THREE ACTS IN A PLAY

2. Write about the scene in which Gloucester’s eyes are plucked out. Obviously, it serves the symbolic purpose of allowing Gloucester to “see” [the truth] better after he has been blinded. But the scene is also graphically violent. Even when Oedipus gouges out his eyes at the end of Sophocles’ play, it occurs off-stage. Consider the place of graphic violence in art. What purpose does this particular incident serve? Is it gratuitous, or is it necessary for the meaning of the play? What about slasher films? What about Grand Theft Auto? When is there a place for graphic violence? When is there not?

Though the scene in which Gloucester’s eyes are plucked is rather grotesque, I believe that it is justified. Because it is so graphic, it truly shows the insanity and utter ridiculousness of the sisters and their husbands as well. Thus this particular incident in a way can show the painful process that it takes for one to be able to see the truth- the same as what has happened to Lear, except that in his case it is more emotional pain than physical. Both of the men are the victims of a great deal of pain and violence- Gloucester, physical violence and pain, while Lear, emotional. I believe violence can be justified, especially if it is intended to show realism. For example, in movies such as “Saving Private Ryan”, the violence is realistic- showing the horrors of WWII. War movies, holocaust movies- etc; these are and should be violent for a reason. Though it is good to maintain some level of shock when one sees violence and thus should not be completely desensitized to it, one should also know what goes on in the world and should not be completely sheltered. HOWEVER, things like slasher films or Grand Theft Auto are gratuitous violence. They are not necessary at all. This doesn’t mean that they should be illegalized or banned, as that would violate a right to free expression and speech, but they are simply “indulgences” (of violence… somehow).