Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: An Analysis of Relationships - Essay Example

Section/# Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: An Analysis of Relationships Both Shelley’s Frankenstein and Stephenson’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde rely on the way in which relationships define the actions that the main characters take. Although both of these novellas will be discussed at some length within this brief essay, the relationship that exists between Dr. Frankenstein and the monster that he creates is of particular interest. This is partly due to the fact that there exists strong references throughout the novel to the way in which Dr. Frankenstein and the monster exhibit a type of father and son relationship. Others have cited that this type of relationship is ultimately one of creator and a created being; which is of course more obvious. Yet, the dynamics and relationship of father and son are nonetheless interesting to consider and relate. As a function of this, this brief paper will look at the way that Dr. Frankenstein and the monster had something of an abusive relationship. In this way, the proceeding analysis will attempt to shed a light on the deeper levels understanding that the psychological analysis of why the characters developed in the way they did is revealed. When Dr. Frankenstein initially created the monster from the many body parts that he collected, it was his hope that such a creation could be an overall benefit to making. In much the same way that a father holds his son at the moment after birth and admires the perfection that nature has done, Frankenstein beheld the creature he had created and was seized not with admiration but with panic and horror at the “thing” that he had allowed to come into this world. Although the creature itself was incomplete and longed for human interaction, touch, love, and all of the needs that regular people have, these needs were not provided by the creator/father. Instead, the creator/father drove the creature fro his sight, and eventually hid from him and cursed him. This naturally caused a great many problems. The first of these was the fact that Frankenstein himself noted, There was non among the myriads of men that existed who would pity or assist me; and should I feel kindness towards my enemies? No: from that moment I declared everlasting war against the species, and, more than all, against him who had formed me and sent me forth to this insupportable misery” (Shelley 17). By way of comparison, one can understand the many different psychological issues and difficulties that can and will develop in a human father and son relationship when love affection or care is not given. For this reason, the reader can see a strong parallel to the way in which Dr. Frankenstein treated the creation which he ultimately dubbed a monster and the way in which countless of scarred and traumatized young people have experienced mistreatment at the hands of their own fathers. Says Dr. Frankenstein, "I was seized by remorse and the sense of guilt, which hurried me away to a hell of intense tortures, such as no language can describe” (Shelley 44). Although the level of comparison is a bit of a leap, it is useful for the reader to understand the way in which the paternal rejection had a profound effect on the way in which the monster himself developed. Rather than coming into the world imperfect and developing more and more perfect attributes, the monster was brought into this world physically repulsive but having many qualities of emotional perfection that allowed him to exhibit all of the good traits that humanity had to offer and hardly any of the bad. Says Dr. Frankenstein, “Curiosity, earnest research to learn the hidden laws of nature, gladness akin to rapture, as they were unfolded to me, are among the earliest sensations I can remember” (Shelley 80). However, as a direct result of the emotional damage that the father transmitted to him, the psychological harm was manifested in his actions. Firstly, the monster felt the sense of rejection. As a way of trying to work around this and determine some sense of the world, the monster went on something of a quest to gain understanding. However, rather than finding understanding, the monster only found more and more people who were fearful of him and wanted nothing whatsoever to do with the creature. In this way, the feelings of rejection that they put upon him were taken more and more severely as the monster determined that the rejection he faced from his creator was also exhibited in the population at large. In this way the reader can understand that the emotional trauma and damage that the father passed along to Frankenstein was what ultimately pushed him over the edge to behave in the horrible way he did towards humanity. This not only helps to help the reader to understand the importance of how Dr. Frankenstein ultimately scarred and destroyed what could have been a normal, although strange, relationship between the two. This also helps the reader to begin to understand the extremely important role of the father-son relationship and the means where any type of abuse or negligence can serve to deeply and irrevocably affect the course of the future both within the relationship and within the way in which such an individual acts within the world in general. Ultimately, although the actions taken by the monster were horrific, they can be traced back to the fact that the abuse and avoidance by the father had triggered the negative response in the creation. Many individuals within our current world who have been abused exhibit similar traits and symptoms. As a function of seeking to find a way to put their pain and emotion into feelings engage in negative behavior. This can of course result in criminal or other behavior that would ultimately garner a negative response on the part of either the father or society in general. Such a level of behavior is not out of the ordinary for individuals who have suffered abuse or psychological trauma. In this way, the reader can understand the reasons why Frankenstein’s monster behave in the way he did to a more full and complete sense. Naturally this cannot be seen as an excuse for the pain and trauma he caused to the world. Instead, the monster realizes that his actions have been harmful and seeks to explain to the reader as to why he has engaged on the destructive course that he has. The monster realizes the futility of human thought and human life by stating the following: “I possessed no money, no friends, no kind of property” (Shelley 122). This helps to envoke a deep level of sympathy in the reader and at least partially explain the actions that have taken place and why. However, the blame for these actions is nebulous as Frankenstein himself notes “William, Justine, and Henry-they all died by my hands” (Shelley 111). In many of the same ways, the reader is also brought to understanding of some of the same types of destructive actions in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Although these are different in the fact that these individuals represent two sides of the same person rather than a creator and monster or father and son, they nonetheless help to demonstrate the way in which the feelings of societal rejection and anger against the system can translate into the same level of destructive impulses that are exhibited by Shelley’s monster in Frankenstein (Saposnik 15). Although Jekyll and Hyde represent an internal battle of sorts, they represent the same type of impulses that drove the monster to behave in the way he did. What is interesting to note with regards to the conflict and development that takes place between Jekyll and Hyde is the fact that there was no instance of paternal abuse or abuse in general that has been elaborated on that ultimately gave rise to the negative actions undertaken by Mr. Hyde. As a function of understanding the root motives behind why these characters chose to behave in the negative ways that they illustrated, the reader is able to understand a far greater and more meaningful level of inference with regards to why the events that took place in the novel were related in the way that they were (Maxner 15). It is further the belief of this author that the element of abuse and the means by which it acted upon the monster and encouraged him to commit unspeakable acts that he would have never considered before was the greatest causal factor in determining the psychological health and stability of Frankenstein’s creation. Although not entirely comparable, the actions of the Mr. Hyde can at least be understood through an examination of the letters that Dr. Jekyll sends to his friend. Within such letters an explanation of the root and underlying animalistic nature that is exhibited in Mr. Hyde Is relayed. Says Dr. Jekyll in a letter, “It seemed natural and human. In my eyes it bore a livelier image of the spirit, it seemed more express and single, than the imperfect and divided countenance I had been hitherto accustomed to call mine” ( Stephenson 81). In much the same way, the desire to hurt and provide pain to the humanity that has so far rejected Frankenstein’s monster is a primal drive and key motivating factor that defines the storyline of Shelley’s piece. As the reader can see from an examination of both pieces which have been engaged with, the ways in which societal recognition as well as paternal approval integrates with the ways in which future actions are decided are powerful and ever present. Rather than extreme circumstances action upon the individual characters of the pieces, the fact of the matter is that the fart deeper realities of interpersonal relations and the censure and ridicule that the characters face as a function of their activities provide a much stronger determining force in the way that the individual traits of the character are revealed. Works Cited Maixner, Paul, ed.. Robert Louis Stevenson, the Critical Heritage.. Boston: Routledge & Keegan Paul, 1981. Saposnik, Irving S.. Robert Louis Stevenson. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1974. Stevenson, Robert Louis. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. New York: Penguin Books, 2003. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Penguin Books, 2007. Read More