What do you think?
Rate this book
Hyde
“An ingenious revision” of Robert Louis Stevenson’s classic Gothic story told through the eyes of the fiend (The New York Times Book Review). Mr. Hyde is trapped, locked in Dr. Jekyll’s house, certain of his inevitable capture. As the dreadful hours pass, he has the chance, finally, to tell his side of the story—one of buried dreams and dark lusts, both liberating and obscured in the gaslit fog of Victorian London’s sordid backstreets. Summoned to life by strange potions, Hyde knows not when or how long he will have control of “the body.” When dormant, he watches Dr. Jekyll from a distance, conscious of this other, high-class life but without influence. As the experiment continues, their mutual existence is threatened, not only by the uncertainties of untested science, but also by a mysterious stalker. Hyde is being taunted—possibly framed. Girls have gone missing; a murder has been committed. And someone is always watching from the shadows. In the blur of this shared consciousness, can Hyde ever truly know if these crimes were committed by his hands? Narrated by Hyde, this serpentine tale about the nature of evil, addiction, and the duality of man “delivers a new look at this enigmatic character and intriguing possible explanations for Jekyll’s behavior” (The Washington Post, Five Best Thrillers of 2014). “Hyde brings into the light the various horrors still hidden in the dark heart of Stevenson’s classic tale . . . a blazing triumph of the gothic imagination.” —Patrick McGrath, author of Asylum “Earthy, lurid, and unsparing . . . a worthy companion to its predecessor. It’s rich in gloomy, moody atmosphere (Levine’s London has a brutal steampunk quality), and its narrator’s plight is genuinely poignant.” —The New York Times Book Review, Editors’ Choice
417 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 18, 2014
169 people are currently reading
4038 people want to read
About the author
Daniel Levine
1 book85 followersDaniel Levine studied English literature and creative writing at Brown University and received his MFA in fiction writing from the University of Florida. He lives in Boulder, Colorado.
Levine's debut novel, Hyde was published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (March 18, 2014). Hyde retraces The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde from the villain's perspective, re-examining his heroism and character.
Levine's debut novel, Hyde was published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (March 18, 2014). Hyde retraces The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde from the villain's perspective, re-examining his heroism and character.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 237 reviews
December 17, 2017
”You speak of human nature. I think of it often too. I think of the human animal. This hairless primate, walking around on two feet and wearing its elaborate costume as it goes about the business of survival. We deceive each other, oh yes. Cheat, torture, kill each other, deliberately, occasionally with pleasure. Other animals live in fear and awe of us. What makes us so special? The mind. The grotesque power of the human mind.”
1931 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde starring Fredric March.
I, Edward Hyde, have a bone to pick with Robert Louis Stevenson. That libelous bit of nonsense he published back in ‘86 maligned me in such a hideous manner. This Stevenson scribbler made quite the pile of pounds sterling off that deceitful tale.
He got almost everything wrong.
Let’s take the beginning of the story when I supposedly stepped on a young girl in the street. I was actually trying to help the girl and in the process of the hue and cry was a victim of Ugly Profiling. I can’t help my countenance. I am not so fortunate to have symmetrical features that reassure people that I am a man of good breeding. Would they have accused Dr. Jekyll? Certainly not, even though he doesn’t look like them either, but he does look like a better version of them. I paid them off with Jekyll’s money, despite the fact that all the girl needed was a bit of dusting off. Later that 100 pounds I so kindly paid the father will be used against me in a most insidious way. They will accuse me of things that I would never do.
The thing to always keep in mind is that I am Jekyll and Jekyll be Hyde. We are both here regardless of which face is being put forward. ”Alone? No, I wasn’t alone. As I tromped home through the rain, I could feel Jekyll’s imprint on my brainstem, where he had gripped me.”
I did kill Sir Danvers Carew. He was putting the screws to Jekyll and I wasn’t about to swing because of his inquisitiveness. It was a messy affair. I used Jekyll’s walking stick. I was meant to use that stick after all. I had taken it from Big House for the very purpose; a murder weapon can never elude its predestined--. In my exuberance the stick did break leaving the head of the thing for the police to find. There was a maid as well, curious as a cat, who peeked out her window at a most inopportune time. In an attempt to keep the end at bay I merely gave them the means to pursue me with more enthusiasm. I did it out of love.
”I had been his whipping boy. Yet I had no desire to punish Jekyll. Quite the opposite, in fact: I wanted to protect him. He was the one taking all these risks, drawing these investigators into our sphere, flirting with exposure.”
To hate Jekyll is to hate myself, but Stevenson was insisting the opposite in his fairy tale.
”The hatred of Hyde for Jekyll was of a different order. His terror of the gallows drove him continually to commit temporary suicide, and return to his subordinate station of a part instead of a person; he loathed the necessity, he loathed the despondency into which Jekyll had fallen, and he resented the dislike which he was himself regarded.”
Not true, not true at all.
John Barrymore in the 1920 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
Stevenson never mentions Georgiana. She married another leaving Dr. Jekyll a confirmed bachelor continuing to pine. Even as she ages he still sees the maid he fell in love with.
”A dainty bird in pink silk with a white-blond bun and blue eyes, her quick lively face tilted up with an amused little smile. … Up close, we could see that fine age lines touched the edges of her eyes, the wings of her mouth.”
Jekyll couldn’t have her, but as fate will have it she has a doppelganger, an unfortunate young girl trapped in circumstances where survival is based upon what she can earn from the flat of her back. We found her while looking for sport over on the East End. I know Stevenson put all the responsibility on my reckless nature, but Jekyll is the one who rented the house for me in Soho. It is such a convenience having a house that we can bring our doxies back to without tainting the walls of The Big House with our moans and groans of passion. Jeannie, in the right lighting, which there is nothing but right lighting in the East End looks like Georgiana. I knew when I saw her that HE would have to have her.
Old passions can rekindle.
”When the baggy drawers had dropped she stood, turned away, marble blue. I followed the knobs of her spine and dimpled coccyx to the lavender bruise on the back of her thigh. She sat on the edge of the bed and lay down as I swung the sheet over her. It settled like silky oil over her contours…. How old are you? She swallowed. Sixteen, she whispered. Sixteen, I repeated. Then I let myself go.”
Even though men of stature were routinely spending their evenings in the bowels of this hell drinking too much gin, smoking opiates, and fondling the nubile bodies of unfortunate teenage girls it was I who am singled out for persecution. Again, I don’t look the part of a gentleman, those gentlemen aren’t deviants, but just men out for a bit of fun. I, on the other hand, seem to wear this deviant behavior on my face. I have the eyes of a devil.
If it were possible for me to love other than the dual parts of myself I could have loved Jeannie.
Spencer Tracy in the 1941 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
The tincture isn’t working. Jekyll has to double and triple dosages to keep me under control. He has waited too long to get more. The drawer is nearly empty. He will die and I will live. The injections are destroying our arm.
”Tentatively I cuff the sleeve and stare at the gouged and pockmarked arm, the black weeping pustule in the cleft. The vein is dark and hard as piano wire under the skin, obviously infected. Under ordinary circumstances, I bet they’d amputate the arm from the elbow down. An appalling sight.”
The new powder arrives and does not work. Jekyll will have to start getting his affairs in order.
It is hard to eat which doesn’t help Jekyll at all. I crave something stronger all the time.
”From the shelf above the glazed press, I haul down the two-gallon jug of ethanol. I pour some water into a graduated glass, and from the cumbersome jug I tip in a splash of the clear, pure alcohol. Bracing myself, I take a sip--boom! A blue flame bursts in the gastros and roars up my esophagus into the sinus and I cough, blinking tears. There’s dinner for you! Burn off all the scum inside.”
I guess I should also talk about the maid Lizzie. A young girl in the wrong place just as Jekyll’s passions had flamed too high to contain. It was odd that he thought of father as he assaulted this girl’s virtue. Our father’s hands guiding his own. Her cries, her pitiful cries for intervention fell on deaf ears. I know it is my place to take the bullet, the blame, but I must remind everyone that when I’m bad, Jekyll is my gleeful companion. In this case Jekyll was being Hyde more than Hyde was willing to be.
I’ve become too strong. Jekyll has become too weak. When Poole starts to swing that ax at the door will I have the strength to end all of this?
James Nesbitt plays Jekyll and Hyde in a superb mini-series titled Jekyll.
Playing around with Classics is always a dicey proposition. You have those purists who are almost offended that anyone would attempt such a feat. I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed Daniel Levine’s version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. He certainly adds details not available in the original. He expands the story, fills in the gaps from Stevenson’s story, uses pieces from the movies inspired by the book, and most importantly does not allow Jekyll to control the narrative.
I often speculate about what was in the first version of this story that Stevenson consigned to the flames. See my review for more details: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde Review Levine would almost have you believe that one of his ancestors rescued that draft from the flames and left it for him to tell the whole story, the real story. This is more graphic than the original, those stories of Hyde’s or rather Hyde/Jekyll’s adventures on the East End are told rather than alluded to. We see Hyde as well as Jekyll unmasked. The evil that lurks in the hearts of man lurks in all of us, peering from the darkness, waiting for an opportunity to take control long enough to slake the thirst of our hidden desires. Jekyll/Hyde is a tragedy, but it is one we all share. None of us are able to cast the first stone.
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.com
I also have a Facebook blogger page at: https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten
1931 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde starring Fredric March.
I, Edward Hyde, have a bone to pick with Robert Louis Stevenson. That libelous bit of nonsense he published back in ‘86 maligned me in such a hideous manner. This Stevenson scribbler made quite the pile of pounds sterling off that deceitful tale.
He got almost everything wrong.
Let’s take the beginning of the story when I supposedly stepped on a young girl in the street. I was actually trying to help the girl and in the process of the hue and cry was a victim of Ugly Profiling. I can’t help my countenance. I am not so fortunate to have symmetrical features that reassure people that I am a man of good breeding. Would they have accused Dr. Jekyll? Certainly not, even though he doesn’t look like them either, but he does look like a better version of them. I paid them off with Jekyll’s money, despite the fact that all the girl needed was a bit of dusting off. Later that 100 pounds I so kindly paid the father will be used against me in a most insidious way. They will accuse me of things that I would never do.
The thing to always keep in mind is that I am Jekyll and Jekyll be Hyde. We are both here regardless of which face is being put forward. ”Alone? No, I wasn’t alone. As I tromped home through the rain, I could feel Jekyll’s imprint on my brainstem, where he had gripped me.”
I did kill Sir Danvers Carew. He was putting the screws to Jekyll and I wasn’t about to swing because of his inquisitiveness. It was a messy affair. I used Jekyll’s walking stick. I was meant to use that stick after all. I had taken it from Big House for the very purpose; a murder weapon can never elude its predestined--. In my exuberance the stick did break leaving the head of the thing for the police to find. There was a maid as well, curious as a cat, who peeked out her window at a most inopportune time. In an attempt to keep the end at bay I merely gave them the means to pursue me with more enthusiasm. I did it out of love.
”I had been his whipping boy. Yet I had no desire to punish Jekyll. Quite the opposite, in fact: I wanted to protect him. He was the one taking all these risks, drawing these investigators into our sphere, flirting with exposure.”
To hate Jekyll is to hate myself, but Stevenson was insisting the opposite in his fairy tale.
”The hatred of Hyde for Jekyll was of a different order. His terror of the gallows drove him continually to commit temporary suicide, and return to his subordinate station of a part instead of a person; he loathed the necessity, he loathed the despondency into which Jekyll had fallen, and he resented the dislike which he was himself regarded.”
Not true, not true at all.
John Barrymore in the 1920 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
Stevenson never mentions Georgiana. She married another leaving Dr. Jekyll a confirmed bachelor continuing to pine. Even as she ages he still sees the maid he fell in love with.
”A dainty bird in pink silk with a white-blond bun and blue eyes, her quick lively face tilted up with an amused little smile. … Up close, we could see that fine age lines touched the edges of her eyes, the wings of her mouth.”
Jekyll couldn’t have her, but as fate will have it she has a doppelganger, an unfortunate young girl trapped in circumstances where survival is based upon what she can earn from the flat of her back. We found her while looking for sport over on the East End. I know Stevenson put all the responsibility on my reckless nature, but Jekyll is the one who rented the house for me in Soho. It is such a convenience having a house that we can bring our doxies back to without tainting the walls of The Big House with our moans and groans of passion. Jeannie, in the right lighting, which there is nothing but right lighting in the East End looks like Georgiana. I knew when I saw her that HE would have to have her.
Old passions can rekindle.
”When the baggy drawers had dropped she stood, turned away, marble blue. I followed the knobs of her spine and dimpled coccyx to the lavender bruise on the back of her thigh. She sat on the edge of the bed and lay down as I swung the sheet over her. It settled like silky oil over her contours…. How old are you? She swallowed. Sixteen, she whispered. Sixteen, I repeated. Then I let myself go.”
Even though men of stature were routinely spending their evenings in the bowels of this hell drinking too much gin, smoking opiates, and fondling the nubile bodies of unfortunate teenage girls it was I who am singled out for persecution. Again, I don’t look the part of a gentleman, those gentlemen aren’t deviants, but just men out for a bit of fun. I, on the other hand, seem to wear this deviant behavior on my face. I have the eyes of a devil.
If it were possible for me to love other than the dual parts of myself I could have loved Jeannie.
Spencer Tracy in the 1941 version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
The tincture isn’t working. Jekyll has to double and triple dosages to keep me under control. He has waited too long to get more. The drawer is nearly empty. He will die and I will live. The injections are destroying our arm.
”Tentatively I cuff the sleeve and stare at the gouged and pockmarked arm, the black weeping pustule in the cleft. The vein is dark and hard as piano wire under the skin, obviously infected. Under ordinary circumstances, I bet they’d amputate the arm from the elbow down. An appalling sight.”
The new powder arrives and does not work. Jekyll will have to start getting his affairs in order.
It is hard to eat which doesn’t help Jekyll at all. I crave something stronger all the time.
”From the shelf above the glazed press, I haul down the two-gallon jug of ethanol. I pour some water into a graduated glass, and from the cumbersome jug I tip in a splash of the clear, pure alcohol. Bracing myself, I take a sip--boom! A blue flame bursts in the gastros and roars up my esophagus into the sinus and I cough, blinking tears. There’s dinner for you! Burn off all the scum inside.”
I guess I should also talk about the maid Lizzie. A young girl in the wrong place just as Jekyll’s passions had flamed too high to contain. It was odd that he thought of father as he assaulted this girl’s virtue. Our father’s hands guiding his own. Her cries, her pitiful cries for intervention fell on deaf ears. I know it is my place to take the bullet, the blame, but I must remind everyone that when I’m bad, Jekyll is my gleeful companion. In this case Jekyll was being Hyde more than Hyde was willing to be.
I’ve become too strong. Jekyll has become too weak. When Poole starts to swing that ax at the door will I have the strength to end all of this?
James Nesbitt plays Jekyll and Hyde in a superb mini-series titled Jekyll.
Playing around with Classics is always a dicey proposition. You have those purists who are almost offended that anyone would attempt such a feat. I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed Daniel Levine’s version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. He certainly adds details not available in the original. He expands the story, fills in the gaps from Stevenson’s story, uses pieces from the movies inspired by the book, and most importantly does not allow Jekyll to control the narrative.
I often speculate about what was in the first version of this story that Stevenson consigned to the flames. See my review for more details: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde Review Levine would almost have you believe that one of his ancestors rescued that draft from the flames and left it for him to tell the whole story, the real story. This is more graphic than the original, those stories of Hyde’s or rather Hyde/Jekyll’s adventures on the East End are told rather than alluded to. We see Hyde as well as Jekyll unmasked. The evil that lurks in the hearts of man lurks in all of us, peering from the darkness, waiting for an opportunity to take control long enough to slake the thirst of our hidden desires. Jekyll/Hyde is a tragedy, but it is one we all share. None of us are able to cast the first stone.
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit http://www.jeffreykeeten.com
I also have a Facebook blogger page at: https://www.facebook.com/JeffreyKeeten
December 20, 2016
Hyde is the story of Jekyll and Hyde from the villain's point of view and what a story it is. The visceral and sense obsessed descriptions are just what one would expect from a character that is made almost completely of someone's baser nature, but if you have a weak stomach, you may want to steer clear of this disturbing tale.
The story is told in flashbacks from Hyde's final days as he's holed up in Dr. Jekyll's lab: "I don't want to die at all, but if there's no escaping it, then at the very least I want to remember everything properly first, the way it truly happened. The truth is inside this head. I simply must extract it. In the end no one will know it but me, but that will be enough." pg 10, ebook. I never considered it before, but how would it feel to be shut away inside someone's mind in a type of half life, always looking out from someone's eyes, then to be suddenly thrust into a body, given complete control, and then blamed for everything that inevitably goes wrong.
Levine's darkly imaginative reasons why Jekyll would have "created" Hyde in the first place were chilling. I found myself pitying Hyde rather than fearing him: "It was a frustrating, blinding feeling, my ignorance. I wanted to know what my purpose was, what Jekyll needed me for." pg 36, ebook. I always wondered that too. After the first failed experiment, Jekyll summons Hyde forth again and again with increasingly awful results. He could have just stopped after the first time and been like, "whoa, THAT was a bad idea" and chucked the rest of his solution into the river. Hyde examines the twisted motivations behind the repeated transformations.
It also looks into the infinite nature of the human psyche. The rest of this review is going to have a major spoiler in it, but I have to talk about it to truly discuss this story because this twist is what elevated Hyde in my mind from a horror story with cheap thrills to a spine tingling look into the darkness of the abyss that could exist in the soul.
Because, beyond that huge twist, this story felt repetitive.
Recommended for readers who enjoy dark, violent re-tellings and can tolerate a slower paced read. Some similar, grisly tales: The Last Werewolf or Black Moon.
The story is told in flashbacks from Hyde's final days as he's holed up in Dr. Jekyll's lab: "I don't want to die at all, but if there's no escaping it, then at the very least I want to remember everything properly first, the way it truly happened. The truth is inside this head. I simply must extract it. In the end no one will know it but me, but that will be enough." pg 10, ebook. I never considered it before, but how would it feel to be shut away inside someone's mind in a type of half life, always looking out from someone's eyes, then to be suddenly thrust into a body, given complete control, and then blamed for everything that inevitably goes wrong.
Levine's darkly imaginative reasons why Jekyll would have "created" Hyde in the first place were chilling. I found myself pitying Hyde rather than fearing him: "It was a frustrating, blinding feeling, my ignorance. I wanted to know what my purpose was, what Jekyll needed me for." pg 36, ebook. I always wondered that too. After the first failed experiment, Jekyll summons Hyde forth again and again with increasingly awful results. He could have just stopped after the first time and been like, "whoa, THAT was a bad idea" and chucked the rest of his solution into the river. Hyde examines the twisted motivations behind the repeated transformations.
It also looks into the infinite nature of the human psyche. The rest of this review is going to have a major spoiler in it, but I have to talk about it to truly discuss this story because this twist is what elevated Hyde in my mind from a horror story with cheap thrills to a spine tingling look into the darkness of the abyss that could exist in the soul.
Because, beyond that huge twist, this story felt repetitive.
Recommended for readers who enjoy dark, violent re-tellings and can tolerate a slower paced read. Some similar, grisly tales: The Last Werewolf or Black Moon.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 23, 2014
I like posting reviews on release dates, but this one drops (ha) on my mom's birthday and I refuse to soil (ha) her day with this book. Instead, the review will go live on the blog 3/17
With my reviews, I tend to follow a format. Hyde, however, made me so angry - and nauseous - that I'm going to jump right into things. I apologize for the quotes below. I know they're gross, but so is this book. Avoid it.
I was so looking forward to having a great, albeit creepy, time with Hyde. After all, it's a reimagining of Jekyll and Hyde, but one where Hyde is the hero and shown in a sympathetic light. Unfortunately, I didn't get that at ALL here. Hyde is foul and disgusting, fully willing to do Jekyll's dirty work for him and kill with no remorse.
The chapter titles confused me. They consist of four days, yet the story lasts far longer than that. I wasn't entirely sure what these days meant. At first I thought perhaps that was how long Hyde was in control of the body, but it quickly became apparent that wasn't the case; in one chapter we're with Hyde for over a month!
You would think Hyde would be a fascinating character, right? Sadly, it was the minor, secondary characters I felt more for. Jeannie, a sixteen-year-old prostitute Hyde frequently visits who winds up moving in with him (along with her younger sister) and ultimately becomes pregnant. At one point the sisters are cast out of the estate and that's it. Jeannie wasn't even given the chance to tell Hyde about the baby. I wanted more about her. Where did she go? What happened to the baby? Out of everyone, Jeannie was the character I was the most drawn to, and she was practically written out of the story and forgotten about. Another character I found intriguing was one who wasn't even in the story: Emile Verlaine. Before the novel starts, Jekyll experiences a bit of scandal while in France when a young boy under his care committed suicide. Through a series of narratives, we learn Emile had other personalities, much like Jekyll. These personalities were separate entities with their own characteristics and likes and dislikes. Again, however, the 'screen-time' wasn't enough for me and ended far too soon.
Hyde would have been a fairly lackluster story had I not noticed just how obsessed with fecal matter it was. At first it was a bird dropping on Hyde's jacket. This happened twice and two scenes seemed two too many. It was then it became apparent that Hyde was a book about shit:
Nope. No thank you. I wash my hands (both figuratively AND literally, if you please) of this novel and it is with a hearty sigh of relief that I'm finally done with it.
Disgusting and unnecessary, Hyde is a novel that I honestly cannot recommend. To anyone. At the end of the book is the original story, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and if you're interested in the inspiration (if you want to call it that) for Hyde, you can easily find a copy for much cheaper at a used bookstore. I hate writing negative reviews without anything positive to include, but there was nothing positive to be said about this book. It was less than 300 pages? I suppose that's a plus. It's really a shame; I love HMH's Young Adult books, but this Adult novel was such a disappointment. Do yourself a favor and avoid this one.
With my reviews, I tend to follow a format. Hyde, however, made me so angry - and nauseous - that I'm going to jump right into things. I apologize for the quotes below. I know they're gross, but so is this book. Avoid it.
I'm not alone. Believe me, I am not alone.
I was so looking forward to having a great, albeit creepy, time with Hyde. After all, it's a reimagining of Jekyll and Hyde, but one where Hyde is the hero and shown in a sympathetic light. Unfortunately, I didn't get that at ALL here. Hyde is foul and disgusting, fully willing to do Jekyll's dirty work for him and kill with no remorse.
The chapter titles confused me. They consist of four days, yet the story lasts far longer than that. I wasn't entirely sure what these days meant. At first I thought perhaps that was how long Hyde was in control of the body, but it quickly became apparent that wasn't the case; in one chapter we're with Hyde for over a month!
You would think Hyde would be a fascinating character, right? Sadly, it was the minor, secondary characters I felt more for. Jeannie, a sixteen-year-old prostitute Hyde frequently visits who winds up moving in with him (along with her younger sister) and ultimately becomes pregnant. At one point the sisters are cast out of the estate and that's it. Jeannie wasn't even given the chance to tell Hyde about the baby. I wanted more about her. Where did she go? What happened to the baby? Out of everyone, Jeannie was the character I was the most drawn to, and she was practically written out of the story and forgotten about. Another character I found intriguing was one who wasn't even in the story: Emile Verlaine. Before the novel starts, Jekyll experiences a bit of scandal while in France when a young boy under his care committed suicide. Through a series of narratives, we learn Emile had other personalities, much like Jekyll. These personalities were separate entities with their own characteristics and likes and dislikes. Again, however, the 'screen-time' wasn't enough for me and ended far too soon.
Hyde would have been a fairly lackluster story had I not noticed just how obsessed with fecal matter it was. At first it was a bird dropping on Hyde's jacket. This happened twice and two scenes seemed two too many. It was then it became apparent that Hyde was a book about shit:
Dr. Petit said that L'inonnu mixed his own feces into the paint. pg. 211
The fecal stink from Carew was still in my nostrils... pg. 225
Numbly, I picked at my buttons, dragging off my sticking clothes. I pulled down my trousers and drawers and stared at the filthy streaks down my legs, a blast of stench making my cover my mouth and cough. I had soiled myself. pg. 227
We passed a horse pulled up to the kerb who lifted his tail and ejected a pile of green droppings that steamed like hot food. pg. 258
He dropped the book into the pot, he turned and unbuckled his trousers, hunkered down, and strained out a dry painful curl of movement. He stood and looked woozily down at the soiled book. pg. 289
Nope. No thank you. I wash my hands (both figuratively AND literally, if you please) of this novel and it is with a hearty sigh of relief that I'm finally done with it.
Disgusting and unnecessary, Hyde is a novel that I honestly cannot recommend. To anyone. At the end of the book is the original story, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and if you're interested in the inspiration (if you want to call it that) for Hyde, you can easily find a copy for much cheaper at a used bookstore. I hate writing negative reviews without anything positive to include, but there was nothing positive to be said about this book. It was less than 300 pages? I suppose that's a plus. It's really a shame; I love HMH's Young Adult books, but this Adult novel was such a disappointment. Do yourself a favor and avoid this one.
December 23, 2021
November Book Pals selection for A GOOD THRILLER group.
This is a wonderfully gothic and engaging tale of Mr Hyde from Hyde's point of view. The author wonderfully fleshes out the character as well as point out some inconsistencies in the original story. He points out that Hyde was not the epitome of evil as Jekyll suggests, but that Jekyll was not without his own faults.
It is a much more psychological thriller than the original. It shows us a much more nuanced character who doesn't hate Jekyll so much as pities him. Even though you know how the story ends (or you would if you'd read the original), you hang on to the edge of your seat to see how you get there.
This is a wonderfully gothic and engaging tale of Mr Hyde from Hyde's point of view. The author wonderfully fleshes out the character as well as point out some inconsistencies in the original story. He points out that Hyde was not the epitome of evil as Jekyll suggests, but that Jekyll was not without his own faults.
It is a much more psychological thriller than the original. It shows us a much more nuanced character who doesn't hate Jekyll so much as pities him. Even though you know how the story ends (or you would if you'd read the original), you hang on to the edge of your seat to see how you get there.
February 7, 2014
I picked up a copy of this book because it sounded very intriguing. I have to tell you that after reading this book that I was a little sad when I finished it. Mr. Levine has a really good talent for telling a spelling bounding story with such depth and character development.
I instantly was in love with Hyde. I never saw him as a villain but more as a humanitarian. In fact, I liked him so much that when Hyde would disappear and Jekyll took over, I was slightly disappointed. The ending did not come as too much of a great surprise to me. It was easy to put all the pieces together on what was going to happen. This book is on the dark side of human nature. I cannot wait to read the next book by Mr. Levine.
I instantly was in love with Hyde. I never saw him as a villain but more as a humanitarian. In fact, I liked him so much that when Hyde would disappear and Jekyll took over, I was slightly disappointed. The ending did not come as too much of a great surprise to me. It was easy to put all the pieces together on what was going to happen. This book is on the dark side of human nature. I cannot wait to read the next book by Mr. Levine.
August 12, 2014
It was an excellent idea, telling the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde through the villain's point of view. However, the execution, especially compared to the original work, left more to be desired.
The book was thrilling in certain places, but for the most part it seemed to drag on and on, specifically towards the end. Hyde also seemed to introduce a lot of aspects that would have been interesting to explore, but were either left unanswered or not given a satisfying answer.
Also, and maybe it's just personal preference, but I hated how the dialogue was formatted in the book. It made it hard to differentiate between the narrative and when another character was speaking, and hard to follow as well since there were no indents.
In all, it wasn't an awful read but it wasn't enjoyable. If anything, it seemed like a chore that just had to get done.
The book was thrilling in certain places, but for the most part it seemed to drag on and on, specifically towards the end. Hyde also seemed to introduce a lot of aspects that would have been interesting to explore, but were either left unanswered or not given a satisfying answer.
Also, and maybe it's just personal preference, but I hated how the dialogue was formatted in the book. It made it hard to differentiate between the narrative and when another character was speaking, and hard to follow as well since there were no indents.
In all, it wasn't an awful read but it wasn't enjoyable. If anything, it seemed like a chore that just had to get done.
February 13, 2014
SLJ review:
* LEVINE, Daniel. Hyde. 448p. Houghton Harcourt. Mar. 2014. Tr $24. ISBN 9780544191181.
Adult/High School–Though The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has been retold and reimagined countless times, Levine separates his novel by delving deeply into the original text and drawing out all of the hints, implications, and loose ends in the story to create an even more plausible, more energetic, and more powerful work than Stevenson’s justly classic novella. Levine’s novel revolves around a brilliantly subtle characterization of Edward Hyde–not, as Dr. Jekyll claims in Stevenson’s work, the “evil” side of Jekyll, but a suppressed second personality, created by Jekyll’s psyche to combat the sexual and emotional abuse heaped upon him by his father. Jekyll unleashes the confused and psychologically tortured Hyde in order to experience the sexual side of his personality, which he has otherwise repressed to the point of impotence. The interplay between the personalities of Hyde and Jekyll–Hyde can see everything Jekyll does, but Jekyll can actually control Hyde’s actions at times–troubles Hyde, but he also relies on Jekyll to show him his purpose in life. Hyde and Jekyll’s precarious double life becomes complicated when an MP named Sir Danvers Carew becomes overly interested in Jekyll’s psychological research, but the real troubles begin when Hyde realizes that there may be another personality lurking within their shared body. Levine’s novel is exquisite–layered and thematically complex while remaining true to the story’s roots as a mystery thriller. Teen readers of that genre–especially those with a Victorian bent, such as Rick Yancey’s The Monstrumologist (S & S, 2009)–should be enthralled. Meanwhile fans of Stevenson’s story–-which has never lacked for teenaged readers–will be pleasantly surprised by Levine’s ingenious take.–Mark Flowers, John F. Kennedy Library, Vallejo, CA
* LEVINE, Daniel. Hyde. 448p. Houghton Harcourt. Mar. 2014. Tr $24. ISBN 9780544191181.
Adult/High School–Though The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has been retold and reimagined countless times, Levine separates his novel by delving deeply into the original text and drawing out all of the hints, implications, and loose ends in the story to create an even more plausible, more energetic, and more powerful work than Stevenson’s justly classic novella. Levine’s novel revolves around a brilliantly subtle characterization of Edward Hyde–not, as Dr. Jekyll claims in Stevenson’s work, the “evil” side of Jekyll, but a suppressed second personality, created by Jekyll’s psyche to combat the sexual and emotional abuse heaped upon him by his father. Jekyll unleashes the confused and psychologically tortured Hyde in order to experience the sexual side of his personality, which he has otherwise repressed to the point of impotence. The interplay between the personalities of Hyde and Jekyll–Hyde can see everything Jekyll does, but Jekyll can actually control Hyde’s actions at times–troubles Hyde, but he also relies on Jekyll to show him his purpose in life. Hyde and Jekyll’s precarious double life becomes complicated when an MP named Sir Danvers Carew becomes overly interested in Jekyll’s psychological research, but the real troubles begin when Hyde realizes that there may be another personality lurking within their shared body. Levine’s novel is exquisite–layered and thematically complex while remaining true to the story’s roots as a mystery thriller. Teen readers of that genre–especially those with a Victorian bent, such as Rick Yancey’s The Monstrumologist (S & S, 2009)–should be enthralled. Meanwhile fans of Stevenson’s story–-which has never lacked for teenaged readers–will be pleasantly surprised by Levine’s ingenious take.–Mark Flowers, John F. Kennedy Library, Vallejo, CA
July 21, 2014
"From the shelf above the glazed press, I haul down the two-gallon jug of ethanol. I pour some water into a graduated glass, and from the cumbersome jug I tip in a splash of the clear, pure ethanol. Bracing myself, I take a sip - boom! A blue flame bursts in the gastros and roars up my esophagus into the sinus and I cough, blinking tears. There's dinner for you! Burn off all the scum inside."
Hyde is a retelling of Robert Louis Stevenson's classic The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde from the perspective of Edward Hyde. If you haven't read the classic, I'd highly recommend reading it before delving into this contemporary version (and incidentally, it's included at the back of the hardcover version of Hyde). It won't affect your understanding of the story, but it's interesting to compare the two books: Levine creates a startlingly fresh and fascinating perspective without deviating from the original plot points, and his is a dark, gritty, and much more detailed version of events. Edward Hyde is not the evil side of Jekyll's personality, but rather a second personality created to protect young Henry Jekyll from sexual and emotional abuse suffered at the hands of his father. Having been repressed for some thirty years, Hyde is "released" from Jekyll's psyche through injections which allow him to assume the body. Hyde revels in the seedier side of London, experiencing Jekyll's basest desires: sex, drinking, drugs, but Jekyll cannot sustain the duality, and Hyde narrates their slow unravelling. I love character-driven fiction, and even in his madness, Hyde has subtlety and depth. A vivid, energetic debut novel by an author to watch.
October 26, 2016
Don't. Just don't.
October 22, 2015
Levine's version expands Stevenson's novella quite a bit. It is very well fitted to the original, imo. Hyde is a dark, destructive tale &, ultimately, a very sad one too.
At the end, Levine included some notes about Stevenson's original, as well as some of his own comments, including,
And Levine certainly does scrutinize the hinted underworld. I think Stevenson would be pleased with this catastrophic, chilling contortion of his characters.
Readers, beware, though: there is plenty of trigger-worthy content in here related to child abuse (physical, sexual, psychological) & rape.
An ominous & truly terrifying tale.
At the end, Levine included some notes about Stevenson's original, as well as some of his own comments, including,
"My interest was not in reconfiguring the premise but in returning to the original, exploring inconsistencies of character and crafting a psychological model to explain Jekyll's plunge into self-annihilation. The original, too, is a murder mystery; why does Hyde kill Sir Danvers Carew? The story says it is a coincidence. Yet the murder is witnessed by a maid in an upstairs window who recognizes Hyde, "who had once visited her master." Who is this master, and why should Hyde visit him? Questions yearn for answers. For nearly 130 years Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has remained immovably on the fickle (and often unfair) shelves of classical literature, an endurance no doubt due to these suggestive ripples in its surface, the tantalizing hints of an underworld calling out for discovery."
And Levine certainly does scrutinize the hinted underworld. I think Stevenson would be pleased with this catastrophic, chilling contortion of his characters.
Readers, beware, though: there is plenty of trigger-worthy content in here related to child abuse (physical, sexual, psychological) & rape.
An ominous & truly terrifying tale.
September 3, 2014
"No one knows what it's like to be the bad man, to be the sad man, behind blue eyes." Sympathy for the Devil. I was expecting to be entertained by Daniel Levine's debut novel Hyde, in which he retells R.L. Stevenson's classic story from Hyde's pov. What I wasn't expecting was to actually feel a bit of sympathy for Hyde in this well-written novel as he struggles to fit into a world in which he has no place, desperately tries to understand what Jekyll expects of him, and comes to be tormented by his own devil.
As the story begins, Hyde is hiding in the doctor's cabinet, waiting for the end he knows is inevitable. Through flashbacks and confused memories, he slowly reveals his side of the story. Of course, the reader cannot really be sympathetic towards many of Hyde's actions but there is the suggestion that someone else is in his mind, driving him to do these things. Most of the onus falls on Jekyll, as we get glimpses of his abused childhood, his failing as a lover, his checkered career as a psychiatrist, his experimenting with drugs, his act of rape, and finally, his sending another to commit a crime he has no stomach to pull off himself. But is there a third personality at work here? The details that flesh out this story are very imaginative and believable.
As the story begins, Hyde is hiding in the doctor's cabinet, waiting for the end he knows is inevitable. Through flashbacks and confused memories, he slowly reveals his side of the story. Of course, the reader cannot really be sympathetic towards many of Hyde's actions but there is the suggestion that someone else is in his mind, driving him to do these things. Most of the onus falls on Jekyll, as we get glimpses of his abused childhood, his failing as a lover, his checkered career as a psychiatrist, his experimenting with drugs, his act of rape, and finally, his sending another to commit a crime he has no stomach to pull off himself. But is there a third personality at work here? The details that flesh out this story are very imaginative and believable.
December 17, 2014
I'm generally not a fan of the classics, I've never read the original 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' and after reading this I'm certain I never will. I did try to listen to the audio version with my daughter last year after we'd finished the audiobook of 'Dracula', which we both loved. We agreed Dr. Jekyll was no Dracula and we gave it up to try something more to our liking.
I think reading this as a fan of the original could work for or against Levine. It's always a risk to take something that is well loved and make it into something new. I understand how readers might not like to see what he's done to one of their all-time favorites. Having no love or affection for the original I thought 'Hyde' was fascinating and well done, the duality of Henry Jekyll versus Edward Hyde was perfectly pitched.
I loved the way the author narrated the story from Hyde's perspective, we come to know and sympathize with him and through his eyes we see Jekyll and their shared history. Suffering abuse at the hands of a disturbed father clearly impacts the inner workings of Jekyll's mind and creates the infamous Mr. Hyde who has stayed hidden for over thirty years. Now as Jekyll approaches his fiftieth birthday, Hyde emerges to act on Jekyll's desires, free to be himself without the repression or constraints of his position in society. Initially born to protect Henry, Edward also feels the resentment and rivalry of a sibling. While we know the end of their story won’t be a happy one it’s fascinating to see how it all evolves.
Events are vividly described, colors, smells, clothing, sounds, the weather are all portrayed with exacting detail as is the madness. I like details and I like gritty dark fiction so this book and I got along quite well. For those of you who don’t like to read about ugly or disturbing things you should take a pass on this, you’ll only be disappointed. For those of you who are willing to read books without a happy ending and glimpse inside the head of a madman I think you should give this a try. The writing and storytelling are excellent, I loved this and there are very few books I can say that about so far this year.
Thank you to the publishers Houghton Mifflin Harcourt and the Amazon Vine program for an advanced reader's copy in exchange for an honest review.
I think reading this as a fan of the original could work for or against Levine. It's always a risk to take something that is well loved and make it into something new. I understand how readers might not like to see what he's done to one of their all-time favorites. Having no love or affection for the original I thought 'Hyde' was fascinating and well done, the duality of Henry Jekyll versus Edward Hyde was perfectly pitched.
I loved the way the author narrated the story from Hyde's perspective, we come to know and sympathize with him and through his eyes we see Jekyll and their shared history. Suffering abuse at the hands of a disturbed father clearly impacts the inner workings of Jekyll's mind and creates the infamous Mr. Hyde who has stayed hidden for over thirty years. Now as Jekyll approaches his fiftieth birthday, Hyde emerges to act on Jekyll's desires, free to be himself without the repression or constraints of his position in society. Initially born to protect Henry, Edward also feels the resentment and rivalry of a sibling. While we know the end of their story won’t be a happy one it’s fascinating to see how it all evolves.
Events are vividly described, colors, smells, clothing, sounds, the weather are all portrayed with exacting detail as is the madness. I like details and I like gritty dark fiction so this book and I got along quite well. For those of you who don’t like to read about ugly or disturbing things you should take a pass on this, you’ll only be disappointed. For those of you who are willing to read books without a happy ending and glimpse inside the head of a madman I think you should give this a try. The writing and storytelling are excellent, I loved this and there are very few books I can say that about so far this year.
Thank you to the publishers Houghton Mifflin Harcourt and the Amazon Vine program for an advanced reader's copy in exchange for an honest review.
June 9, 2014
Gorgeous edition of a take on an incredible classic story...sure, why not, intriguing enough. Jekyll and Hyde have been adapted into numerous films, musicals, now this...brought to existence (judging by the author's afterword) to explain and expand on the original. The thing is that the original needs no explanation, it's perfect as it is, enduring and popular all these years, which is certainly a proof in itself. It is also original and succinct, both things that Levine failed to achieve with his reimagining. Of course, originality is always going to be lost with this let's retell the classics subgenre, which makes me question why anyone would want to write them, they so seldom offer something new to the beloved stories. Particularly for a debut novel as it is the case here...peculiar choice. Succinctness...well, Levine's book is 3 times the length of the original, apparently the author wanted to explain every occurrence, every character action, decision, etc. leaving nothing to imagination or logical suppositions. He's certainly done that and it's a fairly well written book, but it's just so unnecessary.
March 13, 2015
Hyde is an interesting and well-written retelling of the classic tale. I loved Levine's twist of the story so that the reader can understand the events from Hyde's perspective. It is a nice mix-up that blurs the lines between good and evil, right and wrong and is a very thought-provoking piece.
The prose is very readable and the storyline moves at a good pace. The novel kept me guessing even though I knew roughly what to expect and I was always keen to pick the book up and read a few more pages before bed.
This is a great read for those who already like the Jekyll and Hyde story and for those who enjoy retellings of classic tales.
I received this book as a free e-book ARC via NetGalley.
The prose is very readable and the storyline moves at a good pace. The novel kept me guessing even though I knew roughly what to expect and I was always keen to pick the book up and read a few more pages before bed.
This is a great read for those who already like the Jekyll and Hyde story and for those who enjoy retellings of classic tales.
I received this book as a free e-book ARC via NetGalley.
September 29, 2015
Great premise, terrible execution. Stick with RB Stevenson's original.
April 16, 2019
This book is not for the faint of heart. Levine expounds upon the darkness of Hyde to which Stevenson (in the original tale) only alludes, and indeed Hyde’s actions are dark. Proceed with caution if you are squeamish.
Levine attempted to create a story that overlays the original, both preserving that story and telling a new one, and I believe he succeeded in that attempt. This novel feels like a true sequel, and a necessary one, as it continues the exploration of the duality of man. As I read, I was struck by the blurred lines between the natures of man. More than an entertaining story, this narrative begs readers to question their own secret natures and to what lengths they’ll go to help those natures thrive. I recommend reading the original story by Stevenson (included in the back of this book) before reading Levine’s story.
My (small) critique is that I occasionally grew weary of reading Hyde’s ramblings, particularly when he was recounting long stretches of experience in a row. But that’s, again, a small critique. Overall, the story was gripping and intelligent and seemed like the long-untold backstory that Stevenson left out of his original tale.
Levine attempted to create a story that overlays the original, both preserving that story and telling a new one, and I believe he succeeded in that attempt. This novel feels like a true sequel, and a necessary one, as it continues the exploration of the duality of man. As I read, I was struck by the blurred lines between the natures of man. More than an entertaining story, this narrative begs readers to question their own secret natures and to what lengths they’ll go to help those natures thrive. I recommend reading the original story by Stevenson (included in the back of this book) before reading Levine’s story.
My (small) critique is that I occasionally grew weary of reading Hyde’s ramblings, particularly when he was recounting long stretches of experience in a row. But that’s, again, a small critique. Overall, the story was gripping and intelligent and seemed like the long-untold backstory that Stevenson left out of his original tale.
October 4, 2021
Hey skip this one maybe particularly if you don’t think 16 year olds make great love interests for adult men
June 26, 2016
Hyde is a very interesting take on the famous "Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" by R.L. Stevenson. The author writes from the perspective of Mr. Hyde and tells HIS tale.
The entire premise is based of an interesting take on Dr. Jekyll. What if it was Dr. Jekyll all along who was really the villain? The author correctly points out that Dr. Jekyll is :
"....if you look beyond the biased emphasis on Jekyll's goodness, you will see the actions of a calculating, self-loathing egomaniac who makes conspicuous mention of his secret to his lawyer and butler, who lies to his friends, who places poor Hastie Lanyon in a position from which he can't recover, and who leaves himself no choice but suicide in the end. Jekyll is no more saint than Hyde is pure evil."
This is a not so subtle jab at the hypocritical morality of Victorian England. In the original work, Jekyll's "goodness" is a direct result of his social standing. In Victorian times ones standing was based on class, dress and having a "respectable calling" (Law, Medicine, etc). A person of low standing is someone with a menial job, living in a poor part of London and of the lower classes. In such an environment where the strictures of social behavior were all for show, while behind the scenes awful behavior is quite fine as long as it isn't widely known. The Victorians tended also to be a black or white peoples, in terms of morality, no shades of gray. Nor is there any form of "sympathy for the Devil" in the works of the time.
Bearing this in mind, Mr. Levine, takes us on a parallel journey. It's the same events as in the original, but from the perspective of Hyde. Dr. Jekyll is a product of emotional and physical abuse from his father and sexual abuse from his mother. While working in France trying to help a schizophrenic patient, Dr. Jekyll stumbles onto the formula for the chemical which purports to help in the actualization of the "other" personality. This Dr. Jekyll, then returns to England and "creates" Mr. Hyde as a personality that exists to deal with the shame and trauma of his abuse.
The Hyde in this book, is not some bestial low creature (oft referred to in the original) but rather someone who just wants to have his own life. Yet, that is hardly possible when Jekyll hijacks his body and commits deeds that he himself would never do. For example, Dr. Jekyll is impotent, but his Hyde personality can perform for him. So he takes over the Hyde personality to indulge in all manner of debauchery and sin.
The Hyde in this story is actually quite a sympathetic person. In fact, many of the things that are attributed to him are actually Dr. Jekyll using his body. Many of the scenes from the original story are given a new light and perspective. I shall not spoil it by saying what exactly, but if you enjoyed the original- I highly recommend you read this version for a "fuller" understanding.
Perhaps my only complaint with this book was the writing style. The author uses no quotation marks during conversations. This makes it sometimes hard to realize when someone is speaking or when a conversation has ended and is now prose. Though anything said by Hyde is italicized, it is still sometimes jarring and causes a reader to pause and go back to exclaim "Ahh someone is speaking" and this throws off the rhythm of reading.
That being said- this is a very good story. It is original and unique. The version of events as related by Hyde are actually far more plausible than the original story. It also helps solve some of the mysteries in the original- why does Hyde kill Sir Danvers? The murder was, in the original, witnessed by a maid who recognized Hyde from a previous visit to her master, but who was this master? Things like that are laid bare by Hyde. The atmosphere is superb and recalls the ill-lit streets of nineteenth-century London. Thus if you are a fan of R.L. Stevenson's original-then this is a highly recommended book. If you have not read the original, do so before reading this version. It will help. My copy had the original version included.
The entire premise is based of an interesting take on Dr. Jekyll. What if it was Dr. Jekyll all along who was really the villain? The author correctly points out that Dr. Jekyll is :
"....if you look beyond the biased emphasis on Jekyll's goodness, you will see the actions of a calculating, self-loathing egomaniac who makes conspicuous mention of his secret to his lawyer and butler, who lies to his friends, who places poor Hastie Lanyon in a position from which he can't recover, and who leaves himself no choice but suicide in the end. Jekyll is no more saint than Hyde is pure evil."
This is a not so subtle jab at the hypocritical morality of Victorian England. In the original work, Jekyll's "goodness" is a direct result of his social standing. In Victorian times ones standing was based on class, dress and having a "respectable calling" (Law, Medicine, etc). A person of low standing is someone with a menial job, living in a poor part of London and of the lower classes. In such an environment where the strictures of social behavior were all for show, while behind the scenes awful behavior is quite fine as long as it isn't widely known. The Victorians tended also to be a black or white peoples, in terms of morality, no shades of gray. Nor is there any form of "sympathy for the Devil" in the works of the time.
Bearing this in mind, Mr. Levine, takes us on a parallel journey. It's the same events as in the original, but from the perspective of Hyde. Dr. Jekyll is a product of emotional and physical abuse from his father and sexual abuse from his mother. While working in France trying to help a schizophrenic patient, Dr. Jekyll stumbles onto the formula for the chemical which purports to help in the actualization of the "other" personality. This Dr. Jekyll, then returns to England and "creates" Mr. Hyde as a personality that exists to deal with the shame and trauma of his abuse.
The Hyde in this book, is not some bestial low creature (oft referred to in the original) but rather someone who just wants to have his own life. Yet, that is hardly possible when Jekyll hijacks his body and commits deeds that he himself would never do. For example, Dr. Jekyll is impotent, but his Hyde personality can perform for him. So he takes over the Hyde personality to indulge in all manner of debauchery and sin.
The Hyde in this story is actually quite a sympathetic person. In fact, many of the things that are attributed to him are actually Dr. Jekyll using his body. Many of the scenes from the original story are given a new light and perspective. I shall not spoil it by saying what exactly, but if you enjoyed the original- I highly recommend you read this version for a "fuller" understanding.
Perhaps my only complaint with this book was the writing style. The author uses no quotation marks during conversations. This makes it sometimes hard to realize when someone is speaking or when a conversation has ended and is now prose. Though anything said by Hyde is italicized, it is still sometimes jarring and causes a reader to pause and go back to exclaim "Ahh someone is speaking" and this throws off the rhythm of reading.
That being said- this is a very good story. It is original and unique. The version of events as related by Hyde are actually far more plausible than the original story. It also helps solve some of the mysteries in the original- why does Hyde kill Sir Danvers? The murder was, in the original, witnessed by a maid who recognized Hyde from a previous visit to her master, but who was this master? Things like that are laid bare by Hyde. The atmosphere is superb and recalls the ill-lit streets of nineteenth-century London. Thus if you are a fan of R.L. Stevenson's original-then this is a highly recommended book. If you have not read the original, do so before reading this version. It will help. My copy had the original version included.
March 20, 2018
”Hyde” by Daniel Levine [1.5/5]
Look. You need to understand one thing before reading this review by me. I love the source material ”The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde” by Robert Louis Stevenson this book is based on. And I really love a certain adaptation (the musical by Frank Wildhorn) of the source material and I have some pictures in my mind when it comes to Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. And certain characterisations of them too. I am aware that Jekyll is a unreliable narrator and I like when adaptations look into this...as long as Hyde stays the more evil persona.
And trigger warning: this book deals with sexual violence/rape
It fits in with the narrative
The premise of this story is retelling the novella's events from Hyde's perspective and make some additions to the original story fitting to it. Levine crafted a narrative (and I have to say characterisations) that are possible within the original story's narrative. You may know that Hyde's perspective is not given in the original novella and the reader only gets to know Hyde's actions through other people's eyes. And his and Jekyll's characterisations are mostly given by Jekyll himself in his statement of the case. And as mentioned above, Jekyll is far from a reliable narrator. So someone who wants to adapt the novella or retell it in some way or the other has some decisions to make regarding how much weight they want to give to Jekyll's statement. Levine decided to give it very little weight in regards to Hyde being the evil one of the two and I think more of the despicable actions shown in this book are done by Jekyll . This is a possible solution and it fits with the novella's narrative.
And the minor characters match their counterpart in the novella really well.
”In each of us, there are two natures [...]” (Quote from the prologue of the musical)
My biggest problem with this book is the characterisation of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. I like Jekyll to be the better person of the two and I like Hyde being not a good person at all. So I hoped before reading this book both of them will get a shade of grey but stay within this pattern. Well...they really don't in my opinion.
Let's begin with Hyde. He is not what I imagined him to be. Levine decided that Hyde might be misunderstood and imagine my shock when we get to know that some incidents of the novella that seem to the reader really not at all actions of a good person are presented as a misunderstanding and that Hyde had no evil in mind when he did it. Hyde is much more pictured as what I would have imagined Jekyll is, after getting more shades of grey. He is quite...nice most of the time?! And I don't appreciate Hyde being nice when I consume something based on Stevenson's novella.
Jekyll on the other hand does things I always imagined Hyde doing. I won't mention everything but one thing I have to mention, to show you why I am really angry about how Jekyll is depicted in this book. Hyde observes from within the body, while Jekyll is the active persona, Jekyll assaulting and raping his young, female servant. This is a no-go for me. I expected something along this lines from Hyde but not from Jekyll and I wanted to throw the book across the room when I was reading this scene.
And I don't like that Levine decided to rob the story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde most of its obscure elements in using a real psychological phenomenon to explain where Hyde comes from.
”If he be Mr Hyde […] I shall be Mr Seek” (Quote from the novella)
There is a mystery aspect to this novella and you might be surprised by the reveal but I sadly was not. There is someone calling himself “Mr Seek”.
And I think the mystery only works when...well....it is a mystery to you as it is to Hyde who Mr Seek might be.
There's someone speaking
The punctuation of the direct speech in this book is not really there. Everything said by Hyde or Jekyll is formatted in italic. But all the other characters have neither italics to suggest they are speaking nor punctuation. I think this is very annoying within a novel (I think I would have been okay with this style of formatting in a short story though). Sometimes you realise a bit too late, in my opinion, that somebody's speaking because you are already irritated why Hyde might think about such a thing in the precise moment. Not a fan.
The original and more
With all this said I think someone familiar with Stevenson's novella (I think you get the most out of this book when you read the novella beforehand, in my edition it is printed after Levine's take on the story) but not as much a fan of a particular characterisation of both characters or is more open to a different take on them. As you read above most of my problems are connected to how little I am able to like another take on them.
This book was a gift from a friend because he knows how much I love the musical and he thought I would enjoy this book. Sadly I didn't because I expected Hyde's characterisation more in line with what I know from other adaptations.
(If you are interested in how I like Hyde to be portrayed, you might want to take a look at this snippet from the Russian production of the musical.)
Look. You need to understand one thing before reading this review by me. I love the source material ”The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde” by Robert Louis Stevenson this book is based on. And I really love a certain adaptation (the musical by Frank Wildhorn) of the source material and I have some pictures in my mind when it comes to Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. And certain characterisations of them too. I am aware that Jekyll is a unreliable narrator and I like when adaptations look into this...as long as Hyde stays the more evil persona.
And trigger warning: this book deals with sexual violence/rape
It fits in with the narrative
The premise of this story is retelling the novella's events from Hyde's perspective and make some additions to the original story fitting to it. Levine crafted a narrative (and I have to say characterisations) that are possible within the original story's narrative. You may know that Hyde's perspective is not given in the original novella and the reader only gets to know Hyde's actions through other people's eyes. And his and Jekyll's characterisations are mostly given by Jekyll himself in his statement of the case. And as mentioned above, Jekyll is far from a reliable narrator. So someone who wants to adapt the novella or retell it in some way or the other has some decisions to make regarding how much weight they want to give to Jekyll's statement. Levine decided to give it very little weight in regards to Hyde being the evil one of the two and I think more of the despicable actions shown in this book are done by Jekyll . This is a possible solution and it fits with the novella's narrative.
And the minor characters match their counterpart in the novella really well.
”In each of us, there are two natures [...]” (Quote from the prologue of the musical)
My biggest problem with this book is the characterisation of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. I like Jekyll to be the better person of the two and I like Hyde being not a good person at all. So I hoped before reading this book both of them will get a shade of grey but stay within this pattern. Well...they really don't in my opinion.
Let's begin with Hyde. He is not what I imagined him to be. Levine decided that Hyde might be misunderstood and imagine my shock when we get to know that some incidents of the novella that seem to the reader really not at all actions of a good person are presented as a misunderstanding and that Hyde had no evil in mind when he did it. Hyde is much more pictured as what I would have imagined Jekyll is, after getting more shades of grey. He is quite...nice most of the time?! And I don't appreciate Hyde being nice when I consume something based on Stevenson's novella.
Jekyll on the other hand does things I always imagined Hyde doing. I won't mention everything but one thing I have to mention, to show you why I am really angry about how Jekyll is depicted in this book. Hyde observes from within the body, while Jekyll is the active persona, Jekyll assaulting and raping his young, female servant. This is a no-go for me. I expected something along this lines from Hyde but not from Jekyll and I wanted to throw the book across the room when I was reading this scene.
And I don't like that Levine decided to rob the story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde most of its obscure elements in using a real psychological phenomenon to explain where Hyde comes from.
”If he be Mr Hyde […] I shall be Mr Seek” (Quote from the novella)
There is a mystery aspect to this novella and you might be surprised by the reveal but I sadly was not. There is someone calling himself “Mr Seek”.
And I think the mystery only works when...well....it is a mystery to you as it is to Hyde who Mr Seek might be.
There's someone speaking
The punctuation of the direct speech in this book is not really there. Everything said by Hyde or Jekyll is formatted in italic. But all the other characters have neither italics to suggest they are speaking nor punctuation. I think this is very annoying within a novel (I think I would have been okay with this style of formatting in a short story though). Sometimes you realise a bit too late, in my opinion, that somebody's speaking because you are already irritated why Hyde might think about such a thing in the precise moment. Not a fan.
The original and more
With all this said I think someone familiar with Stevenson's novella (I think you get the most out of this book when you read the novella beforehand, in my edition it is printed after Levine's take on the story) but not as much a fan of a particular characterisation of both characters or is more open to a different take on them. As you read above most of my problems are connected to how little I am able to like another take on them.
This book was a gift from a friend because he knows how much I love the musical and he thought I would enjoy this book. Sadly I didn't because I expected Hyde's characterisation more in line with what I know from other adaptations.
(If you are interested in how I like Hyde to be portrayed, you might want to take a look at this snippet from the Russian production of the musical.)
June 8, 2014
I tried, I really tried, but I put this book down after 50 pages. I love the original Dr J and Mr H, but this book was totally not for me. I can not believe the other ratings. I guess I'm the odd man out. However I at times could not even follow a word of this book. I found the writing confusing and just dragged out on an on. No wonder it only lasted one week on the best seller list (New York times) top 20. Based upon the other ratings I guess it is me, but I found this to be a total waste of time and not interesting at all.
October 10, 2019
Author Daniel Levine has accomplished quite a bit with HYDE, his first novel. He's taken a classic work, expanded upon it's themes and re-told the tale from a different perspective.
The result is something with more depth, clarity and entertainment value as compared to the original, that being THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE by Robert Louis Stevenson. That's just my extremely subjective opinion - - Stevenson's legion of fans don't need to become alarmed.
Wisely, the new novel includes the original work in the back of the book, which I read first before tackling Levine's HYDE. I'm glad I did because I obtained a fuller appreciation of what Levine accomplished with respect to Stevenson's original short novel. Levine sticks to the structure of the original and enhances the story with explanations of missing details and the addition of engaging subplots and insights.
While reading the original, I felt great sympathy for the plight of Dr Jekyll, whose mental state becomes unglued as he ruminates on the implications of what his experiment has unleashed. As I read HYDE, I became more empathetic with Hyde and felt some revulsion at the darker nature of Dr. Jekyll. Levine reveals the heart and conscience inside the monstrous Hyde, who in parts of the novel seems to be compelled to act upon the hidden desires and subliminal wishes of Dr. Jekyll.
HYDE is a first person narration by Edward Hyde, re-telling the Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde from his point of view. Levine greatly expands upon the original novel and uses that as a template to explore Jekyll's past including ,a troubled relationship with a cruel, debased and domineering father, and unfulfilled romance, and his prior experimental failure with treating multiple personality disorders.
HYDE is also a great depiction of Victorian times in London, with lush detail and rich imagery. Levine manages to write in a style similar to Stevenson's without mimicry, and manages to make this version of the story more engaging and readable in these current times.
The result is something with more depth, clarity and entertainment value as compared to the original, that being THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE by Robert Louis Stevenson. That's just my extremely subjective opinion - - Stevenson's legion of fans don't need to become alarmed.
Wisely, the new novel includes the original work in the back of the book, which I read first before tackling Levine's HYDE. I'm glad I did because I obtained a fuller appreciation of what Levine accomplished with respect to Stevenson's original short novel. Levine sticks to the structure of the original and enhances the story with explanations of missing details and the addition of engaging subplots and insights.
While reading the original, I felt great sympathy for the plight of Dr Jekyll, whose mental state becomes unglued as he ruminates on the implications of what his experiment has unleashed. As I read HYDE, I became more empathetic with Hyde and felt some revulsion at the darker nature of Dr. Jekyll. Levine reveals the heart and conscience inside the monstrous Hyde, who in parts of the novel seems to be compelled to act upon the hidden desires and subliminal wishes of Dr. Jekyll.
HYDE is a first person narration by Edward Hyde, re-telling the Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde from his point of view. Levine greatly expands upon the original novel and uses that as a template to explore Jekyll's past including ,a troubled relationship with a cruel, debased and domineering father, and unfulfilled romance, and his prior experimental failure with treating multiple personality disorders.
HYDE is also a great depiction of Victorian times in London, with lush detail and rich imagery. Levine manages to write in a style similar to Stevenson's without mimicry, and manages to make this version of the story more engaging and readable in these current times.
October 17, 2017
Read for the theme - read a book by an author with the same initials.
March 12, 2019
So boring. Gave up after 42 pages because there was no plot, just a retelling of Jekyll and Hyde from Hyde's side. That should be thrilling, but it wasn't.
May 23, 2019
this was a good book I think I just read at a time where I was looking for something else entirely, it was still a fun read and interesting to see the story done in his style
December 2, 2025
FREE AT LAST. This took me so long to get through since I was trying to read two books at once. Never again, I can’t do it 😭
Big review for this one since I love the original Jekyll and Hyde story and I have Many Thoughts.
Things I liked:
- the writing, overall, is very nice. I enjoyed the prose and the descriptions for the most part.
- it has some interesting concepts, I like how it connected aspects from the original story that weren’t originally explored since it wasn’t from Jekyll/Hyde’s perspective.
- making Jekyll and Hyde morally grey instead of clear cut “good and bad” is always a fun interpretation, and this had an interesting exploration of that and their relationship.
Things I didn’t like:
- this book is kind of nasty. The nice prose and flowery descriptions felt gross for some scenes, which was intentional (I think. For the most part) but either way it wasn’t nice to read.
- Jekyll and Hyde is often used to portray the evils of humanity. I’m certain there’s other adaptations that take it even worse than this, but so far this is the worst I’ve personally seen it go. It’s a fair reading of the story, since the original is vague in a way that invites a lot of different interpretations, this just isn’t one that I personally like.
- the twist feels like a cop-out. Not gonna spoil it, and it makes sense in some ways and is set up well beforehand, but it also just feels like it’s revealed at the last second and is kind of an eye roll, tbh.
- it went on for so long. This book could be half the length that it is and it probably would’ve been better for it 😭
- the dialogue formatting was confusing. Just need to throw that in there. Please use quotation marks 3
Anyways. I’d recommend this if you’re looking for an interpretation of the story from Hyde’s perspective, are okay with a much darker/grosser subject matter than the original book (I suggest looking up TWs beforehand), and don’t mind a book that drags a bit. Otherwise maybe find another adaptation to read :,)
Big review for this one since I love the original Jekyll and Hyde story and I have Many Thoughts.
Things I liked:
- the writing, overall, is very nice. I enjoyed the prose and the descriptions for the most part.
- it has some interesting concepts, I like how it connected aspects from the original story that weren’t originally explored since it wasn’t from Jekyll/Hyde’s perspective.
- making Jekyll and Hyde morally grey instead of clear cut “good and bad” is always a fun interpretation, and this had an interesting exploration of that and their relationship.
Things I didn’t like:
- this book is kind of nasty. The nice prose and flowery descriptions felt gross for some scenes, which was intentional (I think. For the most part) but either way it wasn’t nice to read.
- Jekyll and Hyde is often used to portray the evils of humanity. I’m certain there’s other adaptations that take it even worse than this, but so far this is the worst I’ve personally seen it go. It’s a fair reading of the story, since the original is vague in a way that invites a lot of different interpretations, this just isn’t one that I personally like.
- the twist feels like a cop-out. Not gonna spoil it, and it makes sense in some ways and is set up well beforehand, but it also just feels like it’s revealed at the last second and is kind of an eye roll, tbh.
- it went on for so long. This book could be half the length that it is and it probably would’ve been better for it 😭
- the dialogue formatting was confusing. Just need to throw that in there. Please use quotation marks 3
Anyways. I’d recommend this if you’re looking for an interpretation of the story from Hyde’s perspective, are okay with a much darker/grosser subject matter than the original book (I suggest looking up TWs beforehand), and don’t mind a book that drags a bit. Otherwise maybe find another adaptation to read :,)
June 11, 2023
This is the worst book I have ever read in my life. I will be honest, my high expectations were never so rapidly shattered like this before, I started reading this book enthusiastically, hoping to grasp a whole new point of view of one of the most intriguing and compelling characters of classic literature and certainly my favourite of all time. First of all, Levine tried to "fix" some aspects about the original book so it would fit his retelling and that was a grave mistake. Dr. Jekyll DRINKS the compound. he does not INJECT it. I don't know how many times I uttered that to myself as I was forcing myself to read through the pages of this excuse of a book. There were so many inaccuracies that I really, nearly lost my mind. Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde is my favourite book of all time, and Henry Jekyll might just be my favourite character of all classic literature and seeing him getting butchered and his own story getting brutally distorted was one of the worst experiences I've had as a reader. Why give him such a terrible childhood? I understand where Levine was trying to come from, but that was so poorly executed. Why make Jekyll a r*pist??? What was the fucking point of that? Oh so he was sexually repressed and he had to do that in order to finally see it was *that* easy as Levine himself said? That was FUCKING nasty. I am UTTERLY disgusted. And blaming Jekyll himself for everything? I understand he IS to blame. But at the same time Levine makes Hyde blameless? Oh so he never actually wanted to take control is that so? All Levine did was try to refute everything Jekyll said in his statement, I KNOW he tried to write how Hyde would've felt and how he would react and I think Levine saw Jekyll as an unreliable narrator and I started to think so too for a while but now that just doesn't' make any sense. Why would he lie? Why would he try to hide anything? He knew damn well the end of his life was near, he knew Hyde would take over for good eventually. Jekyll had to face what he's done and was drowning in guilt and remorse, I think he couldn't care less of what people would think of him after he was gone, he was desperate and inconsolable, it wouldn't seem logical to try to save what was left of his dignity in those moments.
I am not gonna deny it, I truly enjoyed some parts of this book, i think Levine managed to capture the friendship between Lanyon, Utterson and Jekyll pretty well and I appreciated that while it lasted. But mostly this book was such a waste of my time and I considered dropping it, just deleting it from my library many many times but I knew I wouldn't settle down till I was completely finished with it. I give this book one star only and that's for Henry Jekyll, he truly deserves better than what he got in this book.
I am not gonna deny it, I truly enjoyed some parts of this book, i think Levine managed to capture the friendship between Lanyon, Utterson and Jekyll pretty well and I appreciated that while it lasted. But mostly this book was such a waste of my time and I considered dropping it, just deleting it from my library many many times but I knew I wouldn't settle down till I was completely finished with it. I give this book one star only and that's for Henry Jekyll, he truly deserves better than what he got in this book.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 1, 2015
I'll admit that I have never read the original The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, but I picked up this book with the idea that the plot is very similar in both versions. With that being said, I never read this for the story. What actually got me hooked on this book was Daniel Levine's storytelling. His ability to paint a vivid image of the dark and gloomy setting, along with blurring the lines between human and demon, is what did this for me. This isn't solely about rewriting a classic novel from a different character's perspective. This is about exploring the dichotomy which lies within human beings: the character we show to others versus who we really are. Many of us can relate to this, although maybe not to the same extent as wanting to kill someone. Maybe you're someone whose life revolves around rules and you wish, for once, you could indulge your inner rebel without repercussions; maybe you're a neurotic, type-A perfectionist and all you want is to have the capacity to not care about anything for at least an hour. Sure, this book has its dark, creepy moments, but that doesn't mean we can't relate to it. We are all faced with internal conflicts that tear us between what we have to do and what we want to do.
June 3, 2019
The cover boldly states "What happens when a villain becomes a hero?" I wonder if this is a tree falls in the woods kind of a riddle. The tagline btw is totally ridiculous and moot when you take in the plot of the book. Why even tease that this is a reverse book (and it WOULD be really interesting if Dr. Jeckyll was the villain all along, and poor simple Hyde was the good guy) when they both seemed pretty much the same person to me throughout.
I loathed how dialogue was formatted (no punctuation, just italicized and inserted into all the giant paragraphs). How the book was broken up into days with multiple flashbacks also didn't really make sense other than try to artificially induce a timeline or needless suspense. As others have pointed out, Jeannie and her sister were the most interesting part of the book and totally wasted. The treatment of women (well again girls, since pedophilia is a subplot throughout) seemed to be handled for edgy reasons rather than thoughtfully and I felt a bit gross when I finished this book.
I loathed how dialogue was formatted (no punctuation, just italicized and inserted into all the giant paragraphs). How the book was broken up into days with multiple flashbacks also didn't really make sense other than try to artificially induce a timeline or needless suspense. As others have pointed out, Jeannie and her sister were the most interesting part of the book and totally wasted. The treatment of women (well again girls, since pedophilia is a subplot throughout) seemed to be handled for edgy reasons rather than thoughtfully and I felt a bit gross when I finished this book.
June 29, 2014
Normally I have an aversion to any book by any author who usurps the original story in an attempt to hijack the characters and profit from someone elses ideas. The words "stealing" or "plaguerism" come to my mind.
A big exception is Daniel Levine's HYDE. From the moment I read the first review, in the NY TIMES, I knew I had to read this book. It is a thriller, of course...and an extremely well done one at that.
You follow the disastrous decline of a medical experiment and the horrendous toll it takes on physician Jekyll and his evil alter ego, Hyde.
A much different ending than Robert Louis Stephenson predicted and certainly a more detailed telling of the terrible fate of these (two?) men...who are actually inhabiting the same body.
I give it four stars instead of five simply because the story is not original. The writing, however, is superb. It's my hope that Daniel Levine will use his obvious skills to branch out and follow up with an entirely original work of his own...I'd definitely put it on my reading list.
A big exception is Daniel Levine's HYDE. From the moment I read the first review, in the NY TIMES, I knew I had to read this book. It is a thriller, of course...and an extremely well done one at that.
You follow the disastrous decline of a medical experiment and the horrendous toll it takes on physician Jekyll and his evil alter ego, Hyde.
A much different ending than Robert Louis Stephenson predicted and certainly a more detailed telling of the terrible fate of these (two?) men...who are actually inhabiting the same body.
I give it four stars instead of five simply because the story is not original. The writing, however, is superb. It's my hope that Daniel Levine will use his obvious skills to branch out and follow up with an entirely original work of his own...I'd definitely put it on my reading list.
May 31, 2014
The author fleshes out the slender story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by providing glimpses into the doctor's traumatic childhood, turning the story from a Gothic horror novel primarily grounded in fears of evolutionary degeneration to a psychological study informed by the late 19th century's interest in mental disorders. Hyde himself, who narrates the story, is the doctor's necessary mental adaptation to his childhood suffering, brought back to life in adulthood by the doctor's recent personal and professional losses and resultant self-experimentation. Levine brings in real-world history, as well, involving Hyde in the controversial child-prostitution scandal that swept across London a year before the original novel's publication and hinting that Jekyll may have done his early experimentation on drug-enhanced personality dissociation in some clinic like Jean-Martin Charcot's Salpêtrière.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 237 reviews