preview

Dr Jekyll And Mr Hyde Good Vs Evil Analysis

Better Essays

Within the novel, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, by Robert Louis Stevenson, there stands a strange case of good versus evil. However, this case has no great villain or even a valiant hero, it has only a man fighting with his vices and dark urges and desires, which grow darker, more morbid and perverted as the novel goes on. Then, as a means to free himself of such darkness and “evil,” the man creates an antidote or rather a cocktail of drugs to help him in such matter. The only problem being, the cocktail separates his psyche in two and with the two sides released from each other. The darkness, the bad, is allowed to grow and lash out unattended and unblocked. Good, however, is shown to overcome evil, by the actions and events …show more content…

From Hyde’s control and Jekyll’s lack or rather a complete absence of control over Hyde, Hyde can commit acts of murder and other misdeeds. In that absence of good, usually provided by Jekyll, Hyde thrives and can do anything he wants. Even in the very first moments of their separation, Hyde displays his new-found control by affecting Jekyll’s body. “Evil, … had left on that body an imprint of deformity and decay” (Stevenson X, 78). From this declaration from Jekyll’s own confession, Hyde is proven to have had control over Jekyll to affect even the body after the first dosage of Jekyll’s cocktail of drugs. When the doctor is away, “Hyde” is in the metaphorical “cockpit” and while he is in, Jekyll kills and acts rashly and cruelly. Moreover, just as his body is deformed and decayed as stated in the quote, Jekyll’s mind gradually becomes more and more deformed and decayed over time as well. In the absence of good Hyde grew, his influence grew and, his evil grew and all of it began to overwhelm and corrupt …show more content…

In contrast to that idea, the questions to answer would be whether those ideas would be worth trying before Jekyll lost complete control as well as why Hyde would suicide. Moreover, if the situation was even Jekyll saying so, because he cannot change back to himself, then why use that? Jekyll and Hyde are not two people, nor are they one person. What they are, are two halves of one whole human being. “The chemicals do not create the evil – they release it from the chains in which virtue has hitherto imprisoned it” (Dalrymple 27). As the quote points out, Jekyll and Hyde had never been two separate people they were always halves of a whole, metaphorical sides to a coin. So how could they truly refer to each other with “that” if they were never truly even others and not one person? The Hyde side of Jekyll was always there, and it was always part of Jekyll even if the potion split them, they were still one and at least familiar with each other. Furthermore, the quote indirectly suggests Hyde as a beast in chains, which fits exactly with Hyde’s background of being the suppressed by Jekyll and his actions as would a wild beast do when it is released, go wild. From Hyde’s tirade and even from his actions, would the beast, Hyde, truly bring itself down? Thus, affirming that Jekyll ended himself to end the wild tirade and

Get Access