Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English And

Home , An Ideal Husband, Oscar Wilde (play)

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of English and American Studies

English Language and Literature

Marcela Strouhalová

Aspects of the Literary Conversion in Oscar Wilde’s Late Works De Profundis and The Ballad of Reading Gaol Bachelor’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Mgr. Tomáš Kačer, PhD.

2016

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

…………………………………………….. Author’s signature

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank my supervisor Mgr. Tomáš Kačer, Ph.D. for his generous advice and comments which helped to shape this work.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 2. The Historical Background ...... 3 2.1. Jail and its Echoes ...... 6 3. Analysis of Wilde’s Late Works ...... 9 3.1. Encyclical Letter ...... 10 3.2. Song for the Masses ...... 18 4. Wilde the Agitator ...... 29 4.1. The Letters to the Daily Chronicle ...... 30 4.2. Towards the Modern Penal System ...... 36 5. Conclusion ...... 41 6. Works Cited ...... 43 7. Resume ...... 45

1. Introduction

Between the famous and the infamous, there is but one step, if as much as one.

Oscar Wilde, De Profundis

This thesis deals with the aspects of the literary conversion in Oscar Wilde’s late works. It is understood that his late works were written and finished between the time of his imprisonment and his death. Works that fulfil these criteria are De Profundis, The

Ballad of Reading Gaol and the two letters to the editor of the Daily Chronicle. The thesis also relies on personal letters Wilde wrote to his friends and his acquaintances for the duration of the given period.

The thesis explores the reasons for the changes in Oscar Wilde’s literary voice, during and after the time he spent in prison, and how these conceivable changes are reflected within the works that he wrote at the time, mainly the epistle De Profundis, written while in jail, and The Ballad of Reading Gaol, written after his release. It also touches on the subject of the implementation of changes to the prison system, due to his imprisonment as a prominent public figure, and his critique of the system thereafter. In order to do so, two letters to the editor of the Daily Chronicle serve as a foundation for the thesis. In addition to these two letters, De Profundis and The Ballad of Reading

Gaol were the only texts that he wrote and finished between the time of his imprisonment and his death. This thesis considers them all to be indispensable and therefore necessary for inclusion.

The first part of the thesis offers the background to what led to Wilde’s imprisonment – his unconventional lifestyle, the relationship with Lord Alfred Douglas, the libel trial of Marquess of Queensberry, the trials which followed, directly afterwards, against Wilde, by the Public Prosecutor, and the shift in attitude of the

Victorian public towards Wilde, after learning the details of his private endeavours.

Above all, the scandal was the turning point, in all aspects of his life. His crossing class boundaries, was for Victorian society far worse than his publicised lusts, and brought upon him the gloom of a Victorian prison. Just before he was released, one particular event had such a strong impact on him that it was reflected in all of his subsequent works.

The second part analyses Wilde’s literary style, focusing on the conceivable changes in his life. The changes in his late writings are considered mainly in terms of style, form and opinion. They are based on a close reading of the epistle De Profundis, written towards the end of his jail sentence, and The Ballad of Reading Gaol, published within nine months after his release. Combined with his personal letters and secondary sources, this section considers whether there were any changes to Oscar Wilde’s persona and/or opinion per se, which brought about the changes to his literary conversion.

The final section explores the connection between Oscar Wilde’s scandal and his continuous critique of the prison establishment in the works De Profundis, The Ballad of Reading Gaol and the two letters to the editor of the Daily Chronicle, as well as the improvements that took place within the prison system in the given time-frame.

2. The Historical Background

LORD GORING. Lady Chiltern, I have sometimes thought that . . . perhaps you are a little hard in some of your views on life. I think that . . . often you don’t make sufficient allowances. In every nature there are elements of weakness, or worse than weakness. Supposing, for instance, that — that any public man, my father, or Lord Merton, or Robert, say, had, years ago, written some foolish letter to someone … LADY CHILTERN. What do you mean by a foolish letter? LORD GORING. A letter gravely compromising one’s position. I am only putting an imaginary case.

Oscar Wilde, An Ideal Husband

It was January 3rd 1895. The opening night of the comedic stage play An Ideal

Husband by Oscar Wilde in the Haymarket Theatre, with the Prince of Wales present. A month later, on 14 February 1895, another opening night, this time in St James’s

Theatre, staging what was later considered to be one of the best English comedies ever,

The Importance of Being Ernest. It was the year of the Lord of Language. Oscar Wilde

“could spend money like water”, was on top of the world, a celebrity, a confident playwright, always ready to entertain his dinner table audiences ( Harris 175). However, the imaginary foolish letter was not imaginary after all, it had already been written, and, with Marquess of Queensberry trying to get to the very same opening night of The

Importance of Being Ernest, the undoing of Oscar Wilde was staged.

Queensberry did not succeed in humiliating Oscar Wilde on the opening night of his final play. But he did not stop there. Four days later, he went to a club, where Oscar

Wilde was known to dine, and left a calling card which read, “To Oscar Wilde, posing

Somdomite” (Elman 412). Albeit misspelled, Queenberry meant to offend Wilde, and

Wilde, instead of ignoring it, reacted to the provocation. After much discussion with his friends, who were mostly against it, and his lover, Lord Alfred Douglas, the son of

Marquess of Queensberry, who nudged him on, Oscar Wilde decided to sue

Queensberry for libel, which led to the famous trials of Oscar Wilde. Thus, Oscar Wilde was the master of his own ruin.

An Ideal Husband and The Importance of Being Earnest were still

running, when their author was arrested on the criminal charge of having

committed a number of homosexual offences, contrary to the Criminal

Law Amendment Act, 1885. (Hyde 50)

The libel case against Queensberry was dropped soon after it came to light that there might be some truth to his allegations, and the tables suddenly turned. Oscar

Wilde was arrested, which was common practice in Victorians times, and was tried in two successive trials. The first ended in a hung jury, but the scandal was in full swing and Wilde’s name was smeared all over the papers. The biggest sin was not Wilde’s homosexuality, his literature, nor the above-mentioned letter to Alfred Douglas, which, due to carelessness on Douglas’s part, got into the wrong hands, and a copy thereof had got into the hands of Queensberry. The one thing for which Wilde could not be forgiven by the Victorian society, was his crossing of boundaries between the classes:

If Wilde had been content to confine his homosexual relations to Robert

Ross, and even to Lord Alfred Douglas, it is extremely unlikely that his

conduct in this respect would ever have come to the notice of the

Director of the Public Prosecutions. (Hyde 60)

While Robert Ross, a true friend, and later his literary executor, was Wilde’s first male lover, Wilde’s relations with Douglas had lasted for about three years before that point. They had met late June 1891, their relationship had become closer at around the same time when Douglas was being blackmailed by some male prostitutes (Ellman

306). Douglas soon introduced Wilde to the very same practices, with male prostitutes of a lower social class, which later Wilde describes as “feasting with the panthers” (De

Profundis 1042). Once these were made public at the second trial, the witty poet could not say anything in his defence that would change the mind of the judge, who believed in Wilde’s guilt.

Not only the judge, but also the Victorian society that he loved to mock, condemned his relationships with the lover class, which was what morality called for.

Oscar Wilde’s scandal was on everyone’s lips, while his name was being removed from the billboards advertising his plays. Wilde was made an exemplary case. Whoever did not play by the moral rules of the hypocritical English society, could not expect its mercy. As Wilde comments in De Profundis:

Of course, once I had put into motion the forces of society, society turned

on me and said, ‘Have you been living all this time in defiance of my

laws, and do you now appeal to those laws for protection? You shall have

those laws exercised to the full. You shall abide by what you have

appealed to.’ The result is, I am in gaol. Certainly no man ever fell so

ignobly, and by such ignoble instruments, as I did. (1041)

Wilde was no longer on his pedestal and was given the harshest sentence possible, namely, two years of hard labour. This was a sentence that was equal to a death sentence, for people of his social rank. Wilde was sent to jail on 25 May 1895

(Ellman 447).

Oscar Wilde, once the Lord of Language, is sentenced to “two years' hard labour in solitary confinement” (Steed).

2.1. Jail and its Echoes

Who never eat his bread in sorrow,

Who never spent his midnight hours

Weeping and wailing for tomorrow,

He knows you not, ye Heavenly powers.

Goethe

Oscar Wilde did everything, except commit suicide, in the first months of his incarceration, as he admits in De Profundis, “While I was in Wandsworth Prison, I longed to die” (1022). The Heaven to Hell permutation surely was a good enough reason not to wish to live; nevertheless, the jail system and prison conditions at the time of his incarceration, was in desperate need of amelioration1. Jail was particularly bad to the newcomers. As Rupert Cross in his book Punishment, Prison and the Public points out:

Statutes dating back to the eighteenth century authorised hard labour for

convicted felons [ . . . ] For the first month of a sentence of hard labour,

the prisoner had to sleep on a plank bed without a mattress. The period of

separate confinement was abolished during the first war;” (10).

Prisoners had to deserve ‘luxuries’, such as a mattress or a visit from a family member or friend. Strict rules applied to everyone, and Wilde suffered. Due to horrid food, which was not very nutritious and which caused diarrhoea, topped by insomnia, caused by a plank bed, Wilde soon lost weight and was looking nothing like his former self. He fell into depression. Wilde would not have survived for long. Fortunately, many people were not indifferent to Wilde’s suffering. Among them was Richard Burdon Haldane, a member the Gladstone Committee on Prisons. As a member of this committee, he was

1 The issues discussed in Section 4. 6 able to help the withered artist. He arranged for Wilde to acquire books, other than the

King James Bible, and, after suffering in Wandsworth, Haldane arranged for him to be moved to Reading jail, where he stayed until he was released.

Wilde was allowed to read and jot down some of the passages he had read into his notebook. His mental state and his health improved slightly. In Reading, a special medical committee recommended that Wilde be allowed to write for therapeutic reasons, and De Profundis was written, page by page.

Wilde was released on 19 May, 1897. De Profundis, although completed, was published only after Wilde’s death in 1905. It was the highly expurgated version by

Robert Ross. The full corrected text was only published in 1962 (Holland 1247-1251).

Before Wilde left prison, he had seen three little children waiting to be sent to their cells (1060). Although Wilde had seen many children in jail prior to this incident, this particular one made a strong impact on him. Vyvyan Holland, his son, mentions this particular event in his book The Son of Oscar Wilde, “My father was deeply destressed that children who might be the same age as his own could be so barbarously treated by a self-righteous community,…” (175). Seeing small children in jail, not long after he had lost his parental authority over his own children, moved him deeply, which is also evident in his personal correspondence. The subject of children in jail recurs throughout all Wilde’s later works.

By October 1897, he was making the final touches to his poem, The Ballad of

Reading Gaol. Before the poem was published on 13 February 1898, Wilde wrote a letter to the editor of the Daily Chronicle on 28 May 1897. The letter drew from his experiences in jail and called for the amelioration of the conditions of prisoners. He was mostly concerned with children. In his opinion, they did not understand the punishment

“inflicted by society” (1061). He was also concerned with a mentally-impaired prisoner,

7 who should have also, in Wilde’s opinion, been treated individually (1061). On 24

March 1898, Wilde wrote his second letter to the editor of the Daily Chronicle, in which he made suggestions concerning the changes that should be implemented, to improve the conditions of prisoners (Holland 1247-1251). In 1898, the new Prison Act was signed.

3. Analysis of Wilde’s Late Works

This section deals with the analysis of two late works of Oscar Wilde, the epistle

De Profundis, written towards the end of his sentence, between January and March

1897, and The Ballad of Reading Gaol, the larger part of which was written between

July and October 1897.

The first section concentrates mostly on De Profundis and any changes in

Wilde’s persona that could have led to a change of opinion. The thesis offers a comparison to his earlier work and relies not only on De Profundis, but also on personal letters that Wilde wrote to his friends and acquaintances for the duration of the given period. The thesis also analyses the reasons for the writing of De Profundis, who the letter is aimed at, and whether the sublimity of thought is impassioned sincerely.

The second section analyses The Ballad of Reading Gaol, a poem that was

Wilde’s first published literary work after his release from prison. The thesis concentrates on the style, content and the aim of the poem. It also draws a connection between Wilde’s personal life and the issues he dealt with in the poem itself.

Except for the analysis of both works, this thesis will to consider whether there are any underlying themes and/or issues that connect the two works together.

3.1. Encyclical Letter

Oscar Wilde wrote De Profundis between January and March 1897. He was released in May, thus he wrote the letter of about 55,000 words towards the end of his internment in the Reading Prison. Thanks to the Gladstone Committee’s2 recommendations, which were slowly being implemented, and with the help and relentless interest of his friends, he was allowed to read books that he chose himself, and later permitted to write. After such a long time of not being able to write, except for a few letters and notes in his notebook, De Profundis was the only outlet of his literary voice.

The title De Profundis, echoing Psalm 130, was chosen by Robert Ross when he published the expurgated version in 1905. Wilde had originally chosen the title

“Epistola: In Carcere et Vinculis [Letter in Prison and in Chains]” (980). As the title suggests, Wilde was writing a letter. And as a letter, it certainly starts as such,

DEAR BOSIE, After long and fruitless waiting, I have determined to

write to you myself, as much for your sake as for mine, as I would not

like to think that I had passed through two long years of imprisonment

without ever having received a single line from you, or any news or

message even, except such as gave me pain. (980)

According to Robert Ross, it “renders so vividly, and so painfully, the effect of the social débacle and imprisonment on a highly intellectual and artificial nature” (10).

Ellman believes that, “The most important thing about De Profundis is that it is a love letter” (483). Ellman explains:

2 Gladstone Committee - appointed to review a make recommendations for improvement of prisons. 10

De Profundis suffers from the adulteration of simplicity by eloquence, by

an arrogance lurking in its humility and by its disjointed structure. But, as

a love letter, it has all the consistency it needs, and must rank – with its

love and hate, solicitude, vanity and philosophic musings – as one of the

greatest, and the longest ever written. (484)

Nevertheless, the letter, even though addressed to his real ‘panther’ Alfred

Douglas, seems to be addressed to wider audiences, rather than just to the addressee, “I claim on my side that if I realise what I have suffered, society should realise what it has inflicted on me and that there should not be bitterness or hate on either side” (1021).

Wilde explains to Robert Ross, in the letter of 1 April 1897, why he wants Ross to make a copy of the letter, “Well, if you are my literary executor, you must be in possession of the only document that really gives any explanation of my extraordinary behaviour with regard to Queensberry and Alfred Douglas. [ . . . ] Some day the truth will have to be known” (Selected Letters 240). Wilde, still in prison, had decided that the letter would one day be published. The letter thus serves as an explanation, a public apologia, for his conduct. Wilde, in the same letter, continues, “. . . for indeed, it is an Encyclical Letter, and as the Bulls of the Holy Father are named from their opening words, it may be spoken of as the Epistola: In Carcere et Vinculis” (Selected Letters 242). Thus, Wilde wrote the letter for wider audiences and the form of the letter serves as a stylistic means to carry the message that he wanted to communicate to his audiences, to any reader that would be interested in his “truth” (Selected Letters 240). That said, at least parts of the letter are meant specifically for Alfred Douglas, to ”do him good” (242). Last, but not least, Wilde was allowed to write for “therapeutic reasons” and that worked, as Wilde admits that “it has done great good” and “for nearly two years, I had within me a growing burden of bitterness, much of which I have now got rid of” (242).

Wilde’s letter to Alfred Douglas was as much a personal letter to the very person he blamed for ruining his life, his Judas, as it was an open letter to his audiences. It is a very different literary work, when compared to his plays. Before he went to jail, An

Ideal Husband and The Importance of Being Ernest were running in London theatres.

Those two plays were the last that he ever finished.

While Wilde’s last play, The Importance of Being Ernest, is considered to be the best he ever wrote, full of engaging witty dialogs and laughter-inducing coincidences,

De Profundis could be viewed as a dramatic monologue, where Douglas’ answers are presumed. It could not fit into any single genre, it seems inconsistent, full of contradictions, disjointed and not very reader-friendly, while Wilde’s plays were well thought-out, easy to read and hilarious in places.

Another aspect stands out, when De Profundis is compared to the plays.

In terms of literary change, a letter, in which his private life is depicted, could not be much further from a society play, which was created to mirror Victorian society and its hypocrisy. While An Ideal Husband and The Importance of Being Ernest mock the upper-class Victorian society, and thus the external world, De Profundis is a recollection of the past, an autobiography, a reflection of his inner self:

I amused myself with being flâneur, a dandy, a man of fashion. I

surrounded myself with the smaller natures and the meaner minds. I

became a spendthrift of my own genius and to waste an eternal youth,

gave me a curious joy. Tired of being on the heights, I deliberately went

to the depths, in the search for new sensations. (1018)

Wilde does not regret his past experiences, nevertheless he primarily blames Lord

Alfred Douglas for his fall, “To regret one's own experience is to arrest one's own development” (1020). He listed all the flaws he could find in Douglas, but only one in

12 himself. He was not strong enough to resist, he was lacking a strong will. Wilde distanced himself from taking full responsibility for his imprisonment. He offered only partial responsibility and shifted the blame on Douglas. “I allowed you to dominate me”

(1018).

While his earlier plays should have further strengthened his celebrity status, his position within society and make him money to finance his extravagant ways, De

Profundis was a setting for a new beginning. Wilde explained that suffering in jail was not meaningless and it helped him to find “something hidden away”, that something being “Humility” (1018). It was necessary to come from the realisation of past wrongs, to “the starting point for a fresh development” (1018). Wilde saw that he might never redeem his formal position as the Lord of Language, nevertheless he wanted to show to the readers that the Wilde who went into prison, had undergone a soul-searching journey and, at the end of it, had come out as a new man. In the letter to Robert Ross he explained:

Also, there are in the letter certain passages which deal with my mental

development in prison, and the inevitable evolution of character and

intellectual attitude towards life that has taken place: and I want you, and

others, who still stand by me and have affection for me, to know exactly

in what mood and manner I hope to face the world. (Selected Letters 240)

Wilde offered the explanation of the necessity to repent, in order to redeem himself. His soul-searching, an act of self-realization, or, more likely, his quest to find a new beginning, could not be helped by religion, morality or reason. These were external forces. He needed to turn inwards to find the answers:

Of course the sinner must repent. But why? Simply because otherwise he

would be unable to realise what he had done. The moment of repentance

is the moment of initiation. More than that. It is the means by which one

alters one’s past. The Greeks thought that impossible. They often say in

their gnomic aphorisms ‘Even the Gods cannot alter the past.’ Christ

showed that the commonest sinner could do it. That it was the one thing

he could do. Christ, had he been asked, would have said - I feel quite

certain about it - that the moment the prodigal son fell on his knees and

wept he really made his having wasted his substance with harlots, and

then kept swine and hungered for the husks they ate, beautiful and holy

incidents in his life. It is difficult for most people to grasp the idea. I dare

say, one has to go to prison to understand it. If so, it may be worthwhile

going to prison. (De Profundis 1037)

Wilde found the answers he was looking for, not in Hellenism, but in his artistic architype, Christ. He needed to forget the past and to start anew, “What a wonderful beginning!” (1036). Christ made him the offer to do so. He seemed to divorce himself from Greek ideals. Apollo was cruel to Messias, Pallas had no pity for Arrachne, “the pomp and peacocks of Hera were all that was really noble about her and The Father of

Gods himself had been too fond of the daughters of men” (1031). On the other hand,

Christ’s “primary desire was to relieve suffering” (1036).

Wilde saw himself, first and foremost, as an individualist, “I am one of those who are made for exceptions, not for laws” (1019). He believed that his incarceration had strengthened his individualism, “I am far more of an individualist than I ever was”

(1018). These were the very same qualities that he saw in Christ, “And above all, Christ is the most supreme of individualists” (1029). Wilde explained that he finally found his soul, only after he had lost everything, “That is because one realises one’s soul only by getting rid of all alien passions, all acquired culture, and all external possessions, be

14 they good or evil” (1029). Wilde was not exaggerating when talking about himself as one who had lost everything. He had lost his position in society, he was penniless, and he had lost all his possessions. His mother died while he was in jail. He had no home, his wife had been advised to divorce him. However, the loss of his parental authority was what concerned him the most:

I had lost my name, my position, my happiness, my freedom, my wealth.

I was a prisoner and a pauper. But I still had my children left. Suddenly

they were taken away from me by the law. It was a blow so appalling that

I did not know what to do, so I flung myself on my knees, and bowed my

head, and wept, and said, ‘The body of a child is as the body of the Lord:

I am not worthy of either.’ (1030)

Wilde believed it was the loss of those most precious to him, his children, which was the cause of him finding his own soul, his turning point, the moment of resurrection:

That moment seemed to save me. I saw then that the only thing for me

was to accept everything. Since then - curious as it will no doubt sound -

I have been happier. It was of course my soul in its ultimate essence that

I had reached. (1030)

Wilde was no longer a spendthrift that had fallen from his pedestal and found his end in prison, but he was a new artist, resurrected. The resurrected Christ-like Wilde, was searching for his new role and recognised there was only one way to do it, “I will force on me the necessity of again asserting myself as an artist, and as soon as I possibly can” (1022). At the time, he did not see himself as writing a witty play at all:

I am no longer the Sirius of comedy. I have sworn solemnly to dedicate

my life to Tragedy. If I write any more books, it will be to form a library

of lamentation… I shall be an enigma to the world of pleasure, but a

mouthpiece for the world of pain. (Martin qtd. in Ellman 486)

Wilde had found his new role. It was a role worthy of his new self, speaking on behalf of the prisoners:

The prison style is absolutely and entirely wrong. I would give anything

to be able to alter it when I go out. I intend to try. But there is nothing in

the world so wrong, but that the spirit of Humanity, which is the spirit of

love, the spirit of the Christ, who is not in churches, may make it, if not

right, at least possible, to be borne without too much bitterness of heart.

(De Profundis 1038-39)

Is the sublimity of thought impassioned sincerely? There are certain thoughts on that in De Profundis, “Christ, like all fascinating personalities, had the power, not merely of saying beautiful things Himself, but of making other people say beautiful things to him” (1034). Wilde, the writer, needed his audience to adore him. Thus, in De

Profundis, he was setting the stage for yet another play about a fallen prodigal artist who, through sorrow, repentance and Christ, found his true calling in speaking on behalf of the weak and vulnerable.

Wilde saw the frightened vulnerable children in jail, after he had written De

Profundis. The impression it made on him, as well as being unable to see his own children, made the image that much more powerful. There is a strong possibility that

Wilde, “the mouthpiece for the world of pain”, was propelled by the burning image in the mind of Wilde, the private person (Ellman 486).

Wilde’s letter, on 6 May 1897, to Robert Ross shows how topical the thought of his own children was at the time, “. . . but now that the children are publicly taken from me by the Judge’s order, and it is decided that I am unfit to be with Cyril, I am very

16 disheartened” (Complete Letters 249). In another letter to Ross on 15 May3 (four days before his release), Wilde wrote on the subject of his children:

Mr Hargrove, [ . . . ] suddenly deprives me of my children. This and the

death of my mother are the two terrible things of my prison-life, of all my

life. [ . . . ] I shall never get over it. That a Court of Law expunge it from

the scroll History and from Life. I would gladly remain I this lonely cell

for two more years – oh! for ten years if need be. (257)

Wilde knew he would not sustain 10 years in jail, thus he is suggesting, he would rather die for his children, then live without them, “I don’t care to live if I am so degraded that I am unfit to be with my own child” (257).

The words in his private correspondence echoed those in De Profundis. Wilde blamed not himself, but the Court of Law, and thus his fight for the amelioration of prison conditions was based on the loss of his own children. More so, Wilde set himself the goal, not only to alter the conditions of the prisoners, but to also repeal the Criminal

Law, as that was the force that put him in such a humiliating position.

3 Wilde wrote an incorrect date “because of his mental agitation” (Selected Letters 252) 17

3.2. Song for the Masses

It is only what is good in Man

That wastes and withers there:

Oscar Wilde, The Ballad of Reading Gaol

In De Profundis, Oscar Wilde promised to himself, and to the world for that matter, that he would produce a work of art as soon as possible after leaving the prison:

I will force on me the necessity of again asserting myself as an artist, and

as soon as I possibly can. If I can produce one more beautiful work of art,

I shall be able to rob malice of its venom, and cowardice of its sneer, and

to pluck out the tongue of scorn by the roots. (1022)

Wilde always reflected his concerns in his work and the next literary work would not be different. There was no other topic closer to his heart than the subject of imprisonment, especially that of children. The idea of writing about the subject of imprisonment might have originated long beforehand, when Haldane came to visit him in prison. Haldane recollects the visit:

I put my hand on his prison-dress-clad shoulder and said that I used to

know him and that I had come to say something about himself. He had

not fully used his great literary gift, and the reason was that he had lived

a life of pleasure and had not made any great subject his own. Now

misfortune might prove a blessing for his career, for he had got a great

subject. [ . . . ] On his release, there came to me anonymously a volume,

The Ballad of Reading Gaol. It was the redemption of his promise to me.

(Haldane 166-7)

Haldane might have sown the seed from which The Ballad of Reading Gaol grew, nevertheless Wilde’s determination to try to alter the prison system by writing

18 about it and drawing public attention to the problem, was his way of expressing his

Christ-like motives, to show that he was no more concerned with himself, but with others, those less fortunate. In his letter that was postmarked 21 March 18984, to his friend George Cecil Ives, a poet and a penal reformer, he sees the only way of making it right, is by repealing the Criminal Law Amendment Act from 1885:

Yes, I have no doubt we shall win, but the road is long, and red with

monstrous martyrdoms. Nothing but the repeal of the Criminal Law

Amendment Act would do any good. That is essential. It is not so much

public opinion, as public officials that need educating. (Selected Letters

334)

From a letter to Ives, it is apparent that Wilde also sees himself as a reformer, a fighter for the higher purpose. And Wilde certainly aims high. He is fighting for the repulsion of the very piece of legislation that put him in prison. What’s more, he wrote The Ballad of Reading Gaol with the intention, not only to write excellent poetry that people would read with pleasure, but to produce a piece of work, a pamphlet of sorts, that would circulate among the people, so that it might be the common people that bring about a change. Wilde recognised that he had taken upon himself a very difficult task, combining poetry with propaganda, “The poem suffers under the difficulty of a divided aim in style. Some is realistic, some is romantic; some poetry, some propaganda. I feel it keenly, but as a whole, I think the production interesting …” (Selected Letters 311)

This is very different from the opinion he expressed in “The Decay of Lying”, an essay included in his collection of essays, published in 1891, with the title Intentions. In the above essay, he contradicts himself. He calls “foolish” the attempts of Charles

Reade, the English novelist and dramatist, who was a fellow at Magdalen College, to

4 The second letter to the Daily Chronicle was written on the 23 March 1898 19 draw public attention to the state of the convict prisons, and he rebukes Dickens for his attempts “to arouse our sympathy for the victims of the poor-law administration”:

I do not know anything in the whole history of literature sadder than the

artistic career of Charles Reade. He wrote one beautiful book, The

Cloister and the Hearth, a book as much above Romola, as Romola is

above Daniel Deronda, and wasted the rest of his life in a foolish attempt

to be modern, to draw public attention to the state of our convict prisons,

and the management of our private lunatic asylums. Charles Dickens was

depressing enough in all conscience when he tried to arouse our

sympathy for the victims of the poor-law administration. (1077)

Wilde’s incarceration definitely changed his mind about the need to draw the attention of the public to the appalling state of the convict prisons, or, more precisely, the way they are run. He is no more a witty playwright that entertains, or an essayist that discusses, but an agitator calling for a change. As Ellman writes, “he knew that it must fall between poetry and propaganda and that the strength of the poem lay in its ballad narrative” (500). As Robert Sherard, Wilde’s biographer and friend, writes in his book

The Real Oscar Wilde, “I think that one of the few serious purposes he had in life when he left prison was to try to do something to reform the English prison system” (395).

Sherard also believes that the letters to the Daily Chronicle, The Ballad of Reading Gaol and parts of De Profundis stand as evidence of such a purpose (395).

Wilde commenced writing on 8 July, and by 20 July 1897, he had finished the larger part of the poem (Ellman 500). He closely follows the distinctive narrative of a ballad. It is rhythmical, as ballads should be sung. It has 109 stanzas of six lines, divided into six sections of varying length. The lines alternatively have eight and six syllables. The rhyming follows the pattern a, b, c, b, d, b. Albert B. Friedman, in his

20 article “Ballad”, summarises the main features of a ballad, “Typically, the folk ballad tells a compact little story that begins eruptively at the moment when the narrative has turned decisively toward its catastrophe or resolution” (Ballad). Wilde chose to start with the eruptive point a murder:

He did not wear his scarlet coat,

For blood and wine are red,

And blood and wine were on his hands

When they found him with the dead,

The poor dead woman whom he loved,

And murdered in her bed. (The Ballad of Reading Gaol 883)

The ballad follows the story of an inmate, who is sentenced to death by hanging, for the murder of his wife. For dramatic purposes, Wilde choses real hanging of an ex-trooper in the Royal Horse Guards of Her Majesty The Queen, who was hanged for murdering his wife in Reading Jail at the time that Wilde was there in 1896. The murder and the hanging are an artistic means, a vehicle for the narrative of a ballad. The inmate on death-row is quite contemptuous and sleeps well at night, in comparison to the rest of the inmates, who suffer and keep vigil. This contrast then gives the narrator an opportunity to describe the sorrow and hardships of the inmates on an everyday basis, not only before the execution:

With midnight always in one's heart,

And twilight in one's cell,

We turn the crank, or tear the rope,

Each in his separate Hell,

And the silence is more awful far

Than the sound of a brazen bell.

And never a human voice comes near

To speak a gentle word:

And the eye that watches through the door

Is pitiless and hard:

And by all forgot, we rot and rot,

With soul and body marred. (898)

The Ballad of Reading Gaol not only depicts the unsuitable conditions in jail, it also criticises the law and society. However, he is careful not to criticise the law openly,

“I know not whether Laws be right, / Or whether Laws be wrong;”, nevertheless he achieves the same result, by doing it indirectly:

This too I know--and wise it were

If each could know the same--

That every prison that men build

Is built with bricks of shame,

And bound with bars lest Christ should see

How men their brothers maim. (897)

Wilde believed that it was not the prisoners who should feel the shame of being in jail, but the society that put them there. Wilde believed that the prisoners were a mere product of what was wrong with the society, and that finding one’s fate within the walls of prison could happen to anyone. Wilde also suggested that the public is not well- informed about what is happening in jail, and that the conditions of the prisoners should be ameliorated:

With bars they blur the gracious moon,

And blind the goodly sun:

And they do well to hide their Hell,

For in it things are done

That Son of God nor son of Man

Ever should look upon! (897)

One of the main aspects of the poem is that Wilde criticizes obliquely. In the same way, he uses the trooper to draw attention to his own suffering. He intends to alter the prison system by powerful words of poetry. By specifically choosing ballad narrative, he is striving to make a bold dramatic statement that will be talked about, that will make an impact on the reader. As Alfred B. Friedman, in his article “Ballad”, says:

In short, the ballad method of narration is directed toward achieving a

bold, sensational, dramatic effect with purposeful starkness and

abruptness. But despite the rigid economy of ballad narratives, a

repertory of rhetorical devices is employed for prolonging highly-

charged moments in the story and thus thickening the emotional

atmosphere. (Ballad)

Wilde uses all the rhetorical devices to make an emotional statement. The topic is very close to his heart and the ballad is written from his heart. It is full of emotion and that is most likely the reason why The Ballad of the Reading Gaol is considered one of his best works of art. In her book, Linda K. Hughes believes it is “one of the most significant

Victorian ballads” (71). Even Lord Alfred Douglas, who is openly critical of most of

Wilde’s works, in his book Oscar Wilde and Myself, believes that Ballad’s “emotional appeal is, on the whole, quite legitimate” and is convinced “that his reputation among posterity will stand on the “Ballad of Reading Gaol” alone” ” (225).

In The Ballad of Reading Gaol, Wilde does not criticise the system and law openly. Instead he describes the daily hardships of the prisoners. These are the same

23 issues he talks about in the second letter to the Daily Chronicle, namely, the unsatisfactory sanitary conditions, inadequate airing, the food, the solitary conditions, hard labour and the silence:

Each narrow cell in which we dwell

Is foul and dark latrine,

And the fetid breath of living Death

Chokes up each grated screen,

And all, but Lust, is turned to dust

In Humanity's machine.

The brackish water that we drink

Creeps with a loathsome slime,

And the bitter bread they weigh in scales

Is full of chalk and lime,

And Sleep will not lie down, but walks

Wild-eyed and cries to Time. (897)

Wilde not only criticised the conditions, but also the Victorian law. He believed that the

“Humanity machine” was what preceded imprisonment. Wilde believed that, not only the prison conditions, but also the law, should be changed (897).

But though lean Hunger and green Thirst

Like asp with adder fight,

We have little care of prison fare,

For what chills and kills outright

Is that every stone one lifts by day

Becomes one's heart by night.

With midnight always in one's heart,

And twilight in one's cell,

We turn the crank, or tear the rope,

Each in his separate Hell,

And the silence is more awful far

Than the sound of a brazen bell. (898)

Wilde’s heart goes out, especially to children. Some might say that it could be just an easy way to gain more sympathy from the public; nevertheless, one needs to keep in mind that, when Wilde saw the children in prison, it must have reminded him of

Cyril and Vyvyan. He obtained a letter in jail to inform him that his wife had won full custody of their children not long before, and Wilde, upon seeing the vulnerable children, must have been over-sensitive with regards to children:

I am at once taunted and threatened with poverty. That I can bear. I can

school myself to worse than that; but my two children are taken from me

by legal procedure. That is, and always will remain to me, a source of

infinite distress, of infinite pain, of grief without end or limit. That the

law should decide and take upon itself to decide that I am one unfit to be

with my own children, is something quite horrible to me. The disgrace of

prison is as nothing, compared with it. (De Profundis 1016)

It certainly was the children, he thought, that were the most unjust sufferers of the flawed prison system, as they did not understand the punishment imposed by society. In the same way, his sons could not understand why their father was not able to come and see them. Vyvyan Holland wrote in his book Son of Oscar Wilde, “When I was parted from my father for ever I passed through stages of fear, perplexity and

25 frustration. Fear and frustration are more destructive to peace of mind than almost any other mental process” (176).

Wilde, the agitator, was fighting, not only for the children he saw in jail, but for all children in poverty. More so, he was fighting against the system that took his own children away from him. The thought of his own children gave him the strength and reason to write. His personal suffering had turned to a higher cause:

For they starve the little frightened child

Till it weeps both night and day:

And they scourge the weak, and flog the fool,

And gibe the old and grey,

And some grow mad, and all grow bad,

And none a word may say. (897)

There is evidence that Wilde probably intended to write an essay on the topic of the reformation of the English prison system. Nevertheless, the work was never written.

Sherard says on the subject:

He may have been projecting some book exclusively on the subject, for

some time after his death, his landlord showed me the books he had left

behind him, and amongst these was a copy of Juhn Howard’s work, and

various magazines, in which there were articles on prison life in England.

(395)

On that subject, Ellman writes that, although Wilde intended writing an essay that

“would allow pity on his aesthetic system”, an admission of sorts that “he had always underplayed the power of art to exorcise cruelty and to offer a perpetual Last

Judgement, in which the verdict was always merciful”, such work was never put on paper (523). It is interesting to see that, at the end of March, at the height of the

26 discussion of the Prison Bill, Wilde was most active, writing the second letter to the editor of the Daily Chronicle. The following month, on the 7 April 1898, his wife died.

Certainly, Wilde was stricken, not only for the loss of his wife, but also for his children.

With the death of his wife, the path leading towards reunion with his children, as Wilde believes, was forever impassable by overgrowth. Even before the death of his wife,

Wilde wrote to Carlos Blacker on 6 September 1897, “I am greatly disappointed that

Constance has not asked me to come and see the children. I don’t suppose now I shall ever see them” (Selected Letters 306). Wilde realised that he would, most likely, not see his children again. From now on, he produced no other work on the subject of reformation. Children are not mentioned in his personal correspondence at any great length.

Vyvyan Holland, in his book Son of Oscar Wilde, insists that Wilde did try to get some information about his children, and explains how little chance he had, to ever see them again:

During his last years, we were constantly in his thoughts; he was always

asking Robert Ross to try and find out something about us. How we were

and how we were getting on at school. And Ross told me that he wept

bitter tears when he pondered on how he had failed us and himself and

his ancestors. (176)

Wilde felt he let his children down, as well as the rest of the family. He tried to contact his children before his wife died, and continued to do so after her death. His children were dear to him and he tried all he could to gather some news about them to no avail:

Towards the end he realised that he would probably never see us again

and he tried to get messages through to us. He even approached our

guardian through More Adey, to ask to be allowed to write letters to us to

be delivered when we came of age, but my guardian’s reply was that if

any such letters were sent they would be destroyed. (176)

The immense sorrow he must have felt for the loss of his children is evident.

Joseph Pearce stresses that Wilde “told the Irish-American poet and novelist Vincent

O’Sullivan that, for the first time, he had contemplated suicide” (374). Pearce believes that Wilde “was haunted by the loss of his children” (388). It was as if, after his wife’s death, he had lost the driving force that had led him to fight for something that was worth fighting for - for a cause that was closer to his heart than any other, for those personally related to him. He lost not only the purpose to write, but also the purpose to live.

American journalist and author Jim Bishop in his article for Rome News-Tribune writes:

Behind bars, Wilde borrowed money from friends to pay the fines of

three small children in jail for poaching rabbits. He wrote his famous

“Ballad of Reading Gaol.” His mother died. His wife died. Wilde knew

he would never see his sons again. At that point his talent died. (5)

4. Wilde the Agitator

The necessary reforms are very simple. They concern

the needs of the body and the needs of the mind

of each unfortunate prisoner.

Oscar Wilde, The Letter to the Daily Chronicle

In this final chapter, the thesis will explore whether Oscar Wilde’s scandal, his imprisonment, his prominence as a public figure, as well as his late writings, abetted the improvement of the prison system. Wilde, indeed, had set himself the goal of altering the prison system and he voiced his critique of the prison establishment during and after his first-hand experience. In order to do so, this thesis analyses two letters that Oscar

Wilde wrote to the editor of the Daily Chronicle in 1897 and 1898, as well as some of his personal letters, together with secondary sources, explaining the historical background of the period.

The first part of the section is based on a close reading of the two letters. In the second part, the reader will be acquainted with the historical background of the prison system, its major flaws and the development of the changes leading towards the establishment of the early modern penal system. The beginning of the changes correlate with Wilde’s trials, his imprisonment and his release from prison, therefore it is essential to pay close attention to the steps that were taken towards the new Prison Act, signed in 1898.

Finally, this chapter compares the connection between Wilde’s scandal and the final formation of the Prison Act 1898, and draws a possible connection between the two.

4.1. The Letters to the Daily Chronicle

Wilde set himself an uneasy task in De Profundis. He would redeem himself by becoming the “mouthpiece for the world of pain” (Ellman 486).

After his release from jail, Oscar Wilde wrote two letters to the editor of the

Daily Chronicle regarding the need for the amendment of the prison laws and these were published. The first one, on 28 May 1897, was entitled, ‘The Case of Warder

Martin, Some Cruelties of Prison Life’. The second, on 24 March 1898, was entitled,

‘Don’t Read This, if You Want to Be Happy Today’ (Holland 1060). These two letters were not merely personal letters, but instruments used to share with the public and to reveal the conditions that prisoners are subjected to in jail. They were published and therefore considered to belong among the late works of Oscar Wilde. The aim of the letters was not to bring attention to his own suffering, but to the suffering of all prisoners, especially children. He also highlighted that even the people who are involved in the harsh system, people like wardens and the prison governor, are negatively affected by the foul system, as they are powerless5. Wilde felt that the answer lay in the individual treatment of each prisoner and in giving more power to the governor, thus his suggestions were very similar to those of Gladstone Committee

Recommendations. The aim of this section is to ascertain whether Wilde’s recommendations were taken into account, when the new Prison Act 1898 was signed.

The first letter, published just ten days after his release from Reading, was primarily about Wilde’s reaction to the dismissal of a warden, Thomas Martin, for giving some sweet biscuits to a hungry child prisoner. This was in reaction to the letter of the warden himself that was published in the Daily Chronicle, just three days earlier.

5 In The Ballad of Reading Gaol, for artistic purposes, he is contradicting himself 30

Wilde’s letter shows his strong disagreement with the punishment of the warden, who dared to break the prison rules, in order to feed the hungry and distressed child.

Neither the warden nor the child, were strangers to Wilde. Warden Thomas

Martin took care of Wilde towards the end of his sentence in Reading. He also broke the prison rules for Wilde, by bringing him ginger biscuits and the Daily Chronicle (Ellman

485). The child in question was one of three that Wilde saw just before he left jail. In the letter, Wilde criticizes the whole system, “It is not the prisoners who need reformation. It is the prisons” (1064). As Professor of English Law, Rupert Cross, explains, the system was flawed, mainly because of its uniformity and rigidity, which was due to Du Cane’s centralization of the prison system and his “acceptance of general deterrence as the dominant aim of punishment” (13).

In the letter, Wilde explains the horrible conditions for the children who, in his opinion, should not have been there in the first place. The letter is moving and powerful, describing what awaits a child on remand:

To shut up a child in a dimly lit cell, for twenty-three hours out of the

twenty-four, is an example of the cruelty of stupidity. If an individual,

parent or guardian did this to a child, he would be severely punished. The

Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children would take the matter at

once. [ . . . ] A heavy sentence would, undoubtedly, follow conviction.

(1062)

In the letter, Wilde’s attention to the conditions of children on remand, was apparent. More than half of the letter is concerned with the children. He made the connection with his own children, by comparing how badly children are treated in jail, namely, by society, as opposed to how well he, the “individual parent,” treated his own children - yet the same force had taken them from him (1062).

In the letter, Wilde made it clear that it was not the prisoners who were to blame for the bad influence on children in prison. He believed that he, a convicted prisoner, would have been a better option for the children than society. More so, he foreshadowed his own words in The Ballad of Reading Gaol, “For they starve the little frightened child / Till it weeps both night and day: [ . . . ] And some [the prisoners] grow mad, and all grow bad, / And none a word may say” (897). Being one of the prisoners, Wilde had no say in the way the children were treated in prison. In the same way, he, as a father, had no say on the subject of being stripped of his parental rights.

The letter to the editor openly criticized the whole prison system, and thus society itself:

As regards to children, a great deal has been talked and written about the

contaminating influence of prison on young children. What is said is

quite true. [ . . . ] But the contaminating influence is not that of the

prisoners. It is that of the whole prison system. (1063)

Not only are the children on his mind. Wilde also speaks for the mentally unstable man called Prince, whom he met in jail. His harsh critique follows, of the doctors who ignored the fact that the man was becoming insane. The harsh rules apply to all prisoners alike, no exceptions. They have to be followed, even though it is obvious that the prisoner is mentally unstable, which is the core reason for the prisoner disobeying the rules. Such behaviour is often punished, and when all ordinary punishment is not getting any results, flogging follows. Wilde explains that the

Governor of Reading is not to blame, as it is not within his powers to “alter the rules of the prison system” (1066). Wilde is making clear that although Major Nelson, who was in charge of the prison at the time, was kind, he had to follow the rules. Thus, Wilde calls for the individual treatment of each prisoner.

The second letter to the editor of the Daily Chronicle is published ten months after the first one, on 24 March 1898. In it, Wilde brings up the major issues and suggests some changes. He stresses the lack of food and its inadequate nutritional value, as well as the poor sanitary conditions, leading to constant diarrhoea. The second letter is The Ballad of Reading Gaol in prose, concerning the prison conditions. With regards to mental stimulation, Wilde suggests the following:

Deprived of books, of all human intercourse, isolated from every humane

and humanising influence, condemned to eternal silence, robbed of all

intercourse with the external world, treated like an unintelligent animal,

brutalised below the level of any of the brute creation, the wretched man

who is confined in an English prison can hardly escape becoming insane.

[ . . . ] Every prisoner should have an adequate supply of good books. [ . .

. ] Under the present system, a prisoner is only allowed to see his friends

four times a year, for twenty minutes each time. This is quite wrong. A

prisoner should be allowed to see his friends once a month, and for a

reasonable time. (1068-1069)

The timing was perfect, as it was released on exactly the same day as the Second

Reading of the Prisons Bill is read. The Secretary of State for the Home Department at the time was Sir M.W. Ridley, a position which he held from 1895-1900. He appointed

Prison Commissioner, Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Brise, to be responsible for applying the recommendations of the Gladstone Committee (Cross 16).

Haldane’s words during the second reading of the Prison Bill, echo those of

Wilde:

We think that the system should be more elastic, more capable of being

adapted to the special cases of individual prisoners; that certain discipline

and treatment should be more effectually designed to maintain, stimulate

or awaken the higher susceptibilities of prisoners, to develop their moral

instincts, to train them in orderly and industrial habits, and, whenever

possible, to turn them out of prison as better men and women, both

physically and morally, than when they came in. (Hansard)

Richard Burdon Haldane was one of the members of the committee who probably saved Wilde’s life. He was the first to visit Wilde in jail, while he was still in

Holloway in 1895. He recollects his visit:

I put my hand on his prison-dress-clad shoulder and said that I used to

know him and that I had come to say something about himself. He had

not fully used his great literary gift, and the reason was that he had lived

a life of pleasure and had not made any great subject his own. Now

misfortune might prove a blessing for his career, for he had got a great

subject. I would try to get for him books and pen and ink, and in

eighteen months [i.e. twenty/three] he would be free to produce’. (166)

Haldane suggests that he was the one to suggest Wilde to make his downfall into revivification. Haldane’s recollection also shows that he was able to get Wilde books, transfer him to Reading jail, Wilde’s gratitude and that he was interested in wellbeing of his children:

He burst into tears and promised to make the attempt. For the books he

asked eagerly, [ . . . ]We hit on St Augustine’s Works and on

Mommsen’s History of Rome. These I got for him, and they

accompanied him from prison to prison. I afterwards visited him at

Wandsworth Prison, and persuaded the Home Secretary to transfer him to

Reading Gaol. I saw Lady Cowper, and with her aid, his wife and

children were looked after. On his release, there came to me

anonymously a volume, The Ballad of Reading Gaol. It was the

redemption of his promise to me. (167)

Ellman adds that, although the governor of Pentonville objected to giving books to the prisoner, on the grounds that it was against the Prison Act 1865, the Secretary of

State agreed and the books were delivered (possible changes of the recommendations of the committee). Haldane had Wilde moved to Wandsworth, but soon learned that his condition had worsened. As Ellman explains, even though Wilde was very weak from dysentery, which was caused by bad food and sanitary conditions, he had to attend the chapel. Wilde fainted and badly hurt his ear, and as a result, his hearing was impaired6.

After the accident, Wilde stayed in the infirmary for two months. Haldane arranged for him to be moved to Reading. He was considered unfit for hard manual work and “by special favour” was allowed to read in his cell (465).

6 This accident might have been the cause of Wilde’s death as it later develops into meningitis. 35

4.2. Towards the Modern Penal System

A man cannot always be estimated by what he does.

He may keep the law, and yet be worthless.

He may break the law, and yet be fine.

Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man

This section depicts the steps that led from the superannuated prison system towards the modern penal system and answers the question whether Wilde’s scandal, incarceration and writing, had any influence on such a process. It also proves that

Wilde’s opinion on the effects of prison on the prisoner has changed, compared with his earlier work.

Wilde’s choice to write these two letters to the editor of Daily Chronicle, rather than any other periodical, was not circumstantial. Wilde wrote to Ross, “I now think I shell write my prison article for the Chronicle. It is interested in prison-reform, and the thing would not look advertisement. [ . . . ] I intend to write to Massingham” (Selected letters 279). It was a liberal paper that Wilde loved to read and which he asked for, while at Reading - but there was more to it. The very same periodical had started the critique of the prison system in January 1894, with a series of articles “Our Dark

Places” by H.W. Massingham, an assistant editor, who visited a number of prisons in the autumn of 18937. The articles criticise, among other issues, the autocratic and military manner of leadership of Edmund Du Cane, who was in charge, the solitary confinement of the prisoners, overcrowding and recidivism. Massingham considers the prison system as a failure over all, “… the local prison system stands confessed as a vast and appalling failure. It cannot be patched from within; it must be remedied from

7 It used to be presumed that chaplain of Wandsworth prison, W. D. Morrison wrote them. 36 without” (Jewkes 33). The Daily Chronicle was not the first to criticize the system, nevertheless it got overwhelming public attention:

Public criticism was not entirely stilled during the years of Du Cane’s

supremacy. Reformers, ex-prisoners, journalists and politicians variously

attacked the penal edifice, sometimes wildly and ineptly, but occasionally

with telling effect. In the absence of synthetic scandal, such criticism,

however pitched, failed to make a breach in the commissioners’

revetments. (McConville 549-550)

When Oscar Wilde’s high profile trials followed, and soon after his sentencing to two years of hard labour, media attention was at its highest level, and Massingham, an editor8 of the Daily Chronicle from March 1895, followed them closely.

Thanks to immense media attention, public opinion shifted. “There was also a change in attitude towards prisons of the public which had some effect upon administration” (Ellman 474). The Gladstone Committee, already appointed on 5 June

1894 and charged with reviewing prison administration, was chaired by Herbert

Gladstone, who signed the Gladstone Committee Report on 10 April 1895 (Wilde’s third trial started on the 3rd) (Jewkes 33). The report acknowledged a number of issues that needed to be addressed. The issues concerning Wilde were that the crank and tread- wheel should be abolished, that it would be healthier to relieve isolation, and that visits should not be set, but tailored to suit the prisoner. The committee recommended that the educational facilities be improved, especially for juveniles, and that books be made available. It was recommended that solitary confinement be reduced. With regards to juveniles, a special reformatory was suggested, which provided individual treatment.

They also appealed for the after-care of prisoners, especially for juveniles (Brown). Du

8 Massingham became the editor by then. 37

Cane resigned on 23 March 1895, just before Wilde’s second trial, and Evelyn Ruggles-

Brise was appointed as Chairman of the Commission (Cross 16). Even though it would take another three years before the new Prison Act 1898 was approved, many changes had already been implemented, as Haldane discloses in the second reading, “The whole result shows, to my mind, that during the last three years, there has been a noticeable change in prison policy” (Prisons Bill).

Meanwhile, Massingham followed the trials closely, and after sentencing Wilde to two years of hard labour, the Daily Chronicle reports the harsh treatment of Wilde in jail. Massingham not only followed the case, he nudged others to keep the attention on

Wilde’s case. W.T. Stead, first investigative journalist, known for bringing the Pall

Mall Gazette to be one of “the most influential papers in London, with literary contributors that included George Bernard Shaw and Oscar Wilde”, wrote an article in

Review of Reviews where he criticized the harshness of the sentence and the absurdity of the law:

The trial of Oscar Wilde and Taylor9 at the Old Bailey, resulting in their

conviction and the infliction of what will probably be a capital

sentence—for two years' hard labour in solitary confinement always

breaks up the constitution, even of tough and stalwart men—has forced

upon the attention of the public the existence of a vice, of which the most

of us happily know nothing. (Stead)

Wilde’s first letter, The Ballad of Reading Gaol was published soon after his release in February 1898. On 24 March 1898, the debate on the second reading of the

Prison Bill began in the House of Commons. Wilde’s second letter was published in the

Daily Chronicle. Interestingly, the second letter was not signed by Oscar Wilde, as his

9 One of the rent boys, who refused to testify against Wilde, was also sentenced. 38 first letter was, but as the author of the ‘Ballad of Reading Gaol’, to stress that he spoke on behalf of all prisoners, not just himself, and to also advertise the poem (1070).

To conclude, from what has been written in this chapter, the amelioration of the living conditions of the prisoners and the changes that were implemented by the Act

1898, were already pointed out in the Gladstone Committee Report, which was signed seven days after Wilde’s first trial started, which was before Wilde himself could have had any first-hand experience. Wilde touched upon the subject in his essay “The Soul of

Man under Socialism” from 1891, nevertheless his opinions could not differ more from those in his later works, “After all, even in prison, a man can be quite free. His soul can be free. His personality can be untroubled. He can be at peace” (1180). It is understandable that Wilde could not judge the impact of incarceration on a man fully, until he had the first-hand experience himself. That said, in “The Soul of Man under

Socialism”, Wilde recognises the severity of the punishment in Victorian times, where he believed that most of the prisoners “are not criminals at all”:

Of course, all crimes are not crimes against property, though such are the

crimes that the English law, valuing what a man has, more than what a

man is, punishes with the harshest and most horrible severity (if we

except the crime of murder, and regard death as worse than penal

servitude, a point on which our criminals, I believe, disagree). (1182)

Many of the issues in the Gladstone Report were also on Wilde’s mind after he left the prison, above all the need for treating the prisoners as individually. In his letters,

Wilde writes about the children, the lunatic and the warder, because he recognises that, for his writings to have appeal, he needs to write about others, rather than himself.

Wilde recognises the need to shift the focus from himself, to the suffering of the other prisoners, due to the nature of his own sentence. However, he offers his sympathy, and

39 thus he silently demands sympathy from the reader for himself. His own suffering is hidden, but thanks to his poetic, moral and political sympathy towards the prisoners, his own can be read between the lines.

That said, Wilde’s reluctance to directly describe his own suffering in these letters is apparent, especially when compared to De Profundis. While De Profundis is partly a personal letter, partly a public apologia, a chronicle and a prediction, the letters are primarily written to improve the condition of the prisoners, as he promised to.

Similarly, as with The Ballad of Reading Gaol, Wilde connected the Ballad of Reading

Gaol with the second letter, by not signing it with his own name, but as “The author of

‘The Ballad of Reading Gaol’” (1070). By drawing such connections, he shows his desire to be recognised as the author of both, which could bring a positive response from the readers. That is Wilde’s hidden agenda.

Wilde’s notoriety contributed to the penal reform, which is often described as the change towards the modern penal system. Once Wilde’s scandal broke, he and the penal system were under the magnifying glass of the media and the public alike. Wilde was not at the root of the changes, but his scandal abetted the long process toward the modern English penal system (Baily 6). If Wilde’s notoriety had taken his audience and his literary voice away from him, should not his notoriety be the means of getting his audience and his literary voice back to him? Wilde is more popular today than ever before. His books are bestsellers, his quotes are cited by heart. His work is considered ageless. Wilde inspires people and artists all over the world.

5. Conclusion

I wrote when I did not know life;

now that I do know the meaning of life,

I have no more to write.

Oscar Wilde

This thesis aimed to prove that the main aspect of a literary conversion in Oscar

Wilde’s later works, was the loss of his parental rights. A close reading of De

Profundis, The Ballad of Reading Gaol and the two letters to the editor of the Daily

Chronicle showed that he was most concerned with the amelioration of the conditions of prisoners, and that he thus aimed at abetting the Criminal Law of 1885. During the research, one particular aspect of the personal life of Oscar Wilde came to light. A connection was found between his aim to improve the conditions of the prisoners and the loss of his parental rights to his own children. Such an experience made his cause personal. To support such a claim, the thesis relied on personal letters that Wilde wrote to his friends and acquaintances for the duration of the given period. The thesis found that he was most active after his parental rights were taken from him. It was then that he wrote The Ballad of Reading Jail and the two letters to the Daily Chronicle. Soon after his wife died, he believed that there was no more chance of him seeing his children.

Although he had planned to write more on the subject, he lost his personal driving force to write and all work on this subject ceased.

The first section of the thesis offers the background to what led to Wilde’s imprisonment. It shows that the scandal, and thus Wilde himself, was the precursor to what led him to spend two years in a Victorian prison, which became a turning point and affected all aspects of his life. An encounter with small children in Reading jail had

41 such a strong impact on him, just before he was released, that it is reflected in all of his subsequent works.

The second section analyses Wilde’s literary style, focusing on the conceivable changes in his life. A close reading of his epistle De Profundis, written towards the end of his jail sentence, as well as his personal correspondence, shows Wilde’s efforts to be seen as undergoing a change in the prison. Regardless of the motives, he set himself the task of improving the conditions of prisoners and abetting the Criminal Law. The Ballad of Reading Gaol is the very result of this aim. It was published within nine months of his release. As far as any changes to his persona and/or opinion per se are concerned,

Wilde found his answers in the life of Christ, rather than Hellenism. With regard to his literary voice, Wilde chose an entirely different format. Witty dialogues in his earlier plays were replaced by dramatic monologues, the striving for recognition and celebrity status was replaced by the striving for change. De Profundis and The Ballad of the

Reading Gaol draw on deeply personal experiences.

The final section explains the connection between Oscar Wilde’s loss of parental rights and his continuous critique of the prison establishment in the two letters to the editor of the Daily Chronicle and the Ballad of the Reading Gaol. The final section also depicts the steps that led from the superannuated prison system towards the modern penal system, and shows that Wilde’s scandal, incarceration and writings, had an influence on such a process. It also proves that his opinion on the effects of prison on the prisoner had changed, compared with his earlier works.

6. Works Cited

Bailey, Victor. “English Prisons, Penal Culture, and the Abatement of Imprisonment,

1895-1922“. 1997. Pdf. Web. 3 Mar. 2016.

"Ballad". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia

Britannica Inc., 2016. Web. 07 Apr. 2016.

Brown, Richard. "Looking at History." Web log post. Prison Reform 1880-1914.

Richard Brown, 03 Apr. 2011. Web. 07 Mar. 2016.

Cross, Rupert. Punishment, Prison and the Public. Social Sciences Exeter. London:

Stevens & Sons, 1971. Web. 12 Mar. 2016.

Douglas, Alfred Bruce, Lord. Oscar Wilde and myself. London: John Long, 1914. Print.

Haldane, Richard Burdon. An Autobiography. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1929.

Print.

Harris, Frank. Oscar Wilde; His Life and Confessions. Vol. 1. New York: Brentano's,

1916. Internet Archive. University of California Libraries, 5 Feb. 2008. Web. 28

Apr. 2016.

Holland, Vyvyan Beresford. Son of Oscar Wiĺde. Harmondsworth: Penguin

Books, 1957. Print.

Holland, Merlin. Chronological Table. By Oscar Wilde. 5th ed. London: Collins, 2003.

Print.

Hyde, Hartford Montgomery. "The Trials of Oscar Wilde." Google Books. Courier

Corporation, n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2016.

Hughes, Linda K. The Cambridge Introduction to Victorian Poetry. Cambridge

University Press, 2010. Web. 3 March 2016.

Jewkes, Yvonne, Ben Crewe, and Jamie Bennett. “Handbook on Prisons.” Google

Books. Routledge, n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2016.

McConville, Seán. English Local Prisons, 1860-1900: Next Only to Death. Google

Books. Psychology Press, 1995. Web. Mar. 2016

Mulpetre, Owen. "W.T. Stead & the Pall Mall Gazette." Attacking the Devil. WTSRS,

2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.

Pearce, Joseph. The Unmasking of Oscar Wilde. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004.

Print.

"PRISONS BILL." (Hansard, 24 March 1898). N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2016.

Ross, Robert. “Preface. “De Profundis and The Ballad of Reading Gaol”. Oscar Wilde.

Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1908. Print.

Sherard, Robert Harborough. The Real Oscar Wilde: To Be Used As A Supplement To,

And In Illustration Of "the Life Of Oscar Wilde". London: T. Werner Laurie, 1916.

Print.

Stead, William Thomas "The Conviction of Oscar Wilde." Attacking the Devil.

WTSRS, 2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.

Wilde, Oscar. The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde. 5th ed. London: Collins, 2003.

Print.

---. The Ballad of Reading Gaol. Wilde 883-899

---. The Decay of Lying. Wilde 1071-1092

---. De Profundis. Wilde 980-1059

---. Two Letters to the Daily Chronicle. 1060-1070

Wilde, Oscar, and Rupert Hart-Davis. Selected Letters of Oscar Wilde. Oxford: Oxford

UP, 1979. Print.

7. Resume

This thesis deals with aspects of the literary conversion in Oscar Wilde’s late works. Works that fulfil these criteria are the epistle De Profundis, The Ballad of

Reading Gaol and the two letters to the editor of the Daily Chronicle. While De

Profundis and The Ballad of Reading Gaol are analysed in terms of style, content and opinion, the two letters to the Daily Chronicle are used as a foundation to examine whether Oscar Wilde’s scandal, his imprisonment, his prominence as a public figure, as well as his late writings, abetted the improvement of the prison system.

The thesis also relies on personal letters that Wilde wrote to his friends and acquaintances for the duration of the given period. It discusses the possible changes in

Wilde’s personal life and how these conceivable changes are reflected in the given works. It explains Wilde’s aims and the steps that were taken towards abetting the conditions of prisoners and the repeal of the Criminal Law Amendment Act from 1885.

The thesis sets out to prove that Wilde’s motives were based on personal matters and, what is more, ceased due to a personal concern also.

Resumé

Tato práce se zabývá aspekty literární konverze v pozdních dílech Oscara Wilda.

Díla, která splňují tato kritéria, jsou epistle De Profundis, Balada o žaláři v Readingu a dva dopisy redakci Daily Chronicle. Zatímco De Profundis a Balada o žaláři v

Readingu jsou analyzovány z hlediska stylu, obsahu a názoru, dva dopisy redakci Daily

Chronicle byly zkoumány z hlediska vlivu Wildova skandálu, uvěznění jako veřejné osoby a jeho pozdních děl na zlepšení vězeňského systému.

Práce také čerpá z osobních dopisů, které Wilde psal svým přátelům a známým během daného období. Práce zkoumá možné změny ve Wildově osobním životě, a jejich odraz v daných dílech. Práce vysvětluje Wildovy cíle a kroky, které podnikal ke zlepšení podmínek vězňů a ke zrušení pozměňovacího návrhu zákona o trestním právu z roku 1885.

Tato práce si klade za cíl dokázat, že Wildovy motivy byly založeny na jeho osobních zážitcích a co víc, že také z osobních důvodů ustaly.