Оскар Уайльд. Избранное

Давайте сойдёмся на том, что это просто не моя классика. Моя классика - это "Робинзон Крузо", "Джейн Эйр", "Женитьба Фигаро", "Мастер и Маргарита", в конце концов. А тут...

Я пыталась читать роман несколько лет назад и застряла где-то в районе истории с девочкой-актрисой. Сейчас взяла аудиокнигу, её удалось дослушать до конца, но теперь я понимаю, что по пути к финалу у меня была ещё куча мест, в которых я могла завязнуть. Важные, поворотные, драматические события в книге можно сосчитать по пальцам. Они перемежаются довольно скучными диалогами, внутренними монологами, авторскими отступлениями... Когда в текст внезапно влезла длиннющая лекция про мифы и суеверия о драгоценных камнях, я чуть не взвыла и поневоле вспомнила "Собор Парижской богоматери", в котором Гюго две главы посвятил архитектуре и книгопечатанию (если ошибаюсь, прошу простить, давно читала). Вот зачем все эти описания красивых предметов? Чтобы на их фоне ярче подчеркнуть пороки главного героя? Так пороки (возможно, из цензурных соображений) даны лишь намёками. Ну, таскался по притонам. Ну, сбил с праведного пути нескольких приятелей, как его самого когда-то совратил лорд Генри. Ну, разбивал сердца девушкам. Может быть, это впечатляло читателей... сто лет назад.

В историю с актрисой мне почему-то не поверилось. Суицид, конечно, можно списать на юный возраст девушки и её подростковый максимализм, и всё же весь конфликт (она плохо играла, он разочаровался, наговорил гадостей и порвал с нею, она отравилась) кажется притянутым за уши. Так же и в сцене с убийством художника - вот что нашло на Дориана, он же сам притащил друга посмотреть на картину?! Если после истории с актрисой я обозвала героя "сволочью" (в основном из-за его отношения к случившемуся), то история с художником вызвала лишь пожатие плеч, мол, что с этого неадеквата взять.

Наконец появился ожидаемый, но всё же интересный поворот сюжета - моряк. Я возрадовалась, но ненадолго. Допускаю, что в реальности мститель, следящий за жертвой, может нарваться на случайную пулю, но когда такое происходит в художественном произведении, это уже напоминает игру в поддавки. Впрочем, автор (через героя) сам высказывает мысль: в жизни злодей не получает возмездие, праведник не вознаграждается. В этом смысле финал, где герой, желая уничтожить "совесть", убивает себя (потому что никто другой его победить не может), вполне закономерен, за это плюс.

Из всех героев мне понравились художник, моряк, химик. В общем, те, кто умер прямо или косвенно по вине главного героя. Как я могу ему сочувствовать? Он не был мне симпатичен уже с первого появления (возможно, потому что уже тогда я знала сюжет). Если лорд Генри хотя бы обаятелен, то Дориан - просто красивый манекен, не заслуживший ни моей любви, ни жалости, ни даже удовлетворения от его гибели.

Радует только то, что роман прочитан (прослушан), и я могу обратиться к другим книгам.

• WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF LIFE WERE INFINITE?

Humanity has always been searching for ф way to slow down growing older process. No wonder, because human life is so short, and still there is so much to do... In the pursuit of eternal youth, a dream of immortality is occurred in people's minds. Let's imagine what life will be like if this dream becomes true...

Of course, the man will have a wide range of opportunities: to taste everything; to observe the changing world; to learn whatever one wishes; to enjoy oneself in all ways.

However, there is no joy without sadness, so there is a downside: as life becomes longer, along with the amount of pleasures, the amount of failures will increase; if people around remain mortal, then the unfortunate will be ought to experience the loss of loved ones again and again; moments that he wants to forget forever will never leave the doomed; and, after all, who says that life cannot be boring?

On the example of Dorian Gray we can see the consequences of the fight with Nature... In the end, the sins committed by the character do not go unpunished: conscience begins to destroy him from the inside and punishment befalls him from the outside, and as a result, life becomes a torture.
«What sort of life would his be, if day and night, shadows of crime were to peer at him from silent corners, to mock him from secret places, to whisper at his ear as he sat at the feast, to wake him with icy fingers as he lay asleep!»

Nature is designed this way for a reason: every creature is born, goes through its earthly journey, and then invariably dies. So, in Her opinion, any other outcome can have tragic consequences. And to argue with Nature is impossible, neither for humans nor for all other creatures...

• WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT: THE INSIDE OR THE OUTSIDE?

Mind and body, although are parts of the same thing, are still different: a person's appearance doesn`t always correspond to his personality. So which is more important: the material or the moral?

Let's start at the beginning – with the first meeting. A person is more likely to start a conversation with a stranger if he or she has an attractive appearance. Is this regard, the external side is superior to the internal. However, in the process of communication, when the inner world of the interlocutor becomes clear, sympathy can weaken or disappear. If the person has an unpleasant temper, it is hardly possible that people will continue to socialize with him. In this case, the inner wins.

We can also consider wealth and status as a material component. But here the outside loses too: money if far from always determining a person's happiness. In order to be satisfied with life, it is necessary to be accepted in society. And it is impossible if a person has a dark soul.

And one more thing... The body dies sooner or later, but what is connected with the inner world of a person (results of intellectual labor, deeds, theories), sometimes lives for centuries. For example, we read classic literature hundreds of years after the author's death and honor the exploits of long-dead heroes. At the same time, for us it is not all that important how the person looked and how wealthy he was, more meaningful are his thoughts and feelings, his knowledge and experience. So the moral is higher than the material.

As for Lord Henry, he believes that attractive appearance and money are the highest human qualities...
«And, after all, it is a very poor consolation to be told that the man who was given one a bad dinner, or poor wine, is irreproachable on his private life.»
It is clear from my previous reflections that I do not agree with this point of view. Moreover, it seems to me that the character himself doesn't quite believe in his own theories; or at least starts to doubt them at some point...
«"By the way, Dorian," he said, after a pause, "'what does it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose' – how does the quotation run? – his own soul'?"»
One way or another, Henry's thoughts influence young Dorian's mind. And perhaps even become the start of his tragedies.

• WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO LIVE IN THE PRESENT?

What Lord Henry suggests (and what the hypnotized Dorian Gray subsequently accepts) is to forget all previous failures («Experience was of no ethical value. It was merely the name men gave to their mistakes.») and to stop caring about future by following society`s imposed rules of morality («Faithfulness is to the emotional life what consistency is to the life of intellect – simply a confession of failures.»), is favor of momentary pleasure («A man who is master of himself can end a sorrow as easily as he can invent a pleasure.»). In character's opinion, the only value of life is pleasure; all suffering may be avoided if man simply observes his life without analyzing, without evaluating («To become the spectator of one's own life, as Harry says, is to escape the suffering of life.») and without remembering («The one charm of the past is that it is the past.»).
But in my head this life principe just can't be admitted. Because of the followings...

An infant who has just been given birth knows absolutely nothing about this world. Then he performs actions himself or observes the actions of other and memorizes. Thus, through memorization, the baby learns all those difficult things that an adult should be able to do: to walk on two legs, to speak, to understand his desires, to follow rules, to read and to write... And since a person learns throughout his life, this method of cognizing the world keeps helping a child even in adulthood. On this basis, the value of experience may hardly be overestimated. And, indeed, the memory of past is infinitely important: both successes and mistakes of the past can be useful in the present and in the future.

As for the future itself, is should also be valued: one should not commit actions that can lead to tragic consequences. If a person doesn't think about his future, he may do things that he will regret later.

As we now realize, the past and the future are very important values in everyone`s lives. But what about the society as a whole? History, just like all other sciences, has regularities. And since nothing comes from nothing and nothing disappears into nothing - that is, everything has its reasons - then, knowing the past and the present we can prognose the future. And the future is ourselves. So without history - without past and future, but only with the present - we people, the human race, cannot exist.

However, living in the present is not such a bad idea, if you know how to measure it. It is not about forgetting the past and not thinking about the future. It is more about stopping regretting what has already happened and saving all the pleasures for the future, losing the precious "now".