascinating of sins. Religion consoles some. Its mysteries have all the charm of a flirtation, a woman once told me, and I can quite understand it. Besides, nothing makes one so vain as being told that one is a sinner. Conscience makes egotists of us all. Yes; there is really no end to the consolations that women find in modern life…

DORIAN: ‘I was terribly cruel to her. You forget that.’
LORD HENRY: ‘I am afraid that women appreciate cruelty, downright cruelty, more than anything else. They have wonderfully primitive instincts. We have emancipated them, but they remain slaves looking for their masters, all the same. They love being dominated.’

‘She is very clever, too clever for a woman. She lacks the indefinable charm of weakness. It is the feet of clay that make the gold of the image precious.’

LORD HENRY: ‘Every effect that one produces gives one an enemy. To be popular one must be a mediocrity.’
DUCHESS OF MONMOUTH: ‘Not with women,’ said the duchess, shaking her head; ‘and women rule the world. I assure you we can’t bear mediocrities. We women, as some one says, love with our ears, just as you men love with your eyes, if you ever love at all.’

DUCHESS OF MONMOUTH: ‘Describe us as a sex.’
LORD HENRY: ‘Sphinxes without secrets.’ (recycled in A Woman of No Importance)

Wilde’s cult of Individualism and amorality

Individualism is the basis of Wilde’s worldview, expressed most fully in The Soul of Man under Socialism. The aim of life is to develop and express one’s personality.

‘To be good is to be in harmony with one’s self,’ he replied, touching the thin stem of his glass with his pale, fine-pointed fingers. ‘Discord is to be forced to be in harmony with others. One’s own life — that is the important thing. As for the lives of one’s neighbours, if one wishes to be a prig or a Puritan, one can flaunt one’s moral views about them, but they are not one’s concern. Besides, individualism has really the higher aim. Modern morality consists in accepting the standard of one’s age. I consider that for any man of culture to accept the standard of his age is a form of the grossest immorality.’

Interestingly, Wilde anticipates Freud’s dynamic model of the ego or consciousness of man being in permanent turmoil.

He used to wonder at the shallow psychology of those who conceive the ego in man as a thing simple, permanent, reliable, and of one essence. To him, man was a being with myriad lives and myriad sensations, a complex multiform creature that bore within itself strange legacies of thought and passion, and whose very flesh was tainted with the monstrous maladies of the dead.

Obviously that bit at the end of Gothic melodrama but Freud would recognise the general drift. As to ‘morality’, there is no morality when it comes to seeking pleasure. Pleasure-seeking is deliberately amoral.

‘Believe me, no civilized man ever regrets a pleasure, and no uncivilized man ever knows what a pleasure is.’

Wilde completely upends traditional notions of morality which entail self-restraint, to praise self-expression at every opportunity, the pursuit of every sensation, and refuses to call anything a sin.

‘The body sins once, and has done with its sin, for action is a mode of purification. Nothing remains then but the recollection of a pleasure, or the luxury of a regret. The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it. Resist it, and your soul grows sick with longing for the things it has forbidden to itself, with desire for what its monstrous laws have made monstrous and unlawful.’

Or:

‘I should fancy that the real tragedy of the poor is that they can afford nothing but self-denial. Beautiful sins, like beautiful things, are the privilege of the rich.’

You can see why Victorian society was outraged. If someone appeared now, in 2024, preaching that every man should abandon all restraint, seek out every possible experience and sensation, live only for pleasure and self expression, combined with his sustained denigration of women, the outcry, not least from feminists, would be just as loud.

Tell-tale adjectives

Lord Henry goes on about the point of life being to constantly experience new things, new thoughts, new sensations, new ideas. Yet it’s striking how monotonous Wilde’s vocabulary is. When describing beautiful people (Dorian, Sibyl) he invariably compares them to lilies (10 instances), ivory (9) or silver (24).

The curves of her throat were the curves of a white lily. Her hands seemed to be made of cool ivory.

Lord Henry’s influence is continually described as dangerous (8), and propounding ideas which are strange (67), curious (59), fascinating (36), terrible (40), full of sins (37), terror (29), horror (24) and poison (21). Amazing how much mileage you can get from ringing the changes on this handful of key words.

It seemed to him that in exquisite raiment, and to the delicate sound of flutes, the sins of the world were passing in dumb show before him…

He felt that he had known them all, those strange terrible figures that had passed across the stage of the world and made sin so marvellous and evil so full of subtlety…

Once you start recognising this handful of a dozen or so key words, and the simple melodramatic ideas behind them, you begin to understand why this, like all Wilde’s works, is brilliantly imagined, classic in storyline and character, stuffed with clever epigrams and yet, at the same time, curiously (to use one of his own words) superficial and shallow.

Although Dorian horrified adult critics at the time, just a generation later it was being treated as one more of his delightful, if rather gruesome, fairy stories.

And then, like so much of the fiction of the 1890s, despite being written for adults, after the apocalypse of the First World War, it came to seem childish and superficial. Not exactly children’s stories but not really stories for serious adults.


Related links

Oscar Wilde reviews

Martial Epigrams

Readers and listeners like my books,
Yet a certain poet calls them crude.
What do I care, I serve up food
To please my guests, not fellow cooks.
(Book 9, poem 81)

The first thing you discover in the 1964 Penguin Classics paperback edition of Martial’s epigrams, as translated by James Michie, is that this is very far from being a complete edition, in fact it represents only about ten per cent of Martial’s total output.

Martial biography

Martial’s full name was Marcus Valerius Martialis, the cognomen ‘Martialis’ indicating that he was born in March. He was born about 40 AD in the Roman province of Spain and came to Rome around 63, during the reign of Nero. Here, apparently, rather than embark on the cursus honorem or sequence of recognised public offices (quaestor, praetor, aedile, consul) or undertake a recognised profession such as lawyer and advocate, Martial preferred to live by his wits, making himself a witty entertainer and dinner party companion to rich patrons.

Amazingly, Martial seems to have been able to support himself this way for 35 years until he retired back to Spain about 98. (12.18 is a good-humoured song of praise to the simple life back in his home town far from the rigours of Roman life, apparently addressed to his friend, Juvenal the satirist.)

During all those years Martial was dependent on his wealthy friends and patrons for gifts of money, for his dinner, and even for his dress. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, in his earlier career he used to accompany his patrons to their villas at Baiae or Tibur and to attend their morning levées. Later on, he owned a own small country house near Nomentum, and sent a poem, or a small volume of his poems, as his representative to the morning levée. He cultivated patrons far and wide and was especially proud at being invited to dinner with Domitian.

And yet, God, it was a shabby, humiliating and tiring sort of life, as his later poems convey:

Have mercy on me, Rome, a hired
Flatterer desperately tired of flattery…
(10.74)

Martial is best known for his twelve books of epigrams, published in Rome between 86 and 103, during the reigns of the emperors Domitian (81 to 96), Nerva (96 to 98) and Trajan (98 to 117). Martial wrote a rather terrifying total of 1,561 epigrams, of which 1,235 are in elegiac couplets. This Penguin selection contains only about 150 of them. A notable feature of the Penguin edition is that it contains the Latin original next to Michie’s translation of it (although this seems to be standard practice; the much more recent Oxford University Press selection does the same).

What is an epigram?

“An epigram is a short, pithy saying, usually in verse, often with a quick, satirical twist at the end. The subject is usually a single thought or event.” (Academy of American Poets)

It derives from the Greek epigraphein, meaning ‘to write on, to inscribe’ and originally referred to the inscriptions written on stone monuments in ancient Greece. Slowly the term became separated from the act of inscription and by 300 BC referred to any brief, pointed poem, generally about or addressed to someone.

In his 1,500 epigrams Martial is widely agreed to have taken the form to its highest point and every proponent of the epigram for the following 2,000 years to some extent echoes or copies him.

Two texts preface the selection, a 2-page translator’s note by James Michie and an 8-page introduction by scholar Peter Howell.

Translator’s note

In his translator’s note, Michie says the selection is not intended as ‘Martial’s greatest hits’. Rather, the entries were selected to demonstrate Martial’s variety. The texts of the twelve books of epigrams which have come down to us were not arranged logically or thematically, but to ‘reflect the odd juxtapositions of life itself’.

Thus a scatological squib is followed by a deeply felt epitaph (for his 6-year-old slave, Erotion mentioned twice, in 5.34 and 10.61; for the dexterous slave boy Pantagathus, 6.52; or for Pompey the Great, 5.74); contrived panegyrics to Domitian (for liking his poems 4.8; for having impressive fish 4.30; for widening Rome’s roads, 7.61) next to scabrous abuse of someone with bad breath (1.87); a pornographic poem about buggery (1.46) next to a poem lamenting the fickle condition of the dinner party hanger-on (2.27); extended descriptions of a country house (4.64) next to a vivid description of a sumptuous dinner (5.78); corruption at the chariot races (6.46) next to comic behaviour at a slave auction (6.66); insults to a rival poet (7.3) next to a jokey profile of a woman who seems doomed to marry only effeminate men (7.58); a bitter complaint against a noisy schoolmaster whose shouts wake him up early (school lessons started at dawn; 9.68) next to a shrewd criticism of a friend who’s always complaining the world is going to hell (9.70); a fond poem to a friend who’s mean and stingy but makes up for it by being a wonderful farter (10.15) next to the anecdote of the retired boatman who used his boat, filled with rocks, to plug a gap in the Tiber banks (10.85); a comic portrait of the superthief Hermogenes (12.28) next to a short but heartfelt summary of the Good Life (10.47). Variety.

There are a lot of poems about heirs and hangers-on waiting for the elderly to snuff it so they can inherit their money, a lot of anxiety about who cranky old people are favouring in their wills that’s reminiscent of Dickens:

If you were wise as well as rich and sickly
You’d see that every gift means, ‘Please die quickly!’
(8.27)

Or:

She longs for me to ‘have and hold’ her
In marriage. I’ve no mind to.
She’s old. If she were even older,
I might be half inclined to.
(10.8)

(In his fascinating introduction to the Penguin Classics edition of Juvenal’s satires, Peter Green says this was an obsessive subject for authors of this generation. Professional legacy hunters were called captatores and he reminds me that an entire chapter of Petronius’s Satyricon describes a visit to a town entirely populated by legacy hunters.)

There’s a recurring theme criticising the kind of affected connoisseur who dismisses the moderns and only values ‘the Classics’, a type the elegiac poets also despised:

Rigidly classical, you save
Your praise for poets in the grave.
Forgive me, it’s not worth my while
Dying to earn your critical smile.
(8.69)

Michie devotes half his note to an impressionistic prose summary of the cumulative portrait of late-first century Roman locations and people which Martial’s epigrams depict, the Rome of:

shops, amphitheatres, law courts, lavatories, temples, schools, tenements, gardens, taverns, and public baths, its dusty of muddy streets filled with traffic, religious processions, , and never-ending business, its slaves, millionaires, prostitutes, philosophers, quacks, bores, touts, dinner-cadgers, fortune-hunters, poetasters, politicians and layabouts. (Introduction, page 9)

Michie makes the point that the epigrammatist, rather like the satirist, has to pretend to be angry and full of bile, but that a cumulative reading of Martial makes you suspect this was just a pose – or the kind of sentiment appropriate to the genre. For, as you work through these scores of short sharp vignettes, what actually comes over is Martial’s ‘great capacity for fun and for friendship, and an evergreen curiosity about people’.

Michie doesn’t mention Chaucer, but Martial shares Chaucer’s fascination with the huge diversity of real people of his time, their names and occupations, and shapes and sizes and ages and habits and mannerisms and verbal tics and sex lives and businesses. Thus a poem about typical scenes through the hours of the day:

The first two hours of the morning tax
Poor clients; during the third advocates wax
Eloquent and hoarse; until the fifth hour ends
The city to her various trades attends;
At six o’clock the weary workers stop
For the siesta; all Rome shuts up shop
At seven; the hour from eight to nine supplies
The oiled wrestlers with their exercise;
The ninth invites us to recline full length,
Denting the cushions. At last comes the tenth…
(Book 4, poem 8)

Michie also doesn’t mention Baudelaire, but you could draw the comparison between the French poet’s fascination with the endlessly teeming life of Paris, and Martial’s endless snapshots of life in what was, at the time, the biggest city in the world, with its extremes of poverty and luxury, power and enslavements, stinks and smells and endlessly fascinating inhabitants. Maybe the thronged novels of Balzac are a better comparison and, in England, Dickens.

Introduction

The introduction is written by historian and editor of Martial, Peter Howell, who makes a number of points:

Spanish writers

Martial was one of a generation of talented writers who hailed from the fully Romanised province of Hispania, which included Seneca the Elder and Younger; the latter’s nephew, Lucan; Quintilian; and Columella.

A career choice

In their writings both Martial and Juvenal give the impression that they were forced by a social system which made if impossible for middle-class, well-educated men to earn a living by respectable means to become the hangers-on and flatterers of the rich, living from hand to mouth. But this was largely false. Friends urged Martial to take up the law or stand for public office, but he turned down both options.

Patrons and clients

The relation of patron and client evolved during the history of Rome. At the beginning it meant the relationship between a full Roman citizen and foreigners who wanted favours done for them within the legal and political system. By Martial’s time a wealthy, well-connected patron prided himself on having large numbers of dependents, clients or hangers-on. The client acquired protection (for example, from lawsuits) and welfare (most often in the form of being invited to lavish dinners) but in return the patron claimed the client’s support, in law courts, at election time, at social events, and their general flattery at all times:

Labullus, I court you,
I escort you, I support you
By lending an ear to your chatter,
And everything you say or do I flatter…
(11.24)

Clients were expected to be at their patron’s house early in the morning to greet them, then accompany them on their day of social duties, at the end of the day receiving maybe a little cash, preferably an invite to dinner. (See poem 2.27 quoted below.)

Hence the many poems Martial writes about the lamentable plight of the humiliated client and the expressions ‘parasite’, ‘dinner cadger’ and ‘hanger-on’ which Michie uses to describe this social type, known in Latin (and in Roman theatre) as the parasitus.

For hours, for a whole day, he’ll sit
On every public toilet seat.
It’s not because he needs a shit:
He wants to be asked out to eat.
(11.77)

The parasite as poet

Martial was a cut above the average parasitus because he quite early became famous as a poet. The earliest surviving work of his is called Liber Spectaculorum, written to celebrate the opening of the Flavian amphitheatre (what came to be called the Colosseum) in 80 AD. But it was the terse, witty epigrams which he appeared to be able to knock out at will, many either flattering a specific client or appealing to their sense of humour, which kept him in free dinners for 35 years.

How Roman authors made money

A Roman author didn’t make money by selling copies of a work. Copies had to be written out by hand and so remained limited in number. Instead there appear to have been two sources of income for an author:

  1. Dedicate your work to a patron who would respond in kind with gifts – the ultimate patron being the emperor, the classic example being Augustus who worked through his minister, Maecenas, to give both Virgil and Horace gifts of property, land and slaves which made them comfortable for life.
  2. It seems that some notable ‘publishers’ would pay an author for the privilege of having first dibs at copying a work they estimated would be popular and which they could guarantee selling copies of.

Thus by the time he came to publish what is conventionally known as Epigrams Book 1, in about 85, Martial must have been writing poetry for about 20 years and so is able to refer to himself as well known, even if all the other works he was known for, appear to have disappeared.

A Roman book

When all these authors refer to what is translated into English as ‘a book’, they mean a cylindrical roll of papyrus whose ends were often smoothed with pumice-stone and the whole roll wrapped in vellum (note, page 192). The wooden stave round which the papyrus was wrapped often had carved knobs at each end to secure the roll and make it easier to handle. The back of the papyrus was dyed yellow with cedar oil to preserve it from mould and moths (note, page 196). According to poem 1.117 a ‘book’ of Martial’s cost 5 dinarii.

Reasons for Martial’s popularity

Most contemporary poetry was long and long-winded, written about stock mythological subjects in elaborate and stylised verse. Thus Virgil’s Aeneid gave rise to poets who tried to ape his success with long epics such as Valerius Flaccus, Statius and Silius Italicus.

By contrast Martial developed a form which was not just short but very short, but which managed to create drama in a very small number of lines (sometimes as few as two lines). Despite their shortness the epigrams, when collected into books, were arranged to offer a pleasing sense of variety and range.

Martial’s epigrams are sometimes contrived in the sense of carefully structured to make a joke or damning point; but never contrived in the sense of striving to be grand and pompous. They are never pretentious.

No real people are skewered

The short poems of Catullus are packed with gleeful abuse of real individuals. The satires of his friend and contemporary, Juvenal, very much flay real life individuals, albeit under pseudonyms. But Martial, scathing though some of them may be, categorically states that he has not satirised any real people, even under fictitious names. Hence the large number of characters in the poem named Flaccus and Labulla and Lesbia and Cinna and Galla and Postumus. They’re just bland common names used as pegs for the jokes.

Obscenity

Many of the poems are what used to be called ‘obscene’ and still was at the date of this translation (1964). In one of the first poems he uses the same argument that Catullus and Ovid had, namely that although his verse may be pornographic his life is pure.

Roman sexual attitudes

The attitude towards sex that emerges from Martial is one of cheerful permissiveness but not wild and orgiastic promiscuousness. (Introduction, p.16)

Sex is acceptable (unlike in, say, Victorian England) and prostitution is widespread. Adultery is theoretically forbidden but in practice also widespread. Homosexuality and bisexuality are regarded as natural, especially with teenage boys. The active role in male gay sex was through acceptable but for an adult man to take the passive role was more shameful. Poem 12.75 is an amusing squib listing all the types of gay boys he’d prefer to ‘some bitch/Who’d make me miserably rich’ (12.75). The poem about the woman who weighs men’s penises erect and flaccid (10.55) is amusing but the long one complaining that his ‘wife’ isn’t sexually adventurous enough is genuinely funny because so outrageous (11.104).

Domitian

Howell entertainingly speaks up for the emperor Domitian (reigned 81 to 96). He says that Domitian had (as of 1964) the reputation of a Hitler (!) but claims this is the result of the works of Tacitus, Juvenal and ‘other biased writers’. Apart from his paranoid vendetta against the senatorial class (which Tacitus and Juvenal and the other biased writers wrote for) Howell claims Domitian’s rule was for everyone else ‘calm and prosperous, marked by beneficial social and moral legislation’ (p.16).

But Domitian liked Martial and awarded him the privileges of a father of 3 children although Martial was never, as far as we know, actually married and had no children. Hence Martial’s numerous poems sucking up to Domitian (as Virgil and Horace and Ovid shamelessly sucked up to Augustus) (I especially like the panegyric to the imperial fish, 4.30); although Howell disapproves of how, following Domitian’s assassination in 96, Martial quickly knocked off poems saying he’d never liked him anyway and praising the new regime.

Rhyming couplets

The great majority of Martial’s poems were written in elegiac couplets, one hexameter followed by a pentameter, such as we’ve encountered in all the elegiac poets (Tibullus, Propertius, Ovid). The most important single thing about Michie’s translation is he chooses to translate every poem he selects into rhyming couplets, quatrains or other rhyming forms. The precise metre varies from poem to poem, but pretty much all of them rhyme.

It’s a bold decision. It aligns Michie’s versions with the rhyming couplets of the Augustan Age of English verse, very roughly from the 1680s to the 1750s. On the upside rhyme in English poetry creates opportunity for humour and often prompts the author to ingeniously amusing collocations. Rhyme is associated with limericks and light verse of all types. On the down side, ‘serious’ modern poetry abandoned rhyme around the time of the First World War so the solid use of rhyme for all the translations signals and lack of…a lack of seriousness or depth, which, from what both Howell and Miche say about Martial, is maybe not appropriate in every instance.

The epigrams

There are all kinds of ways of grouping and categorising them, starting with the 12 books which Martial himself used as a structuring device. Very broadly there are two types of Martial epigram – ones you ‘get’, which have an appealing twist or sting or point which you can understand; and those which don’t have such an obvious payoff, which presumably made sense in their time but seem flat or pointless or even incomprehensible to us today, even with extensive notes. If a joke needs extensive notes to explain it, it isn’t a very good joke.

Themes

The poet as celebrity and showman

May I present myself – the man
You read, admire and long to meet,
Known the world over for his neat
And witty epigrams? The name
Is Martial. Thank you, earnest fan,
For having granted me the fame
Seldom enjoyed by a dead poet
While I’m alive and here to know it.
(Book 1, poem 1)

Insufferable amateur poets

Whether or not Apollo fled from the table
Thyestes ate his sons at, I’m unable
To say: what I can vouch for is our wish
To escape your dinner parties. Though each dish
Is lavish and superb, the pleasure’s nil
Since you recite your poems! To hell with brill,
Mushrooms and two-pound turbots, I don’t need
Oysters: give me a host who doesn’t read.
(3.45)

To Domitian, pleading his moral probity

Caesar, if you should chance to handle my book,
I hope that you’ll relax the frowning look
That rules the world. Soldiers are free to mock
The triumphs of you emperors – there’s no shame
In a general being made a laughing-stock.
I beg you, read my verses with the same
Face as you watch Latinus on the stage
Or Thymele the dancer. Harmless wit
You may, as Censor, reasonably permit:
My life is strict, however lax my page.
(1.4)

Heterosexual sex

Lesbia, why are your amours
Always conducted behind open, unguarded doors?
Why do you get more excitement out of a voyeur than a lover?
Why is pleasure no pleasure when it’s under cover?
Whores us a curtain, a bolt or a porter
To bar the public – you won’t find many chinks in the red-light quarter.
Ask Chione or Ias how to behave:
Even the cheapest tart conceals her business inside a monumental grave.
If I seem too hard on you, remember my objection
Is not to fornication, but to detection.
(1.34)

inside a monumental grave‘?

Gay sex

think what’s going on is the narrator is buggering a boy who, as a result, is on the edge of orgasm. I’m happy to be corrected if I’ve misunderstood.

When you say, ‘Quick, I’m going to come,’
Hedylus, I go limp and numb.
But ask me to hold back my fire,
And the brake accelerates desire.
Dear boy, if you’re in such a hurry,
Tell me to slow up, not to worry.
(1.46)

Slave or paedophile sex

The eroticism of being blocked or prevented is taken a step further in this poem:

The only kisses I enjoy
Are those I take by violence, boy.
Your anger whets my appetite
More than your face, and so to excite
Desire I give you a good beating
From time to time: a self-defeating
Habit – what do I do it for?
You neither fear nor love me more.
(5.46)

Heterosexual smears

Lesbia claims she’s never laid
Without good money being paid.
That’s true enough; when she’s on fire
She’ll always pay the hose’s hire.
(11.62)

Thumbnail sketches

Diaulus, recently physician,
Has set up now as a mortician:
No change, though, in his clients’ condition.
(1.47)

Or:

You’re an informer and a tool for slander,
A notorious swindler and a pander,
A cocksucker, gangster and a whore…
So how is it, Vacerra, you’re so poor?
(11.66)

Chaucerian physicality

Hoping, Fescennia, to overpower
The reek of last night’s drinking, you devour
Cosmus’ sweet-scented pastilles by the gross.
But though they give your teeth a whitish gloss
They fail to make your breath any less smelly
When a belch bubbles up from your abyss-like belly.
In fact, blended with the lozenges, it’s much stronger;
It travels farther and it lingers longer.
(1.87)

His cheap lodgings in a block of flats

Lupercus, whenever you meet me
You instantly greet me
With, ‘Is it alright by you if I send
My slave to pick up your book of epigrams? It’s only to lend:
I’ll return it when I’ve read it.’ There’s no call
To trouble your boy. It’s a long haul
To the Pear-tree district, and my flat
Is up three flights of stairs, steep ones at that…
(1.117)

Behaviour of a hanger-on and dinner cadger

When Selius spreads his nets for an invitation
To dinner, if you’re due to plead a cause
In court or give a poetry recitation,
Take him along, he’ll furnish your applause:
‘Well said!’ ‘Hear, hear!’ ‘Bravo!’ ‘Shrewd point!’ ‘That’s good!’
Till you say, ‘Shut up now, you’ve earned your food.’
(2.27)

Or this poem about not only being a client, but being a client’s client.

I angle for your dinner invitations (oh the shame
Of doing it, but I do it). You fish elsewhere. We’re the same.
I attend the morning levée and they tell me you’re not there,
But gone to wait on someone else. We make a proper pair.
I’m your spaniel, I’m the toady to your every pompous whim.
You court a richer patron. I dog you and you dog him.
To be a slave is bad enough but I refuse to be
A flunkey’s flunkey, Maximum. My master must be free.
(2.18)

Miniatures of abuse

You ask me what I get
Out of my country place.
The profit, gross or net,
Is never having to see your face.
(2.38)

And:

Marius’s earhole smells.
Does that surprise you, Nestor?
The scandal that you tell’s
Enough to make it fester.
(3.28)

Crude humour

If from the baths you hear a round of applause
Maron’s giant prick is bound to be the cause.
(9.33)

Or:

Why poke the ash of a dead fire?
Why pluck the hairs from your grey fanny?
That’s a chic touch that men admire
In girls, not in a flagrant granny…
(10.90)

Sarcasm about his readers

Caedicianus, if my reader
After a hundred epigrams still
Wants more, then he’s a greedy feeder
Whom no amount of swill can fill.
(1.118)

Self portrait in retirement

Poor morning client (you remind me
Of all I loathed and left behind me
In Rome), if you had any nous,
Instead of calling on my house
You’d haunt the mansions of the great.

I’m not some wealthy advocate
Blessed with a sharp, litigious tongue,
I’m just a lazy, far from young
Friend of the Muses who likes ease
And sleep. Great Rome denied me these:
If I can’t find them here in Spain,
I might as well go back again.
(12.68)


Credit

The Epigrams of Martial, translated by James Michie with an introduction by Peter Howell, was published by Penguin Books in 1973.

Related links

Roman reviews