Essay: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde – human values and fundamentals

The conflict in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is one which exists internally inside Dr. Jekyll, yet comes alive externally by calling into question human values and fundamentals in general. The dual nature of Dr. Jekyll can be interpreted in several ways and its symbolic meaning varies between readers. Some may recognize Dr. Jekyll as a victim, whose attempt at expelling his evil nature concluded in the creation of Mr. Hyde, while others interpret Dr. Jekyll as a man who utilizes Hyde as an outlet to express his evil urges. Regardless of one’s point of view, most will agree that this story is one of good vs. evil. However, by agreeing with this, the reader must evaluate what makes one “good” and one “evil,” as well as acknowledge the dual nature that exists at the core of every human.
The reality of the plot is that Mr. Hyde is Dr. Jekyll’s supposed dark side, who was created as a result of a potion Jekyll made in an attempt to remove his evil nature. However, perhaps Mr. Hyde is nonexistent. Rather than creating a potion to remove his evil nature, Dr. Jekyll created a potion to allow himself to openly express his evil urges without tarnishing his respectable societal reputation and suffering consequent punishments. Mr Hyde is not the accidental result of an experiment, but rather the intended result. He is not Jekyll’s punishment for playing God, but instead he is Jekyll’s reward. Mr. Hyde is just Jekyll, simply having transformed his body into something totally unrecognizable.
In the title itself, Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, it is crucial to note that Jekyll is a respected professional, while Hyde is a low-class imbecile whose name cannot be any more disgraced, as he does not have the societal prestige which an upstanding citizen such as Dr. Jekyll possesses. His name, Mr. Hyde, is a pun on the word “hide”, as Jekyll uses Mr. Hyde as a means to escape from his reality. A common interpretation may be that in speaking of Hyde, Jekyll himself refers to him as a separate being, one who doesn’t have the necessity to care about friends, wealth, or respect that Jekyll needs. However, keeping in mind that Jekyll serves as the narrator, this calls into question his reliability. His own account firmly belies this conclusion, so of course this is what he narrates. In chapter 10, while still being stuck in the body of Hyde, Jekyll writes “Henry Jekyll’s Full Statement of the Case.” If ever Hyde were to exert himself and address an audience as an autonomous being, it would be through that very letter. Yet he does not, because he can not. Ultimately, because he does not exist.
Throughout the entire novel, the reader never gets Mr. Hyde’s point of view, perhaps because it doesn’t exist. Even when Jekyll physically looks like Hyde, he still thinks of himself as Jekyll. At one point, Jekyll talks of what he did to Sir Danvers’ body, and later says, “I saw my life to be forfeit,” which carries a connotation of a very Jekyll-like fear of losing the good life he has. Regardless of his physical appearance or his behavior, he is always Jekyll.
However, Jekyll should not be portrayed as a victim, as he is not one. Jekyll wants to do all the things that he does as Hyde. He loves being Hyde. He revels in the freedom of being Hyde, and it’s only when the consequences catch up to him that his dual personality becomes a problem. Jekyll is not good, nor is he bad. He is a human who seeks no consequences for his actions. It is key that when Jekyll is Hyde, he is not being possessed or out of control. He remembers perfectly everything he has done as Hyde, because he was really in control the entire time.
Ultimately, the story divulges into a topic which is far more extensive than good versus evil. The reader is called to question humanity at its root. To interpret Hyde as a monster who possesses Jekyll is far too simple and rather dissociative, as that is the mistake that Jekyll himself makes. Hyde is not a seperate being who commits Jekyll’s sins for him, as Hyde does not exist. Jekyll is Hyde. Jekyll commits all of his sins on his own. Similarly, perhaps every human is a Jekyll who has a “Hyde.” Just as Jekyll, we are bound and restrained by societal expectations and responsibilities. Although our evil urges may not be relatively as violent as Jekyll’s, humans shy away from expressing their urges, so as to not tarnish their upstanding and suffer consequences. Such a prompt leads to the question of this: If given the opportunity to be whoever we wanted for a night, to do whatever we want without any consequences or association to our daily selves, what would we do? Are humans good because they want to be good, or are they good because they just don’t want to be punished?