thequeercaseofmarius's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark informative mysterious reflective sad tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.5

“…I thus drew steadily nearer to that truth, by whose partial discovery I have been doomed to such a dreadful shipwreck: that man is not truly one, but truly two.”

The legacy that Dr Jekyll and his alter ego, Mr Hyde, have left on the Western world is a strange one. Almost 140 years later, most people can still recognise these characters when they appear onscreen, perhaps even know of the original story they are from, and yet surprisingly few people can say that they’ve actually taken the time to read the novella. I’m here to tell you that it is absolutely worth your time to do so. 

While The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde unfortunately hasn’t aged as well as some of its contemporaries, its historical value is nonetheless fascinating as it presents a unique and complex insight into the 19th century psyche. However, I did find without the historical context it’s incredibly easy to miss a lot of the story. The Penguin edition with notes by Robert Mighall phenomenally helps with this, and I couldn’t recommend this version more. 

You can tell that Robert Louis Stevenson was an incredibly intelligent man, well-read on the current sciences of his time with equally impressive creativity to boot. I thoroughly enjoyed his writing style, I found it to be very vivid, moody, and even frightening at times. His use of suspense and terror as well is nothing short of remarkable, and I came to notice this more when reading the short stories I was previously unfamiliar with; The Body Snatcher and Olalla. They were great reads, I would say just as much as Jekyll and Hyde was. 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

riverofhorton's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark emotional informative mysterious reflective slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.5

 This was a very interesting and in places somewhat unexpected read. I knew the basic premise
that Jekyll and Hyde share the same body with Jekyll being the 'good' side and Hyde being the 'bad' side
, but I hadn't anticipated the subtext of repressed homosexuality contained within the Hyde character. I also hadn't expected one of the characters to be accepting of this,
but questioning of the perceived choice of partner
. I also went into this expecting some discussion of substance use based on other media, but I wasn't expecting
the suicide towards the end, I did find this to have been well done within the context of the story however.


Overall, I enjoyed this story and will likely re-read it in the future 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

meganpbennett's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

True story: when watching The Avengers (2012) for the first time, after meeting Dr Banner, my mom said, "I take it that was Hulk?" to which I replied, "that was Dr. Jekyll." Turns out I owe poor Bruce an apology. While there are similarities between the two men, reading the book for the first time showed that, as in a lot of classic Victorian horror texts, the adaptations have taken on a life of their own, the monsters from the stories becoming those from the movies, not the books.

As discussed in the introduction to the Signet Classics edition (by no more than Vladimir Nabovok himself), the story is a mediocre detective story, going through the motions of a Victorian mystery. It is, however, a splendid look at how good and evil exist within each person, and how attempting to alter the balance within oneself is not a good idea. 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

calamityin's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

4.0


Expand filter menu Content Warnings

sophiemartin's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark emotional mysterious reflective sad slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5


Expand filter menu Content Warnings

bubblyfemme's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5


Expand filter menu Content Warnings

grayscale08's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious tense slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5


Expand filter menu Content Warnings

arianappstrg's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.5

4,5: I love this story but I do have this one unpopular opinion. 'If he be Mr Hyde, I shall be Mr Seek' is a really dumb line :D

The first time I read The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde I did not agree with the narration style at all. Third-person omniscient through the eyes of strangers in a story that could have been a banger psychological profile/ case study just seemed to miss the mark for me. However, the second time I read it, I understood why Stevenson chose to tell the story like so. It makes for such an interesting exploration of concepts like reputation, rumors, gossip, Victorian bias, and police bias. It helps you see how events can be so easily blown out of proportion and how the truth can either be much simpler or more horrifying than anticipated/rumored. It's also an insightful and diverse way of showing how different people account for the same events. It challenges you to distinguish between fact, opinion, and fiction. Still, though, I feel a bit iffy because I keep wondering would my feelings be any different if I followed Jekyll and Hyde's point of view throughout the whole story?

On the bright side, I love the descriptions of Victorian London as its own heavily gothic and spooky character, 'Mr Utterson beheld a marvellous number of degrees and hues of twilight; for here it would be dark like the back-end of evening; and there would be a glow of a rich, lurid brown, like the light of some strange conflagration... The dismal quarter of Soho seen under these changing glimpses, with its muddy ways, and slatternly passengers, and its lamps... seemed, in the lawyer's eyes, like a district of some city in a nightmare'. There is such rich imagery all throughout the story. At times, it's so vivid it overwhelms you but there are also instances where it is so subtle you have to read closely otherwise, you'll easily miss the immersive elements and the spine-tingling feels!

In conclusion, this is a 4,5 for me due to mixed feelings about the narrative style which is, in the end, more of a personal preference than a fault with the story itself. 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings