Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories
This paper aims to assess the influence of Ruskin’s ideas on Oscar Wilde’s aesthetic theories. It examines to what extent Wilde’s aesthetic stance is indebted to the teachings of the Slade Professor, but also why Wilde ultimately disavowed his Ruskinian heritage. The series of lectures Wilde gave in...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Presses Universitaires de la Méditerranée
2020-06-01
|
| Series: | Cahiers Victoriens et Edouardiens |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.openedition.org/cve/7197 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832581217479819264 |
|---|---|
| author | Carole Delhorme |
| author_facet | Carole Delhorme |
| author_sort | Carole Delhorme |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This paper aims to assess the influence of Ruskin’s ideas on Oscar Wilde’s aesthetic theories. It examines to what extent Wilde’s aesthetic stance is indebted to the teachings of the Slade Professor, but also why Wilde ultimately disavowed his Ruskinian heritage. The series of lectures Wilde gave in the US in 1882 testify to the influence of one of his mentors. As Wilde was tasked with spreading the Aesthetic gospel overseas, he decried the ugliness of the modern urban and industrial environment as well as the capitalistic modes of production, thus echoing Ruskin’s writings. He highlighted the importance of beauty in the artist’s environment, asserted the link between beauty and utility, and put forward the social mission of art. Yet, almost ten years later, as Wilde rejects imitation in Intentions (1891) and dissociates art and utility in the Preface to The Picture of Dorian Gray (1891), his theories run counter to Ruskin’s teachings. Even though this rejection of Ruskin’s ideas can partly be accounted for by the evolution of Wilde’s stance itself, it may also be seen as symptomatic of the deeply ambivalent relationship that Ruskin had with the Aesthetic Movement as a whole, and with the doctrine of art for art’s sake in particular. On the one hand, the importance given to beauty and to the purely aesthetic qualities of works of art sets Ruskin as a precursor to the Aesthetic Movement. On the other hand, the link between art and morals in his scheme of thought makes him one of the strongest and most vocal opponents to the doctrine of art for art’s sake. Thus, the ambivalence of Wilde’s Ruskinian heritage actually reveals Ruskin’s own paradoxical position towards the Aesthetic Movement and towards aesthetic modernity in general. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-1c40419c7e4a4207874f6df16b361c42 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 0220-5610 2271-6149 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-06-01 |
| publisher | Presses Universitaires de la Méditerranée |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cahiers Victoriens et Edouardiens |
| spelling | doaj-art-1c40419c7e4a4207874f6df16b361c422025-01-30T10:22:12ZengPresses Universitaires de la MéditerranéeCahiers Victoriens et Edouardiens0220-56102271-61492020-06-019110.4000/cve.7197Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic TheoriesCarole DelhormeThis paper aims to assess the influence of Ruskin’s ideas on Oscar Wilde’s aesthetic theories. It examines to what extent Wilde’s aesthetic stance is indebted to the teachings of the Slade Professor, but also why Wilde ultimately disavowed his Ruskinian heritage. The series of lectures Wilde gave in the US in 1882 testify to the influence of one of his mentors. As Wilde was tasked with spreading the Aesthetic gospel overseas, he decried the ugliness of the modern urban and industrial environment as well as the capitalistic modes of production, thus echoing Ruskin’s writings. He highlighted the importance of beauty in the artist’s environment, asserted the link between beauty and utility, and put forward the social mission of art. Yet, almost ten years later, as Wilde rejects imitation in Intentions (1891) and dissociates art and utility in the Preface to The Picture of Dorian Gray (1891), his theories run counter to Ruskin’s teachings. Even though this rejection of Ruskin’s ideas can partly be accounted for by the evolution of Wilde’s stance itself, it may also be seen as symptomatic of the deeply ambivalent relationship that Ruskin had with the Aesthetic Movement as a whole, and with the doctrine of art for art’s sake in particular. On the one hand, the importance given to beauty and to the purely aesthetic qualities of works of art sets Ruskin as a precursor to the Aesthetic Movement. On the other hand, the link between art and morals in his scheme of thought makes him one of the strongest and most vocal opponents to the doctrine of art for art’s sake. Thus, the ambivalence of Wilde’s Ruskinian heritage actually reveals Ruskin’s own paradoxical position towards the Aesthetic Movement and towards aesthetic modernity in general.https://journals.openedition.org/cve/7197Wilde (Oscar)Pater (Walter)Whistler (James Abbott McNeill)Art for art’s sakeDecorative artsFormalism |
| spellingShingle | Carole Delhorme Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories Cahiers Victoriens et Edouardiens Wilde (Oscar) Pater (Walter) Whistler (James Abbott McNeill) Art for art’s sake Decorative arts Formalism |
| title | Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories |
| title_full | Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories |
| title_fullStr | Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories |
| title_full_unstemmed | Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories |
| title_short | Embracing and Rejecting the Ruskinian Heritage in Wilde’s Aesthetic Theories |
| title_sort | embracing and rejecting the ruskinian heritage in wilde s aesthetic theories |
| topic | Wilde (Oscar) Pater (Walter) Whistler (James Abbott McNeill) Art for art’s sake Decorative arts Formalism |
| url | https://journals.openedition.org/cve/7197 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT caroledelhorme embracingandrejectingtheruskinianheritageinwildesaesthetictheories |