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.