In both Oedipus the King and Minority Report, sight and blindness exist as motifs, with the question of, which characters are truly “blind”? For there is physical blindness that prevents one from seeing the world around them, and there is a lack of vision, in which characters choose not to, or are incapable of perceiving the truth. Characters in the two texts lack the ability to see in both senses of the term. Self-inflicted blindness is prevalent in Oedipus the King and Minority Report, resulting in tension between those who choose to see and those who choose to be blind.
Throughout the play, Oedipus makes the choice to be blind, both from a mental, and a literal stance, causing tension between him and those able to see. In searching for the killer of the previous king, Laius, Oedipus neglects to acknowledge that he could be a possible suspect, even when told that he was the murderer by esteemed prophet Tiresias. This interaction leads to a large amount of tension between the two characters, as Oedipus insults the prophet, mocking his physical inability to see, only to be insulted with the same amount of malice at the king’s own inability to see the truth. “I’m blind, you say; you mock at that! I say you see and still are blind.” (Sophocles, 23). The hubris possessed by the
…show more content…
Sight (and the lack of it) is a featured motif of both stories, present in all major conflicts of them. With that motif comes the choice to be blind, promoting the phrase, “ignorance is bliss”. The validity of that statement is called into question as the plots of Oedipus the King and Minority Report come unravelled, and tensions between characters who choose (at least to some extent) to be blind, and characters who see all, rise. Self-inflicted blindness causes irreparable tensions between those who choose to see, and those who do not in the two