Jump to content

The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde


hume

Recommended Posts

The plot of this tale is so renowned it doesn't bear a synposis. Just to say that what compelled me to read the book was the TV adaptation; starring Cheryl Ladd and Michael Caine. it's strange to see the two interpretations of the doctor. For instance in the novel Jekyll revels in his discovery of Hyde, even lauds the vile sense of freedom mr Hyde gives him, whereas in the screenplay he loathes his dual personality. The book also never explains what sparked Jekyll's interest in his studies or how Hyde could be on friendly terms with a politican, let alone guilty of his murder.

 

It's documented that Robert wrote this story in two days, while sick with fever and in places the absence of explainations for actions and circumstance, could be attributed to his illness.

 

I urge anyone reading this novel to also see the screenplay.

Edited by Kell
Inserted ALL the capitals!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this book about seven years ago, then saw the Broadway play (though on TV), four or so years ago. The book was fantastic (the play as well), though I would certainly need to re-read the book and I would most likely be interested in reading over the screenplay for a comparison/contrast session. Very true points you've made, hume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

A necessary premise: I don't like R.L. Stevenson. The way he writes irks me and I could never finish "Treasure Island". Yet I loved this; I guess it goes to show that occasionally, a superb plot can make up for (what in my opinion are) stylistic deficiencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My tuppence: brilliant story, not particularly well-told. At least (unlike the dreaded "Treasure Island") I actually finished this one - the need to know the resolution of the plot won over the tedium of the style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another of my favourite books, although I always forget about it...

 

I agree with BookJumper that the style isn't all there but when you take into context of the novel it doesn't matter.

 

I studied it when I was at uni and ended up having a custom essay title so I could write about it. I've never read another novel which says so much without saying anything at all. The possibilities of who Mr. Hyde is and the controversial issues it then points to in what, 1886? Unfortunately, we take a lot of that undertoned writing for granted nowadays because we're freely allowed to write and speak about anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I read this story in one evening and was fairly disappointed ... I was hoping for a huge scare but it didn't do anything ... Edgar Allan Poe's William Wilson sent shivers up my spine - this story didn't! I think it would have benefited from being a proper novel with more description and atmosphere!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this story in one evening and was fairly disappointed ... I was hoping for a huge scare but it didn't do anything ... Edgar Allan Poe's William Wilson sent shivers up my spine - this story didn't! I think it would have benefited from being a proper novel with more description and atmosphere!

 

I think you've missed the point somewhat. I don't think Poe is a scary writer, nor do I think Stevenson is and I credit this to the fact that we aren't scared of things which people living a couple hundred years ago were.

 

I think if you read Jekyll and Hyde with the expectations of a twenty first century reader you'll get barely anything from it. The ending for one is pretty poor when you level it with other science type novels. However, when you put it into context it's frightful and controversial and a fantastic little read. This goes for many classics, very few in my opinion manage to succeed as great novels in their time, and then as great novels in modern time without allowing for context.

 

It's as Ben Mines says, "What's wrong with Treasure Island? If you allow that it's an adventure book for Victorian schoolboys, it's perfectly readable."

 

Same goes here.

 

;) x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I missed the point at all ... What I am saying is that, in my opinion, it would have made a better short novel than a short story, as I think the complexities of the plot didn't suit a short story I thought the double personality theme was glossed over and a novel going into more detail over the exploits of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. would have been better. I was disappointed by the length and would have liked more. My point is that it was a good story but felt it would have been better as a detailed novel. Sort of on the size of Hound of the Baskervilles. I felt a little like when I finished it: 'Yeah ... is that it? Where's the rest of it?'

I do think Victorian literature more scary than modern literature ... Stokers Dracula for a start. Also I loved Dickens Signalman story too.

The story about the grave robbers was scarier and was written by the same author ...

Poe on the other hand wrote a short story on a similar theme and tackled it in a better way than R L S did, and Poe DOES send shivers down my spine and he was also an author of Victorian times.

All I am saying is ... I didn't find that particular story scary as I was led to believe.

Edited by Suzanna Addison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have The Complete Tales and Poems of Edgar Allen Poe and have only managed one story in it so far (The Pit and the Pendulum), and it was creepy! I certainly find him to be a scary writer.

 

I don't recall finding Jekyll and Hyde particularly scary, but I really enjoyed it and thought it was very well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's wrong with Treasure Island? If you allow that it's an adventure book for Victorian schoolboys, it's perfectly readable.

As I said, I'm afraid I found it incredibly tedious. This is nothing to do with when and for whom it was written; as I've detailedly explained elsewhere, my reading habits are not curtailed by year or intended audience. I am willing to make allowances for old-fashionedness if a book isn't recent but there is a difference between old-fashionedness and pure boredom.

 

If a book deserves to be a classic it should speak to readers regardless of their placement in time, and this really didn't. If anything, it rocked me to sleep. Ferenc Molnar's "The P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Synopsis by Amazon:

Everyone has a dark side. Dr Jekyll has discovered the ultimate drug. A chemical that can turn him into something else. Suddenly, he can unleash his deepest cruelties in the guise of the sinister Hyde. Transforming himself at will, he roams the streets of fog-bound London as his monstrous alter-ego. It seems he is master of his fate. It seems he is in complete control. But soon he will discover that his double life comes at a hideous price ...

Dr. Jekyll is a scientist with a dark secret - he has created a drug which transforms him into his sinister dark side. At first this is OK, but then Hyde, his alter-ego starts making trouble and goes as far as committing murder. Jekyll's friends start to get suspicious when Mr. Hyde is seen coming and going from Jekyll's home - and then the hideous secret is out....

I really enjoyed this book. It explores human nature and good and evil - and ultimately the choices we make. The book was exciting and gripping. It is original and well written - clearly a classic.

Stevenson's characters were great! I liked the fact Mr. Hyde was written in such a way that I really didn't like him - it is nice to come across a book that sparks emotion and feelings, and this book did that.

I didn't find this book scary, just a great read.

9/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I very much wanted to read Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde, but then I realized that I already know the plot and the plot twist - I think everyone does, by now, since the story has been retold in a hundred different mediums - so I didn't think there would be much left for me to enjoy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read this a little while back and thought it was OK. I knew the plot beforehand as it has been remade millions of times. Weirdly Mr Hyde's first name is "Edward", I didn't expect him to have a first name

 

I have to agree that the Grave Robbers story was a lot scarier.

 

There must have been something in the air around that time what with Stevenson, Wilde, Stoker, Doyle all knowing each other

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I am the opposite, I enjoyed Treasure Island, but did not enjoy J&H at all. I have to admit, I have a soft spot for pirate stories. It was my first classic I read as an adult, and I gave my copy to my dad. He reads mostly books about Indians and mountain men, and does not like flowery wording. He enjoyed it. I have since convinced him to read several classics, all adventure themed aimed at young boys, and he has enjoyed most of them. He is reading Huck Finn at the moment.

 

I was interested at the thought of everyone "committing mass plank-diving suicide." It does hold comedic value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I very much wanted to read Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde, but then I realized that I already know the plot and the plot twist - I think everyone does, by now, since the story has been retold in a hundred different mediums - so I didn't think there would be much left for me to enjoy...

 

See, I don't agree with people thinking like this. If this would be the case, one would rarely ever re-read a book. The story has been told a million times, and for that reason alone, this book IS worth reading. To see what the original story is like, not the changes and interpretations all those other mediums you talk about have made. This is one of the stories I have read, because I wanted to see what the original was like.. and I did like it, wasn't quite what I expected, I think I thought it would be more horrific, but it was just slightly creepy. Plus, it was quite short, not a bad thing necessarily though. Think I might want to go do a re-read some day, because it's been years since I have read this one and am a little hazy about what I exactly thought of it. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Style-wise, I found J&H every bit as tedious as "Treasure Island"; however since the plot of J&H is much more interesting and the philosophical ramifications much deeper and more relevant, I was compelled to finish it in a way I wan't compelled to finish "Treasure Island". Though I felt he could have told the story of J&H better, I still cared what happened at the end; for all I cared, the characters of "Treasure Island" could have committed mass plank-diving suicide.

I completely agree with you on this. His writing style is dry as sticks and the literary equivalent of chewing cardboard for me. However, the J&H story is very interesting and I loved that Jekyll embraces his darker nature which is unleashed in Mr Hyde, rather than feeling repulsed by him as he does in any film adaptation I've ever seen of this story (which changes the nature of the story, I'm afraid!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I read this years ago when we studied it for GCSE and, even though the rest of the class hated it, I loved it.

 

I bought my own copy about six months ago and re-read it immediately. It's such a classic plot, and so famous. I'd definitely count it among my favourite horror/thrillers.

 

A friend of mine is studying English Literature at university and they discussed Jekyll and Hyde. Something she emailed me has always stuck in my mind - her lecturer commented how Jekyll could be gay, and that Hyde is his subconcious expressing his 'darker side' - bearing in mind when it was written.

I just thought it was an interesting idea :roll:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...