This discussion this week surrounding Oscar Wilde’s Salome: A Tragedy in One Act and the illustrations made by Aubrey Beardsley was really interesting. Beardsley’s illustrations were so different from the ones we have looked at in The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and A Christmas Carol. Also unlike those other illustrated texts, Wilde clearly did not approve of Beardsley’s illustrations which added another level of interest - I couldn’t help but feel bad for Wilde for having his work illustrated in a way that he did not agree with, but that raises a lot of questions regarding who has ownership over literature. While Wilde did not approve of Beardsley’s interpretation, is his interpretation any less worthy of analyzing? I thought about that a lot throughout today’s class. 

Kisha brought up the concept of the male gaze in her discussion of Beardsley’s illustrations which I think is an incredibly apt interpretation. Many of the illustrations presented Salome in an incredibly sexual way that is clearly meant to be viewed from a heterosexual male perspective. This overt sexuality that is identified through gaze theory is something that is still prominent in our own cultural moment, so it was interesting in seeing how the male gaze could be applied to Beardsley’s illustrations. Something that I find particularly of interest in this concept of the male gaze within these illustrations is the fact that Wilde himself was gay. Gaze theory is anchored by the fact that media is meant to please the heterosexual male, so I am wondering if that disconnect between Beardsley’s assumed audience and Wilde’s own identity is partially to blame for Wilde’s disapproval of the illustrations.