To look at the duality of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Macbeth
In this essay, I am going to analyse the concept of duality in Robert Louis Stevenson’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Shakespeare’s Macbeth.
The meaning of duality is the quality or condition of having two sides to something, such as good and evil, love and hate and black and white. The novella ‘Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’ Centre’s around ‘duality’. The author R.L.S (Robert Louis Stevenson) introduces us to the two sides of a person, Dr. Jekyll, an “established gentleman”, with “the respect of the wise and good” in society. Whilst Dr. Jekyll lives a virtuous life, he also has sins and desires that he keeps hidden. Within him, the good and the evil sides of his personality are fighting. The author uses the language of battle, writing that there is “war” inside of Dr. Jekyll and illustrates the struggle between the two sides as “two forces meeting on a battlefield”. Dr. Jekyll feels that he is leading a double life and believes that this duality can be found in all humans: “man is not truly one, but truly two”.
The character Mr. Utterson is an additional example of duality. He is described as ‘dusty and dreary’, whilst also being ‘lovable and friendly’; again, we are shown two different sides to one person.
In the novella even property is talked about as being two sided. On one side of the street, the properties are described in a positive manner, “freshly- painted shutters” and “well polished brasses”, demonstrating how the residents took pride in maintaining their property. The other side of the street is described as being almost unattractive and neglected, with “the marks of prolonged and sordid negligence” and “the door which was equipped with neither bell nor knocker, was blistered and disdained”. The reader gets the impression that almost anything has two sides to it.
In the Victorian period Lombroso’s theory was that you could recognize if a person was a criminal by their physical appearance and how they acted. Lombroso’s ideology was that criminals are distinguished from non-criminals by multiple physical abnormalities. R.L.S (Robert Louis Stevenson) had a great understanding of various medical theories and included Lombroso’s theory in the novella by stating that Mr Utterson said, “I had taken a loathing to the gentleman at first sight”. This suggests that there must have been something out of the ordinary about his appearance.
R.L.S (Robert Louis Stevenson) emphasizes the meaning of duality by speaking about Mr. Carew compared to Mr Hyde. He quotes “a very pretty manner of politeness” this suggests to the reader that Mr Carew is very gentlemanly and well mannered, whilst on the other hand Mr Hyde is described as “trampling his victim under foot and hailing down a storm of blows”. This automatically gives us the idea of the two being complete opposites and M. Hyde proving Lombroso’s theory to be true.
However, Mr Carew may not have necessarily been as ‘angelic’ as the novella described. It was important to maintain a certain amount of respectability in Victorian England; so what may have been presented on the outside by Mr Carew, does not mean he was as innocent as he came across. Mr Hyde presented himself with ‘ape-like fury’; this gives the reader the impression that he was sub-human.
The writers use of personification is used a handful of times throughout the novella. This can be shown not only when the author talked about the street of houses, but also in chapter five when he describes the fog: “the fog still slept on the wing above the drowned city”. In addition to this, personification can also be found in the text when the author describes the laboratory as being “dingy, gaunt, littered and strewn”. This tells the reader that the laboratory is in disarray, a lot like Dr Jekyll himself.
It states in the novella that Mr. Utterson passes through the laboratory when making his way to Dr. Jekyll’s cabinet (office). I interpret this as yet another way for the author to show the two sides of Dr. Jekyll’s personality; i.e. the lab symbolizing Mr. Hyde as being “distasteful” and “strewn”, whilst the cabinet was described as having “coeval-glass” and a “business table”, elegant and radiating warmth, just as the respected Dr. Jekyll.
In the penultimate chapter, where the novella climaxes, we see the transformation from Mr. Hyde to Dr. Jekyll for the first time. Dr. Lanyon describes Mr. Hyde as a creature. This automatically tells the reader that he is dehumanizing him based on his physical appearance. He is judging his place in society purely based on his looks. In a modern society, we would find this unpleasant and unfair, however considering the era in which the novella was written this was considered almost normal behaviour.
An example can be seen when Dr. Lanyon first meets Mr. Hyde. He describes him as having a “shocking expression”, which gives the impression of him not having the average appearance. This is because he was comparing him to the men that the doctor was used to associating himself with.
This initial opinion creates an automatic suspicion amongst the reader. He bases his opinion at the beginning on his own “personal distaste” for Mr. Hyde. He is making a judgment because he feels that there is something rather peculiar about him. This could make the reader feel that Dr. Lanyon's character comes across as judgmental because he’s used to people ‘looking’ a certain way. He goes on to describe Mr. Hyde’s clothing as “enormously too large for him”, giving the reader the idea that he is not the average person and shares certain animalistic properties in his character.
Stevenson almost trains his readers into thinking the possibility of a less evolved human is within all people, even if they come across as civilized on the outside. Hyde presents himself “like a madman” and is “ape-like” , even though he’s apart of Dr. Jekyll. This allows the reader to understand that there is a sense of restraint in Dr. Jekyll’s civilized side of persona, although without it, all that would be left is the pure evil of Hyde.
Dr. Lanyon describes Hyde as being “abnormal” and “misbegotten”, meaning that he would have been the classic example of someone frowned upon in society, not adhering to the accepted rules.
Further, from a religious point of view, Mr Hyde may be interpreted as badly designed by God.
Similarly, Duality is also represented in the Shakespearian play Macbeth.
In the beginning of the play, Macbeth is presented as a loyal soldier and reacts strongly to the predictions from the witches. He is in two minds of what to do ‘If chance will have me king why chance may crown me.’ This shows that although Macbeth has acknowledged what the witches have predicted and that he is happy he will one day become king; he feels that it will happen almost naturally, without any actions being carried out on his part. The audience feel quite well disposed about Macbeth at this point because they are under the impression that he is still loyal to the king. The readers of this generation may question as too why Macbeth even believed the prophesy, but it has too be remembered that in Elizabethan times witches and the super-natural were a commonly held belief, feared by many.
As the play progresses, Macbeth’s alteration from soldier too tyrant occurs due too the immense
pressure he is put under by his wife, Lady Macbeth, as well as gaining knowledge that Malcolm will become King Duncan’s successor. This invites the reader to think, that after hearing this news, Macbeth may feel a sense of fear, as well as anger and jealousy. He kills many men and women in order to strengthen his position. He does this because the author wants to emphasize the evil within man. You can compare this to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in that the evil within man was personified in the form of Mr. Hyde while Henry Jekyll remained a good man, whereas Macbeth does not demonstrate any good points in his persona after his transformation from hero to monster.
Macbeth demonstrated the widening of his sociopathic tendencies by slaughtering Lady Macduff. This exposes his fall from noble soldier to a man prepared to commit war crimes. This would not only have shocked a present day audience but also the audience of the time the play was written. Shakespeare intended to shock his audience at his depravity. However, this could be argued as Shakespeare allows the audience a glimpse of the old Macbeth when we see his reaction to his wife dying. Many may question as to why Macbeth presented such upset to his wife dying (taking into consideration that he did not show any remorse or upset when killing Lady Macduff and her children). This may have been yet another attempt for Shakespeare to emphasize the fact that
Macbeth’s character allows his selfishness to get the better of him, in spite of his wife committing suicide.
Macbeth uses the word ‘here after’ when he hears of the suicide of his wife; this is because he wanted here to die of natural death and grow old with him. This also shows great similarity with Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. The two plays identify each other once again, by presenting the two sides of the same coin. Each can be separate but requires the other in order to exist, meaning Hyde cannot exist without Jekyll (even though they are two personalities in one person) as well as Macbeth not being able to survive without Lady Macbeth. My interpretation is that Macbeth wanted Lady Macbeth to see him fulfilling the prophesy and maintaining the position of the monarchy.