Roald Dahl on Human Nature

Roald Dahl Tales of the Unexpected

Reading Journal #1

 

             In his collection of short stories, Tales of the Unexpected, Roald Dahl conveys human nature from a rather satirical perspective. In fact, unlike in his stories for younger children, this work aimed at adults brings to light the sociopathic aspects of human beings. Each of the short stories deals with a horrible and crazy issue: in the first story, “Taste”, Mike Schofield decides to take a risky bet wagering his own daughter; in the second story, “Lamb to the Slaughter,” Mary Maloney kills her husband with a frozen lamb leg; in “Man from the South”, a boy engages in a crazy bet with a stranger where he must wager his finger; and etc. However, Roald Dahl presents these creepy plots in a comical manner with an unexpected yet realistic twist at the end of each story.

             From the stories we have read so far, I cannot clearly make out what Roald Dahl was attempting to convey through the book. I can be sure, though, from the way Dahl described his characters that he did not mean highlight the greatness of mankind. Rather, I would say his stance on human nature was critical perhaps even a bit cynical. From the short stories of the Tales of the Unexpected, many of the characters are sociopathic. Most of the characters show irrational decision making, insane obsessions, and susceptibility to the temptation of betting. In “Taste,” the temptation of gaining two houses gets the better of Mike Schofied, Mary Maloney in “Lamb to Slaughter” loses her mind (but not her cool) and kills her husband in a cold calculated method, in “Skin,” the temptation of food and a good life makes Drioli pay with his skin/life. These events are very unrealistic situations in our everyday life. But here, in these stories, Roald Dahl puts the characters in an extreme situation, and the characters are forced to make a decision. It’s an interesting approach of making the readers imagine “what if?” Right now, sitting comfortably in our rooms, we would never imagine having our fingers chopped off for anything. But could we know for sure that we will be able to resist the temptation of a free sports car? We, the readers, are never going to be put in such a situation but if we are, what kind of a decision would we make and what are the consequences? In most of these stories, the characters fall for temptation and ends up losing something very dear to them (or at least almost in the case of “Man from the South”.) All in all, many of these stories revolve around plots that highlight the folly of human nature.

For me, these short stories felt much like dark humor. It is not only shown throughout the plot but also in the tone of narration. For stories like “Taste”, “Lamb to the Slaughter,” “Dip in the Pool” and “Skin,” where the plot is told from a third person viewpoint by an outside narrator, it was quite notable how the tone of the narrator is more light and amused rather than grave even as he/she is describing something terrible. Moreover, because in many stories the ending is never explicitly given away by the narrator, there is still a room for imagination as to what happened in the end. By leaving conclusion for the readers to decide, the narrator is more so able to take a lighter stance to a heavily grave issue.

 

Reading Journal #3: The Controversy of "The Picture of Dorian Gray"

At first glance, Oscar Wilde's "The Picture of Dorian Gray" may appear to be a work that initially sparked the controversy between aestheticism and morality. After all, the novel embodies the spirit of aestheticism while at the same time, constantly pits aesthetic beliefs against the moral values of the Victorian era. When the novel was first released, it was harshly rebuked by critics for being ‘foul’ in nature and was condemned a ‘fallen work.’ Many readers were outraged when aestheticism prevailed over moral values and eventually destroyed Dorian Gray. Among the outspoken diatribes was a review by the Scots Observer, which stated “It (the novel) is false art for its interest is medico-legal; it is false to human nature—for its hero is a devil; it is false to morality—for it is not made ...sufficiently clear that the writer does not prefer a course of unnatural iniquity to a life of cleanliness, health and sanity.” However, according to Oscar Wilde, “The Picture of Dorian Gray” can hardly be considered an ‘immoral’ book. Oscar Wilde had no intention of persuading the readers that any particular belief was more valid than the other. He was not emphasizing his belief that aestheticism was superior to morality, nor did he implicate any sort of moral lesson. The conflict between aestheticism and Victorian moral values only exist to make the novel more ‘beautiful.’ In his letter rebutting the Scots Observer, he stated “If a work of art is rich and vital and complete, those who have artistic instincts will see its beauty, and those to whom ethics appeal more strongly than aesthetics will see its moral lesson. It will fill the cowardly with terror, and the unclean will see in it their own shame. It will be to each man what he is himself. It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.” Here, in this letter, Oscar Wilde makes it clear that the importance of beauty and morality in art is very subjective to each individual. Therefore, it is perhaps more accurate to assume that Oscar Wilde had no actual intention while writing this novel to bring to light the prevalence of art’s beauty over morality as shown in The Picture of Dorian Gray. Rather, he simply brought up the conflict to create a fascinating plot and to present the novel in an artful manner, suitable to meet his standards of aesthetcism. In this sense, The Picture of Dorian Gray is not meant to be a book that brings up controversy—it is a book that uses a controversial issue to strengthen a clever plot.