Stevenson’s subtle placement of details is what really strikes me about his writing. One of my favorite examples is the difference between Dr. Jekyll’s and Mr. Hyde’s footsteps, with Mr. Hyde’s being light and Dr. Jekyll’s being described as a “heavy creaking tread” (p. 791). Mr. Hyde’s gait is likely due to his lack of remorse. He doesn’t carry a heavy burden of guilt, as Dr. Jekyll does. We also see signs of depersonalization in Dr. Jekyll’s letter as he describes his experiences in both first and third person. He seems to have become confused and detached from his own identity, given that he has essentially split it in half.
The critical role that salt plays in Dr. Jekyll’s formula suggests that it may hold more symbolism than it appears to. The Wikipedia article “Salt in the Bible” states that “In various contexts, [salt] is used metaphorically to signify permanence, loyalty, durability, fidelity, usefulness, value, and purification.” Stevenson reveals in Jekyll’s final letter that the “first salt supply was impure, and that it was that unknown impurity which lent efficacy to the draught” (p. 809). Given its mostly positive symbolism in the Bible (which was a rather popular book in the Victorian age), if salt were to become contaminated in some way, then it could be considered “evil,” and its usage in Dr. Jekyll’s drink might symbolically result in Mr. Hyde’s character. When connected with the theme of friendship, the split between Dr. Jekyll’s/Mr. Hyde’s identity reminds me of how one person can leave a hundred different impressions on a hundred different people. For example, the way my mom sees me is probably very different from how my best friend sees me. The way I view myself even varies from day to day. Every single person I know has a different impression of me, and none of them are fully accurate because they can’t know every single thing I do, say, or think. In the case of this story, Mr. Hyde can represent a secret part of Dr. Jekyll’s identity that no one, aside from himself, knows about. Mr. Hyde represents Dr. Jekyll’s darkest, most secret desires. I wonder, then—if someone who loves me were to encounter the manifestations of my deepest desires, would they still love me? Or would they be disgusted, as Dr. Jekyll’s friends are disgusted by Mr. Hyde? Image Credit: https://bellesguardgaudi.com/en/blog/the-roman-god-janus-and-bellesguard/
1 Comment
The sonnets of George Meredith’s Modern Love offer haunting descriptions that allude to a married couple’s fading love. Sonnets 16 and 17 are particularly visual and subtly woven with a sense of entrapment. These two people are clearly locked in a loveless marriage in a society that does not offer a respectable way out.
Sonnet 16 gives readers a glimpse into a quiet, intimate moment between the couple as they watch a fire in their library fireplace. Almost immediately, there seems to be a similarity drawn between the burning fire and the couple—as if they are staring into a mirror. In line 3, Meredith writes, “Joined slackly, we beheld the red chasm grow” and finishes the phrase in the next line, “Among the clicking coals…” This separation is likely deliberate, since the red chasm symbolically refers to the rift growing between the couple, but in the literal sense it describes the fire. It’s interesting how Meredith uses fire to represent love dying out as opposed to its typical “passionate” sense. Sonnet 17 describes the couple hosting a dinner for their friends. The very first line establishes their roles: “At dinner, she is hostess, I am host” (Meredith). This reinforces the strict gender roles of the Victorian era. Meredith includes macabre language and imagery in order to illustrate the “death” of their marriage, as well as how the couple probably feels dead inside. In line 4, he notes of their friends, “They see no ghost,” which implies that there actually is a (metaphorical) ghost that the couple has covered up. Meredith also mentions a game he calls “Hiding the Skeleton” in line 7, which he describes as “contagious” (line 6). Despite the couple’s lack of love, they still share a sense of camaraderie, since they’re both stuck in a secret situation that only the other understands. They play their roles so well that they make their guests jealous of their “love” (line 14). This suggests that these guests may be trapped in similar situations—if their marriages were truly perfect as Meredith’s couple’s appears to be, then would they have a reason to be jealous? In line 16, Meredith closes the poem: “Dear guests, you now have seen Love’s corpse-light shine.” With some research, I found that “corpse-light” is another word for “will-o’-the-wisp.” Merriam-Webster states, “Eventually, the name will-o’-the-wisp was extended to any impractical or unattainable goal” (2019). The usage of “corpse-light” in Meredith’s sonnet can function as both a creepy image and an analogy suggesting that a perfect, loving marriage cannot exist. Image Source: https://medium.com/@antiquitea/that-victorian-couple-their-steam-powered-blog-and-fetishizing-of-the-victorian-era-f9c5ff9e04c2 Florence Nightingale opens Cassandra with a dagger of a question: “Why have women passion, intellect, moral activity—these three—and a place in society where no one of the three can be exercised?” (p. 672). This first line establishes a sense of urgency, which appears to stem from her desperate desire to choose her own path in life.
One of the prominent differences between men and women that she explores is how each sex is expected to spend their time. Men had (and continue to have) more time to pursue their own interests, whereas women were (and still are) expected to engage in busywork, socialize, and take care of children. As Nightingale points out on page 674, society views man’s time as “more valuable than woman’s” and “that woman has confessedly nothing to do.” Some people today stand by the saying, “Everyone has the same 24 hours; we can make time for our priorities.” However, I think Florence Nightingale might have disagreed. Since women were and are expected to “willingly…be interrupted at all hours” to cater to others’ needs, they have little time to pursue their own interests, leisures, and projects (p. 674). Therefore, men were and are given more time for their priorities. Clearly, society places more value on the product of man’s work than on woman’s, which in turn assigns higher value to men than women. Yet, why should people’s value come from their products as opposed to their own selves? Florence Nightingale wrote this piece around the time of England’s Industrial Revolution, an era notorious for valuing production over human lives and wellbeing. This obsession with product over people shows itself in both gender and economic inequality. An interesting detail I noticed was that Nightingale refers to a child as “it,” as in “its knees” and “itself” (p. 673). This also popped up in a few of the other readings, which raises some questions about how children were viewed in the Victorian Age. How closely were they expected to adhere to the strict gender roles of the period? How much did their socioeconomic status affect these expectations, given that lower-class children typically had jobs to help support their families? Since these children were forced to grow up so quickly, it’s possible that gender roles were imposed upon them from a very early age. However, since women often worked alongside men, how separate were the “separate spheres” for the working class? Finally, I’d like to discuss the title. As noted in the piece’s introduction, Cassandra is a reference to a Trojan princess from Greek mythology who could foresee disasters but was cursed so that no one would believe her. Much like Cassandra, the idea that women could and should be equal to men was often dismissed and ridiculed in Nightingale’s time. However, Nightingale makes a prediction of her own: “…there shall arise a woman, who will resume, in her own soul, all the sufferings of her race, and that woman will be the Saviour of her race” (p. 676). While I don’t think any one woman has singlehandedly established gender equality, Nightingale was right in that women would rise up and challenge the limitations imposed by gender. While much of Cassandra still rings true today, it’s exciting to see so many movements dedicated to making the world a more equal place. Note: I think I might have a slightly different version of the book, as the page numbers are different from those listed in the course schedule. Image credit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra |