Perhaps this is the most classic story about the confrontation between good and evil, and the recognition of the inner struggle each man faces in his life. The idea of this sensational short story came from Stevenson's dream, in which he woke up in a blind rage and immediately began to write the story.
The descriptions are nice but go on too far, making me want to read hastily, so to finish the story. Specially in the last pages in which the narrative ends 20 pages before the character stops yapping. If the story means to propagate the ideal of a dual human nature and the dangers of succumbing to evil, it's dumb and wrong. If not, nice fiction mate!
This was an interesting read. Much shorter than I ever knew. I thought it was intriguing to see into Jekyll's mind at the end. Though I am a little upset it seems that his name was chosen purely to be able to make a "Mr. Seek" pun.
I haven't read this in decades and had forgotten how short it is. It's easy to lose the specifics of the book with so many movies overwriting the story.
The majority of the book is written in 3rd person by the friend (and lawyer) of Dr. Jeckyll. Something I didn't remember was how much care his friends and even the staff within his home, took to preserve Dr. Jeckyll's reputation in the backdrop of Victorian England. Even how willing his friend was to overlook unpleasantness as a normal course of behavior.
""I incline to Cain's heresy," he used to say quaintly, "I let my brother go to the devil in his own way."
[ . . .]
""No sir: I had a delicacy," was the reply, "I feel very strongly about putting questions; it partakes too much of the style of the day of judgment. You start a question, and it's like starting a stone. You sit quietly on the top of a hill; and away the stone goes, starting others; and presently some bland old bird (the last you would have thought of) is knocked on the head in his own back-garden and the family have to change their name, No, sir, I make it a rule of mine: the more it looks like Queer Street, the less I ask.""
I'd say it's a typical story. A man/woman who is two completely different people. However, its narration it's good, I mean, its story itself it's "nothing" really, personally. But how it's written and the way its story happens.. it's a little creative. If I had never read anything similar as this story, maybe I'd loved it so much.. But I had, so.. it's not a "surprise" for me. Besides, I prefer those stories where you don't nor can imagine what's really going to happen 'til it happens. And this is not one of those stories you don't know what's gonna happen 'til then.. So, that's why I'd rate it as "it was ok". I also think it also depends on your mood... When I read this book, I was a bit tired. I'm not saying it's a bad book or a "too simple" book.. I'm saying it's a good book but only it has some things I already knew those things would happen so..
If you're going to read it.. DO IT! :) And comment your opinion here, so everybody can read and complete "their puzzles" of the ideas they had built.. before, during and after the book.
This was one of the books that one of the groups in my reading class picked for their extensive reading project. I read it to make sure that I am up to speed when they have their group discussions about what they have read so far.
The book is still written is the Victorian English style that I've seen in other full length books from that era, though it is a bit watered down. I think it might be a bit of challenge for them since some of the slightly archaic forms of British English are used in this book. I haven't read the real book, but I feel that I have a better grasp on the famous tale.
Very short, easy to read in one sitting. If you don't mind old books and the old way to writing, which can be a bit odd and a bit dry in places, this is an enjoyable classic and a must-read to fully appreciate every remake of it since.
Interesting book, not very long, and yet very satisfying in the end. You'll like this a lot more if you're like me and didn't like the movie. full five star.