How Do You Like 'dem Apples?

If we've learned anything in the last two weeks, its that you don't mess with God (referring to the christian/catholic male deity). We've also learned that scientists who learn too much end up killing innocent people and die lonely and sad.

So last week, we had Frankenstein, a young scientist who learned too much, discovered too much, and created a monster that screwed up his entire life. Whether his intentions were good or not, he played God, created life in an unnatural way (i.e. without the help of woman) and was punished for it. He also died after losing all his family and friends and wasting his life chasing a monster through the tundra.

This week, we have Dr. Jekyll, a successful doctor who learned too much, discovered too much, and released his inner "monster" that screwed up his entire life. He, too, played God and created a new life from himself. This part of him effectively consumed him, destroyed him, killed him. He messed with the natural order of life and he "got what he deserved".

Those of us who grew up in the christian/catholic church know that God is super particular about the way life is made. Strictly between a man and a woman. Crazy shit happens when you try to mess with God's creation-of-life plans. And we all know that too much knowledge is always a bad thing (Adam and Eve screwed the pooch on this one). You learn too much? Boom: Humanity is cursed with sin and your son murders your other son. You have intercourse with someone of the same sex? Literally boom: he sends fire from the sky and burns entire cities to the ground and for the next two thousands years you live on the outskirts of civilization. Moral of the story? Don't mess with Gods way of creating life, man.

I see these two stories, both Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, as warnings from the authors. Knowledge, and especially too much of it, can be a really bad thing. It will ruin your life. Also, don't mess with how life is made because whatever thing you make, will inevitably kill you. Don't play God and God won't play you.

I actually kind of hate both of these lessons, however. These were both written during big moments of change in the world. There was a lot of new technologies and politics were constantly changing. Some people were scared about how these changes would affect the comfy lives they were accustomed to living. People were scared. They were scared their lives were about to be completely flipped, meaning they might be treated like those people they had marginalized for hundreds of years (sound familiar????)

So I say screw that. Knowledge is an amazing thing. Knowledge gives color and vibrancy to life. It makes you feel all types of things, good and bad. If we feel the same way constantly, if we're as "emotional as a bagpipe", are we really living? Is this a quality of life we should strive for? Aren't feelings what gives us life? On the whole life thing: surrogacy seems to be going pretty well and there aren't any robots trying to kill us yet so I think were doing pretty well on the creating-life-unnaturally front. Never stop striving to learn more and discover everything you're capable of. Screw the old way of doing things. I think civilization's doing pretty well for itself (compared to where we started that is...).






So how do you like 'dem apples, God?

How Many Skeletons Do You Have in Your Closet?

We all have skeletons in the closet - but they're generally not real skeletons.  How many of us actually could (or better yet, would want to) murder another person, or do some vicious deed, if no one would ever know?

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is more than just a statement of the dementedness of 19th century scientists (recall Frankenstein).  What Stevenson illustrates in this Victorian-era horror story is the innate desire of mankind to be guiltless monsters.  While the rules of society constrain us, we secretly desire to do evil deeds.

Stevenson's story argues that the potential to ruin one's own social status is what keeps the monster in each one of us at bay.  Reference to social image occurs throughout The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, such as Enfield's encounter with Mr. Hyde:

"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 has any friends or any credit, we undertook that he should lose them."

If status was the only thing keeping us from destroying each other, wouldn't we have completely annihilated our own species?  If we were solely murderous, ravenous animals, our system of self-restratint would have broken down a long time ago.  With one malicious mistake, the monster that has been trying to break out of its cage would escape and consume us.  Perhaps then we'd forget all about social status, or merely find ways to conceal our crimes.  Harmless members of society by day, but behind closed doors...

There must be something else that keeps us from being monsters.


Do we not all (or at least most of us) come equipped with some sense of moral consciousness? Stevenson's story neglects the human capacity for sympathy and its ability to create a naturally defined line between what is good and what is evil.  Sympathy is the very foundation of many typical societal ideals, such as anti-violence.  At times, sympathy causes us to feel compassion for complete strangers.  Society is not built purely for the purpose of constraining us, but is rooted in one of the very things that makes us human.  We are not all born innately monstrous - something evil in the world around us must ignite it.


References:

Stevenson, Robert Louis. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Ed. Stanley Appelbaum. Roslyn, NY: Dover Publications, 1991.
GIF source: http://imgur.com/gallery/oVr9Y

Dangerous Curiosity

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, like Frankenstein, has a variety of themes. One theme that I noticed over and over again is that curiosity is dangerous. These people seem to be consumed with curiosity and the desire to seek information. Mr. Utterson is an introvert who usually keeps to himself, but he for some reason became obsessed with finding Mr. Hyde and his relation to Dr. Jekyll. I kept thinking to myself, why the hell is so obsessed? Let it go man! I understand that Mr. Utterson is usually “the last reputable acquaintance and the last good influence in the lives of downgoing men” (1), which clearly shows throughout the novel, but he hasn’t talked to Dr. Jekyll in a long time and it is truly none of his business! His curiosity gets the best of him and ends up consuming much of his time and got him into this strange situation that changed his life forever.

Mr. Utterson tries to find Mr. Hyde, “if he could but once set eyes on him, he thought the mystery would lighten and perhaps roll altogether away” (8). But that rarely happens! Curiosity will get you in trouble, it does not solve anything. There are many times when you have been so curious that you become obsess, and then once you find some answers, you are still not satisfied. So what do you do? You go and find some more answers, and that just leads to trouble. The power of curiosity is so strong, we as humans do not limit ourselves. We want to know more and more, we let curiosity consume our everyday life. We want reasonable/logical explanations and we want them at all costs.

Dr. Lanyon gave in to his curiosity and guess what? He died. At first, all he had to do was help his friend and then go on with his life. But no, he had “gone too far in the way of inexplicable services to pause before [he saw] the end” (40). Even though Mr. Hyde warned him about what he can possibly witness and how it may change his life dramatically, he still decided to seek an explanation. He thought he was prepared, he thought that there was nothing to fear. Why are we so curious? Why do we always need an explanation? Why can’t we let go of things?

Dr. Jekyll believed that “man is not truly one, but truly two,” (43) for he felt like he lived a dual life. He believed that there was part of him who was just like any other man, and the other part was “pure evil,” (45). He was curious of that evil side, he wanted to see what would happen if he separated the two. His curiosity caused such chaos and death. Just because he could do it, it does not mean he should have, we discussed this with Frankenstein. He created a monster, whether he wanted to or not, that is what he did. And why did he create this monster? Because of curiosity!

When is it okay to give in to the curiosity? When do we go too far? How do we know we’ll go too far? We don’t. “It is one thing to mortify curiosity, another to conquer it,” (24) we may be able to suppress our curiosity for a while, but it is hard to control it. We will always want answers, but we have to make sure that we are prepared for the consequences. But that does not mean that we have to stop being curious, instead let’s be curious and cautious. If you are curious, look for answers, but if you reached answers that can be potentially dangerous, stop! Know your limits.