meena7861234
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
The new GCSE exams have got me stressing out so if anyone has any Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde notes (quotes and analysis) please can you share them with me? I also do An Inspector Calls and Macbeth.
Thank you.

These are my quotes so far:
First description of hydes evil nature- 'man trampled calmly over child's body' which shows he's comfortable with violence which comes naturally. Stevenson deliberately inflicts the violence onto the child to show the lack of remorse and to increase the readers fear of his character.
0
reply
jamesg2
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
Meena,

I do not have too much time tonight so I will just make a few of points. At the weekend I will give a more considered
response.

I do not agree with your explanation of the trampling of the little girl. She had been sent by her family to fetch the doctor and was returning back to her house when she bumped into Hyde. The trampling was not a deliberate act of violence but a reaction - I believe - to the shock of her bumping into him.

The assault on the girl has to have happened the week before the Sunday walk which opens the novella. There is no way an incident like that would not have been reported by Enfield to Mr Utterson on their previous Sunday walk. However in his statement Dr. Jekyll comments that once he had stabilised Hyde he would go out on excirsions as Hyde. This was one such excursion and up to that point there had been no acts of violence by Hyde. The act of violence that happens here is a consequence of shock. This incident is not the same as Sir Danvers where the attack is instigated by Hyde.

In addition the description of this act is not Hyde's, it is Enfield's who is emotionaly shocked at what he has just witnessed. The doctor who attends the girl reports that she was not seriously injured. Hyde also volunteers compensation. He offers £100. In todays money that would be £109,000. And remember Jekyll is a millionaire.

Yes Hyde hurts the girl and if Enfield had not gone after him and forced him to return he would have ignored the injured girl and gone home.

But he did not attack the girl he reacted to the girl bumping into him. Of 90% of his time as a person, Hyde is non violent. It appears that on the excursions that jekyll took him on it was to the red light areas of London. As a rule Stevenson did not involve his character's with sex - and that may have also been the case with Hyde - but there are sufficient hints in the novella that he certainly enjoyed voyerism.

The problem is Jekyll's belief that it is possible to separate the two nature's of man and by doing so curb man's more violent self. What alarms jekyll is that he cannot control the Hyde aspect of his character. And that is important to remember, these are not two different people: they are two different aspects of Jekyll. Jekyll and Hyde are not two different people but two parts of the same person. Hyde is the submerged part of jekyll as opposed to a different person.

The murder of Sir danvers is caused by jekyll. Shocked that one morning he awakes as Hyde he isolates Hyde and for two months does not take the medicine that transforms him. When he does so - two moths later - Hyde is bouncing off the ceiling and when Jekyll takes him out he is aware that he is highly unstable. We know that Sir Danvers had a letter for Mr Utterson but we do not know what it is that he stopped Hyde to ask him.

The responsibility for the murder of Sir Danvers is two fold. First is Hyde - although he is furious with Jekyll for leaving him for two months - it was his decision to blungeon Danvers to death. Second is Jekyll. He knew when he transformed into Hyde that Hyde was extremely unstable: both emotionally and as a character. He now had the ability to transform back to Hyde without the portion. Jekyll knew that yet he took Hyde out into London where he met Sir Danvers.

As you will be aware, duality is one of the themes of the novella. It was a theme that Stevenson developed in a number of his works of shorter prose. Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is not the only work where Stevenson explored this theme. It is easy to jump onto the cliche of Hyde as the epitomy of evil but I believe you do the story an injustice by doing so. It is the story of a good man with a noble intention who believe's it is possible to separate the two nature's of man. In a sense the story is a tradgety. Here we have a character who has a fatal flaw - that he can thinks he can separate these two aspects of man - and only when it is too late - when he is unable to control the Hyde aspect which keeps returning on its own account - does Jekyll realise just what he has done. But by that time it is too late.
3
reply
mattme1963
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Look at the contextual detail needed for these quotes:
'I incline to Cain's heresy'
'would have estranged Damon and Pythius'
'like some damned Juggernaut'
'pede claudo'
I don't like the novella as a whole, but the context actually makes these references pretty interesting...
0
reply
jamesg2
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
"I incline to Cain' heresy" is a comment by My Utterson regarding his approach to others and his potential clients.
"would have estranged Damon and Pythius" is a reference by Lanyon and describes his opinion of Dr. jekyll's experiment. It is a good quote if you are focusing on
Jekyll as a character and some of the issues I raised above.
"like some damned Juggernaut" is Enfield's dscription of how Hyde trampled the girl.
"pede claudo" Is a Mr. Utterson comment and is an abbreviated reference to the Latin phrase "pede poena claudo" which translates to "punishment comes limping." It is a reference to Jekyll and Utterson's belief that there is a cost to what he is doing.

I do not understand - and I believe Matt might be feeling the same - what is your focus and approach. Are you trying to argue that Hyde is a monster and evil? It
can work - and if that is your approach - aside from the Juggernaut quote most of the other quotes will not be of help.

It would help if you could outline what you feel about the novella and what area you want to focus on.
0
reply
meena7861234
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by jamesg2)
Meena,

I do not have too much time tonight so I will just make a few of points. At the weekend I will give a more considered
response.

I do not agree with your explanation of the trampling of the little girl. She had been sent by her family to fetch the doctor and was returning back to her house when she bumped into Hyde. The trampling was not a deliberate act of violence but a reaction - I believe - to the shock of her bumping into him.

The assault on the girl has to have happened the week before the Sunday walk which opens the novella. There is no way an incident like that would not have been reported by Enfield to Mr Utterson on their previous Sunday walk. However in his statement Dr. Jekyll comments that once he had stabilised Hyde he would go out on excirsions as Hyde. This was one such excursion and up to that point there had been no acts of violence by Hyde. The act of violence that happens here is a consequence of shock. This incident is not the same as Sir Danvers where the attack is instigated by Hyde.

In addition the description of this act is not Hyde's, it is Enfield's who is emotionaly shocked at what he has just witnessed. The doctor who attends the girl reports that she was not seriously injured. Hyde also volunteers compensation. He offers £100. In todays money that would be £109,000. And remember Jekyll is a millionaire.

Yes Hyde hurts the girl and if Enfield had not gone after him and forced him to return he would have ignored the injured girl and gone home.

But he did not attack the girl he reacted to the girl bumping into him. Of 90% of his time as a person, Hyde is non violent. It appears that on the excursions that jekyll took him on it was to the red light areas of London. As a rule Stevenson did not involve his character's with sex - and that may have also been the case with Hyde - but there are sufficient hints in the novella that he certainly enjoyed voyerism.

The problem is Jekyll's belief that it is possible to separate the two nature's of man and by doing so curb man's more violent self. What alarms jekyll is that he cannot control the Hyde aspect of his character. And that is important to remember, these are not two different people: they are two different aspects of Jekyll. Jekyll and Hyde are not two different people but two parts of the same person. Hyde is the submerged part of jekyll as opposed to a different person.

The murder of Sir danvers is caused by jekyll. Shocked that one morning he awakes as Hyde he isolates Hyde and for two months does not take the medicine that transforms him. When he does so - two moths later - Hyde is bouncing off the ceiling and when Jekyll takes him out he is aware that he is highly unstable. We know that Sir Danvers had a letter for Mr Utterson but we do not know what it is that he stopped Hyde to ask him.

The responsibility for the murder of Sir Danvers is two fold. First is Hyde - although he is furious with Jekyll for leaving him for two months - it was his decision to blungeon Danvers to death. Second is Jekyll. He knew when he transformed into Hyde that Hyde was extremely unstable: both emotionally and as a character. He now had the ability to transform back to Hyde without the portion. Jekyll knew that yet he took Hyde out into London where he met Sir Danvers.

As you will be aware, duality is one of the themes of the novella. It was a theme that Stevenson developed in a number of his works of shorter prose. Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is not the only work where Stevenson explored this theme. It is easy to jump onto the cliche of Hyde as the epitomy of evil but I believe you do the story an injustice by doing so. It is the story of a good man with a noble intention who believe's it is possible to separate the two nature's of man. In a sense the story is a tradgety. Here we have a character who has a fatal flaw - that he can thinks he can separate these two aspects of man - and only when it is too late - when he is unable to control the Hyde aspect which keeps returning on its own account - does Jekyll realise just what he has done. But by that time it is too late.
Thanks for your response but I believe the text is open to interpretation. I think that Stevenson deliberately picked 'victims' that are vulnerable to heighten the victorian readers fear of Hyde and to emphasise how repressed his 'pleasures' really are. Hyde paid compensation to the girls family because of others pressuring him. In the text it is suggested that Jekyll in the form of Hyde didn't care about the girl because he 'trampled calmly' the oxymoron suggests this. If he didn't mean it or was just reacting would it not be more sincere after?

Also, I do believe Jekyll acknowledges his dark side and that's why Hyde was created so he could fulfill his desires without his repuatation being affected and also so he wouldn't face any consequences/punishments. I think that Jekyll does try to do good by creating Hyde as he believes that the dark side of him is being separated out of the respectable Victorian gentleman that the society think he is however he chooses to let Hyde out onto the streets ,as you said, whilst he knows that he is dangerous. Also, it's Jekyll himself that states if he had good intentions Hyde would have come out as a better person (or an angel?). Furthermore, Jekyll never accepts responsibility or even accepts that Hyde is a part of him proving he is not as good as he seems.
0
reply
jamesg2
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
It is clear Meena that you have a clear view of the novel and do not need further support. You know what you want to say.

Two points:-
a) It was Jekyll that paid the money to the girls family, not Hyde. It is Jekyll's signature on the cheque. Wherever Hyde goes Jekyll go as well. Hyde is Jekyll's route to those areas of London and experiences. He cannot do it without Hyde.
b) Here is a quote you might want to think about.
"Henry Jekyll stood at times aghast before the acts of Edward Hyde; but the situation was apart from ordinary laws, and insidiously relaxed the grasp of conscience. It was Hyde, after all, and Hyde alone, that was guilty. Jekyll was no worse; he woke again to his good qualities seemingly unimpaired; he would even make haste, where it was possible, to undo the evil done by Hyde. And thus his conscience slumbered."
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you finding researching unis for 2021 entry?

I have been able to get all the information I need from online research (51)
19.84%
I have tried virtual events and found them useful (58)
22.57%
I have tried virtual events and did not find them useful (48)
18.68%
I would be interested in trying socially distanced or scaled down in person events (54)
21.01%
I want to but don't know where to start with researching unis for 2021 entry (22)
8.56%
I haven't started researching yet (24)
9.34%

Watched Threads

View All