A More Macabre Turn

It might be just that it's late at night and I've read one too many dark short stories, but I can't stop thinking about Gloucester's eyes.

Photo Credit: goto10 under cc license

When I saw the 2008 PBS adaptation of King Lear starring Ian McKellen, I was shocked at how graphically they portrayed the removal of Gloucester's eyes. And now, whether I want to or not, I have the image of his eyeless face seared into my soul.

My question, though, is how much of this representation is necessary? Certainly this is a scene in the play with the potential to deal in spectacle, letting the audience see Gloucester blinded in a way they never saw Oedipus do to himself, for instance. How much do we need this particular spectacle to evince the feelings we have when Gloucester says in act IV, "I have no way, and therefore want no eyes"? More importantly, what do we think of choices in adaptation of this scene considering how unflinchingly visual our culture has become? Does our current cultural emphasis on vision make this scene all the more painful for us to the watch?

Basically, this particular strain of thought has taken me from adaptation theory to reader response, to disability studies in one very tiring night. This topic kind of gives me the willies, but I'm still drawn to it. I don't know if it'll be my final paper, but it's something I've been exploring tonight.