25 pages • 50 minutes read
Oscar WildeA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
“Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime” thematizes the relationship between fate and free will not as a binary opposition, but as a complex and ambiguous interplay. Almost as soon as he receives the reading from Mr. Podgers, Lord Arthur appears to relinquish his free will in order to fulfill his fate—even, or especially, because that fate is so antithetical to his self-conception. Lord Arthur’s response is manifestly excessive; the other characters who have their palms read do not have similar reactions, as they understand that Mr. Podgers is at the party as a curiosity rather than an authority. Yet Lord Arthur is immediately convinced that committing murder is an inevitability. His belief in fate immediately overtakes his free will.
However, Lord Arthur’s initial response to his palm reading has much to do with the eerie London night, where “murder grinned at him from the roofs of the houses” (Chapter 2, Paragraph 2). By the next afternoon, he has come to terms with his fate and is proceeding to carry it out in the most calm and discreet way possible. By this point, it is more difficult to see Lord Arthur as a helpless victim of destiny:
For a moment he had a natural repugnance against what he was asked to do, but it soon passed away. His heart told him that it was not a sin, but a sacrifice; his reason reminded him that there was no other course open. He had to choose between living for himself and living for others, and terrible though the task laid upon him undoubtedly was, yet he knew that he must not suffer selfishness to triumph over love (Chapter 3, Paragraph 5).
Lord Arthur consciously and deliberately reframes the act of murder as a moral duty. Whereas the previous night he had railed against the absurdity of his fate, feeling that his very character had been affronted, he now assimilates the murder into his self-image. To not commit the murder would be selfish, he reasons. By presenting a protagonist who deliberately pursues his apparent fate, rather than actively avoiding it, Wilde ironizes the opposition between destiny and free will, showing how a belief in predestination offers a cover for acts not otherwise justifiable. Lord Arthur never once questions fate or openly asserts his own free will by rejecting the prophecy. He feels that becoming a murderer is inevitable, and the best way to fulfill his duty to others is to quickly and efficiently commit the murder for which he is predestined.
In this context, Lord Arthur’s failed attempts at murder take on a humorous, distinctly Wildean, twist. Tormented after the exploding clock fails to do more than amuse his uncle, Lord Arthur renounces his intention actively to pursue his fate, declaring that he will henceforth “[l]et Destiny work out his doom” (Chapter 5, Paragraph 36). Shortly thereafter, of course, Lord Arthur does fulfill that doom by throwing Mr. Podgers into the Thames River. Although the act is seemingly spontaneous, it is also the one that solves Lord Arthur’s problems most efficiently—and with the added benefit that no one he cares about has to die. In other words, he could not have done better if he had been acting from intention.
By the end of the story, Lord Arthur can remain secure in the knowledge that his attempts to willfully commit murder were unsuccessful, implying that any evil came from his destiny, now completely divorced from his personality. Mr. Podgers, however, ends up having predicted his own fate without knowing it; he, ultimately, is the loser of any battles between free will and destiny.
Like much of Wilde’s other work, “Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime” delights in portraying the illusions—and delusions—of upper-class British society. Appearances create the only reality worth engaging. The exquisite bonbonnière—literally, a box for candy—that encloses a poison pill emblematizes the potential contradiction between appearance and reality, with its charming exterior and deadly contents. But the fact that the pill never has the chance to do its deadly work reveals that the relationship between appearance and reality is not simply one of opposition, nor is the valuation of appearance over “reality” necessarily to be deplored in all cases.
For instance, Lady Windermere treats Mr. Podgers’s failure to appear “mysterious, or esoteric, or romantic-looking” (Chapter 1, Paragraph 19) as at best an inconvenience and at worst an affront to good taste that only his skill can overcome. Moreover, part of the crisis that Mr. Podgers’s palm reading sparks in Lord Arthur’s mind has to do with the idea that Lord Arthur’s destiny as a murderer is inscribed on his body, available for all to see.
More broadly, Wilde develops the theme by exploring how appearances and performance enable people to move through the social world, regardless of what they might be doing behind closed doors or what they might privately think. Part of the pleasure in this exploration is getting too close to the “truth,” as when Mr. Podgers reads the palm of Lady Fermor in Chapter 1:
In fact, many people seemed afraid to face the odd little man with his stereotyped smile, his gold spectacles, and his bright, beady eyes; and when he told poor Lady Fermor, right out before every one, that she did not care a bit for music, but was extremely fond of musicians, it was generally felt that cheiromancy was a most dangerous science, and one that ought not to be encouraged, except in a tête-à-tête (Chapter 1, Paragraph 40).
The partygoers’ fear that Mr. Podgers—not known for his discretion—might reveal something about them that they would rather keep hidden foreshadows, in muted form, Lord Arthur’s panicked walk through London in Chapter 2. At the moment, however, it is Lady Fermor’s turn to be the object of investigation. Her lack of interest in music might be understood simply as a failure of taste, and a relatively forgivable one at that. To be accused of liking the musicians more, however, suggests a failure to maintain proper appearances and, thus, an attack on a reality formed by social consensus. In other words, the problem is not that Lady Fermor enjoys the company of musicians; her true transgression is in not concealing that fact from someone as socially inferior as Mr. Podgers.
Social performance even shapes Lord Arthur’s brief foray into the underworld of political radicals and explosives experts. The aristocratic and eminently respectable Count Rouvaloff puts Lord Arthur in contact with Herr Winckelkopf. In turn, Herr Winckelkopf—who in spite of his criminal profession and the seediness of the street he lives on, turns out also to have been one of Lady Windermere’s guests—recognizes Lord Arthur immediately, and invites him to partake of “the most delicious Marcobrünner out of a pale yellow hock-glass marked with the Imperial monogram” (Chapter 5, Paragraph 10) as they discuss the exploding clock. Even this “famous conspirator” exercises mastery over his appearance. Wilde’s point is not that people simply pretend to be things they are not, but rather that people may be many things, even if they are seemingly contradictory.
When it was published in the volume of short stories in 1891, “Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime” was given the subtitle, “A Study of Duty.” “Duty” carries with it the connotations of moral rectitude and proper behavior; Wilde ironizes this discourse of morality by demonstrating how it continues to function as a cover for deeds that clearly fall outside the boundaries of morality. Lord Arthur copes with the disturbing news of his murderous destiny by rewriting that destiny as a matter of duty, a task that must be carried out so that he can become the best husband to Sybil he can possibly be. The action in question—murder itself—is less important than the terms in which he approaches it. Indeed, Lord Arthur is so scrupulous in his planning that he tries to make sure he will not incur any financial benefit from the death of Lady Clementina.
Wilde’s ironic use of the language of morality is particularly prominent in Chapter 3, where the narrator observes that “[m]any men in his position would have preferred the primrose path of dalliance to the steep heights of duty; but Lord Arthur was too conscientious to set pleasure above principle” (Chapter 3, Paragraph 5). Although he would much rather ignore the prediction and marry Sybil as planned, Lord Arthur possesses too much moral rectitude to do so; delaying the marriage until he has completed his task becomes the ultimate act of conscientious self-sacrifice. By the time his second murder attempt fails, Lord Arthur is so deeply invested in the morality of his actions that he curses the thwarting of his “good intentions”—he was just trying to do the right thing. By demonstrating that the language of morality and “duty” can be pressed into service to justify murder itself, Wilde satirizes those people who rely on that language to bolster their sense of being better than others. While they might feel that they are above the petty concerns that lead other people to engage in surface-level deceptions, Wilde reveals that morality itself enables the confusion of truth and appearance on a grand scale.
By Oscar Wilde