The monster and Robert Louis Stevenson: an approach

The monster and Robert Louis Stevenson: An approach. Autora: Andrea Santos Enríquez Titor: Manuel Míguez Ben Traballo de Fin de Grao para a obtención do Grao en Lingua e Literatura Inglesas Ano académico 2017/2018 Curso: 4º 1 The monster and Robert Louis Stevenson: An approach. Autora: Andrea Santos Enríquez Titor: Manuel Míguez Ben Traballo de Fin de Grao para a obtención do Grao en Lingua e Literatura Inglesas Ano académico 2017/2018 Curso: 4º 2 Contents 1. Summary 4 2. Introduction 5 3. Overall Presentation of the Context and Society 8 3.1. Reception in Victorian England 8 3.2. Victorian Society and its Fixation on the Double Nature of the Human Being 11 3.3. Stevenson’s Duality 14 4. A New Concept of the Figure of the Monster 21 4.1. The Duality of Dr. Henry Jekyll 21 4.2. Mr. Hyde’s Character Analysis 27 4.3. The Setting’s Emphasis on Duality and the Idea of the Double 31 5. Jack the Ripper, the Real Mr. Hyde? 34 6. Conclusions 37 7. Bibliography 39 3 4 2. Introduction The Strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is, in my opinion, one of the most relevant pieces of writing when trying to understand one of the possible approaches to the concept of human duality and the figure of the monster. The actual reason for me to have chosen this topic is Mr. Hyde's similarities to the historical figure of Jack the Ripper, also known as the The Whitechapel Murderer. The crimes of the famous serial killer happened short after the publication of Stevenson’s novella and it drew my attention how people seemed to point out at possible similarities between personalities and occupations of both figures. I came across Jack the Ripper as a consequence of reading many detective stories, in particular the ones that involve the famous Sherlock Holmes. My interest for the genre does not involve only books, but also TV-shows and films. Mystery stories always manage to make a great impact on me, the sense of enigma and the riddles that embody the cases attract my attention so immensely that I find myself unable to stop reading until I get to know the answers to all of my questions. So when I finally read Stevenson’s story I could not help but notice the similarities between both characters, Hyde and Jack, and I became curious. Stevenson’s novel actually gives the impression of a detective story, given that the character of Mr. Utterson plays the same role and behaves the same way a usual detective does in any typical detective story, carrying out an investigation around the strange behavior of his friend and client Henry Jekyll. Although sadly, unlike in most mystery novels, the lawyer lacks the eye of an investigator, and he is unable to solve the mystery on time and save him. So instead, the reader gets to the resolution of the case through a confession made by Jekyll himself in the final chapter, where he explains with extensive detail the creation of his other more sinister half, and how due to his own lack of self control, this now manipulative monster Mr. Hyde makes his life come to an end. 5 I begin this project by giving an insight into the context and society in London during the time that the novel was published in 1886. The way Stevenson’s work was received by criticism and the public of the Victorian era demonstrates just how popular the novella was even shortly after its publishing. It sold thousands of copies in a short time and triggered the creation of various adaptations that served as a denominator for the tastes of the public and opened the eyes of many people to the interior wonders of the human mind and human duality that Stevenson wanted to explore. After that, I examine society’s fixation with the topic of human duality. Having respectability as the standard rule of the people, Victorians are often accused of being too closedminded or too repressed. As I will further explain later on in the project, people feared showing their own desires and their interior self in fear of exterior judgment, and so they restrained themselves. People of higher social status needed to dress nicely, they needed to have nice houses and decorations, and needed to behave accordingly to their status just for the sake of others’ approval of them. But this self-repression only helped the creation of psychological and scientific theories that studied and intended to understand this duality that the Victorian people tried so hard to hide, and along with them, writers like Stevenson himself also became interested. In the next chapter I explore the possible reasons for Stevenson to have written such a story and his fascination for dualism. I delve into the past of the writer, looking into the many different occurrences in his life that could have helped him develop his own take on the duality of the human being, like the city he was born in, Edinburgh, its division in two, and how he himself suffered the repression of his own “other-self” because of his status. Also relevant could be the figure of William Brodie, also known as Deacon Brodie, the body snatching business he was familiar with, and possibly, the doctor and anatomist John Hunter. After that, I focus on the new concept of monster that Stevenson insisted was born from the duality within a human being, analyzing the different aspects of the novel that present it. First I 6 explore the secondary characters of the story, like Mr. Utterson, Mr. Einfield and Dr. Lanyon, all apparently conventional and respectable Victorian men, but who in some instances show duality within themselves, even if they do not acknowledge it or they deny it. And finally, I examine Jekyll’s own duality. Following, I focus on the study of Mr. Edward Hyde’s character, the aspects that make him so mysterious and dangerous, how he brings out the worst in the people that surround him, and how he turns from being just one side of the personality of Dr. Jekyll to a monster. In the next chapter I further explain the duality of the novel showing examples introduced by Stevenson in the setting of the city of London. From the happy streets filled with people during the day, to the foggy dark alleys of the night. From the apparent coquetry of the higher social class houses, to the poorest streets in the district. From Dr. Jekyll’s house, to the back door Mr. Hyde uses to go in and out. Everything seems to emphasize the duality of the characters. Finally, in the fifth and final chapter of the project, I put in common the character of Mr. Hyde with the figure of Jack the Ripper, the most famous serial killer in the history of London. Having great popularity since it was published, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde faced accusations of having inspired the famous serial killer to commit the crimes, sometimes making people fuse both characters together, saying that Hyde and the Ripper were one and the same, that Mr. Edward Hyde was real. 7 3. Overall Presentation of Context and Society What kind of book is The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a Gothic novella written by the Scottish writer Robert Louis Stevenson that was published in 1886. It tells the story of Dr. Henry Jekyll and how he is eventually overwhelmed by his alter ego Mr. Hyde. Having the idea of duplicity of nature in the human being in mind since he was little due to certain influences and experiences in his life, some of which I will further expand in this project, Stevenson ended up writing several works that could be considered attempts to fulfill his need to explore the topic of duality and the capability of evil in every human being no matter their status, only to manage to accomplish his goal when he finally wrote The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. 3. 1. Reception in Victorian England When Stevenson finally wrote the first manuscript for The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde he was faced with the strong opposition of his wife, Fanny Stevenson, who “according to the custom then in force, wrote her detailed criticism of the story” (Balfour, 16). As a result, Stevenson burned the draft, deciding to rewrite it again. Despite Fanny’s first opinion on the story, the new and more polished version of the novella quickly became a success after it was published in 1886. As stated by Stevenson’s biographer, Graham Balfour, in his The Life of Robert Louis Stevenson – Vol. 2: “its success was probably due rather to the moral instincts of the public than to any conscious perception of the merits of its art. It was read by those who never read fiction, it was quoted in pulpits, and made the subject of leading articles in religious newspapers.” (Balfour, 17-18) 8 Aside from this, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde earned many critics’ favor for multiple reasons. John Addington Symonds, biographer, poet, literary critic and close friend of Stevenson, agreed with the fact that the novella’s writing and style were remarkable, even though some aspects of the novel were in his opinion too complicated and could even be considered problematic for his taste: “But as literature also it was justly received with enthusiasm. Even Symonds, though he doubted "whether any one had the right so to scrutinise the abysmal depths of personality,"admitted, "The art is burning and intense";and the cry of horror and pain which he raised was in another sense a tribute to its success. "How had you the ilia dura ferro et œre triplici duriora to write Dr. Jekyll? I know now what was meant when you were called a sprite."” (Balfour, 18) The main motif of Symonds’ disagreement was due to the ending of the story. He claimed that he had “rebelled against it with the scorn of a soul that hates to be contaminated with the mere picture of victorious evil.” (Brown, 408) Symonds had a strong opposition to the “victory” of Mr. Hyde, defending that “The suicide end of Dr. Jekyll is too commonplace” and that Dr. Jekyll needed to have “given Mr. Hyde up to justice” in order for him to have gained back his dignity (Brown, 408). The monstrous figure of Jekyll and Hyde was born from the idea of the double. Nevertheless, it is important to mention that this ‘double’ was actually not a theme completely original for Stevenson. Andrew Lang, in a review he wrote in 1886 admitted, regarding the originality of the topic, that “Mr. Stevenson’s narrative is not, of course, absolutely original in idea.” (Lang, 55). Duality had been the focal point in other previous works like Frankenstein by the writer Mary Shelley or the tale William Wilson by Poe, among many others. Still, the novel was received gracefully, as Lang stated, about the popularity of Stevenson’s novel, that “They [The readers] will be hard to please if they are disappointed in his [Stevenson’s] Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” (Lang, 55) and that “While one is thrilled and possessed by the horror of the central fancy, 9 more than a facade for him, as he was a gambler and led a life of crime during the night. Ben Johnson, in an article for Historic UK where he talks about Brodie’s life, states the following: “unknown to most gentlefolk, Brodie had a secret night-time occupation as the leader of a gang of burglars. An extra-curricular activity that was necessary to support his extravagant lifestyle which included two mistresses, numerous children and a gambling habit.” (Johnson, “Deacon Brodie”) While working for his customers during the day, Brodie “would copy their door-keys” (Johnson, “Deacon Brodie”) to later on proceed to go to these same houses by night and steal from the families who inhabited them, just so he could “support his night-time activities” (Johnson, “Deacon Brodie”). In my opinion, the similarities between Brodie and the later on Dr. Jekyll are indisputable. The personality of Brodie had reinforced the idea of duality and a new world of ideas in Stevenson’s mind. In fact, Stevenson was so engrossed by Brodie’s story that it inspired him to write the play Deacon Brodie or the Double Life (1922), that ended up being rather unsuccessful and never really satiated Stevenson’s fascination with Brodie and the theme of duality (Radeska, “Gambler William Brodie”). Nonetheless, he seemed to come to terms with it when he wrote Jekyll and Hyde, as Johnson states: “It is said that Brodie’s bizarre double-life inspired Robert Louis Stevenson, whose father had had furniture made by Brodie. Stevenson included aspects of Brodie’s life and character in his story of a split personality, The Strange Case of Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde’” (Johnson, “Deacon Brodie”). On top of that, there came to a start a new Era for Medicine, specially for the study of Anatomy. Edinburgh was considered to be one of the pillars for this practice of medicine at the time, being one of the leading centers in Europe. H. P. Tait, in his “Some Edinburgh medical men at the time of the Resurrectionists” (1948), defends how “there existed no means for the practical study of anatomy in Britain, save for the scanty and irregular material that was supplied by the gallows” (Tait, 116) before the Anatomy Act was passed in 1832 and the regularization of 16 anatomical material that was to be used for scientific study and dissection. Nevertheless, the law still demanded that the doctors and surgeons needed to have in their hands an extremely high degree of knowledge and artistry. And with a doctor not having enough subjects of study, “How, then, was he to obtain this skill without regular dissection?” (Tait, 116) And so there appeared new individuals who “opened graves and removed the corpses” (Tait, 116), that is, they had access to their material in an illegal way, burglarizing graves of dead people who had been just buried. This way, anatomists, surgeons and doctors of the field, had to turn to body snatching. Because of this, those people who would usually be considered pillars of respectability, ended up leading double lives as well. This people were known as “Resurrectionists”, “Resurrection-men” or “Sack-’em-up Men” (116), and as Tait states: “With the rise of Edinburgh as a medical centre, in particular of its anatomical school […] the Resurrectionists became busy both in and around the city and in other parts of Scotland.” (Tait, 116). Nonetheless, people did not just stay still and watched as these illegal acts were being committed. The general public little by little was beginning to become more aware of these activities, and so they tried to “take measures in order to circumvent them.” (Tait, 117) They attempted to guard and to have watchers over the graves, but these efforts were not really that successful, most of the time being useless, as the watchers left their post and the graves for whatever reason and left “the cost clear for the “thieves of the night.”” (Tait, 117). But soon came to public knowledge the case of two men who had gone way too far in this business. These two were William Burke and William Hare, who committed what came to be known as the ‘West Port Murders’. Tait declares the following: “Burke and Hare appeared on the scene in the winter of 1827, but, having no stomach for body-snatching, they resorted to cold, calculated murder […]. By such means, some sixteen corpses of murdered folk were provided by Burke and Hare for Dr. Knox before the infamous pair were arrested in November 1828.” (Tait, 117) 17 To further the irony, after their trial, that resulted in the death penalty by hanging for Burke, the following day “a public lecture and demonstration was given on Burke’s brain” (Tait, 117). Tait also mentions how it was also possible that the figure of Robert Liston (1794-1847) could have been “the original of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Dr. Macfarlane in The Body Snatcher […]. He was an active resurrectionist as a student. A man of unusual initiative and considerable dexterity in operations, Liston rapidly became a well-known surgeon” (Tait, 120). Having been a supposedly good doctor with a good career, he had been part of the body-snatching business, and therefore, showing also the same duality that can be seen in Dr. Jekyll. “The Body Snatcher” (1884) is another precursor to Jekyll and Hyde written by Stevenson that also explores duality of human nature and the shady world of medical science. Ruth Richardson, for The Lancet in her article “The art of medicine: Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Body Snatcher” (2015) reflects on the figures of Burke, Hare and Dr. Knox within the story. The Body Snatcher concerns two grave-robbers, who are also medical students in Edinburgh and “run a dissecting room for their master, a thinly disguised Dr. Robert Knox, the 19th-century anatomist who purchased corpses from the infamous murderers William Burke and William Hare.” (Richardson, 412) Burke and Hare, or two people very similar to them, become support characters in Stevenson’s story, “”unclean and desperate interlopers who supplied the table”, delivering the body of a young woman for dissection.” (Richardson, 412) She also points out Stevenson’s childhood and his environment, which turns out had tied his own family to the industry of body snatching: “Not only had he been raised by a generation whose childhoods had been shadowed by body snatching and burking, but one of his uncles had actually trained under Knox himself. That generation was, however, passing: Sir William Fergusson—Knox’s assistant at the time of Burke and Hare—had died in London in 1877, Serjeant-Surgeon to Queen Victoria.” (Richardson, 413) 18 Richardson finally also brings up the character of Mcfarlane from The Body Snatcher, whom she believes to be “a prototype for both Jekyll and Hyde, in Stevenson’s novel published in 1886, only 2 years after The Body Snatcher.” (413) Curator Greg Buzwell, in his article “‘Man is not truly one, but truly two’: duality in Robert Louis Stevenson’s Stramge case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde” for The British Library supports the idea that maybe Stevenson had been also influenced by the man known as Dr. John Hunter, another very famous medical figure. Buzwell stated the following: “The depiction of Dr Jekyll’s house was possibly based on the residence of famous surgeon John Hunter (1728-1793), whose respectable and renowned house in Leicester Square in the late 18th century also had a secret. In order to teach and to gain knowledge about human anatomy, Hunter required human cadavers, many of them supplied by ‘resurrection men’ who robbed fresh graves. These were brought, usually at night, to the back entrance of the house, which had a drawbridge leading to the preparation rooms and lecture-theatre.” (Buzwell, “Man is not truly one, but truly two”) Taking into account the description of Jekyll’s house that Stevenson gives in the book it seems pretty clear that Hunter’s and Jekyll’s houses are extremely similar and could have even been one and the same. As explained in the quote above, John Hunter happened to live around the time of the Resurrectionists, and working for the field of anatomy, he also required of their service to provide him with subjects for his study of the human body, which were delivered to him supposedly through the backdoor of his house (Buzwell), thus committing these illegal operations and “evil deeds”, as it would’ve been considered at the time, covertly and unknown to everyone else, much like Henry Jekyll also transformed into his “evil-self”, Hyde, and left and entered his house through the back door. Insisting on the same topic is also Stephen Paget, who in his biography of Hunter published in 1897 called John Hunter, man of science and surgeon, he further encourages this theory when he explains that the house, that had been acquired by many people through the years and even had 19 served as museums, had been too a source of inspiration for Stevenson when he designed Jekyll’s house: “After Hunter's death, his great rambling mansion, three blocks thrown into one, passed through many hands. Till 1806 the Museum was still filled with his collection. Later, the premises were used as a gallery for the exhibition and sale of pictures, then as a Museum of the Mechanical Arts and National Manufactures, then (1874) as the Headquarters of the Middlesex Volunteer Artillery. And there is a tradition that Stevenson drew from them his picture of the house and museum of Dr. Jekyll.” (Paget, 155) 20 4. A New Concept of the Figure of the Monster The monster that Stevenson created is not what our current society would consider purely a monster, beings like Frankenstein, vampires or werewolves. Instead of that, Stevenson’s monster emerges from the dark and evil side of human nature. It is part of what and who we are. As I stated previously, the idea of this sinister alter ego or double was not something completely new and original, as it had been studied and talked about before, but Stevenson’s work helped the popularity of this idea to get so much attention in literature, not just in the idea that we had of man, but of society in itself. 4.1. The Duality of Dr. Henry Jekyll The story of this Strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde presents to the reader the tale of the professional and respectable Dr. Henry Jekyll, who is actually guilty of leading a double life that is a secret to the rest of the people surrounding him. The way by which he manages to lead this double life is by creating a potion that separates his two inner selves. On the one side the doctor is able to remain himself, honorable and correct, but once he consumes the potion he created he transforms into his other evil self, whom he names Edward Hyde. This double personality that comes out when he drinks the potion allows Jekyll to satiate his most inappropriate and less morally acceptable desires without restrictions and punishments. According to Masao Miyoshi in his “Masks in the Mirror: the eighteen-nineties”: “While Jekyll and his ilk continue to live in the lie of respectability, the “idealized” double who is Jekyll’s joyboy must carry the burden of the disguise. Jekyll fears disclosure of the Hyde who is his “true” identity [...] for fear of losing forever the exquisite pleasure of that second life.” (qtd. In Bloom, 5603) 21 Throughout the story of The Strange Case of Jekyll and Hyde there is a huge contrast between the character of Hyde and the rest of the people that surround him that can be appreciated. All the characters, who happen to be male, seem to have their lives kept together, all of them respectable and professionals of their respective fields. The story is mostly told from Mr. Utterson’s perspective, a lawyer who is, as Miyoshi puts it, “a highly respected citizen and counselor: in his professional life, he is always correct and trustworthy, yet there is something furtive and suppressed about him” (qtd. In Bloom, 5604). At the very beginning of the story, Utterson is described the following way: “Mr. Utterson the lawyer was a man of a rugged countenance, that was never lighted by a smile; cold, scanty and embarrassed in discourse; backward in sentiment; lean, long, dusty, dreary, and yet somehow loveable. At friendly meetings, and when the wine was to his taste, something eminently human beaconed from his eye; something indeed which never found its way into his talk, [...]. He was austere with himself; drank gin when he was alone, to mortify a taste for vintages; and though he enjoyed the theatre, had not crossed the doors of one for twenty years.” (Stevenson, 3) Mr. Utterson is portrayed as “cold”, “scanty” and “austere with himself” (3), but when he drinks people can see something different in him that they never really get to see fully because it “never finds its way into his talk” (3). He also states that he likes the theatre and yet he has not seen a play “for twenty years” (3). All of these elements could portray the obvious need for him to keep safe his respectable appearance in the repressed Victorian society. Miyoshi does point out that there is still a “suggestion of vicarious pleasure”, as “Utterson, too, it turns out, has a past not quite innocent”. (qtd. in Bloom, 5604). As Miyoshi explains, when Utterson deduces that the motive for Jekyll to leave everything he has in his will to Hyde in case he dies or disappears could be that Hyde is blackmailing Jekyll, Utterson worries about his friend, but then he quickly “considers the possibility of a similar treat to himself” (qtd. In Bloom): “and the lawyer, scared by the thought, brooded a while on his own past, groping in all the corners of memory, lest by chance some Jack-in- the-Box of an old iniquity should leap to light there” (Stevenson, 19). We never get to know about the lawyer’s past, but it does seem suspicious how he looks back to the old days and worries that 22 something similar to what Jekyll is going through might also happen to him and he could end up being blackmailed by Hyde as well. Another example of Utterson’s own possible double nature can be found in chapter 1, while he’s conversing with Mr. Einfield. During this exchange, in which Utterson asks his distant relative and friend if he had “asked about the – place with the door” (8), referring to the door Mr. Hyde had been seen departing from, Einfield answers the following: “No, sir: I had a delicacy,” was the reply. “I feel very strongly about putting questions; it partakes too much of the style of the day of judgment. You start a question, and it’s like starting a stone. You sit quietly on the top of a hill; and away the stone goes, starting others; and presently some bland old bird (the last you would have thought of) is knocked on the head in his own back-garden and the family have to change their name. No, sir, I make it a rule of mine: the more it looks like Queer Street, the less I ask.” (Stevenson, 8) In this fragment we can appreciate Einfield’s policy of not sticking his nose where it does not belong, typical of the repressed society of the time. Given that the public image of people could be affected, Einfield decides that he would rather not ask any questions. And with this, Utterson seems to agree wholeheartedly with him when he says: “A very good rule, too,” (Stevenson, 8). In the same chapter, there is also the case of a fellow doctor, similar to Jekyll, a pillar of respectability, but who in presence of Hyde behaves in the following way according to Einfield’s description: “But the doctor’s case was what struck me. He was the usual cut-and-dry apothecary, of no particular age and colour, with a strong Edinburgh accent, and about as emotional as a bagpipe. Well, sir, he was like the rest of us; every time he looked at my prisoner, I saw that Sawbones turn sick and white with desire to kill him. I knew what was in his mind, just as he knew what was in mine; and killing being out of the question, we did the next best. We told the man we could and would make such a scandal out of this, as should make his name stink from one end of London to the other. If he had any friends or any credit, we undertook that he should lose them.” (Stevenson, 6) The duality of the doctor is shown, he is on the verge of losing control of his actions, and he emanates “desire to kill” (Stevenson, 6) Hyde, but because of the predominance of the repressiveness of the Victorian society, he turns to what he considers to be the next best option, and that is damaging Hyde’s reputation around London. This shows, again, just how important 23 appearances are for the people of this time, enough to consider it a fair punishment for Hyde’s terrible actions. Finally, there is the case of Dr. Lanyon, another of Utterson’s good friends, someone who disagrees with Jekyll’s methods or as he calls them: “scientific heresies” (Stevenson, 21). In his case, Lanyon ends up dying when he finds himself unable to deal with the sight of Jekyll’s transformation, “a phenomenon which his matter-of-fact science cannot explain” (qtd. In Bloom, 5604). As Lanyon mentions to Utterson in chapter 9: “I saw what I saw, I heard what I heard, and my soul sickened at it; and yet now when that sight has faded from my eyes, I ask myself if I believe it, and I cannot answer. My life is shaken to its roots; [...] I feel that my days are numbered, and that I must die; and yet I shall die incredulous. As for the moral turpitude that man unveiled to me, even with tears of penitence, I cannot, even in memory, dwell on it without a start of horror.” (Stevenson, 66) In conclusion, and as Miyoshi states, the other “important men of the book, then, are all unmarried, intellectually barren, emotionally stifled, joyless” (qtd. In Bloom, 5605). However, when it comes to Dr. Jekyll, this sense of repression of his own desires does not compare to what Utterson and the rest of the characters do, which is simply accept it and conceal their impulses, which leads them to live sad and boring lives, or to straight up die, like Dr. Lanyon. Jekyll instead, being conscious of his own duality and embracing it in a way, tries to find a solution, and he manages to do this when he creates his potion, a potion that allows his body to transform, and as a consequence, grants him the possibility to set himself free from his and society’s inhibitions, dwelling on whatever his alter ego desires without repercussions. Lauren McDonald defends: “As the reader we recognize that they are actually two different individuals living in the same body. [...] Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are very different individuals. Jekyll is handsome and “good” in the eyes of society whereas Hyde is ugly and “evil” when viewed through society’s glasses.” (McDonald, 2) The opinions held by society and the people surrounding both Jekyll and Hyde are completely opposite. Society accepts Jekyll, but it does not accept Hyde. It accepts Jekyll’s actions even if his scientific methods are not everyone’s cup of tea and the doctor seems to manage to 24 maintain his good reputation, but on the other hand society does not take Hyde’s actions well. One could come to think that social class can have something to do with it, that higher classes and people with respectable professional positions do not commit unacceptable actions and therefore they are to be respected because they always behave accordingly and properly. But McDonald comes to the conclusion that the fact that Jekyll and Hyde are one in Stevenson’s novel and how they share the same body serves as a way to show society that “there really was not so much distinction between the classes of society and that everyone is capable of evil” (3) even if you are a well respected doctor. Jekyll’s social respectability has no meaning to it because inside he was also Hyde who was being searched for as a criminal. This way “the lines between the social classes were blurred because one man, Jekyll, fit into two social classes by transforming himself into Hyde.” (McDonald, 3) Victorians are known to prefer “normalcy” (McDonald, 4), they craved for what they considered for them to be the conventional and mandatory behavior, if something happened that was out of those boundaries of normalcy, they did not feel comfortable around it. As McDonald puts it: “Victorians feared abnormality and tried to hide it. I think Victorians wanted to believe that everyone was that they were what they appeared to be. I also think that they wanted everyone to fit into the category of “normal” so their actions would be predictable” (4). Predictability is a factor that very commonly is associated with “normalcy”, so it is easy to agree with McDonald’s thoughts when she states the following: “Jekyll and Hyde went against this social norm because they were unpredictable; eventually Jekyll couldn’t even predict or control Hyde. I think this suggestion in Stevenson’s novel would probably have frightened the reader because it eluded to lack of control and disorder in society.” (McDonald, 3) The first physical description of Dr. Henry Jekyll that we have access to in the novel occurs in chapter 3, “Dr. Jekyll was Quite at Ease”, in which the narrator depicts him as “a large, wellmade, smooth-faced man of fifty, with something of a slyish cast perhaps, but every mark of 25 Victorian setting. This means that the descriptions Stevenson gives of “well-maintained and safe city streets are contrasted with those of dirty, neglected and hostile areas of the city” (Czyżewska and Głąb, 20): “Two doors from one corner, on the left hand going east, the line was broken by the entry of a court; and just at that point, a certain sinister block of building thrust forward its gable on the street. It was two stories high; showed no window, nothing but a door on the lower story and a blind forehead of discoloured wall on the upper; and bore in every feature, the marks of prolonged and sordid negligence. The door, which was equipped with neither bell nor knocker, was blistered and distained. Tramps slouched into the recess and struck matches on the panels; children kept shop upon the steps; the schoolboy had tried his knife on the mouldings; and for close on a generation, no one had appeared to drive away these random visitors or to repair their ravages.” (Stevenson, 4- 5) Like I have previously stated at the beginning of this project, critics found very interesting how dualism had been brilliantly introduced in Stevenson’s style and setting and how different elements on the environment help to emphasize Stevenson’s concept of duality. Czyżewska and Głąb insist that “apparently, he introduced the motif of duality from the beginning of the story. In the cited passage, obviously, it refers to the two different spheres of the city.” (20) Additionally, “the dark corners of urban descriptions correlate with the equally dark recesses of the human psyche.” (Czyżewska and Głąb, 21) intertwining even more the characters with the places they frequent. One only needs to pay attention to the descriptions of the setting when Hyde is present. The street where he lives is described by Utterson the following way: “The dismal quarter of Soho seen under these changing glimpses, with its muddy ways, and slatternly passengers, and its lamps, which had never been extinguished or had been kindled afresh to combat this mournful re-invasion of darkness, seemed, in the lawyer’s eyes, like a district of some city in a nightmare” (Stevenson, 27) Nocturnal foggy streets and dimly lit street lamps seem to constitute the sinister atmosphere surrounding Mr Edward Hyde, threatening and ominous enough that Utterson compares it to the scenery typical of a bad dream. As a result, the reader is left wandering in a mist of mystery, enigma 32 and uneasiness, “toiling in mere darkness and besieged by questions” (Stevenson, 13), just like Utterson in his numerous nightmares even previous to meeting Hyde in person: “He would be aware of the great field of lamps of a nocturnal city; then of a figure of a man walking swiftly; then of a child running from the doctor’s; and then these met, and that Juggernaut trod the child down and passed on regardless of her screams. […] The figure […] haunted the lawyer all night; and if at any time he dozed over, it was but to see it glide more stealthily through sleeping houses, or move the more swiftly and still the more swiftly, even to dizziness, through wider labyrinths of lamplighted city, and at every street-corner crush a child and leave her screaming” (Stevenson, 14). 33 5. Jack the Ripper, the Real Mr. Hyde? Who was Jack the Ripper? Richard Jones, the site author of The Jack the Ripper 1888 historical resource site, defines him as “the world’s most famous serial killer” (Jones, Jack the Ripper 1888). The crimes committed by this unexposed murderer were a series of brutal murders in the East End of London in 1888, murders that also came to be known as ‘The Whitechapel Murders’. All of the canonical five victims were, in fact, prostitutes, a profession that had became quite popular in “one of London’s poorest and most crime-ridden quarters” (Jones). Jones declares that the first canonical victim is considered to be Mary Nichols, who was found dead on August 31st 1888, with her throat cut open and disemboweled. A week after, on September 8th, a second victim was found that was identified as Annie Chapman, this time “the violence had escalated, with the killer having removed and gone off with her womb” (Jones). The next victim, Elisabeth Stride, was found on 30th September, but it seemed like the killer had been interrupted, as “her throat had been cut, but she had not been mutilated” (Jones). Nevertheless, Catherine Eddowes, his fourth victim, that had also been killed the during same night, was mutilated, as he had removed her face, uterus and one of her kidneys. And finally, the body of the last of the five canonical victims, Mary Kelly, was found “skinned down to the bone” (Jones). Jones further explains that because of the “skill and speed that he displayed in removing the organs” the Divisional Police Surgeon at the time, Dr George Bagster Philips, had “suggested that the murderer possessed some anatomical knowledge” (Jones). And so the theory of the doctor or medical man behind the gruesome acts of the killer started to become popular. This meant that the culprit was considered a normal and respectable working man by day, that became a serial murderer of prostitutes by night. 34 In another one of his articles, called “Jack the Ripper and violence” (2014), Jones explores the possibility of the society of the time having influenced Jack into committing his crimes. In the middle of the literary production of that Victorian society was, indeed, Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, as apparently “there was a lot of controversy at the time over the stage play.” (Jones, “Jack the Ripper and violence”) With the novel having sold thousands of copies since its publishing in 1886, different adaptations were created. The most popular play adaptation was the one that opened in August of 1888, “playing at London’s Lyceum Theatre, with American actor Richard Mansfield performing the dual role of Jekyll and Hyde.” (Jones, 2014). Jones declares that because of the absolutely impeccable and terrifying performance, and the magnificent way the transformations were represented, the audiences were extremely frightened and alarmed at the thought that his “Mr Hyde persona might not be all down to acting, and some were even wondering if Mansfield himself might be responsible for the East End murders” (Jones, 2014) Yes, the accusation might seem ridiculous today, but even the newspapers covered the controversy and drew “a parallel between Mansfield’s depiction of the evil Hyde, and the all too real villain who was bringing terror to the East End streets of the Metropolis” (Jones, 2014), Jack the Ripper. As it turns out, even letters were sent to the City of London Police accusing Mansfield of being the serial killer: “‘I should be the Last to think because A man take A dretfull Part he is therefore Bad but when I went to See Mr Mansfield Take the Part of Dr Jekel and Mr Hyde I felt at once that he was the Man Wanted … I do not think there is A man Living So well able to disgise Himself in A moment …’” (Anonymous, 5 October 1888) Of course, these accusations against him were not taken seriously by the investigators, but the connection between the character Mr. Hyde and the invisible East End killer was still being noticed by the crowds. As Judith Flanders exposes in her article “Jack the Ripper” (2014), when, three weeks after the opening of the play, “a prostitute was found murdered in Whitechapel – the start of the series of murders known as the Jack the Ripper killings – many people connected 35 Stevenson’s outwardly respectable Dr Jekyll and the murderous Mr Hyde” (Flanders, 2014) with the serial killer, and even the newspapers at the time actively referred to the East End killer as Mr. Hyde. Sadly, because of the strong controversy surrounding the play and the killings, “the play of Jekyll and Hyde was closed, for reasons of taste. Yet the idea of outward respectability and inner corruption remained in the air” (Flanders, “Jack the Ripper”, 2014). 36 6. Conclusions As I have shown in this study, the theme of duality was of great importance in the times of Victorian England, be it for the society or for literary works like The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Of course, this theme happens to be very complex, and one can take many different paths to pursue in order to understand it in relation to Stevenson’s work, but sadly, because of the lack of space and because of the fact that maybe they fell a little out of the scope, I could not actually approach other possibilities. Still, it is undeniable that duality is a very rich topic and there are many possible different approaches that could lead to very different and interesting conclusions. As I came to understand it, duality shows the two sides of humanity, the good and the evil. Victorian society happened to reject their duality in their everyday lives, choosing to repress their inner “evil” selves, in order to obtain exterior acceptance from their social circles. People that belonged to higher classes showed a facade that hid their true imperfect self. Nevertheless, they did show an interest in the study of the topic, as works like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde did in fact reach a high level of popularity, sold many copies and also ended up being adapted afterwards. Stevenson himself experienced this duality during his entire life, from the divided Edinburgh that he lived in, to the many historical figures that happened to influence his views on it. It seems obvious to me that duality was of great importance for the writer, as he tried, work after work, to write something that he actually thought did it true justice. This novel brought up a new possible figure of the monster, that this time was born from the inside of human nature, a truly terrifying possibility. On the one hand, we have the character of Henry Jekyll, a true human being, both good and evil. A respectable doctor liked by everyone, but who, drunken in his own scientific pride, takes it upon himself to artificially create his own “salvation”, a potion that, because of his own recklessness, ends up killing him. 37 And on the other hand, there is the pure and liberated essence of evil within Jekyll, Edward Hyde, who, because of the doctor’s carelessness, becomes stronger and more powerful and ends up prevailing over him. From pushing a little girl in the middle of the street to the straight up murder of a man in the darkness of the night, Hyde shows no signs of remorse and mercy, only caring for his own pleasure and survival. I found the way Stevenson wrote the novel very intriguing, all elements referring back to the same topic of duality. One of them being the setting, as it is clearly used to help emphasize the contrariety between the charming and “cocket” streets of London where Utterson walks through during the day and the apparent front entrance to Jekyll’s nice house, and the darkness, fogginess, decay and mystery engulfing the scene whenever Mr. Hyde makes his appearance. 38 7. Bibliography Anonymous, “Review of The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde”. The Times, 25 January 1886. The British Library, Collection Items, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/the-times-review-of-strange-case-of-dr-jekyll-and-mr- hyde. Accessed 29 May 2018. Anonymous, “Anonymous letter to City of London Police about Jack the Ripper”. 5 October 1888. The British Library, Collection Items, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/anonymous-letter-to-city-of-london-police-about-jack- the-ripper. Accessed 28 May 2018. Balfour, Graham. The Life of Robert Louis Stevenson – Vol 2. Charles Scrobner’s Sons, New York. 1901. pp. 16-18. https://www.questia.com/library/215903/the-life-of-robert-louis-stevenson. Accessed 29 May 2018. Baumeister, Roy F. “How the self became a problem: A psychological review of historical research”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 52 (1). Jan. 1987. pp. 163-176. http://persweb.wabash.edu/facstaff/hortonr/articles%20for%20class/Baumeister%20self %20as%20problem.pdf . Accessed 4 June 2018. Bin, Xiao. "Morality In Victorian Period." Theory & Practice In Language Studies, Vol. 5, No. 9, pp. 1815-1821, September 2015, China. Bloom, Harold. The Chelsea House Library of Literary Criticism. The Critical Perspective. Volume 9. 1989,“Masao Miyoshi From “Masks in the Mirror: The Eighteen-Nineties” The Divided Self: A Perspective on the Literature of the Victorians, 1969” pp. 5603-5606. 39 Braune, Teege. “In Boozo Veritas #47: Mon Semblable, Mon Frère!”, (23 June 2014). <https://thedrunkenodyssey.com/tag/strange-case-of-dr-jekyll-and-mr-hyde/>. Accessed 8 June 2018. Brown, Horatio F. John Addington Symonds: A Biography compiled from his papers and correspondence. Library of the University of California Santa Cruz, 1908, p. 408 https://archive.org/stream/johnaddingtonsy02symogoog#page/n406/mode/2up Accessed 2 June 2018 Buzwell, Greg. “’Man is not truly one, but truly two’: duality in Robert Louis Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde” The British Library. http://www.britishlibrary.cn/en/articles/man-is-not-truly-one-but-truly-two-duality-in- robert-louis-stevensons-strange-case-of-dr-jekyll-and-mr-hyde/. Accessed 10 June 2018. Czyżewska, Urszula, and Głąb, Grzegorz. “Robert Louis Stevenson Philosophically: Dualism and existentialism within the gothic convention”, Roczniki Filozoficzne (Annals of Philosophy), 2014. https://www.kul.pl/files/581/Roczniki_Filozoficzne/Roczniki_Filozoficzne_62_3_2014/Czyzewska _Glab_19.pdf Accessed 18 June 2018 “Dualism”, Oxford English Dictionary Online, Oxford University Press, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/58113?redirectedFrom=dualism#eid, Accessed 8 June 2018 Flanders, Judith. “Jack the Ripper”. British Library. Discovering Literature: Romantics and Victorians. 15 May 2014, https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/jack-the-ripper . Accessed 20 June 2018. Gish, Nancy K. Article Jekyll and Hyde: The Psychology of Dissociation on International Journal of Scottish Literature. Issue two, Spring/Summer 2007. http://www.ijsl.stir.ac.uk/issue2/gish.htm. Accessed 1 June 2018. 40 Huang, Han-Yu. “Monsters, Perversion, and Enjoyment: Toward a Psychoanalytic Theory of Postmodern Horror”. Tamkang University, March 2007. pp. 91-96, http://www.concentric-literature.url.tw/issues/The%20Gothic%20Revisited/5.pdf Accessed 1 June 2018. Johnson, Ben. “Deacon Brodie”. Historic UK. Ltd. Company Registered in England No. 5621230. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/Deacon-William-Brodie/ Accessed 9 June 2018. Jones, Richard, Jack the Ripper 1888, 2007, www.Jack-the-ripper.org . Accessed 21 June 2018. // “Jack the Ripper and violence”, September 2014, Jack the Ripper Tour. A Walk Worth Investigating. https://www.jack-the-ripper-tour.com/generalnews/jack-the-ripper-and- violence/ Accessed 21 June 2018. Lang, Andrew. “Review of The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde” British Library. Collection Items, 9 January 1886, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/andrew-langs-review-of-strange-case-of-dr-jekyll-and- mr-hyde. Accessed 29 May 2018. McDonald, Lauren. “Duality in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, The Picture of Dorian Gray, and “Dionea””. 2008, Student Writing Awards. 4. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/swa/4 Paget, Stephen. Masters of Medicine:“John Hunter, man of science and surgeon”, 1897, p. 155 https://archive.org/details/johnhuntermanofs00pageuoft Accessed 10 June 2018. Poe, Edgar Allan. Edgar Allan Poe: The Storyteller. “The Story of William Wilson”. American Literary Classics. Second Edition: 2013. pp. 6-21. https://americanenglish.state.gov/files/ae/resource_files/edgar_allan_poe_storyteller.pdf Accessed 5 June 2018. 41