What Are The Psychological Lens In Dr Jekyll And Mr Hyde

There are many stories that have been broken down and turned into arguments with several lenses. Robert Louis Stevenson’s “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” is one of these stories. Deconstructing this story resulted in several scholarly arguments from different lenses expressing the hidden complexity of the simple novella. When reading Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde through a historical and psychological lens, the “human condition” comes to light through symbolism, characterization, and a shift in narrative style.

The ambiguity within the text of “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” lead to differing beliefs about the core principles of the text. From a historical and psychological literary lens, allows the reader to understand that one of the core

From a psychological lens, the struggles Dr. Jekyll faces with controlling his alter-ego, Mr. Hyde, is one similar to an addictive nature. Unable to maintain his true self anymore, “I was seized again with those indescribable sensations that heralded the change. I was once again raging and freezing with the passions of Hyde,” (Stevenson 72). Dr. Jekyll’s description of being “seized” by the sensations, broaches the loss of control he experiences, as most addicts feel. The development of Dr. Jekyll’s character expresses parallels to that of modern day and Victorian era addicts. He is at the will of Mr. Hyde, and despite consciously knowing what happened to Hyde, he could not stop what was to come. Struggling to subdue his drive to enact evil actions, Dr. Jekyll subconsciously scapegoats Mr. Hyde as the culprit rather than himself. Similarly, Patricia Comitini describes the essence of Dr. Jekyll as an addict. She also elaborates on how Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde isn’t the most significant dyad, but Jekyll and Utterson, as Dr. Jekyll is someone struggling with an addiction, similar to the culture during the Victorian Era, and Utterson who is considered “unaddictable” and she frames her lens around Jekyll and Utterson being contrasting figures, not Jekyll and Hyde (Comitini 113). This new lens brings light to the hypocritical

Saposnik argues that the popularity and more modern interpretations of Jekyll and Hyde have spoiled the actual meaning of the story which he believes is about social and moral dualism, rather than a good versus evil antithesis. Though this argument has its validities, the story itself contradicts many scholars' ideas. Saposnik explains the general idea of the relationship between Jekyll and Hyde that is most popular is they are two contrasting people or personalities within one mind, that are split into their independent selves. Saposnik argues they are not two people but one with conflicting ideologies, “allowing subsequent generations to take the translation for the original, to see Jekyll or Hyde where one should see Jekyll-Hyde” (Saposnik 715). The idea of moral dualism is Dr. Jekyll’s own two conflicting thoughts about the same subject, rather than both of his personalities seizing control over the actions and thoughts of the original Jekyll. In his final statement Jekyll explains his two thoughts, “I, for my part, from the nature of my life, advanced infallibly in one direction, and in one direction only.I learned to recognize the thorough and primitive duality of man,” which in short is Jekyll expressing how he has two contrasting inner personalities (Stevenson 58). He soon chose his alter-ego, Mr. Hyde, and the evil ventures that he yearned for. Scholar, Saposnik, makes interesting points, such as people not pronouncing