Gross Indecency: The Three Trials of Oscar Wilde Essay

Oscar Wilde and his trials, both literal and figurative, has been the subject of quite a few films and plays apart from the considerable mass of writing that exist on this subject. This is because Oscar Wilde, as a metaphorical figure has never failed to capture the public imagination as the veritable revolutionary against society’s delimiting and deterministic conventions and a crippling value system. And yet, Moises Kauffman’s latest play Gross Indecency: The Three Trials of Oscar Wilde manages to turn the relatively familiar material – the trials and indictment of the legendary Wilde on charges of sodomy and pederasty – into a riveting and powerful document against social determinism. The theme of Kauffman’s play is the ever-continuing conflict between art and morality and of course with such a theme, Wilde, the martyr to nineteenth century morality, with his assertion that there are no immoral books, only badly written ones is the perfect hero. Drawing from a huge variety of sources that includes trial transcripts, journalistic articles, contemporary autobiographies (including the one by Wilde’s lover, Lord Alfred Douglas) and later biographies, Kauffman in the play successfully brings alive the past in a way that Wilde himself would have approved of. The play breaks all generic boundaries and has the elements of a historical drama, a docudrama, a courtroom drama, a social commentary, tragedy and comedy all rolled into one. The oft-repeated tale of Wilde’s fall from fame and fortune is by no means old wine in new bottle, primarily because the playwright’s in-depth research brings in new life into the tale by documenting new perspectives and exploring newer avenues and thereby problematizing the positions of victim and victimizer, secondarily because Kauffman concentrates in showing history in its own context and does not overtly attempt to make it contemporary, and finally because by showing Wilde’s plight in his confrontation with a world that found him fundamentally subversive to the interests of the society the playwright strikes an universal chord. Wilde’s passionate attempt to live a life on his own terms is superbly dramatized in the play. Most riveting are the dramatizations of those moments that change the life of the author for once and all. Such a fateful moment comes when Wilde denies kissing a young man with a witty putdown of his looks instead of a straightforward ‘no’. In the first of the three trials and in a climactic moment Wilde is asked by the prosecuting attorney Edward Carson, if he had ever kissed one of the young working class men with whom he was known to keep company. Wilde, with his suave and polished wit replies: â€Å"Oh, dear, no, He was a peculiarly plain boy. † Carson leaps victoriously at the implication of such a comment, that Wilde would have kissed the boy if he was a little more attractive and the author’s fate is sealed. From this moment onwards the play takes on a destructive momentum as Wilde’s entire life spirals out of control betrayed by his own wit. Never again is he able to gain control of his life. Through the presentation of Wilde, with support from his extensive research, Kauffman manages to subtly problematize the positions of victimizer and victim in the play. For as we find in the play, even before he stabs himself with his own clever tongue Wilde frittered away his prodigious talents by surrounding himself â€Å"with the smaller natures and the meaner minds. As he quotes from â€Å"De Profundis† towards the end of the play â€Å" I became the spendthrift of my own genius, and to waste an eternal youth gave me a curious joy. † Still, the intrinsic irony of the fact that it is his suavity, wit and incomparable craft with words that would bring his downfall is also highly symbolic as far as the theme of the play is concerned, for the play, among other things, engages with the typical Victorian debate over morality and art. Wilde refused to side with the dominant discourse of compartmentalizing his personal erotic longings and keeping it separate from the aesthetic side of his life. And the fact that he raised his personal sense of morality to the level of an art turned out to be the ultimate source of his tragedy in an age which preferred to look at art as a mode moral dispensation for social welfare. Apart from tracing the tragic downfall of this hero with a sincerity and passion that raises Wilde’s conviction and his untimely death to the level of a crucifixion so that the protagonist becomes a patron saint for all those whose life has been crippled by the narrow moralities of a compulsively prohibitionist society, the play also successfully and subtly presents a multilevel study in public perceptions of class, art and sexuality and this is what makes Kauffman’s themes universal. The playwright uses a chorus of actors, who appear both on stage and in front of it posing as the investigators in a hearing, almost classical in its simplicity. This modern chorus continuously reads, quotes or acts out from a huge variety of sources – fruits of the playwright’s research on his subject – establishing an ever-shifting mosaic of perspectives. This chorus takes up several convincing and often hilarious figurative perspectives. The multiple roles bring to the table the likes of Queen Victoria (the author of the Gross Indecency Law), and G. B. Shaw to name a few. The chorus quotes from the memoirs of Wilde and his lover, the accounts of Sir Edward Clarke and the editor Frank Harris. A particularly inspired scene is the one when a later day academic is brought into the play to deconstruct Wilde’s performance in court with insights that are nonetheless valid for being presented satirically. However the most hilarious of all these is probably the scene where the chorus dons long white underwear to display how Wilde procured his ‘gross indecencies’. The greatest success of Kauffman’s use of the chorus lies in the fact that by means of it, very subtly but surely, he manages to communicate a rather unsettling idea to the readers of the play: that even in our age of individual freedom, we are not very far from the social Puritanism that crippled Wilde during his lifetime.