This reminds me of the idea of the participation award. Should we really idealize basic human victories? I think stardom should be reserved for the abnormal, and we take their stupidity with it.

I suppose this does... encourage good behavior. Of course one should always strive to nurture their relationships with trust and respect. However, there should not be a supreme type of love. It isn't a competition.

Stupid! Love is defined slightly differently by everyone. One cannot be "loved more" than somebody else, for it is impossible to understand another's experience with affection. Love can sometimes be unhealthy, but it can feel good to that person. Also, "the best couple in love" is a deeply annoying phrase and unworthy of being a celebrity. Love is too pure to be stimulated by fame, it is personal.

If you have to "find" a celebrity, I feel like whoever they may be will not be a true celebrity. It is unnatural, forced. We cannot truly make ourselves be interested in anything, especially something of heightening normality. Such as supreme milkmaid. We want to watch the abnormal, and usually, the abnormal can be stupid.

wooo mama preach

Maybe by loving the men who hurt, they won't feel the need to hurt women. We get it.

And they demean women for they feel it is the only thing they can control.

They are demeaning their women to the same, low platform that they feel about themselves.

And this is done by lashing out at someone sacred- their mothers, their wives, their children. The intensity of their backlash is a direct result of the intensity of their struggles. Tupac had a lot going on..

A compassionate way to respond.

I suppose all women could feel this way. For me, sexism in rap is distant. They are talking about some other girl, who I would probably never act like... so I can still enjoy the music... right? But who are these other girls? Why are they black girls? This article makes me believe that every woman that listens to rap music shares this disconnected mindset. If this is so, who are the girls that the rappers are talking about? Their fantasies of women and how their interactions with them will go? That's deeply twisted, deeply resentful. "I need to know why they are so angry at me"

What is the reward? Are women forced to be comforted by this lifestyle?

Perhaps hearing the worst, nastiest, most profane thoughts gives women some sort of power because they know what's going on in their heads. Men are less of a mystery, for they put it all out there- what they fantasize about, what they like/dislike, etc.

Understandable. The hate for others made these women cling closer to people close to the, i.e., the men they loved who abused them.

This is powerful. Women falling for bad boys is such a strange, repetitive trend. Usually the very qualities that attracted them are the ones that hurt them.

I really like this god-like admiration for hip-hop artists who are honest and"bad", who's music is so gritty. It goes to show that humans crave music about hardship, for they feel like the artist understands them. The artist is put on a pedestal for somehow being smarter or more special because they are able to connect with their fans in a way nobody else seemingly can.

I am confused... they didn't want to be called ladies? What did they prefer?

Such a gruesome favor... this is yet another faucet and layer of Dorian's charm.

Just because he was beautiful.

Perhaps they are the only ones that will listen to him.

How is Lord Henry not respectable? Upon reading this I realized that the readers really know very little about Henry's character. He is kind of like God, or maybe the Devil, in that he hold this power in the book but each reader is imagining him differently.

That is true.. goes along with the whole "ignorance is bliss" thing

I have felt drawn to people inexplicably before, and I'm curious to where this attraction derives from. It's not necessarily sexual- sometimes it is- but it is more intense interest in one another. "Destined to know each other". I don't know

I like how he depicts bravery as a scarlet color. Naturally.

It is ruined. Being effortless is perfect, trying is sometimes repulsive.

This implies that the truest art form is people, which is why they are so infinitely fascinating and easy to fall in love with.

This is why Lord Henry is Oscar. Smart, sharp, but kind of cooked to a crisp from living so fully.

Dorian is vastly defined by others' perception and hopes for him in this book. Lord Henry's "influence", Sibyl's passion, Basil's talents.

I thought he was passive towards Dorian's actions? Contradictory saying #10,000 by Lord Henry.

He doesn't love Sibyl, he loves the idea of her and what she makes him feel. A rather selfish way of "loving someone". He separates her identity as a person and actress (he only wants the actress) by referring to her as her character.

Wilde wants to feel this way, perhaps this is why he wants to be Dorian. Or something.

I wonder if that is subtly in reference to Dorian, who himself is a work of art. The creation of Dorian's intellect and self awareness is brought to light in this chapter, but it is stimulated by Basil's depiction of him. Dorian creates himself through Basil's eyes.

Interesting but I disagree-- It seems that beauty would stimulate it?

Henry is all influence, completely wound up inside because of it. That is why he is Wilde. Dorian is clean and ready to be influenced. Maybe that is why Wilde wants to be this way.

Dorian lives poetically- he is living, breathing freak of nature and work of art. But he is useless and can't do anything but be admired.

She fulfills many different fantasies for Dorian, and that is why he is so smitten. She cures his boredom.

That's right...maybe. They become scandals, they are romanticized for it. That is why we love reading about beautiful celebrities getting DUI's or arrested for drugs or at trials for domestic violence. It makes sin easier to watch, for it is done in style.

No... I believe this is the moment he goes bad, for he becomes vain! Vanity spoils enchanting people.

I wonder if the painting would have been good if Dorian was not he subject. Was Dorian wonderful, or Basil's ability?

Perhaps this is a metaphor for Dorian's power. Deriving from something lovely, but rather over-bearing.

Henry is talking about himself.

This is selfish- he went exactly against what he was praising him for in the previous sentence.

This is interesting, I always wondered why the style of this play was so different from all his other works.

So contradictory, he is ruining what is lovely!

This is the moment Dorian goes bad, because intellect and beauty overlap.

Henry talks the talk, but doesn't do all of these grand, brave things he talks about. He is sick inside, that is why Dorian ends up resenting him. He lives through everyone else.

This is a powerful quote, for it is saying that corruption is bringing out Dorian's beauty, at the same time ruining it.

I think this could be talking about Basil. He is brave in painting Dorian, for in his way, it is a declaration of homosexual love. He is afraid of the painting, afraid of Dorian, sort of afraid of Henry for taking away Dorian. So since he is full of fear- he is brave? Just because he feels it?

Maybe the world thinks of Wilde as a bad influence to his fans- but too intellectual and right on to be ignored.

another piece of evidence supporting Dorian's power

I believe that Oscar ideally would like to be seen this way, immediately trusted and worshipped without giving anything of his intelligence or soul away. Dorian is effortless and already powerful.

It is almost as if he is implying intelligence is dirty. That everything beautiful should have absolute clarity of understanding and delivery.

Gosh, this is such a great series of ideas. Artists crave the chase of fame and don't know what to do with it once they have it- perhaps that goes for all of the lucky ones, the ones who are special enough to get a shot at fame. It is their fatal flaw. And I suppose being talked about it better than being invisible.

I feel like this is the informal thesis of the essay. When a star lives for recognition and for their brief moment in the limelight, they cannot help but become depressed, upon realization that even the most dedicated fans are selfish, and do not care that much. One must live for themselves, not for the adoration of others. If the celebrity cannot separate the two, will always be disappointed.

Alienation is a key reason why Byron was incurably melancholy. He couldn't really relate to anyone, therefore skipped around his relationships. He was searching for something, and digging himself further into lonliness when he wouldn't find it. I don't even know if Byron knew what he was looking for, what would make him feel less alienated.

This is a valuable source Thorsby uses in this essay to explain Byron's early stained innocence and melancholy.

This is well said. Fans feel like that have this sort of personal handle or understanding about artists. No wonder everybody falls in love with them- it is exposing and romanticizing the personal, lonely sides of people.

I wonder what behavior qualifies someone as a "star". What differentiates this quality from just being pretentious? I think art is necessary for weeding out phony celebrities.

so a brand?

This is why Byron was famous! He lived the aesthetic and tragedy that he wrote about. He was just as famous for being a compelling conversationalist and playboy as was for his work. He was the poet and the poem combined.

Perhaps they only allow us mortals to see the glamorous bits, or the parts that fit their image, and that is why they are so idealized.

So celebrities are famous for the way they live, not what they create?

So for lack of a better phrase- Byron was "pimped out", in a sense. His persona was a money making machine.

It reminds me of the modern rockstar, Mathew Healy, from the 1975. He is aware that his bad-boy, chain-smoking, english bred image sells records and makes money. He has openly said that the character he is when on stage, in his music videos, photoshoots, etc- is not him. But people still buy the records and and want to believe in their image.

I agree with @Albany in that Byron saw sex as a source of power, as appose to something normal shared between two people. I don't think there was any real partnership through his life, because even when he interacted and relied on people (like his half-sister Augusta), it was tainted with his desire to push the limits of british society. He desired unconventional women and boys, both of which where outside the box of respectable romance at the time. I think maybe he did this to distract from his inherent sadness.

of course they do..

Byron described himself and his tendencies through romanticizing other people. I think this is a reoccurring part of artistry: poets coming to understand themselves by writing about their reaction of other people.

This is well worded. Helps fill the gaps of when his epiphanies sort of began.