What Everybody Gets Wrong About Jekyll and Hyde (2012) • Hacker News Board

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

#61

Post by projectramo » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 4:27 PM UTC

It is worth pointing out that, in one sense, the "misreading" and the "proper reading" are the same. One is just metaphorical and the other is literal.

To state it more clearly, even if you believe that Hyde is the evil in Jekyll's soul, and not just Jekyll acting out his fantasy, the former is a metaphor for the latter.

I also disagree with this reading because it is clearly stated that Hyde is smaller than Jekyll because such a small percent of Jekyll is evil. (Hyde is the unadulterated evil, in other words).

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

#62

Post by bitcrusher » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 5:39 PM UTC

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 the story that WAS told was just as interesting... Angel isn't about the duality of his nature. That was a character device to actually explore Redemption. I think the show did very well at exploring that issue. Angel goes through several phases of trying to cope with what it means to be redeemed... At first, his hardline do gooder stance, where it was never acceptable to "do wrong", which, given his profession actually ended up doing more harm than good. The story continued with him having to deal with "walking the line" and ultimately, allowing others to ALSO redeem themselves, through their own journey, accepting that the path to redemption was as unique as the person who was seeking it.

In a lot of ways, I actually found Angel to be much deeper than Buffy, especially as Buffy progressed through later seasons. The shows were definitely dealing with two entirely different aspects of human nature, so it is difficult to compare them fairly.

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

#63

Post by setr » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 5:48 PM UTC

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.

From my own experience, I didn't have the slightest bit of trust for any book recommended by the school, mostly due to the generally horrible treatment they give in class discussion.

I didn't even realize the picked books might have any value until I accidentally read 1984 on a friend's recommendation, not realizing I'd have it for class the following semester.

And I still couldn't stand the class discussion of it.

So if I was going to do any reading, I had more incentive than not to avoid anything the school recommended: they'd kill anything I liked about the book anyways.

I think my worst experience was being assigned voltaire (candide iirc), and realizing no else one was laughing, not even the teacher

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

#64

Post by emodendroket » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 5:59 PM UTC

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…

> 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 given the chance to read the story in its entirety before it is dissected to death, chapter by chapter.

Maybe, but I think the bigger reason is just that teenagers have generally not developed the kind of maturity where reading a classic work of literature is very enjoyable.

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

#65

Post by emodendroket » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:01 PM UTC

tjalfi wrote: post #45

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…

Literary augury[0] is my term for that kind of literature discussion. [0] https://www.britannica.com/topic/augury

I feel like people get way too carried away with this criticism. I remember a comic circulating making fun of overactive seeking of symbolism, and the example they chose was Edgar Allan Poe's "The Raven." I mean, really, could someone have possibly chosen a worse example to argue for the primacy of surface meaning?

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

#66

Post by emodendroket » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:02 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #35

lostboys67 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 they're teenagers with better things to do with their time than reading old 'boring' books by a bunch of pointless dead people.

Well, the irony is they really don't have better things to do and someday they'll regret not putting the time into such things when it was available to them. But you know the old saw -- youth is wasted on the young.

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

#67

Post by Tenhundfeld » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:15 PM UTC

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.

FYI, I think you mean canon, not cannon. I'm not trying to be an OT pedant; given your comment, I thought you might appreciate the feedback.

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

#68

Post by emodendroket » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:15 PM UTC

moosey wrote: post #49

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…

> 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."

But, really, as a single driver, your behavior doesn't have that much influence on others.

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

#69

Post by khedoros1 » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:27 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #66

dagw wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 they're teenagers with better things to do with their time than reading old 'boring' books by a bunch of pointless dead people.

Well, the irony is they really don't have better things to do and someday they'll regret not putting the time into such things when it was available to them. But you know the old saw -- youth is wasted on the young.

There were some required reading books that I enjoyed and learned from, and some that I still don't see the point of. On the other hand, some things that I did in my own time in high school laid the foundations for my career and current interests. I can't see that as completely wasted time.

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

#70

Post by emodendroket » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:43 PM UTC

khedoros1 wrote: post #69

emodendroket wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the irony is they really don't have better things to do and someday they'll regret not putting the time into such things when it was available to them. But you know the old saw -- youth is wasted on the young.

There were some required reading books that I enjoyed and learned from, and some that I still don't see the point of. On the other hand, some things that I did in my own time in high school laid the foundations for my career and current interests. I can't see that as completely wasted time.

Well, I had more free time than I'll probably ever have again and I frittered away a lot of it on bad TV, lame forums, etc.