No End for Old Men

Through a seemingly never ending intellectual dispute, Oscar Wilde employees Gilbert and Ernest in The Critic as Artist to facilitate his dirty work, that is, to determine if a critic is in fact an artist.

The two older men are positioned in the library of a house in Piccadilly, and it is no stretch to envision Gilbert and Ernest smoking cigars and sipping whiskey while perching on deep brown or burgundy, leather office furniture, discussing criticism and art in a fairly removed setting. After a verbose debate, which follows a pattern of questions from Ernest and explanations from Gilbert, and the belittlement of human intelligence and journalism, it is decided the critic is an artist and the artist a critic.

Gilbert focuses on proving criticism’s merits by arguing its further extension of art to the manifestation of being art itself. Criticism is described as treating the work of art simply as a “starting off point for a new creation.” The response of the critics’ is a new work of their own that, in Gilbert’s opinion, need not bear any obvious resemblance to the thing it criticizes.

Oddly enough, journalism is not allowed the same ideal. Gilbert argues his point by claiming that criticism lends itself to new attitudes for the mind and new points of view. It can be argued that journalism generates the same benefits in its readers. An art form in its own right, which also creates art (writing) from a starting-off point, journalism is deemed a vessel for the opinions of the uneducated, keeping one in touch with the ignorance of the community. The contradictory undertone of Gilbert’s arguments cements an age-old idea that art is in the eye of the beholder.

However, Gilbert does manage to share admirable and timeless observations. For example, Gilbert mentions that humanity will always love those that have confessed their sins not to a priest, but to the world. This succinctly explains the rampant availability of reality television. People enjoy reveling in the flaws of others because it assures them they’re not alone in their imperfections. Another valid point is the public's willingness to forgive everything except genius. Genius is limited, and because of its distance from the masses, it suffers the wrath of mob mentality. People are less inclined to side with something strange and unfamiliar to them, such as genius, and more likely to tolerate an old friend, such as stupidity.

Gilbert passionately argues his beliefs, but in a beautifully hypocritical fashion states that a real passion ruins a critic. Perhaps, Gilbert would benefit in knowing that criticism, art or not and contradictory or not, is as unavoidable as the stupidity he disdains. To escape from criticism, one would have to forgo any and all opinion in favor of the unachievable feat of doing nothing, saying nothing, and being nothing.