Wilde's rhetoric is highly stylized with the goal of creating the flow of a long poem. The guard, Herod, and Salome all have alarms which signal their impending doom but they refuse to listen. Salome's obsession with John turns to revulsion when he rejects her sexual advances- clearly a response she isn't used to. The kiss transforms from the erotic into the horrific, a running theme throughout.
Isn't it interesting that John is imprisoned in cistern? Something designed for water- the tool and symbol of baptism.
The book The Legend of Salome by Zacona points out that the difference between the Mark and Matthew versions of the story is one of psychological depth- a topic I hope to explore this week. This book also mentioned that Wilde gained some of his inspiration from the work of Gustave Moreau.
Because the Strauss libretto attempts to be as close to the Wilde play is possible I'm spending a lot of time with the original text before moving to the opera. My goal is to really understand the imagery Wilde found important so the contrast between the two will really jump out at me. My focus for this week is just comparing gospel accounts, and familiarizing myself still with Wilde's original work (and the sources he used for inspiration).
Any thoughts on De profundis?
Monday, July 27, 2009
Sunday, July 26, 2009
More thoughts
Something that bears considering: the ways in which Wilde's play differs from the biblical narrative. It seems so obvious, yet I had not considered it until today when I began reading Ross Kraemer's "Implicating Herodias and Her Daughter in the Death of John the Baptizer."
Why this is important: It has to do with the constructedness of the figure of Salome. Not only is she portrayed through text by men alone (Matthew, Mark, Flavius Josephus, and Wilde) but she might actually be their creation entirely. According to the Kraemer article, much of the details of this story are nebulous. He's not quite sure who is married to whom and when (with a good deal of scholarly precedent for this confusion). I have not finished reading the article yet, and when I do I will comment more.
I think Wilde's departures from the conflicted biblical narratives, and Josephus's narrative, are possibly loaded with meaning. I would like to know more about how and why Wilde chose to represent a little-known and seldom-named biblical woman the ways he did. Because of the hazy nature of the biblical narrative, Wilde has complete license to portray Salome however he chooses. But no doubt he has accrued various cultural and artistic versions of the story of Salome. The history of interpretation and transmission of this story is important in being able to discern Wilde's careful artistic choices in his particular version of this character. This is a question we have had with regard to Salome's portrayal as a sex symbol. Was Wilde just following popular cultural portrayals of Salome with regard to her sexiness? Probably yes and no. I don't know of any other controversies around the artistic creation of Salome. But this Salome, combined with Wilde's indecent public behavior, was enough to land him in prison, correct? Why such an explosion over a woman who might not have even existed?
But, here are a few general notes about the actors and their actions that need to be compared more closely with the biblical narrative (and other popular ones as well):
Salome's obsession with John the Baptist (why?)-->her desire to have him beheaded--> culminates with the infamous kiss of his beheaded pate.
Herodias' dislike of John because he speaks ill of her marriage. Her resentment of her daughter until Salome requests to have him beheaded.
Herod's fear of John, not because John necessarily represents the Jewish population which he does not want to upset (although the Jewish contingent is represented and occassionally speaks; there is a lot of interesting cultural friction in the play); but he actually thinks he might be a holy person. In the Kraemer article, he mentions that Jesus was thought to be John the Baptist come back to life (I believe this has biblical moorings, although I am not sure where). John must have been a fearsome prophet indeed. But this means that Wilde might have been tuned into messianism as well. John certainly seems to speek messianically.
John. That's about all I can say. Who is he criticizing with his cryptic words? Is he right or does he just have everyone running scared? Why does he spurn Salome? Love (or is it lust?) is not bad. I don't know what to make of this character, but perhaps as I continue with my close reading and writing about the poem that will become more clear.
A note on aesthetics, which is a favorite subject of mine: Wilde's play seems entirely motivated by aesthetics, by a concern for beauty, from the very beginning. He also shows a concern for metaphorical language. Everything is compared to something or someone else. Continuing on the theme of the moon I discussed in summary thoughts, part 1, this is from a book on poetics. Discussing Louise Gluck and Sylvia Plath, DeSales Harrison says, "When Gluck mentions the nouns 'moon and pond,' she is of course naming two terms central to the work of Sylvia Plath. For Plath, the mutable, cold, illuminated, and obscure surface of her moon and the shifting, reflective surface of her pools were the surfaces to which she could pose her questions about fate, determination, intention, image, and the terms of representation. Gluck, then, positions herself at the edge not only of her own prior accomplishments but of Plath's as well, and in doing so, identifies her own desire specifically to pick up where Plath left off. Perhaps 'moon' and 'pond' are now exhausted terms, but they illuminate a path of inquiry into the nature of lyric subjectivity that Gluck undertakes to extend, an inquiry that Plath began but could not complete" (The End of the Mind, 174-75).
This could possibly reveal part of what Wilde is doing, whether intentionally or not. Even though Salome is a drama, it reads more like an extended poetic monologue. Although the voices shift and express different opinions (which often are just as changeable as humans themselves), Wilde's poetic style speaks throughout. The imagery is impressive for the way in which he endows symbols with meaning, most particularly the moon. Whereas female poets seem to pose questions to the world around them (I wrote a paper on this relating to Emily Dickinson and Mary Oliver; the quote about Plath seems to confirm it), Wilde seems to display the impulse to define the world or to show what is going on in it. This seems very masculine somehow, as though Wilde is (ironically) impregnating his story with his essence. We can investigate this little theory more.
Why this is important: It has to do with the constructedness of the figure of Salome. Not only is she portrayed through text by men alone (Matthew, Mark, Flavius Josephus, and Wilde) but she might actually be their creation entirely. According to the Kraemer article, much of the details of this story are nebulous. He's not quite sure who is married to whom and when (with a good deal of scholarly precedent for this confusion). I have not finished reading the article yet, and when I do I will comment more.
I think Wilde's departures from the conflicted biblical narratives, and Josephus's narrative, are possibly loaded with meaning. I would like to know more about how and why Wilde chose to represent a little-known and seldom-named biblical woman the ways he did. Because of the hazy nature of the biblical narrative, Wilde has complete license to portray Salome however he chooses. But no doubt he has accrued various cultural and artistic versions of the story of Salome. The history of interpretation and transmission of this story is important in being able to discern Wilde's careful artistic choices in his particular version of this character. This is a question we have had with regard to Salome's portrayal as a sex symbol. Was Wilde just following popular cultural portrayals of Salome with regard to her sexiness? Probably yes and no. I don't know of any other controversies around the artistic creation of Salome. But this Salome, combined with Wilde's indecent public behavior, was enough to land him in prison, correct? Why such an explosion over a woman who might not have even existed?
But, here are a few general notes about the actors and their actions that need to be compared more closely with the biblical narrative (and other popular ones as well):
Salome's obsession with John the Baptist (why?)-->her desire to have him beheaded--> culminates with the infamous kiss of his beheaded pate.
Herodias' dislike of John because he speaks ill of her marriage. Her resentment of her daughter until Salome requests to have him beheaded.
Herod's fear of John, not because John necessarily represents the Jewish population which he does not want to upset (although the Jewish contingent is represented and occassionally speaks; there is a lot of interesting cultural friction in the play); but he actually thinks he might be a holy person. In the Kraemer article, he mentions that Jesus was thought to be John the Baptist come back to life (I believe this has biblical moorings, although I am not sure where). John must have been a fearsome prophet indeed. But this means that Wilde might have been tuned into messianism as well. John certainly seems to speek messianically.
John. That's about all I can say. Who is he criticizing with his cryptic words? Is he right or does he just have everyone running scared? Why does he spurn Salome? Love (or is it lust?) is not bad. I don't know what to make of this character, but perhaps as I continue with my close reading and writing about the poem that will become more clear.
A note on aesthetics, which is a favorite subject of mine: Wilde's play seems entirely motivated by aesthetics, by a concern for beauty, from the very beginning. He also shows a concern for metaphorical language. Everything is compared to something or someone else. Continuing on the theme of the moon I discussed in summary thoughts, part 1, this is from a book on poetics. Discussing Louise Gluck and Sylvia Plath, DeSales Harrison says, "When Gluck mentions the nouns 'moon and pond,' she is of course naming two terms central to the work of Sylvia Plath. For Plath, the mutable, cold, illuminated, and obscure surface of her moon and the shifting, reflective surface of her pools were the surfaces to which she could pose her questions about fate, determination, intention, image, and the terms of representation. Gluck, then, positions herself at the edge not only of her own prior accomplishments but of Plath's as well, and in doing so, identifies her own desire specifically to pick up where Plath left off. Perhaps 'moon' and 'pond' are now exhausted terms, but they illuminate a path of inquiry into the nature of lyric subjectivity that Gluck undertakes to extend, an inquiry that Plath began but could not complete" (The End of the Mind, 174-75).
This could possibly reveal part of what Wilde is doing, whether intentionally or not. Even though Salome is a drama, it reads more like an extended poetic monologue. Although the voices shift and express different opinions (which often are just as changeable as humans themselves), Wilde's poetic style speaks throughout. The imagery is impressive for the way in which he endows symbols with meaning, most particularly the moon. Whereas female poets seem to pose questions to the world around them (I wrote a paper on this relating to Emily Dickinson and Mary Oliver; the quote about Plath seems to confirm it), Wilde seems to display the impulse to define the world or to show what is going on in it. This seems very masculine somehow, as though Wilde is (ironically) impregnating his story with his essence. We can investigate this little theory more.
Monday, July 20, 2009
summary thoughts, part 1
So, Kathryn, I have been carefully reading the play and taking notes in the margins. I want to put them here so you know what my reading of the play is. Some of the notes are by way of summary, but some actually involve critical thought. :) Maybe laying out a summary of the play will help us see common thematic elements that are more deeply embedded. (You alluded to this when you mentioned to me you were trying to decipher the meaning of certain colors.)
Here it goes.
I am exceedingly intrigued by the cistern that appears within the first four lines to set the scene. Cisterns have a long and venerable history, and it would be interesting to investigage Wilde's choice of this location for John's imprisonment.
The first official line of the play is "How beautiful is the Princess Salome to-night." Narraboth presents her beauty as a fact of his experience. His line is followed up by the Page's statement about the moon. It is a metaphorical construction that compares the moon to a dead woman. The moon holds a great deal of meaning throughout the play for numerous characters. It seems that she, in the play she is called she and traditionally the moon is feminine, becomes a mirror of the goings on below. Each male character notes her appearance, usually by analogy to something else. Herodias does not think the moon is like anything but itself. Is she resisting the male interpretation of things? The male gaze is certainly almost obsessively the focus of this play (either the way it is meted out or withheld). How do women challenge or resist that gaze?
Page 1:
Narraboth: Salome looks strange, like royalty. She appears to be dancing. Here there is antecedent confusion; he does not say "Salome has a strange look." He says "She," which makes it seem that he just took up the Page's description of the moon. But clearly the two men have independent descriptions going. Here is where the Salome/moon conflation begins that continues throughout the play. Interestingly, the moon is personified, which seems uncharacteristic for the male gaze.
Page: moon is slow moving.
The Roman soldiers say that it is "ridiculous" that Jews dispute about their religion. Adds a little color to the cultural and biblical setting. It also sets up a spot for John, who in typical Hebrew prophet fashion seems to speak against the grain of common society, is literally a voice crying in a wilderness of voices that do not know the proper will of God.
page 2:
Narraboth notes Salome's beauty again. Page displays his jealousy and his fatalism by saying that N. should not look at Salome so much because "something terrible may happen." It is perhaps significant that the page belongs to Herodias because his statement could be interpreted as looking out for his mistress's interests. But with his lament for N. after he kills himself the page betrays his love.
The soldiers comment on Herod's appearance. He is "sombre" and "is looking at someone."
N. notes S's paleness. His description of her whiteness is hyperbolic. Shadow of a white rose in a silver mirror? Please. He worships her, and white is usually meant to be emblematic of purity. In contrast, the first description of Herodias is of her black mitre with pearls and her blue-dusted hair. This, combined with the Beardsley illustration "Enter Herodias," makes her out to be a terrible authority figure (mitre suggest leadership). In the illustration, she is a woman with exceedingly large and pugnacious breasts, to borrow a phrase from Their Eyes Were Watching God. This illustration, and all of the illustrations of women in this book for that matter, are dripping with irony. The women's dresses and capes appear to fill the entire page yet their genetalia are so blatantly displayed. Automatically it seems an insult to propriety, but this was obviously intentional on Beardsley's part. B.'s drawings are classified as erotica (see, for example, the title page). This says something about the reception and transmission of these images in popular culture. *We need to find out about the history of the Beardsley illustrations. Beardsley also displays male genetalia, but in two places: "The Woman in the Moon" (if the moon really is a woman, should not the Page cover himself out of respect?); in the page's "Platonic Lament" for Narraboth, his genetalia are concealed behind his shroud and bier. The second place is in "The Eyes of Herod." The two candelabra-bearing cherubs have male genetalia. But Herod, the lustful foil to Salome, is completely covered in the same illustration. Salome, however, has her right breast displayed quite obviously. The light that interposes between the two looks like an abbreviated menorah, and the five flames cast up a veil of smoke between Herod and Salome. Oh, there is a third instance of the male genetalia--in the second "Toilette of Salome," but this is incidental, I think. It is not only the genetalia and midriffs that make these illustrations "erotic." To me it seems as though the various characters' eyes, languishing or hostile or nearly nonexistent concealed behind masks make the illustrations provocative. It's also the moderately extreme poses, particuarly that of the "The Climax," fittingly.
Okay, I didn't get very far in terms of the play, but I will write again soon.
Here it goes.
I am exceedingly intrigued by the cistern that appears within the first four lines to set the scene. Cisterns have a long and venerable history, and it would be interesting to investigage Wilde's choice of this location for John's imprisonment.
The first official line of the play is "How beautiful is the Princess Salome to-night." Narraboth presents her beauty as a fact of his experience. His line is followed up by the Page's statement about the moon. It is a metaphorical construction that compares the moon to a dead woman. The moon holds a great deal of meaning throughout the play for numerous characters. It seems that she, in the play she is called she and traditionally the moon is feminine, becomes a mirror of the goings on below. Each male character notes her appearance, usually by analogy to something else. Herodias does not think the moon is like anything but itself. Is she resisting the male interpretation of things? The male gaze is certainly almost obsessively the focus of this play (either the way it is meted out or withheld). How do women challenge or resist that gaze?
Page 1:
Narraboth: Salome looks strange, like royalty. She appears to be dancing. Here there is antecedent confusion; he does not say "Salome has a strange look." He says "She," which makes it seem that he just took up the Page's description of the moon. But clearly the two men have independent descriptions going. Here is where the Salome/moon conflation begins that continues throughout the play. Interestingly, the moon is personified, which seems uncharacteristic for the male gaze.
Page: moon is slow moving.
The Roman soldiers say that it is "ridiculous" that Jews dispute about their religion. Adds a little color to the cultural and biblical setting. It also sets up a spot for John, who in typical Hebrew prophet fashion seems to speak against the grain of common society, is literally a voice crying in a wilderness of voices that do not know the proper will of God.
page 2:
Narraboth notes Salome's beauty again. Page displays his jealousy and his fatalism by saying that N. should not look at Salome so much because "something terrible may happen." It is perhaps significant that the page belongs to Herodias because his statement could be interpreted as looking out for his mistress's interests. But with his lament for N. after he kills himself the page betrays his love.
The soldiers comment on Herod's appearance. He is "sombre" and "is looking at someone."
N. notes S's paleness. His description of her whiteness is hyperbolic. Shadow of a white rose in a silver mirror? Please. He worships her, and white is usually meant to be emblematic of purity. In contrast, the first description of Herodias is of her black mitre with pearls and her blue-dusted hair. This, combined with the Beardsley illustration "Enter Herodias," makes her out to be a terrible authority figure (mitre suggest leadership). In the illustration, she is a woman with exceedingly large and pugnacious breasts, to borrow a phrase from Their Eyes Were Watching God. This illustration, and all of the illustrations of women in this book for that matter, are dripping with irony. The women's dresses and capes appear to fill the entire page yet their genetalia are so blatantly displayed. Automatically it seems an insult to propriety, but this was obviously intentional on Beardsley's part. B.'s drawings are classified as erotica (see, for example, the title page). This says something about the reception and transmission of these images in popular culture. *We need to find out about the history of the Beardsley illustrations. Beardsley also displays male genetalia, but in two places: "The Woman in the Moon" (if the moon really is a woman, should not the Page cover himself out of respect?); in the page's "Platonic Lament" for Narraboth, his genetalia are concealed behind his shroud and bier. The second place is in "The Eyes of Herod." The two candelabra-bearing cherubs have male genetalia. But Herod, the lustful foil to Salome, is completely covered in the same illustration. Salome, however, has her right breast displayed quite obviously. The light that interposes between the two looks like an abbreviated menorah, and the five flames cast up a veil of smoke between Herod and Salome. Oh, there is a third instance of the male genetalia--in the second "Toilette of Salome," but this is incidental, I think. It is not only the genetalia and midriffs that make these illustrations "erotic." To me it seems as though the various characters' eyes, languishing or hostile or nearly nonexistent concealed behind masks make the illustrations provocative. It's also the moderately extreme poses, particuarly that of the "The Climax," fittingly.
Okay, I didn't get very far in terms of the play, but I will write again soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)