The Decay of Lying

Wilde’s essay aims to persuade the reader of his argument regarding his “new aesthetics” (17), or the principles of the Aestheticism literary movement. To do this, he contrasts Aestheticism with Realism and debunks the latter as an approach to creating “great Art.” He also employs a variety of literary and rhetorical devices to engage the reader while framing himself as a credible authority on art.

The essay form follows a Socratic dialogue in which the characters of Cyril and Vivian discuss the argument Wilde makes, which is integrated into the dialogue as an argument Vivian makes in an article he is writing. This structure enables Wilde to pre-empt questions readers may have in interrogating his theory and to present rebuttals to potential critiques. In this way, Wilde, with Vivian as his speaker, provides a thorough discussion of his artistic ideals in relation to a myriad of past and contemporary artists and writers. Through Vivian, Wilde criticizes the work of fellow writers such as Henry James and highly successful publications like Mrs. Humphry Ward’s 1888 novel Robert Elsmere. According to Wilde, their failure lies principally in their privileging of realism over artistic invention or using fact-based sources of inspiration rather than adopting Lying as a Necessary Creative Force.

Wilde’s main complaint thus arises as a response to the Realism movement in art and literature. As an aesthete, Wilde is unimpressed by the realist artistic production of his time in which “Nature” and “Life” replace art as the main sources of works’ subject and form. Though these are abstract concepts, Wilde renders them accessible through frequent personification. He is thus better able to outline the ways in which “Nature,” “Life,” “Fact,” and “Art” interact and come into conflict with one another. Both nature and life are juxtaposed with art as examples of realities defined by imperfection versus the perfection of art. When nature and life influence art, this results in art that imitates life. Similarly, if fact supersedes fiction, or lying, the art that is produced is no more than a copy of real life incapable of transcending the vulgarities, pettiness, and dullness therein. Vivian insists that art should “anticipate life. It does not copy it, but moulds it to its purpose” (11). In this way, artistic conventions and form can be upheld without the limitations and imperfections imposed by reality.

Truly great art, according to Wilde, can only be achieved by creating Art for Art’s Sake. In other words, “great art” must be kept separate from political, personal, and moral influences—it exists in a different sphere, and it creates its own reality. Intermingling these various influences creates bad art that is doomed to become “old-fashioned” (17), in addition to the slew of other flaws Wilde lists throughout the essay. This principle is juxtaposed with the realist position that art should represent real life and regular people, but it likely also responds to the moralistic strictures of Victorian society, which produced many didactic literary works in which ethical characters are rewarded while unethical characters are punished. Wilde refutes both ideas and asserts that art should be privileged above all else, separate from outside influence and strictures.

Vivian argues that when people encounter “great art,” they experience a beauty that is not available to them in everyday life, and they absorb its perfection of type, or style. This type then shapes the way they perceive the world around them, reflecting the theory of Art as an Inventive Force. In this way, “great art” comes to define the way people see, understand, and interact. Thus, to contribute to the creation of great art, Wilde, and Vivian, recommend that “The proper school to learn art in is not Life but Art” (8), lest one risk producing art that is imitative instead of inventive. Extending this point, Wilde’s text can also be understood as a defense of arts education more generally, as good art begets good art, just as bad art begets bad art.

In terms of tone, Wilde’s syntax is generally sophisticated but also rather hyperbolic. He tends to make assertions and argue his points using extreme language to add emphasis, such as calling realism a “complete failure” (16) and repeatedly using adverbs like “only,” “all,” “never,” and “always.” He complements this strong diction with frequent allusions to underscore his authority as a speaker on the art world. He runs through entire lists of authors and works to provide numerous examples of what constitutes either an appropriate or inappropriate attempt to create art. Though he often pokes fun at the work of those he does not admire, he is specific in his criticisms and keeps his commentary strictly focused on the works and styles themselves rather than engaging in ad hominem attacks. As a result, Wilde’s critiques seem well-reasoned and well-supported rather than personal. In his use of Vivian as a vessel for his opinions, Wilde also creates additional distance, veiling some of the more heavy-handed opinions in the narrative.

Wilde often refers to examples from Classical Greek and Roman mythology, but he also takes his essay beyond the boundaries of Western Europe and Eurocentric thought to comment on the art and philosophies of the Middle East and East Asia. He describes Europe as having an innately “imitative spirit,” in contrast with the “frank rejection of imitation” and “love of artistic convention” (8) found in Eastern cultures. Wilde praises parts of Europe that have experienced Eastern influences through empirical affiliations, namely “Byzantium, Sicily, and Spain” (8). He lauds these places as the birthplaces of “beautiful and imaginative work in which the visible things of life are transmuted into artistic conventions, and the things that Life has not are invented and fashioned for her delight” (8). With outside, Asian influence, certain areas of Europe have a culture rooted in what Wilde might consider more authentic art.

Wilde’s use of humor in the essay is typical of his work more broadly, and the irony and wordplay not only make the text more enjoyable to read but also create a wittiness that drives the pacing of the argument. The title of the essay in itself, “The Decay of Lying: A Protest” ironically presents the loss of something traditionally considered negative—lying—as something worth protesting. This is counter to what one might expect and piques interest in what Wilde will say to support what could otherwise appear to be a controversial stance. Wilde further extends this irony by arguing that it is only by lying that one can create truly beautiful art.

Through this layering of examples, explanation, elaboration, and humor, Wilde constructs both an explanation and a defense of the key tenets of the Aestheticism movement.