---Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, The ~ Export

"Idealistic young scientist Henry Jekyll struggles to unlock the secrets of the soul. Testing chemicals in his lab, he drinks a mixture he hopes will isolate—and eliminate—human evil. Instead it unleashes the dark forces within him, transforming him into the hideous and murderous Mr. Hyde.

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde dramatically brings to life a science-fiction case study of the nature of good and evil and the duality that can exist within one person. Resonant with psychological perception and ethical insight, the book has literary roots in Dostoevsky’s “The Double” and Crime and Punishment. Today Stevenson’s novella is recognized as an incisive study of Victorian morality and sexual repression, as well as a great thriller." from the Publisher

INTERESTING LINKS
On line Reading With Chapter Guides
Biography of Robert Louis Stevenson

DISCUSSION SCHEDULE
April 1 through April 8	Chapter One through Chapter Five
April 9 through April 15	Chapter Six through Chapter Ten
April 16 through April 22	Epilogue

Discussion Leader: Bill H

B&N Bookstore | Books Main Page | Book Discussion Guidelines | Suggest a Book for Discussion
We sometimes excerpt quotes from discussions to display on pages on SeniorNet's site or in print documents.
If you do NOT wish your words quoted, please contact Books.

April 1. April Fool's Day! This seems like an appropriate date to start the discussion of

"The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde."

It appears Mr. Hyde made a fool of Jekyll for bringing him into existence.

Most of us are familiar with the novel and can recall the two personalities Stevenson created. One good. One bad. As I read the novel, I couldn't help but theorize that perhaps this story was this the author's way of expressing belief that a bit of Mr. Hyde was hiding in all of us.

Let's be honest with our selves, haven't there been times when we would have liked to cast off our inhibitions and acted with the reckless abandon of Jekyll's other self? I must qualify that remark by saying not with the complete recklessness of Hyde.

So here is a chance to express your thoughts about Stevenson's novel, or telling us about the times when you would have liked to have been a Mr. Hyde! You can do this by signing on for the discussion. I do hope to read what you have to say about good and evil.

My sincere thanks to Marjorie for creating a fine heading.

Bill H

I've seen several versions of the movie but have never read the book. Sign me up!

Marni

Bill H,

I have never read the book either. I would like to join up.

Marjorie, I love the header.

Marni and Hats,

Welcome to the discussion. And now you are both signed up. Yes, I think Marjorie did a great job on the heading as well.

I would like to add that you can read the story on line, if you wish.

Bill H

Yes! Yes! I'll be there! Oh! One of my old time favorites. I love it.

Me too Bill, I will gladly be there. I only saw the movie but it stayed in my memory for so very long and I don't know why.

Scrawler and Eloise, Welcome! I'm so happy you two joined in.

This story has stayed with me all through the years, also. I suppose it is due to the heavy drama of all the movies.

Well, we have five participants including myself. So it is a go!.

If you wish, you can read it on line by using the link in the heading. That web site provides chapter guides for the story, making it easier to keep pace with the discussion.

Bill H

Oh, count me in. This book is irresistible.

Kleo

KleoP, Welcome. I'm so happy you signed up. I remember your fine posts from other discussions I had.

It seems a fine group are assembling for this discussion.

Bill H

I do believe that I am kin to Jekyl and Hyde. I can feel my fangs grow often, right out of the blue. I need a good discussion but please Bill, no DNA testing.

OK, Andrea, no DNA. Thank you for joining in and you are most welcome.

It seems like we have a fine group assembles here. Should make for a good discussion.

Bill H

But will be joining you ..I wonder how young I was when I read this story and what age when I saw the movie I have to say both sort of haunted me since most books I read had nice characters ...anna

Hi, Anna, and welcome to the discussion. I'm looking forward to the fine posts of all the folks we have here.

I must admit that it was the movies that stayed with me all through the years, especially the one Frederick March stared in. He won an Oscar for that performance

Bill H

I never saw the one with Frederick March it was Spencer Tracy and Ingrid Bergman ..I recall and over the years I think I have met a few Jeyklls and Hydes although a couple of them turned out to be bi-polar . Perhaps Stevenson knew of some and did a story about how it could happen...Looking forward to visiting this book again. anna

Anna, I believe I am much older than you. However, I happened to see the one with Fredric March and Mariam Hopkins not too long ago on TCM. It was far superior than the one with Spencer Tracy and Ingrid Bergman. Although, Ingrid Bergman turned in a much better acting performance than Mariam Hopkins in portring Ivy Pearson, and the special effects of the change of Jekyll into Hyde were also superior.

The performance of Fredric March is unforgettable. If you get a chance, view this movie. It was released in 1931. And I was just about old enough to see it but my mother said "No."

Bill H

I saw on television the silent film version (1920) starring John Barrymore. That was a terrific version.

Marni

I've seen several movie versions, but never actually read the story. I'm always fascinated by stories that reveal the hidden soul of man--such as "The Picture of Dorian Gray" where the "Hyde" side of his nature is shown in a painting which he keeps hidden from the world while his living flesh is spared the effects of his evil deeds. I would be interested in a discussion which focuses on the duality of human nature and the results of our failure to control the dark side of our nature.

Marni, I missed the silent version of the movie with Barrymore. I'll keep watch for that. It would be great to see John Barrymore playing that role. Were the special effects in that silent movie of a high-quality?

I saw some silent movies of Lon Chaney--the man of a thousand faces--and they where excellent.

Horselover, good to see you here. I watched the Dorian Gray movie a couple of nights ago, I thought of the painting as reflecting the soul of Dorian Gray. Would a portrait such as this reflect the soul of most of man/woman kind?

Perhaps the failure to control our nature is governed by brain chemistry. Many obsessive compulsive patients can testify to this. Remember the movie with Jack Nicholson as he asked his annalist is this "As Good as It Gets?"

Horselover, I hope this means you are going to join us here. This discussion will allow you to express your views on the duality of human nature and the dark side of humans.

Bill H

Folks, if your book is like mine, it has chapter names instead of numbers. But I gave them numbers as well by printing them on a blank page in the back of my book. I guess it is easier to show than to explain.

 
Chapter 1. The Story of the Door.           
Chapter 2. Search for Mr. Hyde.         
Chapter 3. Dr, Jekyll at Ease.              
Chapter 4. The Carew Murder Case.   
Chapter 5. Incident of the Letter.         
Chapter 6. Remarkable Incident of Dr.Lanyon  
Chapter 7. Incident at the Window. 
Chapter 8. The Last Night 
Chapter 9. Dr. Lanyon's Narrative 
Chapter 10.Henry Jekyll's Full Statement of the Case

Bill H

The special effects in the Barrymore version were unsophisticated and amusing. We're so used to fabulous seamless special effects today. That and horeselover's remark "failure to control the dark side of our nature" makes me think of the incredible special effects in the final Star Wars film. Movies have come a long way! But some silent movies are still fun and interesting.

"As Good as It Gets" - Was that the one where Nicholson tossed his neighbor's dog down the laundry chute?

Marni, yes, Nicholson did throw his neighbor's dog down the chute. But he latter came to love the dog.

Bill H

In my opinion, Dr. Jekyll has a new competitor and that's Sam Johanek. I just finished The Basenji Revelation. An amazing read. There are few books written in the psychological thriller genre that deserve special attention and this is one of them. It's called 'The Basenji Revelation' and is a powerful drama, which although supernatural in its core never escapes our actual human reality. The story is actually quite interesting. It combines elements of both the mythical (for those that didn't know - the Basenji is an ancient African breed) and the modern as it charmed me with a rich history. In the end, I felt the author's message going beyond just the simple mystery and the unexplained. I highly recommend it - a very, very good read indeed.

Ksickler, welcome to the discussion and thank you for telling us about "The Basenji Revelation" I think I'd like to read that one. I love novels like that.

I hope you join us in this discussion. I'm sure your post will be interesting.

Bill H

ksickler - You reminded me of two Basenji dogs who lived with a couple several doors down on my street some years ago. The dogs escaped from their house every once in awhile and it made me nervous. I heard that they were originally bred to hunt lions in Africa. I watched the dogs in action once when they had escaped. They worked instinctively as a team together and went after another dog right in front of my house. One Basenji crossed to the other side of the street. They came at the dog from two sides. Luckily the owner of the Basenjis came after them just then and took them home. They seemed quite fierce. They don't bark apparently. I wonder what would have happened to that dog they were after if their owner hadn't shown up. Luckily, they and their family moved away shortly after.

Bill, I do hope to join this discussion. However, although our basic nature is probably controlled by brain chemistry, as you suggest, I think the majority of us manage to keep our dark side in check. Obsessive Compulsive Disorder results from brain chemistry gone haywire, but most compulsives harm themselves more than others. In the movie, "As Good As It Gets," the other characters come to understand this and are able to forgive the Nicholson character--even the dog. But "Hyde" and "Dorian Gray" are more about the existence of evil than about compulsions. I look forward to that aspect of the discussion.

Horselover,

" But "Hyde" and "Dorian Gray" are more about the existence of evil than about compulsions. I look forward to that aspect of the discussion."

Yes, I agree with what you posted and that aspect of the discussion should make for a very good exchange of views on the topic.

There is so much that can be said about good and evil as it exists not only in the world but in the whole human race. I will offer examples of this throughout the discussion. I am looking forward to the many posts of the participants.

Bill H.

The theme of the duality of human nature is one of many in this book, but there is a question racing around my cob webbed brain: Why did Stevenson. feel he had to write about such a theme in the first place. What was going on in his world that he felt compelled to write about the duality of human nature? And perhaps an even more important question are we living in the same world today?

"The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, published in January of 1886, sold 40,000 copies in six months in Britain. Stevenson said later that its plot was revealed to him in a dream. The mystery of Jekyll and Hyde is gradually revealed through the narratives of Mr Enfield, Mr Utterson, Dr Lanyon, and Jekyll's butler Poole. Utterson, Jekyll's lawyer, discovers that the nasty Mr. Edward Hyde is the heir of Dr. Jekyll's fortune. Hyde is suspected of a murder. Utterson and Poole break into Jekyll's laboratory and find the lifeless Hyde. Two documents explain the mystery: Jekyll's old friend, the late Dr. Lanyon, tells that Jekyll and Hyde are the same person. In his own account Jekyll tells that to separate the good and evil aspects of his nature, he invented a transforming drug. His evil self takes the form of the repulsive Mr Hyde. Jekyll's supplies of drugs run out and he finds himself slipping involuntarily into being Hyde. Jekyll kills himself, but the last words of the confession are written by his alter ego: "Here then, as I lay down the pen and proceed to seal up my confession, I bring the life of that unhappy Dr. Jekyll to an end."

The story has been considered an criticism of Victorian double morality, but it can be read as a comment on Charles Darwin's book The Origin of Species - Dr. Jekyll turns in his experiment the evolution backwards and reveals the primitive background of a cultured human being. Henry James admired Stevenson's "genuine feeling for the perpetual moral question, a fresh sense of the difficulty of being good and the brutishness of being bad". ('Robert Louis Stevenson' by Henry James in Century Magazine 35, April 1888) Modern readers have set the story against Freudian sexual theories and the split in man's psyche between ego and instinct, although the "split" takes the form of a physical change, rather than inner dissociation. The conflict between Jekyll and Hyde reveals also era's class phobias. Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde has become an icon of popular culture and adapted among others into screen over 20 times. The story of double personality and metamorphosis appealed strongly to Victorian readers. The novel was partly based on Stevenson's and W.E. Henley's play DEACON BRODIA (1880), where an Edinburgh councilor is publicly respectable person but privately a thief and rakehell. The basic theme of true identity have attracted such writers as Mary Shelley (Frankenstein, 1818), Hans Christian Andersen ('The Ugly Duckling', 1845), Fyodor Dostoyevsky (Crime and Punishment, 1866), Bram Stoker (Dracula, 1897), Franz Kafka ('Metamorphosis', 1915)."

Scrawler, As is suggested here, it might have been the Victorian culture that motivated Stevenson to think about the hidden side of human nature. He was also in ill health for much of his life; writing about such adventures into evil might have been his way of acting out his fantasies. As for the world today, in some respects it is quite the opposite of Victorian times. Almost anything can be discussed, or even acted out, in public.

Not to mention Oscar Wilde, of course.

It's interesting that Stevenson attributes the inspiration for the book to a dream, like Mary Shelley's for Frankenstein. I wonder if Wilde was influenced by Stevenson?

Stevenson and Wilde might also, in addition to being influenced by Shelley and Dostoevsky, have been influenced by the Victorian interest in physiognomy, the belief that the truly virtuous are angelic to gaze upon and that ugly people are physically repugnant due to the nature of their soul.

Phrenology, the theory that the shape of one's head indicates all sorts of things (I remember first learning about it in Henri Verneuil's movie The 25th Hour, a superb movie), was a very serious matter to late 19th century Victorians (and Americans).

Blech.

I'm not sure about the tie-in to Origins, but will think about it as I read, and think about Jekyll and Hyde in relation to how Victorian England viewed Origins. It will be interesting. There is also Darwin's The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex to consider.

Darwin was willing to apply his theory of evolution by means of natural selection directly to humans. Other scientists have always had difficulties with this, generally, but not always clouded by religious viewpoints.

This will be a lot to think about while reading this little book. But we're not starting until April! I thought it would be sooner!

Kleo

Folks, I have just realized that two religious occurrence will take place during the scheduled discussion. They are Passover, Good Friday and the Easter weekend, and some of the participants in the discussion will be observing the religious aspects of these days and, of course, the preparation for them and will not have as much time or inclination to post as they ordinarily would have.

Therefore, with your indulgence, I have asked that another week be added to the discussion schedule in order to give the participants that are celebrating these religious events additional time to post their thoughts.

Bill H

Bill, Another week with you is always welcome--and the rest of the discussion group, of course.

Another week with you all would be welcomed.

Thanks for all the information. But I still wonder why "a dual personality" would appeal to those living in the Victorian era. Were they questioning their own existance?

The Victorian era was a time of change. But when Stevenson wrote his book people were beginning to question the new ideas brought to them through the new technology and the ethical questions that went along with those new ideas.

Aren't we doing the same today over the "cloning" issue?

The era was characterized by an apparent contradiction between the widespread cultivation of an outward appearance of dignity and restraint and the prevalence of social phenomena that included prostitution, child labour, and an imperialist colonising economy. Even fashions were restrictive. Maybe the idea of a "dual personality" appealed to them because they encountered this phenomenon in their daily lives.

It was a time of industrialization and the rise of the middle class and middle class morality. Plus, as we see in the novels of Dickens, it was a time of great disparity between the rich and the poor. The upper classes, whether they displayed their cruelty outwardly like Hyde, lived and maintained their life style at the expense of the poor and downtrodden. Like Dickens, maybe this was what Stevenson was trying to portray.

For the most part the nineteenth century saw the European nations carve up the world with their empires. These various nations were in some way connected with Queen Victoria. She had a grand plan that someday all nations would be under her control or under control of her family. While Queen Victoria promised to take care of these "foreign" empires, Britian was suffering from the effects of "taking care" of these empires at the expense of their own people suffering. We see it today in America as we promise to give the people of Iraq what some of our own people don't have and can't afford. I see this as a dual personality of a nation and since Stevenson was well-traveled for his time, I'm sure he saw the effects both in England and foreign countries. One more reason to write about dual-personalities.

Scrawler, I think you posted something about this before. Please do elaborate about Queen Victoria's "grand plan" as I know nothing about it. I do know that her children married various European thrones and etc., but had never heard of it actively referred to as a "grand plan" of hers.

Thanks,

Kleo

Are you talking about

The Empire on which the sun never sets? The British Empire. Perhaps that is what Queen Victoria meant when she talked about the Grand Plan and she came pretty close to it.

Éloïse

Yes, Eloise that's exactly what I mean by Victoria's Grand Plan. Had she succeeded Americans would now be speaking the "Queen's English." But the United States and others put a stop to Her expansion. William H. Seward, Secretary of State during Lincoln's administration recognized China, for example, as a soverign nation and convinced the other European nations that it was better to have China united than divided. He sent the United States fleet to that part of the world to make sure that they got the message.

Later on he purchased Alaska from Russia which brought him some ridicule because it was thought that all Alaska offered was ice and polar bears. But this purchase kept Alaska and the other territories out of the hands of Europeans. He also discouraged Napoleon to re-establish France in Mexico and encouraged Civil War veterans to help Juarz with his struggle for Mexican independence.

After the Civil War the American army and navy were two of the strongest in the world except for England and although Palmerston, the premier of England and Napoleon thought about war with America, cooler heads pevailed; especially when they were concerned that Canada and parts of Mexico might fall into American hands.

You might ask what this has to do with Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. It was all a part of the anxieties in the world in which Stevenson lived and this pessimism is reflected in his writing.

I'm still curious about the phrase "Victoria's Grand Plan," which I have never heard of. I've entered into an on-line search and got zero hits. This means it would be helpful if you could name a book or something that uses this phrase that I could look at, Scrawler. Thanks.

I also don't know anything about Seward recognizing China during Lincoln's presidency. So, what book or books on Queen Victoria? I have read only one biography of her. It reminds me, isn't there a new book on the Opium Wars?

And, yes, it's all relevant, Victorian society, and quite interesting.

Kleo

Can I join as a "maybe"? I am assuming you already have a quorum, so I don't want to commit in total just now. I need to actually "look" at this book and see if it appeals, but I have never read it and would like to. So, can I be a maybe for now, with a certainty to follow?

Scootz, sure you can join as a maybe. That's better than not joining at all! I would have answered your post sooner but I had one of those real busy days.

There is a link in the heading that will take you to an online read complete with numbered chapters. Take a look and see if you like it. Although I do think having the book is better.

The one I have has a great introduction that is worth the price of the book. I only paid $3. 95 for it at my local Barnes and Noble. It's one of their Classic Editions.

BIll H H

Bill, I looked at the BN edition tonite when I was there. I'll pick it up soon and I guess, count me in.

I,too, could not find any reference to Victoria's Grand Plan. However, I did find this:

"Her children and grandchildren stretched all over the globe, reigning as sovereigns or consorts. From the UK, Germany, Romania, Russia, Greece, and Spain her children and grandchildren would change the face of the world."

So even if she did not have a Grand Plan to start with, she certainly succeeded in spreading her influence around the globe.

Yes, there's no doubt that her children were well-placed in the royal families of all of Europe. The one who didn't marry into another European royal family married a Canadian politician, I believe.

Still, it's a more intriguing story if there was indeed have a Victorian "Grand Plan" behind it. Frankly, even if not totally accurate it would make a great conspiracy theory, and I would love to learn more.

It was the most politically intriguing of times and one could learn the history of the world today just by knowing about her designs and what it took to get her children married off like she did. Again, not much if there is no Grand Plan, but quite a bit if there is one.

And scheming is rightfully the world of the royals, why put anything past one? I would love to read about it.

The cheap BN classic sounds good. My household goods are packed up right now, but in them I have a huge, gilt-edged leather bound, illustrated copy of Strange Case. It was a present from someone and it is one of my favorite books to hold while reading out loud to my son, who's now all grown up.

Kleo

Stevenson insisted that Jekyll be pronounced JEEK-ull (JĒ-kəl), as this is the correct Scots pronunciation of the name, but JEK-ull (JE-kəl) remains an accepted and common pronunciation.

I had to check out the posts Since April is the starting date I wondered what you all were talking about. I have read several books about Queen Victoria A long time ago to be sure and may even have the books somewhere in my house since I find it almost impossible to get rid of a book I have read. IF I can find one easily ( unlikely since every inch of extra space holds my books) I will read them again. Perhaps some biographer coined the phrase "GRAND PLAN" when researching Victoria and seeing how her family married and became part of so many other Royal Houses. That was certainly a time when ROYALTY would not consider marrying a commoner, I know my husband's family came from England not too long after the Mayflower ..and our oldest daughter when she was young looked a great deal like Princess Anne ...NOW I know there was no royal background that was known so let us say some royals did procreate beyond the ROYAL throne!

Funny I recall this story when I read it and have personally known several people that turned out to be bi-polar although my mother would have said THEY WERE JUST BORN MEAN which was a truth in some ways.

I am as a rule a very calm person but when I was about 7-8 my younger brother who was about 6 said one day he wanted to be a crook when he grew up I can still recall how incensed I was and how angry and I started to beat him up ..and try to get him to take that remark back and all of a sudden I am sitting on top of his chest ( and I was smaller ) and choking him. I was horrified when I realized that and got up a immediately and while I get angry about things I feel are unfair and wrong I have put aside that kind of anger Frankly it scared me and I have never forgotten how I felt ...

I have to say when I read about some of the crimes committed today ( I know there have always been similiar crimes ) but I feel through our TV's and movies and even our books that are so explicit in how crimes especially murder are committed I cant help but feel we are feeding not the best that is in us but the worse. We are our own Jekyll and Hyde.Now I think I will buy that book from B&N that is where all my extra money goes! anna

I'm going to pick mine up today- I hav a collection of the BN Classics. Bill mentioned the introductions, and they are fabulous. But I might just caution you not to read it before the book, because they tend to be filled with spoilers- at least the ones I have read so far. Forewarned and all that!

Scootz, thank you for the warning.

You're welcome, Hats. Some people don't mind a spoiler, and to others they are right up there with criminal behavior. They ARE excellent, though, I will say that.

You don't have shih tzu, do you by any chance? I knew a gal years ago on aol who had a hats screenname.

Scootz, I don't have one. It's not me. Sorry.

Scootz, Hoooooray!! for deciding to join in. Yes, those introductions of the B&N Classics are great. And they could be book discussions in and of themselves because they present arguments for and against the various novels.

However, they can be spoilers. But I am reading the introduction because it is presenting deeper concepts and thoughts about the story that I would not have been fully aware of, if I had read the novel prior to reading the introduction.

Bill H

Horselover,

"Stevenson insisted that Jekyll be pronounced JEEK-ull (JĒE-kə?l), as this is the correct Scots pronunciation of the name, but JEK-ull (JE-kə?l) remains an accepted and common pronunciation"

If you look closely at this cover illustration of the book that was published in July of 2005, you will see that Jekyll is indeed spelled Jekill in the Scots fashion and the title used is "Mr." not "Doctor" as is characteristic in England and brings forth what you posted.

We considered using this illustration in the heading but decided to go ahead with the more familiar book cover illustration.

Bill H

However, I hasten to add that the posts I have been reading here are a fine prologue for the actual discussion of RLS novel without digging too deeply into the novel itself.

Bill H

Some of the books I've read regarding: William H. Seward are as follows: "William Henry Seward: Lincoln's Right Hand" By John M. Taylor "The Civil War in the United States" By Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels "Booknotes: LifeStories" Brian Lamb "Battle Cry of Freedom" By James M. McPhererson "Dark Lanterns" by Frank L. Klement "Salmon P. Chase" By Albert Bushnell Hart "The Insanity File" by Mrk E. Neely, Jr/R. Gerald mcMurtry "Dark Union" by Leonard F. Guttridge and Ray A. Neff "The Lincoln Murder Conspiracies" William Hanchett "Stanton: "The Life and Times of Lincoln's Secretary of War" by Benjamin P. Thomas and Harold M. Hyman "The Salmon P. Chase Papers" Edited by John Niven "Blood on the Moon" by Edward Steers, Jr. "A Bullet for Lincoln" by Benjamin King "Booth" by David Robertson "Lincoln and Booth" by H. Donald Winkler "The Lincoln Conspiracy" David Balsiger and Charles E. Sellier, Jr. "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn "Allan Pinkerton: The Eye Who Never Slept" by James Mackay "Spy for the Confederacy" Jeannette Covert Nolan "Mary Surratt: An American tragedy" Elizabeth Steger Trindal "The Surrogate Assassin" Christopher Leppeck "A True History of the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln and of the Conspiracy of 1865" by Louis J. Weichmann "Let Us Have Peace" by Ulysses S. Grant; Brooks D. Simpson

Books in which Queen Victoria is mentioned: "Crown of Thorns and Glory" by Vander Heuvely Gerry "The Salmon P. Chase Papers" Edited by John Niven "Mary Lincoln: A Biography of a Marriage" by Ruth Painter Randall "The President's Wife" Ishbel Ross "The Civil War in the United States" by Krl Marx and Frederick Engels

I'm researching the American Civil War so I my emphasis has been in persons like William H. Seward, Abraham Lincoln, and Edwin M. Stanton, but Queen Victoria influenced the lives of Americans as well as those of her own people, so I've done some research in that area as well.

Scrawler,

I am glad to know you are continuing your writing and researching.

Anna,in reference to your last post.

Gee!! I never want to upset you. What did your little brother do, and does he still remember the incident?

Scrawler

I would be interested in learning a little more of how Queen Victoria influenced the lives of Americans. Your statement aroused my curiosity.

Bill H

What we wanted to be when we grew up and he SAID I WANT TO BE A CROOK ! Sorry but that made me so MAD ..and he wouldnt take it back ..I dont think he recalls that and he was the only child who wanted to do things differently than the rest as I told my one brother once when he was complaining Well Every family has a black sheep and Ken is a black sheep But he is OUR black sheep so we just have to learn to deal with him. Actually he is a good person but as I would have said and still do HE IS BULL HEADED .. He argues the opposite side to everything Right or wrong Now I just ignore him . but at 7 that was hard to do .. anna answering Bill's question

Thank you, Scrawler. Already I want to read the book on Pinkerton. I'm reading Battle Cry of Freedom right now.

Kleo

I have my copy of the book now and eagerly await our discussion.Just so everyone knows, I have never read the book, nor have I seen any movie. All I know about Jekyll and Hyde I learned from Bugs Bunny! LOL or other such parodies, etc.

I'm 55 and have an education background, but read few classics in my schooling. In the past few years, I have tried to catch up. That's where I'm starting from.

I imagine that Victorian society and its restrictions played a part in this book- pretty standard for books to reflect their time and mores.

We do face issues now such as cloning (as someone mentioned), stem cell research, euthanasia, et al that tax our moral codes and concepts.

As to good/bad/evil- I do not believe I have an evil side. I may have a side that is not so nice at times, but evil- no. I reserve that term for true sociopaths who apparently lack something in their brains that most of us have to sustain a moral code and conscience. I guess I don't look at many things as being evil- it has to be pretty extreme, such as murder, child molestation, rape, etc. I don't consider the everyday foibles that we all have to be "evil" or even close to it.

That said, I do think that an otherwise kind person could be turned into something close to evil by drugs. I have a loved one very close to me who battles a very serious addiction. This book will be interesting for me on that ground- how drugs can change one's entire personality. I hope you'll all bear with me as I may be seeing/saying a lot on this issue throughout. I've become somewhat versed in addiction, drugs, etc - more than I ever wanted to be.

Scootz, what about the complicity of probably millions of Germans, French and other citizens in the murder of the Jews of Europe before and during WWII? Does this make them all sociopaths? I think that Gavin de Becker's book, The Gift of Fear, and others do well to dispel the myth that only sociopaths commit evil acts.

For one thing, a sociopath is a very specific clinical diagnosis of a medical illness that very few human beings fit. On the other hand there are millions of murders, child rapes, rapes and violent assaults every year. Are our highest security prisons filled entirely with sociopaths? I don't think it would be possible to house 1000s of sociopaths together, in multiple institutions all over the country.

I think I agree with de Becker that humans want to believe they are not capable of horrendous acts of violence, that those humans who commit those acts are somehow subhuman or inhuman or so removed or different from ourselves that there's no chance anyone we know would ever do the same. I think that humans, under the most dire circumstances, are capable of violent actions against other humans. If you've never been tested, maybe you don't know what you're capable of.

However, I suspect we will have more to discuss about this when we start the book.

Kleo

Scootz

Thank you for telling us that you have never read the book or watched any of the Jekyll/Hyde movies. This will alert all of us not to jump too far ahead in our posts, thereby spoiling the story for you.

If any of our posts indicate that we have progressed further than where we should be at the time, please let us know. Jekyll and Hyde is such a well known piece of fiction that as a result of that fact we may be inclined to do this.

I often think about doing a discussion of a well known book and movie of the same name simultaneously. Do you folks think this idea would be met with the approval of reader participation?

Bill H

Kleo

A very interesting post.So much there for discussion.

Bill H

"The Victorian Era saw numerous innovations in Science, Technology and the Humanitties. Great Britain became the most powerful nation in the world in terms of both military and industrial prowess. The fact that most, if not all, the members of today's European monarchies can trace their ancestry back to Victoria may well be an indication of this power.

Victoria, British Columbia, was named after the queen, as were Victoria Island in the Northwest Territories and Regina, Saskatchewan. The Victoria Falls were named after the queen as was Lake Victoria, in 1877 her style became "By the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, Empress of India." http://www.geocities.com

It was her influence in the Northwest Territories through the Russian Tsar and as a result of the "Trent" affair with Britain that prompted William H. Seward, Secretary of State under Lincoln to purchase Alaska.

"Russia first broached the subject of a possible sale of Russian America at the close of the Crimean War in 1856. Washington was preoccupied with internal problems at that time, and nothing came of the initiative. After the war, however, the atmosphere changed. The movement for confederation in Cananda, formalized in 1867, underscored the permanence of the British presence in North America. What if the Union Jack and not the Stars and Stripes, were to fly over Russian America? The United States might not be the dominant power in its own hemisphere. Alas, geopolitical wisdom was in short supply in postbellum Washington. The only lobby for the acquisition of Russian American consisted of fishermen in Washington Territory who wanted access to Alaskan harbors." ~ "William Henry Sewrd Lincoln's Right Hand by John M. Taylor.

Queen Victoria influenced such matters as pregnancy, children, marriage and men in ways which would of surprised even her.

"The Ideal Victorian Woman was supposed to make her husband the center of her life and be the Light of the Home while her husband tangled with the world at large. She was supposed to be his helper and servant -- or so the ladies magazines preached. Perhaps if she had not had an empire over which to preside, Queen Victoria's name would be linked with the exact antheis of what we now think of as "Victorian" if she had spent her time challenging a woman's role more publictly than in her letters to her daughter..." ~ http://www.victoriana.com

Here's what she had to say about men:

"We poor creatures are born for man's pleasure and amusement, and destined to go through endless sufferings and trials..." What is worse, she adds, is that men do not even appreciate the sacrifices made by the wife "dear Papa even is not quite exempt though he would not admit it -- but he laughs and sneers cosntantly at many of them and at our unavoidable inconvenience (pregnancies)." http://www. victorianan.com

So we can see Queen Victoria's influence was not only military and expansion into foreign countries, but also in the mores and customs of the time.

"We poor creatures are born for man's pleasure and amusement, and destined to go through endless sufferings and trials...""

Gee, Scrawler!!

That thought never entered my deceased wife's mind.!

I can see it was Victoria that started the war between the sexes!! ButI hasten to add, I am not at war with anybody especially with you ladies here.

Thank you for the links.

Bill H

I forgot to say in my last post that...

Last August I had cataract surgery for both eyes, of course, two weeks apart.

But anyway, both the doctor–who did the cataract surgery– and her assistant were women. Well, the assistant and I got to talking (she did the talking. I did the listening) and she was saying much the same as what Victoria wrote. You better believe I agreed with all she said. I was not about to alienate either of those two ladies.

The, surgeon, Doctor Laura was not present during this conversation.

Dr. Laura did a magnificent job removing those cataracts of mine. And because of that fine lady I can see now better than I ever could.

Bill H

This is why I have to control my temper. Anger is a mighty force. This emotion, anger, can make people do the unthinkable. Most murders, I would say, are acts of passion. On an impulse, a gun is pulled out and shot.

I know nothing about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde either accept the famous name of the book and the name of the author. For all of this time I have thought of two men in the book. Now, from reading the posts, I see there is one man bearing the two names. Is this a case of split personality?

I need to go back and reread the posts.

I often think about doing a discussion of a well known book and movie of the same name simultaneously. Do you folks think this idea would be met with the approval of reader participation?

Yes. It sounds interesting.

Scootz. We have a general discussion - "---Books into Movies"

Click "last" if this link takes you to the first post.

Yeah, I'm game to do movies and books. I only hesitate because I get frustrated with people who dismiss all movies because they aren't exactly like the book--rather common. The best movies are from books. A book taken directly to the screen will not necessarily be a great movie, in fact when you get the author in their with their great book, you often wind up with crummy movies. Hemingway's books were superb, his movies needed him to back off.

If people like movies, let's do it. But if folks don't like movies or think all movies are crummy in comparison to the book they are written from I would rather not.

Hats, no need to reread the posts, just read the book. We don't know as much as we think we do--and we know we never do, that's why we're here to discuss the book, to learn what we don't know.

"Unavoidable inconvenience?" Dang, I always thought Q. Victoria was rather smart.

Bill, now you display intellect agreeing with the assistant no matter what she said before the cataract surgery. "Yes ma'am!" With a salute.

Kleo

I missed the question posted by Bill H. That's why I can't answer it.

Bill H, I rolled back and did see your question. I would love to read a book and look at the movie too. I have missed so many good movies. Now is the chance to read the book and see the movie. Great!

Kleo, I even came to attention when the she --the cataract surgeon--walked into the consultation room. I'm going to post her web site so you all can see a picture of this wonderful woman. You better believe I think she is a wonderful person!!

Hats, when our present discussion ends, not for a while yet, (I hope) I'll post over in "Books into Movies" and ask for nominations for books/movies to be discussed.

If you folks use the link our Pat posted for that forum, I'm sure all of you could post quite a few great ideas on what you have read and then watched on the silver screen. Most of us have formed ideas about the books/movies we have read and seen. Give it a try.

Kleo said:

"Hats, no need to reread the posts, just read the book. We don't know as much as we think we do--and we know we never do, that's why we're here to discuss the book, to learn what we don't know."

That is good advice. You will discover events in that novel you could never learn from the posts.

It is a short novel. I have a paper back edition of the book and my copy the of the story only consists of eighty-one pages!! Imagine that. Only eighty-one pages and so much on those pages to be discussed.

I realize this has nothing to do with the discussion. But in my last post, I promised I would post a link to the web site of Dr. Laura. I may be over doing my praise for this wonderful lady but I think she is great because I can see so great now!! My humble thanks to God also. If you would like to see her picture and read about her accomplishments, click on the link below.

Dr. Laura

Bill H

Looking at your doctor I can see why you were so charming and acquiesenct (did I spell that right) one thing I believe that changed womens place in America was the fact that women were in short supply and learned they didnt have to be as subservient as their mothers might have been. In studying early American history many of the women from England were surprised to find that among the Cherokee women they held the right to first choose the man they married, he had to provide her with a house, and could divorce him by simply placing his clothes outside the door, She was the one who decided whether she would have a baby, Even to destroying one and it was the woman and her brothers who made the decisions about how to raise the children. It was interesting to me when I was reading all of this and sharing it with members of my womens groups that so many who had never mentioned it before said they were part Cherokee....

Well I am IRISH and I think we were born independent !! anna

I will share a story from my marriage to illustrate Once my husband ( who was really the most understanding and kind and caring to women) suggested I change some habit or thinking It has been so long ago I dont really recall, I didnt reply right away saying I would think about it. My answer was I have thought about what you said but realized you fell in love with me because of how I am Now if I were to change you might fall out of love so I think I will just remain as I am" He did hug me and laughed but he didnt suggest I change again either.

"... and could divorce him by simply placing his clothes outside the door..."

Anna, if that custom prevailed to day the "Goodwill" would have to buy an additional fleet of trucks and hire more drivers to pick up all the clothes sitting outside the doors of any community.

But on a more serious note. It seemed that Cherokee women did more than just rule their own Tepee. I received the impression they were the overseers of the community .

Also, you gave your husband a good answer to his request, and he showed how understanding he was by accepting that answer. As you know, I'm also Irish and can well understand you saying you would remain as you are.

Bill H

I can understand why some people find books more promising than movies, but they are two different mediums and so some, not all, writers find it hard to write movie scripts. Hemingway, and Raymond Chandler come to mind who had difficulty transferring their books into movies. I only had one experience writing a movie script and I hated it.

Most all the writing done is dialogue. So if you are not into "snapy" dialogue and perfer writing descriptions like I do, you might have a difficult time. Writers can suggest camera angles, dress their characters, and sometimes give instructions to the both the actors and director, but most of the time the writer is ignored and director takes over.

In my case I forgot to dress my characters and tell the camera to go inside the apartment - so you had these naked characters mouthing words that nobody could hear because the camera was still shooting the outside shots. My script never even made it to the cutting room floor. It just became an exercise in frustration. I prefer to go into the minds of my characters and create long descriptive paragraphs and those things can be done better in books.

Bill H,

It is a short novel. I looked at copies yesterday in the store. I thought the books were abridged. Finally, I decided abridged must mean abridged and unabridged mean unabridged. In my book there are only fify-three pages. It is a Dover edition. On the book it does say unabridged. So, I am trusting this is the whole book.

Hats

If your book says unabridged, then you have the complete story of Jekyll/Hyde. Good for you getting the book. I'm sure you will enjoy the discussion much more.

Bill H

Since we have been talking about movies and with it being "Oscar" night and all; I thought I'd illustrate what writers go through when they write a movie script.

Perhaps some of you will remember the movie "The Blue Dahlia." Well, the script was written by Raymond Chandler. I recently read the movie script which I'd gotten back in the 1970s (for some reason I've been on a Raymond Chandler kick lately - can't get enough of his books) - at any rate in "Afterward" Matthew J. Bruccoi had this to say about Chandler, the movie, and what Chandler himself said about this movie and writing in general:

"Late in 1944 Paramount had a cris: Alan Ladd was about to be recalled by the army, and there was no script ready for him. John Houseman's account of how "The Blue Dahlia" was written includes the characteristic elements of Raymond Chandler's personality and work, which may be summarized by the concept of "honor". In completing this screenplay [drunk] he did the honorable thing, and honor is what "The Blue Dahila" is about. Johnny Morrison lives by the code of the hard-boiled Los Angeles knight. It does not occur to Johnny Morrison/Alan Ladd to seek police assistance. His wife has been murdered, and he is obligated to do something about it. She was unfaithful and was responsible for the death of their child in a drunken car accident; nevertheless she was his "wife."

"Chandler did in fact know at the start who the murderer of Helen Morrison was supposed to be: Buzz Wanchek (William Bendix). But at that time the conduct of servicemen in movies had to be cleared with Washington; and the Navy Department ruled that Wancheck, a wounded hero, could not be the murderer. Bad for morale; disrespect for the service. Therefore Chandler was required to abandon the plot rationale of his screenplay. In June 1946 he complained to James Sandoe, a crime literature specialist:

Yes, I'm through with "The Blue Dahilia," it dates even now. What the Navy Department did to the story was a little thing like making me change the murderer and hence make a routine whodunit out of a fairly original idea. What I wrote was a story of a man who killed (executed would be a better word) his pal's wife under the stress of a great and legitimate anger, then blanked out and forgot all about it; then with perfect honesty did his best to help the pal get out of a jam, then found himself in a set of circumstances which brought about partial recall. The poor guy remembered enough to make it clear who the murderer was to others, but never realized it himelf. He just did and said things he couldn't have done or said unless he was the killer; but he never knew he did them or said them and never interpreted them."

But in the movie there was "the absurd trick-shooting scene-supposedly proving that Buz could not have shot Helen Morrison.

The ending of the movie was also shot differently than the original script. "The script ends with the three war buddies looking for a bar after Joyce Harwood (Veronica Lake) drives away, but in the print of the movie that was released, Buzz and George walk away leaving Johnny and Joyce in a promissory happy-every-after finish."

"Chandler was not proud of "The Blue Dahilia," feeling that the plot change and the incompetent performance of "Miss Moronica Lake" had damaged it. He complained to Sandoe: "The only times she's good is when she keeps her mouth shut and looks mysterious. The moment she tries to behave as if she had a brain she falls flat on her face. The scenes we had to cut out because she loused them up! And there are three godawful close shots of her looking perturbed that make me want to throw my lunch over the fence." (May 30, 1946).

"Nevertheless "The Blue Dahlia" was a success. It grossed over $2,750,000 - a lot of money in those days. Chandler received his second Acadamy Award nomination for the screenplay, but the Award went to Muriel and Sydney Box for "The Seventh Veil."

"Chandler never returned to his novel after he converted it into this screenplay. Since the working draft of the novel has not been found, we can only speculate about whether "The Blue Dahlia" was originally conceived as a Philip Marlowe vehicle."

"A pre-occupation with words for their own sake is fatal to good film making. It's not what films are for. It's not my cup of tea, but it could have been if I'd started it twenty years earlier." - Chandler to Dale Warren (November 7, 1951)

"I am not interested in why the Hollywood system exists...I am interested only in the fact that as a result of it there is no such thing as an art of the screenplay, and there never will as long as the system lasts, for it is the essence of this system that it seeks to exploit a talent without permitting it the right to be a talent. It cannot be done; you can only destroy the talent, which is exactly what happens - when there is any talent to destory." - Chandler, "Writers in Hollywood" (1945)

"...most writers in Hollywood are employees...As an individual I refuse to be an employee, but of course I am only an individual." - Chandler, "Critical Notes" (1947)

When I first saw this movie I didn't like it. Some how the murderer didn't feel right and now I know why. Everything in the script leading up to the final act shows all the clues toward Buzz being the murderer, but than all of a sudden the manager ends of being the murderer. In the orginal script he's an old, harmless man - hardly a murderer - but in the movie he's portrayed younger and greedier by Will Wright.

Some of you have seen movies, myself included, of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Some of these movies were faithful to Stevenson's original story, but others were not. Perhaps some of the reasons for this are the same reasons why the original Chandler script was changed.

At any rate tonight as you watch the Oscars being awarded perhaps you will have an insight of what it takes to make an original script into an award winning movie.

Hats, you are welcome.

Bill H

Scrawler, that was an interesting post.

Now I certainly don't wish to offend you, and I apologize if I do because I value your posts. But that post would be more suitable for the "Books into Movies" forum.

Maybe with your help we can generate more interest in that forum by posting it there. Posts like that last one of yours would go a long way in promoting Books into Movies. Here is a link to

Books into Movies

Bill H

Thanks Bill for your suggestion. You are right of course.

We had been discussing the reason "why" Stevenson wrote "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." I am sure that Stevenson was aware of the technological progress and the expansion of England during the Victorian era, but perhaps more than anything Stevenson was probably influenced in his writing by Victorian London. Here then is a description of Victorian London:

"Victorian London was the largest most spectacular city in the world. While Britain was experiencing the Industrial Revolution, its capital was both reaping the benefits and suffering the consequences. In 1800 the population of London was around a million souls. That number would swell to 4.5 million by 1880. While fashionable areas like Regent and Oxford streets were growing in the west, new docks supporting the city's place as the world's trade center were being built in the east. Perhaps the biggest impact on the growth of London was the coming of the railroad in the 1830s which displaced thousands and accelerated the expansion of the city.

The price of this explosive growth and domination of world trade was untold squalor and fifth. In his excellent biography, "Dickens", Peter Ackroyd notes that "If a late twentieth-century person were suddenly to find himself in a taveren or house of the period, he would be literally sick - sick with the smells, sick with the food, sick with the atmosphere around him."~ http://www.fidnet.com

Once again we can see the "duality" of a particular situation - this time a place - Victorian London. On the one hand you had London "reaping" the benefits of the Industrial Revolution with the coming of the railroad and the new docks built to support the world trade. While on the other hand you had "flth and squalor" not to mention the displacement of thousands from their homes and business.

Stevenson was sick as a child and he had respiratory troubles all of his adult life. When I picture the Industrial Revolution, I picture "Polution" which I'm sure contributed to Stevenson's health. This then could be yet another reason for writing "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde."

I've heard of the "Black Dahlia" but never of the "Blue Dahlia." Interesting.

Scrawler, did you mean to post a link to something besides an advertisement? If you post a link it's generally a good rule to click on it when your post comes up to make sure it's to what you intended.

George Marshall's Blue Dahlia

Kleo

Try googling Dickens' London Page. It came up for me.

To continue:

"Imagine yourself in the London of early 19th century. The homes of the upper and middle class exist in close proximity to areas of unbelievable poverty and filth. Rich and poor alike are thrown together in the crowded city streets. Street sweepers attempt to keep the streets clean of manure, the result of thousands of horse-drawn vehicles. The city's thousands of chimney pots are belching coal smoke, resulting in soot which seems to settle everywhere. In many parts of the city raw sewage flows in gutters that empty into the Thames. Street vendors hawking their wares add to the cacophony of street noises. Pick-pockets, prostitutes, drunks, beggars, and vagabonds of every description add to the colorful multitude.

Personal cleanliness is not a big priority nor is clean laundry. In close, crowded rooms the smell of unwashed bodies is stifling. It is unbearably hot by the fire, numbingly cold away from it.

At night the major streets are lit with feeble gas lamps. Side and secondary streets may not be lit at all and link bearers are hired to guide the traveler to his destination. Inside, a candle or oil lamp struggles against the darkness and blacken the ceilings."

All though Stevenson spent most of his adult life traveling on the Continent and in the Scottish Highland, he had to be aware of the London that Dickens describes. Unlike, Dickens, Stevenson argued against "realism"; he preferred to write about the longings and desires of his characters. In other words his stories are stories of escapism against the very hazards of everyday life described by Dickens.

All sorts of info on Victorian life

These days, with modern sanitation, computers, and cell phones, it requires a real effort to imagine life back then.

Horselover, you mentioned "sanitation" and here's an excerpt from Dickens' London Page:

"Until the second half of the 19th century London residents were still drinking from the very same portions of the Thames that he open sewers were discharging into. Several outbreaks of Cholera in the mid 19th century, along with The Great Stink of 1858, when the stench of the Thames caused Parliament to recess, brought a cry for action. The link between drinking water tainted with sewage and the incidence of disease slowly dawned on the Victorians. Dr. John Snow proved that all victims in a Soho area cholera outbreak drew water from the same Broad Street pump.

Sir Joseph Bazalgette, chief engineer of the new Metropolitan Board of Works (1855), put into effect a plan, completed in 1875, which finally provided adequate sewers to serve the city In addition, laws were put in effect which prevented companies supplying drinking water from drawing water from the most heavily tainted parts of the Thames and required them to provide some type of filtration."

Perhaps, the most significant statement here was that nothing was really done about sanitation, until "The Great Stink of 1858" when the stench of the Thames caused Parliament to recess"...

There is a great book about this topic, Scrawler, Bazalgette and the waterworks. Was it one of the ones mentioned earlier? The Great Stink of London by Stephen Halliday. There's also a mystery novel about it--haven't read the mystery novel. The Great Stink of London is a wonderfully fun and insightful book about those stinky times.

Isn't Hyde a bit later, though? Post-stink?

Kleo

Scrawler, I agree that politicians hardly ever do anything about problems until it affects them in some way.

From Barnes and Nobles, and of course to take advantage of thier free postage I ordered enough books on sale to qualify ended up with 7 books for the sum of $33.83 ,free shipping and 1,60 tax Not bad ... but I will wait to read it ..that is why I ordered the other books ..........which is as good as an excuse as any...

anna

Thanks Kleo P for your info about the book by Stephen Halliday. "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" came out in 1886, while the "Big Stink" occurred in 1859. But I can't help but wonder how long it took parliment to take action to correct this problem.

In the Streets: "After the Stage Carriages Act of 1832 the hackney cab was gradully replaced by the omnibus as a means of moving about the city. By 1900 3,000 horse-drawn buses were carrying 500 million passengers a year. A traffic count in Cheapside and London Bridge in 1850 showed a thousand vehicles an hour passing through these ares during the day. All of this added up to an incredible amount of manure which had to be removed from the streets.

Cattle were driven through the streets until the mid 19th century. In an article for "Household Words" in March 1851 Dickens, with characteristic sarcasm, describes the environmental impact of having live cattle markets and slaughterhouses in the city:

"In half a quarter of a mile's length of Whitechapel, at one time, there shall be six hundred newly slaughtered oxen hanging up, and seven hundred sheep but, the more the merrier proof of prosperity. Hard by Snow Hill and Warwick Lane, you shall see the little children, inured to sights of brutality from their birth, trotting along the alleys, mingled with troops of horribly busy pigs, up to their ankles in blood but it makes the young rascals hardy. Into the imperfect sewers of this overgrown city, you shall have the immense mass of corruption, engendered by these practices, lazily thrown out of sight, to rise, in poisonous gases, into your house at night, when your sleeping children will most readily absorb them, and to find its languid way, at last, into the river that you drink."

I don't know about you folks, but it makes me happy to be alive in our "own" time period. I'll never complain about the traffic again. We just had a light snow fall overnight and already the crews are out on the road clearing the highway just below me.

And can you imagine trying to raise children in an atmosphere such as Dickens described? After reading some of these passages, I can't help wonder why any of our ancestors survived long enough to bring us into the world.

The London sewers were opened in 1865 and completed by 1875, long before Dr. Jekyll. They are considered, to this day, one of the greatest engineering feats in human history.

Kleo

Anna

I think you are going to like the book. And all those books you received!! You will have enough reading for quite a while.

Bill H

Scrawler, Our ancestors must have been the fittest, since the average life span in those days was about 40 years.

I am anxious to re-read the book to see how it compares with the memory in my mind. I feel this hestitant memory, the sense of being chilled by the evil character. Stevenson was a very capable author and I wonder if his illness gave him mind the time to think of his plots and poems. I am posting my favorite poem It is one I recall my mother reciting to me.She had a lot of his childrens poems memorized most likely from when she was in school It was only much later I found the books of Stevenson. I think there was part of me that thought my mother had made them up In any case I think my life long love of poetry goes back to this one. I hope you dont mind my sharing it here anna

My Shadow

 

I have a little shadow that goes in and out with me, 
And what can be the use of him is more than I can see. 
He is very, very like me from the heels up to the head; 
And I see him jump before me, when I jump into my bed. 

The funniest thing about him is the way he likes to grow 
Not at all like proper children, which is always very slow; 
For he sometimes shoots up taller than an india-rubber ball, 
And sometimes he’s so little that there’s none of him at all. 

He hasn’t got a notion of how children ought to play, 
And can only make a fool of me in every sort of way. 
He stays so close beside me, he’s a coward you can see; 
I’d think shame to stick to nursie as that shadow sticks to me 

One morning, very early, before the sun was up, 
I rose and found the shining dew on every buttercup; 
But my lazy little shadow, like an arrant sleepy-head, 
Had stayed at home behind me and was fast asleep in bed.

Thanks Kleo P. for that information. Horselover, you right of course our ancestors had to be strong to survive. Whenever I have some "bad" days I think about my Irish and Greek grandmothers coming to America alone as teenagers - what they must have gone through just to get here. Anna, once again the beauty of your poems touches me - Thanks

Railroads:

"Starting in the late 1830s, competing railway companies burrowed into London as far as possible, displacing the poor, and then building a termius. The result was a ring of railway stations such as London Bridge Station (1836), Euston Station (1837), and Paddington Station (1838) with no central connection. This incresed congestion in the city, as connections had to be amde by coach.

Railway Stations were considered "Modern Day Cathedrals" contained elegant hotels. As railway travel became more affordable, and traffic increased, cheaper and seedier hotels grew up around the sttions and teh elegant hotels lost business.

Dickens lamented the changes wrought by the railroads but, like most Victorians, accepted the change as a necessity in his travels. His faith in the railways was severely shaken when he was involved in a serious accident at Staplehust in 1865."

The railway system reminds me of the "light rail" in San Jose, California. I would take a bus downtown to the "light rail" and ride that for awhile, but than I'd have to walk for blocks to get on yet another bus in order to get close to my office. It used to take me about four hours travel time. I understand that now they have the "light rail" connections so you can ride it from the Bart in Oakland almost to the end of San Jose. What was interesting to me was that when my mother was a little girl in the 1930s there was a trolly that ran from San Francisco to San Jose, but they took all the rails out in the 1940s, only to put them back again in the 1970s.

I thought it was interesting the comment that was made about Victorians accepting the change as necessary in [his] travels and it was only when he was involved with a serious accident that Dickens faith was shaken. If you read alot of Victorian authors, they always seem to use the railroad as symbolic. The most graphic to me was "Anna Karenina" by Leo Tolstoy.

Anna,

Thank you for posting that poem. I remember reading it oh, so long ago in my boyhood in one of the children's verses books. It took me back quite a ways.

Bill H

Ok, I'm wanting to just mention in advance that I may not be able to do this group as planned. The MY NAME IS RED group is moving more slowly than first talked about and the great books begins the 15th. I really want to complete the RED group. And I really want to do the great books group. I also attend a f2 group for which I am reading a book, so this group may have to be dropped. Sorry.

Food and Drink:

"Throughout his work Dickens relishes in the description of food and drink in such a way as to make the most meager meal seem a feast...

Drinking is ubiquitous in Dickens. From the peasants in Paris soaking up the spilled wine in the street in "A Tale of Two Cities" to Mr. Micawber's famous punch, everyone seems to have a drink in hand. This partly reflects the fact that in Dickens' London, alcohol was safer to drink than the water.

Dickens, by all indications was a moderate drinker himself. While diligently pointing out the evils of overindulgence, he also had no patience with the Temperance Movement, which he lampooned in "Pickwick Papers"..."

Once again we see where those who have it are able to drink wine and spirits while those who can't afford it as the peasants illustrated in "A Tale of Two Cities" are forced to soak it up from the very streets of Paris. This illustrates the duality of life that surrounded even Stevenson in Scotland.

Be careful what you drink, Stevenson, seems to be saying in "Dr.Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" - it could be hazardous to your health.

Incidently, I'm reading "Pickwick Papers" and it is a delightful read. Dickens' tends to be sarcastic about almost everything that surrounds him from the clergy to the Temperance Movement to the law. They certainly don't write like Dickens any more and at times you have to stumble over the 19th century dialect, but it does provide for a rollicking good time.

Scootz

We are all going to miss you in the discussion. If you get a chance, drop by and say hello.

Bill H

Oh Bill, you're awfully sweet. I'm so sorry to have to back out but I just can't do them all. Had the RED group finished, I would have been ok. I will drop by and certainly, if things change (and they often do) I may try to squeeze you in. Ya know- if I can get my f2f book finished this week, I maybe could do Jekyll and Hyde...hmmm. I will try, ok?

The Poor:

"The Victorian answer to dealing with the poor and indigent was the New Poor Law, enacted in 1834. Previously it had been the burden of the parishes to take care of the poor. The new law required parishes to band together and create regional workhouses where aid could be applied for. The workhouse was little more than a prison for the poor. Civil liberties were denied, families were separated, and human dignity was destroyed. The true poor often went to great lengths to avoid this relief.

Dickens, because of the childhood trauma caused by his father's imprisonment for debt and his consignment to the blacking factory to help support his family, was a true champion to the poor. He repeatedly pointed out the atrocities of the system through his novels."

As we will see, Stevenson also pointed out the atrocities of the system towards the poor, but used escapism as a means to do so. Yet, as we read Sevenson's writings the images that he creates makes the reader see beyond the printed words.

"With the turn of the century and Queen Victoria's death in 1901 the Victorian period came to a close. Many of the ills of the 19th century were remedied through education, technology and social reform...and by the social consciousness raised by the immensely popular novels of Dickens."

So to did Stephenson take the world around him and tap into the "social consciousness" when he created "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." The very transformation of the respectable Dr. Jekyell echoed the growing pessimism that many people felt as the Victorian era slowly came to a close.

Didn't Stevenson have TB for much of his life? He traveled around the world trying to find a place where his health could improve until TB finally killed him. He must have had a lot of experience with doctors. I wonder if that affected his writing and why he wrote about a doctor.

Marni

Robert Louis Stevenson fought illness constantly, writing many of his best books from a sickbed. He traveled widely for his health and according to the, World Book, "in order to learn about people". So since he was under the care of doctors we have to assume that not only did he know about doctors but also about medical terminology. Part of the reason for the continued success of his novels is that they have considerable psychological depth. Which brings us to why a man who was constantly sick should write about horror?

According to Dennis Hamilton, a short story writer "The ancient Egyptians concocted tales of spiritual revenge to discourage tomb scavengers. And a million years prior to the Egyptian refinement, the caveman painted real-life horrors on the walls of his house."

Since we established the fact that Stevenson was interested in learning about people, and because he was sick himself he perhaps not only wanted to find out about people who were well but who were physically sick and mentally sick. Perhaps he also looked into the Egyptian tales of spiritual revenge and combined them with his own feelings of illness and applied them to his own time.

"Our conscious intellect is too exclusively analytic ...and so it misses a great deal of reality, especially within ourselves," Abraham Maslow, a science fiction writer wrote. "Since creativeness is "the opposite of dissociation," he remarked, the "whole man" becomes possible through "the recovery of aspects of the unconscious and preconscious" - the "poetic, metaphoric, mystic, primitive, archaic, childlike." "Horror", according to J. N. Williamson in his introduction to "Tales of Horror, Fantasy & Science Fiction" "contains all that." Horror is all around us!

You have only to turn on the six o'clock news and the real horror of the world blasts itself into our living rooms. According to David W. Taylor, a professor of English at Maravian College, "There is real horror in loneliness and rage, in twisted love and jealousy. The writer need look no further than the next street corner to find his subject matter: the constant degradation of women, the shame of the street people, the unspeakable isolation of a nursing home, the underground missile silo overflowing with pent-up doom."

Certainly in Stevenson's time he could relate to the "constant degradation of women" and the "shame of the poor." We have only to change "unspeakable isolation of a nursing home" into the "unspeakable isolation of the workhouse." Although in Stevenson's time he didn't have to deal with "underground missile silos" and mishaps that could happen there; he had to deal with the effects "technological progress of the Industrial Revolution."

"Some readers don't know they would appreciate horror fiction," Professor Taylor proceeds, "because such frights are so closely woven into the fabric of our lives and have become so "Acceptable" that we give them no more thought than a fish does to the water he swims in. This genre of writing offers [the writer] a way to make horror a throbbing, black thing behind the bed, a thing that will not be loved, but "cannot be ignored" - if we are to be enlightened by it."

Stephenson in his search to understand people better took something "acceptable" in his own period of life and made it a horror so that not only can it not be "ignored" but because of his writing we are also "enlightened" to the dangers of the horror he portrayed. "The Strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" is truly a "fine bogey tale."

Ha! I finished my f2f read and am going to get a headstart on Hyde today. Gonna just hafta put up with me I guess!

Scootz

More than happy to put up with you.

Bill H

Did you know that "Jekyll and Hyde" is a musical? And the musical is about to be made into a film?

"Jekyll & Hyde is headed for the big screen! The Hatchery has announced plans to turn the musical into a feature film, in partnership with Grand Illusions Media Partners. You can now read the complete press release here. Further details will be posted as they are announced."

Hi Scrawler, You wrote some really interesting material in your last post and I'm sorry to start out my posts with a correction Abraham Maslow (1907-1970) was not a Science Fiction writer but the founder of Humanistic Psychology. His well known "Hierarchy of Needs" has become a basic tenet of modern Psych.

I was waiting to see what book would win out in the "Great Books" competition. Since it was Don Quixote I have decided to not participate in that discussion and go with the Stevenson book. I truly love Stevenson since his Poems, "A Child's Garden of Verses", was such an integral part of my childhood. He has the great ability to convey deep thoughts in a simple way that is available to all. I know dozens of his verses by heart and they often come to mind.

Judy

The other night I watched the 1996 movie "Mary Reilly" starring Julia Roberts and John Malkovich as Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. I thought it was very well done. John Malovich gave an excellent performance as did Julia Roberts. The story was told through the eyes of a poor Irish girl (Julia Roberts) who worked in the house of Dr. Jekyll. The story unfolds from Dr. Jekyll's house which over looks the laboratory. Rather than a horror movie it is presented as a "spooky mystery." One of the themes of the movie dealt with the problem of women loving men who are both loving and caring and at times who react only to their more primitive urges. The only part I didn't like was the ending - it didn't make sense, but than I read the reviews that indicated that they had to redo the last scenes after the movie had already been shot, and as a result it didn't quite fit together.

Hi Anna, I too knew "My Shadow" by heart from my Mothers recitation. My love of poetry also comes partly but not completely, from Stevenson.

The most wonderful thing about "My Shadow" is that it it helps a child look at things they wouldn't ordinarily contemplate. It joins the Analytical with the Emotional sides of our brain (Right Brain-Left Brain Connection).

My emotional connection is to the poem "The Land of Counterpane" which is about a sick boy who has to "lie a-bed". I too was sick a lot and this boy in a different land, in a different time was having the same thoughts as I. What salve to a sick childs soul.

So thanks for bringing me back to that wonderful book' A Child's Garden of Verses.

Judy

I wonder if we could look at this story as an extreme example of a mid-life crisis? The middle-aged Jekyll begins to realize that he has missed out on expressing certain parts of his nature. So he decides to stop repressing them. Instead of buying a sports car and dating much younger women, he simply goes too far.

Judy Shernock

Welcome ! I'm so pleased you decided to join us in the Jekyll/Hyde discussion. I'm sure you will have some interesting posts.

Yes, RLS can get his point across with little writing. I guess what I'm trying to say is: He writes a compact story.

I have learned much about Stevenson from the introduction of both Jekyll and Hyde and Treasure Island from the Barnes and Noble Classic editions. Please do not think I'm plugging the Barnes and Noble Classics. However, the introductions in their classic editions are suburb

Scrawler

Oh, I wish you would have let me know of the Jekyll Hyde movie you watched.

Horselover was telling us they are going to make a musical of Jekyll/Hyde. Is going to be a stage production or silver screen? I suppose it is now called color screen.

Bill H

I grew up on a steady diet of "A Child's Garden of Verses." - "The rain is raining all the time..." was my favorite. I used to watch the rain fall over the Pacific Ocean and like the poem mentioned by Jim; I was a sickly child who "lie a bed," but I think that's where my imagination and creativity was encouraged.

Judy thanks for the information on Abraham H. Maslow.

That's an interesting theory, Horselover; maybe we can explore that further during our discussion - it certainly makes sense to me.

Musical Composition: Stevenson was an amateur composer who wrote songs typical of California in the 1880s, salon-type music, entertaining rather than serious. A flageolet player, Stevenson had studied harmony and simple counterpoint and knew such basic instrumental techniques as transposition. Some song titles include "Fanfare, Tune for Flageolet, Habanera, Quadrille." Robert Hughes in 1968 arranged for chamber orchestra a number of Stevenson's songs, which went on a tour of the Pacific Northwest in that year. (http://secondeveningart.com)

Please do not think I'm plugging the Barnes and Noble Classics. However, the introductions in their classic editions are suburb

Well, you could do a lot worse things, Bill!

I totally agree. I started a collection of the B&N classics about 18 months ago. I really like them and think the introductions are excellent. (Just don't read them first- major spoilers abound!)

I have finished Hyde and look forward to the discussion. Question- where is the epilogue of which you speak for our third week ?????

Are you reading from the B&N edition? and if so, did you read any of the other stories therein?

Scootz

The epilogue I posted in the heading is just my idea of giving those of us who observe the upcoming religious holidays a chance to post their thoughts about the story that otherwise may have been missed.

I belive both the Jewish and Christian religious holidays are coming up the same week. I mean The Passover, Good Friday, and Easter Sunday, in that order.

These religious days fall during the April 9th and April 16th week of the schedule and I just wanted to give everybody an extra week. And it would be nice to post any further thoughts you may have about the novel and it's author. .

But there is no epilogue in the book. I hope I did not confuse anybody, but I suppose I did.

Bill H

Scootz, yes there are more stories in my book, also, They are "A Lodging for the Night," "The Suicide Club" (a few weeks ago I watched a movie of that one) "Thrawn Janet, " "The Body Snatcher," and "Markheim."

They all seem to be of the macabre genre.

Yes, the introduction can be a spoiler, if read first but, after one has finished the story, it is great to go back to the introduction and get a further insight and depth of the novel that otherwise may have been overlooked. I must confess, however, I did read it first and then went back and reread it.

Bill H

Tomorrow I'm off to B&N to get my copy. So you have definitely convinced me that its the best edition. I read the book many , many years ago and also saw the old movie. I look forward to rereading it and to the discussion.

Judy

Info on the musical

As you can see, they have added some elements to the plot, including some female characters. Somehow, it's hard to picture Hyde cavorting on stage, or Jekyll singing "Let My Inner Self Go."

I have never read Dr. J and Mr. H nor did I ever read Stevenson, as my background is in French literature, but I plan on having a fresh look at this author and possibly give my two cent's worth starting April first.

Judy

I'm sure you will like the B&N Classic.

Horselover,

Thanks for the link. It was an amusing read.

Eloise

I look forward to your two cents worth. Your posts add up to many more times that amount.

Bill H

Folks, those of you who have seen the movie, but haven't read the novel, are in for a big surprise. The written story is NOTHING AT ALL like the movies that reached the silver screen.

I guess what I'm trying to say is you will be lost, if you try to follow the discussion just from the movies you have watched.

Bill H

I think I've seen it all now, horselover. The song titles are a hoot!

I suppose this would be a sort of Phantom of the Opera type thing, Dark story put to music.

Think of all the dark types in Operas. The Devil in Faust comes to mind. If he can sing I'm sure Mr. Hyde will manage a solo or two. Actually I'm sure the writer of the musical had a lot of material to draw upon. London will lap it up.

I got my copy from B&N and will start to reread it in a day or two.

Judy

I just saw the 1932 version of the movie with Fredric March. "Best Actor Academy Award winner Fredric March plays the man/monster in the expressionistic, pre-Code 1932 version morphing before your eyes into a fiend that impacted the look of Creature Features to come." (from back cover of DVD.)

This was a great film - the special effects were outstanding for the time. I thought the black and white film with it shadows added to the mood and tone of the film. The only drawback was the over-the-top melodramatic scenes between Miriam Hopkins and Fredric March as well as those between Rose Hobart and March. I thought if she said "I do love you! I do!" one more time I was going to kill her myself. But the film did emphasize the Victorian ideals of conformity and as I said the scenes with the monster were beautifully portrayed. I can see where March got an Academy Award for Best Actor.

Scrawler

I also saw that movie and thought of it as the best of them all. It was far better than the one with Tracy and Bergman. I can well understand Fredric March receiving an Oscar for his performance in that movie.

Bill H

Bill, Did you read about the different stories re the actors of HYDE in the introduction? Pretty interesting, I thought.

Scootz,

Are you referring to the movie with March and Hopkins? I did but now I forget. You see forget fullness comes with age.

Bill H

No, I'm referring to the plays that were put on about Jekyll and Hyde. Didn't one guy have to come to the theater caged, or somesuch? seems there were a few pretty outrageous stories.

Scootz

I never saw any of those. Maybe someone else can help here?

Bill H

Bill, Look in your introduction, right on the first page, xiii. SEcond paragraph talks about the guy coming to the theater in a boxed car (I thought it was a cage).

I haven't seen the one with Spencer yet, but will do so soon. I understand from the comentary that Spencer wanted Hepburn to play both female parts and he hadn't even met her yet. He also thought his career was over when he saw himself as Mr. Hyde. Spencer also wanted to portray Hyde as suffering from alcohol and drug abuse, but MGM wouldn't let him.

I agree that Fredric March did a wonderful job and deserved the academy award. He spent three weeks in the hospital suffering from the effects of the make-up in the last scene of the movie. So far all the movies I've seen have been good in many different ways.

In other comentaries from the DVD of the 1932. They mentioned that the first actor to play Mr. Hyde in the late 1800s did so about the same time as the Jack the Ripper crimes were being committed in London. The play closed early on Broadway because there were some that thought he - Mansfield I believe his name was - was actually the Ripper. Also, Mansfield knew when the lighting on his make-up was good because the ladies fainted.

Haven't we come a long way ladies - I promise not to faint in cyberspace!

Hi BillH and All,

I have started "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." This is my first time reading it. I haven't finished it yet. I have enjoyed reading all the background information given here. I haven't looked at the movie. The book is spine tingling.

Robert Louis Stevenson had a wonderful imagination. I just keep feeling that this book, in some way, touches on Psychology and the complexities of the human mind. I bet Sigmund Freud would have felt like making several comments about this book.

I have a Dover Edition of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. There is a comment written in the front of the book.

"To some extent the tale reflects the Victorian era's repressive polarization of "virtue" and "vice." Bit it also looks backward to Frankenstein(another scientific experiment "tampering with the unknown"--containing potential for good, but unerringly headed for disaster) and forward to our present knowledge of the influence of body chemistry on psychology and personality."

Scootz,
Yes!! I remember it now. It was the actor Mansfield that transformed himself into Hyde right on stage without chemical assistance. And that is what the theater audience found hard to believe Thank you for reminding me of that.
Scrawler

I didn't know March spent time in the hospital after playing tha part of Hyde. Although I do understand that most good actors try to become the roll character they are playing. Of course, not for all time.

Hats

I also feel RLS had a message pertaining to the complexities of the human mind when he this book. I believe he was trying to get across to us the evil that lurks just waiting to get loose.

After you finish the book, watch one of the movies. You will find a vast difference between the two.<p.Bill H

It's interesting that somewhere in the story, Jekyll talks about his reasons for trying to separate the two aspects of human nature--good and evil. He says it's so that one can do evil without suffering the pangs of conscience. And so that one can lead a moral life without regretting the paths not taken. However, in this experiment, while Jekyll succeeds in separating the evil side of his nature, he never succeeds in keeping Henry Jekyll from knowing about the horrible crimes of Hyde. So in this sense his experiment is a failure. It's also a failure, as he describes, because he never succeeds in controlling the separation. One's evil deeds cannot be encapsulated. If you do evil, it will eventually take over your whole life.

Horselover,

You wrote "If you do evil it will eventually take over your whole life. " What did you mean by this? There are many people who are never caught for their heinous crimes and they succeed very well in separating the evil part of their lives from their outward successes.

I will wait to hear what crimes you are talking about and how you define evil before I comment further. I wish all criminals were caught and punished but it just isn't so.

Judy

Judy, I agree that not all criminals are caught and punished by the legal system. What I meant was that, as with Hyde, the more you give into a desire to do evil, the more difficult it becomes to return to a good life. Success is not equal to a good life. You are absolutely correct in saying that some people can be "successful"--at least for a time--while doing evil. We saw this during the Enron scandals. But I think that when these people became enmeshed in their schemes which eventually destroyed the company and the lives of many of their employees, they were unable to return to a moral life despite the surface appearance of success. Richard Nixon was another example of someone who seemed to reach the highest level of success, but was unable to disentangle himself from the evil he practiced and encouraged in those around him.

Literature abounds with 'Faust' stories where the main character achieves success by making some sort of bargain with the devil. In a sense, this tale of Jekyll and Hyde is a Faust story of a scientist who thought he could deal with evil. But, as we all know, the devil always exacts a price for such success--the loss of one's soul. This is what eventually happened to Jekyll. The good and moral part of his nature was taken over by the evil once he decided to give into his baser desires, and there was no way to return.