Appreciation of Literature and Film

Abby Godfrey

“There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.” 

Harry Potter is one of the greatest books ever written and I will die on this hill. In 1997, the first book in the series, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, was published. Whether you enjoyed the book or not it was a well written book that soon changed the lives of thousands of people worldwide. In my opinion, the success of a book can be based on the reach and influence that it has over people. Harry Potter accomplished this. If I mentioned Harry Potter what would be the first thing that came to mind? For many you would think of a beautiful story of found family, action packed with witchcraft and wizardry and of course the adorable little house-elf Dobby and his sock. However, some people would view this book with a shifted paradigm and view Harry Potter through their ever critical moral and religious lens. This view has led to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone being banned in thousands of schools. In said schools this book had been deemed dangerous due to the mention of “witch-craft” and the “occult”, which was seen as evil and anti-christian. This book has also been frequently accused of having “anti-family themes”. Due to individuals pushing their own personal moral and religious values into schools many children have been deprived of their ability to read this book.

To this day both Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and The Picture of Dorian Gray are both continuously brought up in conversations in attempts to ban books. Many “do-gooders” also had problems with The Picture of Dorian Gray again due to their war on any opinion or belief that does not align with their rigorous conservative moral beliefs and their religion. In The Picture of Dorian Gray they’re LGBTQ+ characters. It is a tale as old as time those in power trying to restrict peoples access to ideas that they deem “wrong”.

I absolutely believe that there are no moral or immoral books. There are so many examples of books that have opinions someone will disagree with. If every single book was banned because someone had a moral opposition to it then all books would be banned. Even for myself there are some books that have some questionable topics in my opinion, Lolita by. Vladimir Nabokov for example. While I may believe that the topic of the book may be immoral it is simply a book meant to provide a service whether that be teaching us something or to simply entertain us. If this book were real life then I would have a strong moral opposition to it, however it is a book, and it is a very well written book at that. Lolita is a classic not because people agree with the topic on a moral ground. It is a classic because it was very well written and accomplished its goal as a novel.

There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well-written, or badly written. That is all. –Oscar Wilde

Cameron Dailey

I fall somewhere in the middle when agreeing or disagreeing on this statement. While I do agree that there are well-written and badly written books, I don’t agree with the statement there are no moral or immoral books. This statement would have a different meaning to each person since everyone has their own idea of morals. But this would make a book that’s about murder or crime neither moral or immoral and basically leaves every book in a grey area when it comes to judging a book based on morality. I think a book can be well written and also immoral at the same time it just depends on what the book is actually about. If a book is portraying negative actions and sending a message that isn’t positive to the reader I would say it is an immoral book. Everyone can have their own judgment of a book’s morality, but a book can definitely be immoral based on the contents inside. An example of an immoral book would be Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf. This book describes the process by which Hitler became antisemitic and outlines his political ideology and future plans for Germany. The ideologies that are written in this book and also the person who wrote it are morally wrong. Making this an Immoral book. I’m not saying that anyone who decides to read this book is immoral just because they read it but the material it contains is. Anyone can read immoral books and still be a good person, the knowledge of any book is open for anyone to learn about without being judged on their morals. Hitlers book could be very well written but that does not mean that it is not immoral.

“The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium.”

In 1936, Helmut Newton started his career in film photography. As his career took off, he chased more paramount ideas with his photography. Newton geared his photography towards the idea of sexual desire in a rebellious standing against early 1900s social norms. He used a single-lens (SLR) camera to take photos in film. His photography built his reputation, and he became dubbed the “father of modern photography”.

Film was one of the many forms of photography at the time. Developing a photo from the film is a tedious process. It involves chemicals, darkness, and time, not including the expectation of taking the photos perfectly with the correct placement on the film roll as well. In this time, there were other ways to take photographs and with simpler processes. With film as a more delicate form of photography, it’s fascinating to review why it was such a common method. SLR cameras provide higher resolution photos, meaning a higher definition and clearer quality. The negatives of the photos provide clear ownership of who took the photos and can make a photo timeless. SLR cameras required less energy than other forms of photography at that time to take a photo. With the development of the film being the most tedious process, the advantages of film photography at that time outweighed the negatives. Film photography isn’t a perfected form of photography, making it an imperfect medium in which Helmut Newton thrived in.

Although the contradiction of the mid-1900s paragon laid the groundwork for Helmut Newton’s film photography, the spectator’s eyes single-handedly developed the ethical connotation of the primitive images. As Newton had intentions with each picture he took, how we see it gives it its meaning. His argument against the norm in a negative moral standard is what drove him to take the picture. In turn, he succeeded. His photos were intricate and beautiful; they were loved by the viewer. It was up to the viewer to interpret the photo and elicit its moral meaning. 

The aphorism is valid in the position of the photographer, Newton, and the viewer, us. Overtime, photography develops and photos become more modern. To go down to the raw morals of a human and capture that in an image in the early 1900s to demonstrate the same meaning to this day is astounding. He was able to use the imperfect medium given to him, the SLR camera, and produce beautiful images. His inspiration was the moral life of man, and the moral meaning drawn from the images was from an imperfect medium, film. To review his images in “King of Kink,” is to be reminded of what humans will always be even in a perfect world. 

Helmut Newton is one of the best examples of the aphorism because of his resources and what his photos represent, to the extent that he still has an impact on modern photography. The jump to go against the standard social norms is what continues to drive finding those raw and natural habits and keep capturing them through an imperfect medium.

Samantha Wilson  

“No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.” 

                                                                                                                    – Oscar Wilde  

When Wilde put this aphorism in his preface, the meaning was to stand that artists do not make a piece of work to establish a connection to anything but to create beauty. By making a connection, the artist is proving something or even promoting an idea by taking the beauty away. The second part of the aphorism means we can prove things that are not true but also things that are true. It is unlikely that true things are proven as we normally intended to prove false things, as Wilde added the word “Even” to interrupt this statement. I fall in the middle with this aphorism because I disagree with the first part but agree with the second part. I don’t agree with the first part because I believe that every artist’s work is proving something. Even if they didn’t intend to prove anything, they still desire it in a way. To desire something means that the artist would have a strong feeling or a wish. I think you can desire something without knowing. Here, an artist desires to prove anything but more in a way of not knowing. For example, most artists want to be successful or to have their work known. Artist desire to be successful and by creating their works, they desire to prove that they are successful. This makes me think of the singer Noah Kahan because when he started his career, he wanted his fans to feel something and learn from his songs. Since his big album in 2022, Noah Kahan’s music has touched and inspired many of his fans who can relate to his songs. This is seen through his tour of 2023 being completely sold out and his songs standing as anthems for many young fans. The impact his music has on fans is proof of the unwanted desire and goal. He wanted to leave an impact as an artist and his music proved that he could do that. This leads me to believe that artists do desire to prove anything even if it is something small, like an idea or something big, like success, but it still leaves the beauty of the work through its popularity or impact. I agree with the second part because we can still prove things that are true. Typically, we see we prove things that are false to be true, but we can also prove true things are true. One thing that contradicts this statement is that because we can prove both false and true things, then an artist shouldn’t care to prove things. On this part, I disagree because artists are making statements in different ways to prove something is false or true. This makes me think of the singer Christina Aguilera. A life lesson that seems to be true is that you need to love yourself. In her song “Beautiful” she proves this lesson to be true even if we already know or think that it is true. She uses the line “Words can’t bring you down” and describes feeling insecure to prove we don’t need to be ashamed but accept the truth that we are “beautiful” and love ourselves.  

“Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.”

– Oscar Wilde

“Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope.”

– Oscar Wilde

These particular aphorisms that Oscar Wilde crafted complement one another by challenging the kind of life one will live based on their viewpoints in life. Particularly the beautiful things in life. Wilde’s aphorisms are not only relevant to the world of art but also to people’s daily lives. The first aphorism captures the qualities of a corrupt being who can’t see past all the negative, while the second aphorism captures the qualities of a cultivated being who embraces optimism. I agree with the aphorisms because if someone can see the good in the world, they can also pass on that outlook to others. And I agree, cultivated people tend to be less dense in comparison to the ones who are “corrupt,” because they are still able to look beyond the surface and find beauty in the beautiful things this world has to offer. Regardless of what is going on in their personal life. The cultivated choose to set their other matters aside and take the time to appreciate life, even if it is ever so slightly. It’s because they care and that is why there is hope for them. But when it comes to the ones who can only find ugliness in beauty, it is seen as a fault or something wrong with them. And that is true, but it doesn’t mean that they can’t change. 

“Life is what you make it,” said Eleanor Roosevelt, former First Lady of the United States. Roosevelt’s inspirational quote is what correlated with Wilde’s aphorism the most. It is true because all individuals have a choice, and that is to be miserable or make the most out of what they have. Roosevelt’s intended purpose of this quote was in an inspirational sense to motivate individuals who are having hard times that it doesn’t always have to be so bad and that they have the power to make the change themselves. Wilde’s aphorisms and Roosevelt’s famous quote are similar in a sense because they both share situations that involve a cause and effect. Specifically to the second aphorism, if one is capable of not having a superficial outlook they are cultivated and that there is hope for them. While if one can’t find any beauty in the world, it is an issue that lies within themselves.  

Wilde’s aphorisms share an important value as they hold a great life lesson embedded within. The utilization of aphorisms throughout The Picture of Dorian Gray helped Wilde establish a deeper connection between the reader and the characters. And that goes back to the second aphorism because both instances share the same algorithm and that’s only one example of how relatable the aphorisms are to reality. 

“There is no such thing as a moral or immoral book. Books are well-written, or badly written. That is all.”

This aphorism by Oscar Wilde stuck out especially to me for several reasons, the main one being how it is still a relevant sentiment today. Purity culture tries to push the idea that books that tackle controversial topics and try to promote discussion are instead promoting the controversial actions that take place in the books themselves, deeming the novels immoral and obscene.

The first half of the aphorism is the part that sticks out the most to me, because while the sentiment is meant to apply to books, it also rings true for other forms of art as well. Whether something is moral or immoral is a highly subjective question, and is one that relies entirely on cultural context. Ideals that were commonplace in one part of the world fifty years ago could be considered highly immoral today in another part of the world. Likewise, ideals that may have been considered taboo fifty years ago could be considered commonplace virtues in the eyes of modern society. To try to pin down one exact definition of morality is impossible.

It reminds me specifically about the current book banning phenomenon that has been occurring in both school libraries and public libraries across the United States. Books are constantly being challenged and removed from shelves over their inclusion or discussion of sensitive topics such as race or racism, sex and sexuality, or vulgarity and obscenity. However, the problem with removing books with controversial topics is that in the process, you also remove the chance for students and young adults to be able to learn about and participate in these complex conversations in any meaningful or intellectual manner.

Coincidentally, the book that this aphorism reminds me of is also one of the most banned books in America, The Catcher in the Rye. The main character, Holden Caulfield, is a troubled youth, and throughout the novel he undermines many moral values, uses vulgar language, and performs rebellious acts such as drinking, smoking, and hiring a prostitute. One could easily label Holden as an immoral character for these things and claim that he, and by extension, the book, supports immoral values. However, that does not make the book itself problematic. The point of the novel is that Holden has lost his innocence, and no longer has an idealistic mindset; he is going through typical teenage angst.

Catcher in the Rye was not meant to be a moral book or an immortal book. It is simply meant to encapsulate the mindset of a disillusioned teenager who does not know how to deal with his emotions. It is an extremely well-written book which handles the subject matter in a way that is both easy to understand and easy to relate to. And yet a few years after I read it for my English class in high school, it became a challenged book and was removed from the required reading lineup. To limit a book’s worthiness of being shown on the grounds of its supposed morality is to miss the entire purpose of reading entirely. A book should be judged on the quality of its writing, not by how people might incorrectly interpret the message.

This blog post feels a little bit all over the place, but that’s because this quote touches on a subject that I am passionate about. The idea that classical literature is being used to turn children against their parents and to promote rebellious and unhealthy lifestyles is a concept that I find utterly absurd. People are meant to analyze and apply critical thinking to the themes in books, not take them at face value. To do otherwise seems all too similar to judging a book by its cover.

Mary Andrews

“Diversity of opinion about a work of art shows that the work is new, complex, and vital.”

I wholeheartedly agree with the above aphorism from the preface of The Picture of Dorian Gray (1891). To illustrate the validity of this statement in today’s society, it is important to use modern day examples. A recent work of art that has stirred up differing opinions is Taylor Swift’s 2020 album folklore. As soon as the album was announced, critics had many takes due to Swift switching genres (again).

Oak Juneau

The critic is he who can translate into another manner or a new material his impression of beautiful things.

     Oscar Wilde’s aphorism encapsulates the essence of the critic’s role in the world of art. It suggests that a critic is not merely someone who passes judgment or critiques art but rather someone who possesses the ability to transform their perceptions of beauty into something new and innovative, introducing a completely new perspective into the art and thus enriching it and allowing it to be more refined. This transformation involves translating the essence of a piece of art into a different form or medium, thereby contributing to the ongoing conversation and evolution of artistic expression.

     Delving into the world created by filmmaker Guillermo del Toro, one finds “Pan’s Labyrinth” – a film that stands out. Known for his distinct style, he weaves elements of fantasy with dark themes of evil, brutality, and torment that make one think deeply about the complexity of human nature and behavior. This movie – drawing from tales of old, myths, and true past events – achieves a look and feel that captures the eyes and hearts of viewers and draws one into a world of despair. 

    Furthermore, imagine a film critic who has viewed “Pan’s Labyrinth” and is deeply moved by its exploration of the human condition, its symbolism, and its intricate storytelling. Instead of merely writing a traditional review, this critic might decide to translate their impressions of the film into a different medium, such as writing a scholarly essay, creating a series of paintings inspired by key scenes, or even composing a piece of music that captures the film’s mood and themes. In doing so, the critic is not only engaging with the art, but also contributing their own creative interpretation, thus enriching the artistic discourse surrounding the film. This process of translation and reinterpretation allows for a deeper understanding and appreciation of the original work while also expanding the possibilities of artistic expression. 

    Overall, I find Wilde’s aphorism completely valid in how it emphasizes the transformative power of criticism and highlights the important role critics play in shaping our understanding of beauty and art. It encourages us to see criticism not as a mere evaluation but as a creative act in its own right, capable of inspiring new forms of expression and dialogue within the artistic community. Wilde’s words remind us, in a touching way, that those who judge art have a big say in what we all think looks good or is artful; this insight nudges us to see the act of judging not just as feedback but as an art form itself – one that can spark new ways to talk and create beyond old lines. By taking up this view, we help bring about a space where new art can grow, making our shared culture richer and letting us all see more layers in the tales we tell through art.

“To reveal art and conceal the artist is art’s aim.”

I found this aphorism to hold incredibly true as although, in many cases, artists like to accept their fame and recognition for their work, I think that the main purpose of art is to hide the actual creator of the work and display their masterpiece at the forefront. I don’t believe it is necessary to know/have a great understanding of the artist in order to appreciate their work and I feel that this aphorism emphasizes that idea. Vincent Van Gogh, one of the world’s most famous and renowned artists did not become talked about until his life was nearly over. He had been creating beautiful art for all of his existence but he, himself, went unrecognized all of this time. It wasn’t until the final 2 years of his life that he began to get noted for his incredible work. This goes to show that Van Gogh’s aim in making art wasn’t to be worldly recognized; he was simply creating art for art’s sake. This connects back to the aphorism because his artwork became extremely well liked and appreciated after his death, leaving the actual person behind the masterpieces somewhat a mystery and hidden from the general public. I would also argue that the artist being concealed and letting the actual art speak for itself makes the work more special. I feel that too often, society lets the artist control too much of how we see the art that’s being created. In pop culture we continuously let music artist’s personal lives dictate how we feel about the work they put out to the public. The truth of the matter is, you don’t have to be the best person to make good artwork and I believe that art should be appreciated as is and not by the logic of whether or not the person who created the project is worthy of that recognition. Just as the aphorism states, the whole goal of art is to be able to speak for itself and oftentimes have nothing to do with the actual artist. All good art can be put up for interpretation and one of the most beautiful things about it is that people can hold a plethora of different meanings for one singular piece of art. This has nothing to do with the person who created the work, as art is a very personal experience that can be uniquely interpreted by every individual. Overall, the meaning of art is to focus on just that and not the superficiality of who the artist is behind it.