| Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde - Robert Louis Stevenson Seems to me that the popular conception of this story misses the point a bit. It's not about good vs. evil -- not really. It's a tale of social repression and liberty. Dr. Jekyll discovers a duality within himself -- he states that he is "inclined by nature to industry, fond of the respect of the wise and good among my fellowmen..." but also that he has an "...impatient gaiety of disposition" that runs contrary to his desire to be esteemed and respected amongst his fellowmen. And so in truth it is not a dichotomy of Good and Evil -- not in a universal, philosophical sense of those words. Rather it is a dichotomy of Respect and Passion. The duality Jekyll finds within himself is of this nature: he truly loves the respect of those around him, but that necessarily means sacrificing "undignified" behavior. On the other hand, he truly loves to be undignified, free and unfettered, but that means sacrificing the respect of those he esteems. Stop right there. And so what leads him to what he later describes as "shameful acts" is not so much a desire to do evil, or even a love for vices, but a simple passionate nature. This speaks of the Victorian set of virtues -- reserved, under control, calm, wise, respected, anything but passionate and impetuous -- more than a more true virtuous nature -- full of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness. And so Jekyll is condemned by his society to see his more passionate nature as shameful. Jekyll's endeavour is to disconnect these two halves of himself -- this, in itself, could be a worthy experiment, but the danger comes because it is one that his performed upon (and curiously connected to) his own psyche, and there is a grave conflict within his psyche. In endeavoring to disconnect these two personalities, he is recognizing that neither one is morally superior to the other -- one is simply accepted by society while the other is rejected. A passionate and undignified man is not by nature more sinful or wicked than a reserved and dignified man. I would say he believes this on paper, but not in his heart. Deep down, he is a product of his society, and believes, along with those he esteems, and dignity and reservation are virtues, while passion and recklessness are vices. Yet perhaps this book is a tale that conforms to, instead of reacts to, Victorian morality. Edward Hyde turns out to be uncontrollably wicked, murderous, and evil. Perhaps the point is that there is no liberty, lack of dignity, "gaiety of disposition" without wickedness, and virtue lies in reservation and bridling the beast within. That Jekyll unleashes a monster because he refuses to recognize it as a monster, believing what I wrote above -- that if one could disconnect the two halves, both could live their lives well. If that's the case, then the book is based on a lie, and one of the lies I hate the most -- that passion is ugly and deformed and should be killed before it can kill. I remember another story- one of a man who lived in the desert, dressed in camel's hair and ate locusts. A man who was passionate about doing good -- he was called the best of all men. And of others around him, pious reserved men who kept the law and were respected in everyone's eyes. They were called white-washed tombs. |