Oscar Wilde’s fairytales have been read to children for more than a century. Nevertheless, since the time of their publication in 1888 and 1891, the target audience of The Happy Prince and Other Tales and A House of Pomegranates have been the concern of critics. Delving into the context behind the rich and colourful imagery, one can find implications of homosexuality, the Paterian aesthetic and religious connotations. According to Carol Tattersall, The Happy Prince and Other Tales successfully mislead the public that it is innocent of any intention to undermine established standards of living or writing. Tattersall’s argument is based on comparing the first collection to Wilde’s second, A House of Pomegranates, which was perceived as “offensive and immoral” (136). On the other hand, William Butler Yeats states in his introduction to The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde that overall the reviewers of The Happy Prince and Other Tales were hostile because of Wilde’s aesthetic views (ixxvi). But Yeats overlooks the fact that Wilde was very pleased and proud, dashing notes to friends and reviewers and signing copies to many people (Tattersall 129). In general, the reception of Wilde’s first collection was more positive than that of the second because it was milder and more subtle in its controversial themes.

This essay highlights The Happy Prince’s advantageous use of conventions of the fairy tale genre to stress critical issues of the Victorian period: the challenge of the established Christian socio-moral order, the rising of the bourgeois industrial society, and the advent of aestheticism as a response. Using the close reading technique supported by the Victorian socio-historical background, the analysis establishes that the criticism proceeds by double associations. Firstly, the clear structure of the tale, enriched by a plethora of aesthetical features and suitable narrative processes, is propitious for children’s access to a message calling for more human generosity. Meanwhile, subtle analogies to the Christian imagery appear blurred by paradoxical elements. This prevents a definite religious interpretation from adults to which those messages are intended. Secondly, in connection with aestheticism, a social and moral criticism takes the form of a satire of the utilitarian vision of the bourgeoisie and a questioning of the common Victorian beliefs: the link between beauty and moral integrity, as well as the moral code of femininity. Finally, the utilitarian discourse and the disapproval of the research for pleasure from beauty merging with a hedonist vision, advocate an “art for art’s sake” free of these respective considerations.