Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

tor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 87 posts

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#41

Post by jacobush »

MikeTaylor wrote: post #29
morganvachon wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a modern fictional character that would come closer to the Jekyll-and-Hyde relationship as espoused in the parent article is the CW show Arrow . Oliver Queen is a harmless playboy in the public view (and in the last season, the mayor of his city), but he puts on the hood and does things, sometimes unspeakable things like torture and murder, in order to achieve his greater goal of "saving his city" from crime…

Thanks for the tip -- I'll try Arrow .

Dunno why watching one or two episodes of Arrow almost killed me with boredom?

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#42

Post by hawkice »

morganvachon wrote: post #14
MikeTaylor wrote: post #4

This is dead on target. It's also why I found the TV series _Angel_ (the _Buffy_ spin-off) so unsatisfying. There is a truly fascinating story to be told about a vampire whose soul has been restored to him, and who is always at war with his own evil nature. But _Angel_ is not it. Instead, the eponymous character is essentially entirely good except when some supernatural agency transforms him back into Angelus, his ev…

I think a modern fictional character that would come closer to the Jekyll-and-Hyde relationship as espoused in the parent article is the CW show Arrow . Oliver Queen is a harmless playboy in the public view (and in the last season, the mayor of his city), but he puts on the hood and does things, sometimes unspeakable things like torture and murder, in order to achieve his greater goal of "saving his city" from crime…

The real issue with Batman as a lens into this conflict is that Batman only seems controversial. He has bad PR in Gotham, but nothing he does is really bad. Punch an attempted rapist? They might have to send you to jail but no one is booing you. If Arrow has the main character murder and torture, that's a real exploration of hidden darkness. Color me interested.

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#43

Post by FearNotDaniel »

Well of course in Stevenson's time many more readers would have reached the same understanding of the text, because the Christian faith acknowledges just that: we all have a “sin nature“ (Mr Hyde) in us, tempted towards selfish and evil behaviour, at least sometimes longing to act out without consequences. Unfortunately so many Christian teachers have failed to pass on the rest of the message - that this does not make any one of us more inherently “evil“ than any other, and that there is a clear and effective path to liberation from these desires - that the faith itself is just as universally musunderstood as this marvellous book.

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#44

Post by Broken_Hippo »

lostboys67 wrote: post #31
dTal wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Astute observation, succinctly put. I would additionally add that it also works the other way; if a story's themes and metaphors are too clear before the story is over, it can damage suspension of disbelief and hurt enjoyment. This is one reason why the typical teaching methodology of a US high school English class typically has the effect of blunting the enjoyment of classic literature - students are not usually giv…

Why would you not read the book in it entirety first as home work or in the holiday before you are due to cover the book in class? I certainly read all of my assigned texts an din the case of classical studies several other books and plays in the cannon.

Why would you not read the book in it entirety first as home work or in the holiday before you are due to cover the book in class?

Because not everyone has that sort of luxury. Pre-college, I never had an actual syllubus detailing such things. Sometimes we'd get told we'd start a book every x weeks or something, but we never actually knew.

Most common method of introducing books was to hand them out in class, giving a reading assignment for that night with discussion beginning the next day.

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#45

Post by tjalfi »

dTal wrote: post #23
scandox wrote: post #3

This is all absolutely correct, but what I feel it misses is that the mythic power of the story lies in our enjoying it, reading it naively. In other words we deliberately read it ourselves in repressed mode. If we read it the first time with the kind of clarity suggested here then we don't actually feel its power: we are merely interested - rather than complicit.

Astute observation, succinctly put. I would additionally add that it also works the other way; if a story's themes and metaphors are too clear before the story is over, it can damage suspension of disbelief and hurt enjoyment. This is one reason why the typical teaching methodology of a US high school English class typically has the effect of blunting the enjoyment of classic literature - students are not usually giv…

Literary augury[0] is my term for that kind of literature discussion.

[0] https://www.britannica.com/topic/augury

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#46

Post by johnsonjo »

"Are we good because we want to be good, or are we good because we just don’t want to be punished?"

It's interesting he brings up this point. I once took a leadership class at my University, and in the class my teacher once said, "do you follow the speed limit because if you don't you'll get a ticket or because it is the right thing to do?" He then followed it by saying, "If you follow it because it's the right thing you're crazy." When I heard this I was just hoping he wasn't applying it to things other than the speed limit. Sometimes I feel you have to do the right thing, because it is the right thing.

Another similar case was when I was reading my economics book which said altruism only exists due to incentives, and it wouldn't exist otherwise; I personally believe there are people who act altruistically despite incentive going either way. Although, I also find personally if I do the right thing despite incentives for me to lie or do otherwise people will often make up the difference.

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#47

Post by mcguire »

johnsonjo wrote: post #46

"Are we good because we want to be good, or are we good because we just don’t want to be punished?" It's interesting he brings up this point. I once took a leadership class at my University, and in the class my teacher once said, "do you follow the speed limit because if you don't you'll get a ticket or because it is the right thing to do?" He then followed it by saying, "If you follow it because it's the right thing…

I respectfully suggest that, if he left it at that, there is something wrong with your teacher.

Further, I'll suggest that there is something wrong with that take on altruism, simply because that's not how altruism feels.

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#48

Post by johnsonjo »

mcguire wrote: post #47
johnsonjo wrote: post #46

"Are we good because we want to be good, or are we good because we just don’t want to be punished?" It's interesting he brings up this point. I once took a leadership class at my University, and in the class my teacher once said, "do you follow the speed limit because if you don't you'll get a ticket or because it is the right thing to do?" He then followed it by saying, "If you follow it because it's the right thing…

I respectfully suggest that, if he left it at that, there is something wrong with your teacher. Further, I'll suggest that there is something wrong with that take on altruism, simply because that's not how altruism feels .

Genuinely curious, what part did I get wrong about altruism? How would you describe it?

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#49

Post by moosey »

johnsonjo wrote: post #46

"Are we good because we want to be good, or are we good because we just don’t want to be punished?" It's interesting he brings up this point. I once took a leadership class at my University, and in the class my teacher once said, "do you follow the speed limit because if you don't you'll get a ticket or because it is the right thing to do?" He then followed it by saying, "If you follow it because it's the right thing…

There is an alternative to "I don't speed because I might get ticketed" and "I don't speed because it's the right thing to do", and it's "I don't speed because it benefits me when everyone drives carefully."

It can be argued that altruism itself generates dividends for the whole of society, and thus acts of altruism can be seen as self-benefiting, adding a middle that isn't otherwise considered.

A good example might be: "I pay taxes to help welfare recipients because I'm forced to." vs. "I pay taxes to help welfare recipients because it's the right thing to do." There is yet another option of "I pay taxes to help welfare recipients because it has economic benefits and because I don't want to personally deal with the homeless everywhere I go." The last one might sound heartless, but I think that it might appeal to more conservative members of society, and it also turns out to be true.

Re: What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012)

#50

Post by morganvachon »

jacobush wrote: post #41
MikeTaylor wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the tip -- I'll try Arrow .

Dunno why watching one or two episodes of Arrow almost killed me with boredom?

It's a struggle sometimes, and I wonder if it's down to who is writing and/or directing a specific episode. There was an episode last season that dealt with gun control in a 80s style "very special episode" way. It was clumsy, awkward, and did very little for the overall story arc.

Overall though, it's a good show with a darker theme than most current superhero fare. Though, I may be biased as the Green Arrow was my favorite comic book character as a kid.

Post reply on HN