Frankenstein vs. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: A Comparative Study

Introduction

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818) and Robert Louis Stevenson's Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886) are two landmark novels widely known and appreciated for the ideas they put across. Both books address the concept of a scientist attempting to manipulate the rules of the universe and eventually causing great destruction as a result of their efforts. In a way, these scientists appear to fuel the stereotypical image of a researcher who disturbs the natural balance of the world by engaging in activities that run against generally accepted cultural values. Both novels also address the idea of death as being caused by the suffering one person triggers. Numerous people die around Frankenstein and around Dr. Jekyll — who even ends up killing himself — emphasizing the degree to which disruptions of nature's balance can affect the world.

The Risks of Doing Science

Mankind is obsessed with the idea of evolution, and ever since the early ages people have expressed particular interest in wanting to know more about the world and in trying to do everything in their power to make life more rewarding. Even so, people are likely to perceive evolution differently depending on their background and general way of thinking. Some may believe that progress has a positive effect on society as a whole, while others are unsettled by the sense that science becomes less certain the more people learn.

The very idea of the future is bleak to some people, and they therefore feel hesitant about being enthusiastic about life in general. As Willem Drees observes, "Whether the universe is to expand forever or will collapse again in some billions of years, ending in ice or in fire, there is no indication of a humane human destiny" (Drees 2). Individuals are thus inclined to believe that accumulating a great deal of knowledge can sometimes be harmful.

Richard Dawkins' book The Selfish Gene relates to people as being nothing but machine-like creatures. Many are likely to oppose this idea and to believe that people are much more than that, and that science only succeeds in providing a bleak and uninteresting view on life. To a certain degree, people's ability to focus on the future is owed to those who have the courage to put forward behaviors that society is unlikely to accept. As Drees notes, "Our ability to look ahead, to simulate the future — and this is in particular the ability of the scientist — gives us the power to resist the selfish genes we are born with, and if necessary the selfish memes with which we are indoctrinated — a call to rebel against the tyranny of our genes and memes" (Drees 3).

Numerous religions emphasize the fact that evil is not necessarily a natural concept — rather, people make its existence possible through their actions. Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll similarly adopted attitudes that address evil as something strongly connected with human behavior and thinking.

Moses Maimonides is a prominent Jewish historical figure known for his work connecting science to religion in an attempt to have people acknowledge the benefits of supporting both fields. While Maimonides recognized the existence of supernatural powers that humanity was unable to explain, he was strongly opposed to individuals engaging in magical practices. His theories led people to consider that evil could only exist through the absence of goodness. As a result, treating evil as something with a definable form — a physical concept that can be identified — came to be regarded by many as being fundamentally at odds with the concept of good.

The Connection Between the Two Scientists

In a way, scientists take on risks that the masses are unwilling to take, since this is often the only way for them to achieve progress. Dr. Victor Frankenstein and Dr. Henry Jekyll are both portrayed as characters who are initially interested in acting for the benefit of science and of society as a whole. A concept that unites the two is that they are very different from the typical scientists of their era. Instead of following a gradual path toward a more complex understanding of the world, they engage in practices connected to the divide between good and evil and to the idea of creating something that humanity would disapprove of.

Both Frankenstein and Jekyll are renowned scientists who spent their entire lives trying to discover ideas that the masses were afraid to even consider. Frankenstein is an exemplary student throughout his university years and is particularly proficient in chemistry and related fields. Dr. Jekyll is a similarly notable figure in the world of science, holding numerous degrees and earning the appreciation of the scientific community through his contributions.

One reason why the two scientists tend to be rejected by their peers is that they dare to step outside the realm of conventional science in order to engage in experiments that most of the scientific world considered nonsensical and contrary to common sense. They pursue lines of thinking that science and humanity in general are not accustomed to entertaining. Considering the attitudes prevalent in both the early and late nineteenth century, it is safe to say that people were reluctant to support controversial scientific experiments and that most individuals would have reprimanded scientists who took things too far.

The greatest difference between Dr. Jekyll and Frankenstein is that the former was genuinely concerned with making the world a better place through his research, while the latter was primarily motivated by a desire to elevate his status and satisfy his pride by making discoveries no one else had managed to make. Nevertheless, both scientists ultimately demonstrate that human nature can be divided into two essential forces: good and evil.

Dr. Jekyll recognizes the constant struggle between good and evil that people must face and decides to conduct a study that would reveal more about this struggle and potential ways to allow good to prevail. Frustrated by his own past immoral behavior, he intends to create a potion that would suppress his vices and allow him to engage in moral activities. Instead of achieving this aim, however, the potion proves to be a mechanism for separating his vices from his overall character. While managing to bring forth one persona in line with his intentions, Dr. Jekyll also creates Mr. Hyde — a man who embodies everything that his creator despised in human beings.

Frankenstein, by contrast, is an arrogant scientist focused on performing experiments that will improve his social standing and make him feel better about himself. He is less concerned with the contribution his research will make to science. Consequently, he is disappointed when he observes the creature he has created. He is unwilling to know it better or to help it gain a clearer understanding of its condition.

Conclusion

All things considered, Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll's efforts are certainly praiseworthy, and it would be absurd for someone to claim otherwise. Their discoveries, if successful, would have revolutionized society and helped mankind achieve heights previously believed to be impossible. It is this very impossibility that brings confusion to both accounts — the two scientists accomplish part of their goal, but their failure to consider the consequences of their actions is ultimately their downfall. The two novels demonstrate that science is strongly tied to working within safe environments and ensuring that experiments do not have a negative effect on the social order.

The central characters in these novels are blinded by their success to such a degree that they become certain failure is impossible. This shared hubris, more than any external force, is what destroys them both.

Dawkins, R. The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition. Oxford University Press, 16 Mar. 2006.

Drees, W. Is Nature Evil? Religion, Science and Value. Routledge, 2 Sep. 2003.

Shelley, M. Frankenstein, Or the Modern Prometheus: The 1818 Text. University of Chicago Press, 1974.

Stevenson, R. L. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Alan Rodgers Books, 1 Aug. 2005.

Van Woerkens, M. The Strangled Traveler: Colonial Imaginings and the Thugs of India. University of Chicago Press, 1 Nov. 2002.