Interpreting Wilde

In the form of a discussion one might overhear at a haughty London café Mr. Wilde endeavors to depict the critic as an informed middleman between artist and public, and attempts to define art itself. As a member of the aesthetic movement and thus a firm believer in the phrase ‘art for art’s sake’ he lifts art of any real obligations, except to be deemed artistic. And all the moral and physical requirements that he believes art need not follow, he places on critics. Gilbert, a man in this dialogue probably meant to embody Wilde himself, explains to his less enlightened friend Ernest that it is the critics’ responsibility to filter what he is taking in through his screen of experiences and knowledge, and judges the resulting emotions or realizations. If what he gains from the exhibition is profound or unoriginal or pleasing in anyway, it is his or her duty to have other people experience it as well. That means that art just has to be reality with a sprinkling of magic, as Wilde says. “The best thing one can say about modern creative art is that it is just a little less vulgar than reality.” And to be honest, I don’t have the authority to agree or disagree.