In addition to the Sapphic lyrical piece I got to read this week, I endeavored The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson. I was pretty excited to start this piece because the exploration of the duality of man is something that I have always found to be an interesting aspect of literature (not even just in literature, cinema, music, all forms of art seem to have their own way of expressing this concept). I find it particularly fascinating because it is one of those things that make art so innately human and can appeal to all readers. We have all struggles with the bad and good within us and think that it is safe to say many wish we could just remove the ugly parts. sometimes. While there is a moral to the story of balance in the individual, it’s also relevant that we look deeper; we can see that this piece also serves to make a comment on society. To provide some backstory, Dr. Jekyll seeks to separate the “bad” parts of himself which ultimately leads to his downfall. The piece brings up an excellent point of light in the darkness and the necessity of one for the existence of the other. But that is the obvious aspect of the story that most people can interpret from the piece upon their read through. Instead, it can be beneficial to interpret the transitions that were occurring in Europe as there was increased class mobility and changing gender roles but there was also anxiety surrounding much of the continent as a result of an economic depression so we can understand how and why this may have actually been a conversation about societal expectations. Not only were there many transitions that took place during this time, but this was an era of scientific advancement and we can see the push and pull of humanity regarding science between Hyde and some of the other characters in the story. A good example of Jekyll struggling with his humanity, or perhaps better stated is the characters that represent humanity, are his interactions with Lanyon and Utterson. Utterson, tasked with executing Jekyll’s will, brings up his dislike for Hyde stating, the he “never approved of [the will] … [and has] been learning something of young Hyde … [and what he] heard was abominable” (Stevenson). In this scene, Jekyll asks Utterson to change subjects and promises that the moment he chooses, he “can be rid of Mr. Hyde” (Stevenson). Of course, as readers, we know that Jekyll will not be rid of Hyde, but this is a great example of the struggle we talked about earlier. Jekyll ignores calls of his friends and instead continues to pursue science (and as we later discuss, indulgence) leaving his humanity behind. There are many examples of Lanyon’s disdain for Hyde and honestly, too many to count – Afterall, Lanyon and Hyde essentially end their friendship over the dispute of Hyde’s existence. Lanyon refers to Jekyll's practice as "unscientific balderdash" and Jekyll pushes comments such as that off, referring to his old friend as an "ignorant, blatant pedant [and that he] was never more disappointed in any man than Lanyon” (Stevenson). These exchanges are great examples of Jekyll ignoring the call of humanity and resigning into his experiments and indulgence. Moving past the battle between humanity and science, this text and the characters of Jekyll and Hyde serve to comment on society. Jekyll, is an example of the model Victorian man: educated, wealthy, respected in his community, and well-liked while Hyde is the opposite of that. While we don't know exactly what Hyde gets up to in his free time, we do know that he kills someone and that is a decent basis to start analysis for the character. We know Hyde appeals to two base passions: fear and hatred as learned from Jekyll as he states that “that child of Hell had nothing human; nothing lived in him but fear and hatred” (Stevenson). So, on one side of the coin we have the ideal Victorian man and on the other, some hell child. Jekyll has responsibilities as a result of who he is in society so when he notices these desires he has; he creates Hyde as a way of escaping these responsibilities and allowing himself to indulge in whatever he may like. So, this story serves as a way of commenting on the expectations of society – because Jekyll feels he can’t indulge, he creates a monster that ends up taking over his life. While one can argue that the moral of this story may be that by indulging in shameful acts can lead to one’s total submission to such, I don’t think that’s the main point being made here. I believe that Jekyll felt forced by his responsibilities to create a whole different person to partake in activities that may be deemed shameful (I'm talking about things outside of the blatant murder that occurs—I don’t believe Jekyll create with the intention of committing murder). I think the text serves better as a commentary on society and how it forces people to make decisions as Jekyll does that it does as cautionary tale of indulgence. There are also blatant references to the duality of mankind, but I don't think that the main purpose of the Jekyll/Hyde persona (I think that it may be a function of the duo, but I think they better serve as juxtaposition to each other in commenting on society). Instead, I think that it is better reflected in the push and pull between science (or I should better state "bad science" as we are specifically referring to the unstable practices of Jekyll) and humanity. Ultimately, I believe the text strives to show how society's impositions can lead people to create greater monsters within themselves when they are unable to act freely. Here is a link to the text, unfortunately, there are no page numbers to reference: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/43/43-h/43-h.htm I also used some of Hope Jennings’s notes to steer my analysis: https://prezi.com/nuscplrwmx5n/fin-de-siecle-masculinities-monsters-doubles-and-male-friendships/?utm_campaign=share&token=cba0e6ad1ec3815171c6bd752e9238fccdacf96e0fa45a47f291d2c35a0111a1&utm_medium=copy
1 Comment
Jordan Ann Stocker
5/25/2020 12:02:12 pm
you have some very interesting insights into what the story represents, struggling with the "bad" parts of your self is I believe a universal theme that everyone can understand and relate to. My take was that hyde represented the animal nature of humans that people want to suppress.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |