What many people miss about "Jekyll and Hyde" is that it is not a good vs evil story, because Jekyll is not good, he was never good. He was always evil! He created Hyde as a way of committing acts of evil and get away with it, and not have to worry about ruining himself as Jekyll. While he is physically Hyde, he is mentally Jekyll, so he knows what he is doing. Hyde is technically not even a character. He is a "shell" for Jekyll to wear.
Could Hyde also be a victim of Dr. Jekyll's? Hyde would never have been born had Jekyll not brought time into existence. The story leaves much room for interpretation; we can just go deeper into the meaning of the story; getting more knowledge, etc., makes the story more entertaining and us perhaps a bit wiser?
I've seen several adaptations- the one with Jack Palance was my favorite- (he was also my favorite Dracula behind Lugosi) and I felt as you do but failed to verbalize so well as you. Congrats!
He's not evil per se. He's a hypocrite, composed of both good and evil like all people. Instead of owning up to his inequities, he tries to excuse and purge them by creation of Hyde. It has surprising depth for such a short book.
A shame so many young students on here were "forced" to watch this by their teacher. I loved watching these documentaries when they first aired, and I was a 13. As a fan of classic horror I've always loved Fraylings work. When something becomes part of a curriculum it can sometimes lose its potency. I blame boring teachers
I'd have loved to have been forced to watch these episodes by my teacher. When I was at school we weren't encouraged to watch anything, except for Shakespeare so this would have been a pleasure.
One of my favorite novels . Amazing that he managed write some of his greatest novels in his short life . Since he died in 1894 at the age of 44 on the Island of Samoa
6:52 She also enthralled him with stories of William Brodie,who was the actual basis for Jekyll and Hyde because of his double life as a cabinet maker and tradesman by day and criminal by night. He became obsessed with him and tried to live a bohemian life that mirrored that of the deacon as he was called. But then he suffered a massive relapse of his lung disease and was confined to his bed and depended upon his father’s money. He even cited the deacon as inspiration for his novella in his journals about the dream.
I was raised in Westbourne, and went to school in R.L.Stevenson Avenue, the road opposite Skerryvore. I visited that house many times between 1980 & 2007. I did a Mr.Hyde makeup for a student film and photographed the Actor in the makeup outside Skerryvore in honour of RLS.
Old Town Edinburgh is absolutely fascinating! I would recommend anyone interested in history to visit. It is so rich in history. You can visit Greyfriars kirk yard if you dare. And Holyrood House, the Heart of Midlothian the site where people were executed. And the closes where Burke and Hare did their evil deeds. It is all there for you to see. Real history
In the brilliant words of the genius Christopher Hitchens-- “Religion poisons everything”. Many a horror, both fiction and all too real, is born of it.
Perhaps it is understandable that the Freudian psychologist drew parallels. If you consider the novel it would seem on surface to be about the ID and the SUPER EGO. And if you consider occurrences in authors real life (If they are to be believed) e.g Calling his childhood nurse Cummy "My second mother my first wife." Then later referring to his wife Fanny Osbourne as "Mother" , might be considered evidence to Freudian's of the Oedipus complex. However this is merely an observation on my part. Not necessarily my opinion
18.18 I lived in the cream house across the road, in the background its Alum chine road. Mungo Jerry lived 5 houses around the corner on RLS road I was the stage manager for Pontins at Christchurch.. absolutely beautiful place
I'm wondering what year the neighbour, Clive Holland recorded his voice for the BBC. He must have been fairly old. He would have been there between 1885 and 1887.
Aside from the people who may have influenced Robert Louis Stevenson, such as Deacon Brodie, there is a literary precursor for The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. And that is the novel, The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner by James Hogg; an earlier Scottish writer. It concerns a staunch Calvinist, Robert Wringhim, who, under the influence and persuasion of a sinister and mysterious stranger, called Gil-Martin, believes that he is saved and one of the elect, and is justified in murdering people who he believes have been damned by God. Critics have speculated that the stranger, Gil-Martin, might be the devil, or even, more plausibly, another, darker manifestation of Mr. Wringhim's personality, like Mr. Hyde, in Stevenson's novel. The novel didn't have much success at the time of its publication, but has since become a literary classic, with writers like Andre Gide expressing how much they were impressed by it. It has been described as an early modern crime novel, though written from the viewpoint of the criminal, rather than a detective. Stevenson is on record as having read and admired the novel; and it might also have been an influence on him in creating that famous work. You might be interested to know that I have written a comic take on Jekyll and Hyde, entitled, A Serpent in Eden, that can be seen at the website: www.inkitt.com/stories/horror/183677
Sou do Brasil, por acaso assisti esse programa. Maravilhoso. O episódio do Frankestain é meu predileto. Vontade de ter esse DVD. Obrigado por compartilhar.
“Well, it was this way,” returned Mr. Enfield: “I was coming home from some place at the end of the world, about three o’ clock of a black winter morning, and my way lay through a part of town where there was literally nothing to be seen but lamps. Street after street, and all the folks asleep-street after street, all lighted up as if for a procession and all as empty as a church-till at last I got into that state of mind when a man listens and listens and begins to long for the sight of a policeman. All at once, I saw two figures: one a little man who was stumping along eastward at a good walk, and the other a girl of maybe eight or ten who was running as hard as she was able down a cross street. Well, sir, the two ran into one another naturally enough at the corner; and then came the horrible part of the thing; for the man trampled calmly over the, child’s body and left her screaming on the ground. It sounds nothing to hear, but it was hellish to see. It wasn’t like a man; it was like some damned Juggernaut. I gave a view-halloa, took to my heels, collared my gentleman, and brought him back to where there was already quite a group about the screaming child. He was perfectly cool and made no resistance, but gave me one look, so ugly that it brought out the sweat on me like running. The people who had turned out were the girl’s own family; and pretty soon, the doctor, for whom she had been sent, put in his appearance. Well, the child was not much the worse, more frightened, according to the Sawbones; and there you might have supposed would be an end to it. But there was one curious circumstance. I had taken a loathing to my gentleman at first sight. So had the child’s family, which was only natural. But the doctor’s case was what struck me. He was the usual cut-and-dry apothecary, of no particular age and colour, with a strong Edinburgh accent, and about as emotional as a bagpipe. Well, sir, he was like the rest of us; every time he looked at my prisoner, I saw that Sawbones turn sick and white with the desire to kill him. I knew what was in his mind, just as he knew what was in mine; and killing being out of the question, we did the next best. We told the man we could and would make such a scandal out of this, as should make his name stink from one end of London to the other. If he had any friends or any credit, we undertook that he should lose them. And all the time, as we were pitching it in red hot, we were keeping the women off him as best we could, for they were as wild as harpies. I never saw a circle of such hateful faces; and there was the man in the middle, with a kind of black, sneering coolness-frightened too, I could see that-but carrying it off, sir, really like Satan. ‘If you choose to make capital out of this accident,’ said he, ‘I am naturally helpless. No gentleman but wishes to avoid a scene,’ says he. ‘Name your figure.’ Well, we screwed him up to a hundred pounds for the child’s family; he would have clearly liked to stick out; but there was something about the lot of us that meant mischief, and at last he struck. The next thing was to get the money; and where do you think he carried us but to that place with the door?-whipped out a key, went in, and presently came back with the matter of ten pounds in gold and a cheque for the balance on Coutts’s, drawn payable to bearer and signed with a name that I can’t mention, though it’s one of the points of my story, but it was a name at least very well known and often printed. The figure was stiff; but the signature was good for more than that, if it was only genuine. I took the liberty of pointing out to my gentleman that the whole business looked apocryphal, and that a man does not, in real life, walk into a cellar door at four in the morning and come out of it with another man’s cheque for close upon a hundred pounds. But he was quite easy and sneering. ‘Set your mind at rest,’ says he, ‘I will stay with you till the banks open and cash the cheque myself.’ So we all set off, the doctor, and the child’s father, and our friend and myself, and passed the rest of the night in my chambers; and next day, when we had breakfasted, went in a body to the bank. I gave in the check myself, and said I had every reason to believe it was a forgery. Not a bit of it. The cheque was genuine.” 9 “Tut-tut,” said Mr. Utterson. 10 “I see you feel as I do,” said Mr. Enfield. “Yes, it’s a bad story. For my man was a fellow that nobody could have to do with, a really damnable man; and the person that drew the cheque is the very pink of the proprieties, celebrated too, and (what makes it worse) one of your fellows who do what they call good. Black-mail, I suppose; an honest man paying through the nose for some of the capers of his youth. Black-Mail House is what I call that place with the door, in consequence. Though even that, you know, is far from explaining all,” he added, and with the words fell into a vein of musing. 11 From this he was recalled by Mr. Utterson asking rather suddenly:” And you don’t know if the drawer of the cheque lives there?” 12 “A likely place, isn’t it?” returned Mr. Enfield. “But I happen to have noticed his address; he lives in some square or other.” 13 “And you never asked about the-place with the door?” said Mr. Utterson. 14 “No, sir: I had a delicacy,” was the reply. “I feel very strongly about putting questions; it partakes too much of the style of the day of judgment. You start a question, and it’s like starting a stone. You sit quietly on the top of a hill; and away the stone goes, starting others; and presently some bland old bird (the last you would have thought of) is knocked on the head in his own back-garden and the family have to change their name. No, sir, I make it a rule of mine: the more it looks like Queer Street, the less I ask.” 15 “ A very good rule, too,” said the lawyer. 16 “But I have studied the place for myself,” continued Mr. Enfield.” It seems scarcely a house. There is no other door, and nobody goes in or out of that one but, once in a great while, the gentleman of my adventure. There are three windows looking on the court on the first floor; none below; the windows are always shut but they’re clean. And then there is a chimney which is generally smoking; so somebody must live there. And yet it’s not so sure; for the buildings are so packed together about that court, that it’s hard to say where one ends and another begins.” 17 The pair walked on again for a while in silence; and then, “Enfield,” said Mr. Utterson, “that’s a good rule of yours.” 18 “Yes, I think it is,” returned Enfield. 19 “But for all that,” continued the lawyer, “there’s one point I want to ask: I want to ask the name of that man who walked over the child.” 20 “Well,” said Mr. Enfield, “I can’t see what harm it would do. It was a man of the name of Hyde.” 21 “H’m,” said Mr. Utterson. “What sort of a man is he to see?” 22 “He is not easy to describe. There is something wrong with his appearance; something displeasing, something downright detestable. I never saw a man I so disliked, and yet I scarce know why. He must be deformed somewhere; he gives a strong feeling of deformity, although I couldn’t specify the point. He’s an extraordinary-looking man, and yet I really can name nothing out of the way. No, sir; I can make no hand of it; I can’t describe him. And it’s not want of memory; for I declare I can see him this moment.” 23 Mr. Utterson again walked some way in silence and obviously under a weight of consideration. 24 “You are sure he used a key?” he inquired at last. 25 “My dear sir…” began Enfield, surprised out of himself. 26 “Yes, I know,” said Utterson; “I know it must seem strange. The fact is, if I do not ask you the name of the other party, it is because I know it already. You see, Richard, your tale has gone home. If you have been inexact in any point, you had better correct it.” 27 “I think you might have warned me,” returned the other, with a touch of sullenness. “But I have been pedantically exact, as you call it. The fellow had a key; and what’s more, he has it still. I saw him use it, not a week ago. 28 Mr. Utterson sighed deeply but said never a word; and the young man presently resumed. “Here is another lesson to say nothing,” said he. “I am ashamed of my long tongue. Let us make a bargain never to refer to this again.” 29 “With all my heart,” said the lawyer. “I shake hands on that, Richard.”
36:06 what adaptation is that from? And why would she be scared of Edward when she clearly slept with Edward? Did they switch it to Edward Jekyll and Henry Hyde?
It's from the 1980 BBC TV adaptation starring David Hemmings. She's so frightened because he's stuck in mid-transformation. No, they didn't switch the names. She was engaged to Henry Jekyll but was sleeping with Edward Hyde. I think this one may still be on TH-cam.
I think its sort of disingenuous of Christopher Frayling to state that there is no insinuation of Hydes evil beyond the fact that he 'seems' evil...of course there was a limit to what Stevenson could write in those days...but the fact that he does prowl Soho and the fact that he savagely knocks over and beats a woman at the start of the story...I think the reader is meant to infer that he gets up to much worse, although it can't be explicitly stated...possibly the spectre of homosexuality could linger over Hyde, as I believe Utterson initial theories about Jekylls involvement with Hyde leans towards blackmail (and this is inferred in a way that Victorian readers could have inferred as such because there is an emphasis on Hyde being 'younger' than Jekyll) and of course Danvers Crew is murdered by Hyde in Soho, known for male as well as female prostitution...what was Danvers carew doing in a back alley at that time? Hyde doesn't just 'seem' evil...he actually does get up to evil actions but a lot of it is left up to the reader to imagine...and of course the public imagination was dominated by the Ripper so, of course, that tended to colour more interpretations of the story at the time.
He doesn't knock over and beat a woman at the start of the story. He tramples a child. And the murder of Danvers Carew did not take place in Soho. Hyde's house was in in Soho, but the location of the murder wasn't specified, except that it took place near the river. And the notion that blackmail implies homosexuality is completely unsupportable. Any implication of homosexuality in the story is a fantasy that you've gone out of your way to concoct.
Open to interpretion? To me, it's straight forward the description of drug abuse. In Stevenson's time, opium was the downfall of many young gentlemen, and I'm sure he has to observe some of his friends mental decline due to the addiction.
Stevenson had been addicted to Opium or Laudanum since he was a child. He suffered from respiratory problems in which he was given many addictive substances. He stayed inside by himself all the time..
MR. UTTERSON the lawyer was a man of a rugged countenance, that was never lighted by a smile; cold, scanty and embarrassed in discourse; backward in sentiment; lean, long, dusty, dreary, and yet somehow lovable. At friendly meetings, and when the wine was to his taste, something eminently human beaconed from his eye; something indeed which never found its way into his talk, but which spoke not only in these silent symbols of the after-dinner face, but more often and loudly in the acts of his life. He was austere with himself; drank gin when he was alone, to mortify a taste for vintages; and though he enjoyed the theatre, had not crossed the doors of one for twenty years. But he had an approved tolerance for others; sometimes wondering, almost with envy, at the high pressure of spirits involved in their misdeeds; and in any extremity inclined to help rather than to reprove. 1 “I incline to, Cain’s heresy,” he used to say. “I let my brother go to the devil in his quaintly: “own way.” In this character, it was frequently his fortune to be the last reputable acquaintance and the last good influence in the lives of down-going men. And to such as these, so long as they came about his chambers, he never marked a shade of change in his demeanour. 2 No doubt the feat was easy to Mr. Utterson; for he was undemonstrative at the best, and even his friendship seemed to be founded in a similar catholicity of good-nature. It is the mark of a modest man to accept his friendly circle ready-made from the hands of opportunity; and that was the lawyer’s way. His friends were those of his own blood or those whom he had known the longest; his affections, like ivy, were the growth of time, they implied no aptness in the object. Hence, no doubt, the bond that united him to Mr. Richard Enfield, his distant kinsman, the well-known man about town. It was a nut to crack for many, what these two could see in each other, or what subject they could find in common. It was reported by those who encountered them in their Sunday walks, that they said nothing, looked singularly dull, and would hail with obvious relief the appearance of a friend. For all that, the two men put the greatest store by these excursions, counted them the chief jewel of each week, and not only set aside occasions of pleasure, but even resisted the calls of business, that they might enjoy them uninterrupted. 3 It chanced on one of these rambles that their way led them down a by-street in a busy quarter of London. The street was small and what is called quiet, but it drove a thriving trade on the week-days. The inhabitants were all doing well, it seemed, and all emulously hoping to do better still, and laying out the surplus of their gains in coquetry; so that the shop fronts stood along that thoroughfare with an air of invitation, like rows of smiling saleswomen. Even on Sunday, when it veiled its more florid charms and lay comparatively empty of passage, the street shone out in contrast to its dingy neighbourhood, like a fire in a forest; and with its freshly painted shutters, well-polished brasses, and general cleanliness and gaiety of note, instantly caught and pleased the eye of the passenger. 4 Two doors from one corner, on the left hand going east, the line was broken by the entry of a court; and just at that point, a certain sinister block of building thrust forward its gable on the street. It was two stories high; showed no window, nothing but a door on the lower story and a blind forehead of discoloured wall on the upper; and bore in every feature, the marks of prolonged and sordid negligence. The door, which was equipped with neither bell nor knocker, was blistered and distained. Tramps slouched into the recess and struck matches on the panels; children kept shop upon the steps; the schoolboy had tried his knife on the mouldings; and for close on a generation, no one had appeared to drive away these random visitors or to repair their ravages. 5 Mr. Enfield and the lawyer were on the other side of the by-street; but when they came abreast of the entry, the former lifted up his cane and pointed. 6 “Did you ever remark that door?” he asked; and when his companion had replied in the affirmative, “It is connected in my mind,” added he, “with a very odd story.” 7 “Indeed?” said Mr. Utterson, with a slight change of voice, “and what was that?” 8
The poor students who have been "forced" to watch this by their English teacher should count themselves lucky...and going by some of their unintelligible comments they need to spend more time studying and less time moaning on here 😆
@@allisonspencer8768 I'm glad. My mum got me into The Pan books of horror when I was young, they're full of short stories, some written at the early part of the 1900's. My daughter enjoyed them too. If you're interested in old school horror they're worth a look 👍
I guess I would've resented being forced to watch this for schoolwork. But I'm watching now purely out of interest, particularly for Christopher Frayling whose books, especially on film, are fascinating and deeply insightful.
The solemn butler knew and welcomed him; he was subjected to no stage of delay, but ushered direct from the door to the dining-room where Dr. Lanyon sat alone over his wine. This was a hearty, healthy, dapper, red-faced gentleman, with a shock of hair prematurely white, and a boisterous and decided manner. At sight of Mr. Utterson, he sprang up from his chair and welcomed him with both hands. The geniality, as was the way of the man, was somewhat theatrical to the eye; but it reposed on genuine feeling. For these two were old friends, old mates both at school and college, both thorough respecters of themselves and of each other, and, what does not always follow, men who thoroughly enjoyed each other’s company. 4 After a little rambling talk, the lawyer led up to the subject which so disagreeably pre-occupied his mind. 5 “I suppose, Lanyon,” said he “you and I must be the two oldest friends that Henry Jekyll has?” 6 “I wish the friends were younger,” chuckled Dr. Lanyon. “But I suppose we are. And what of that? I see little of him now.” 7 Indeed?” said Utterson. “I thought you had a bond of common interest.” 8 “We had,” was the reply. “But it is more than ten years since Henry Jekyll became too fanciful for me. He began to go wrong, wrong in mind; and though of course I continue to take an interest in him for old sake’s sake, as they say, I see and I have seen devilish little of the man. Such unscientific balderdash,” added the doctor, flushing suddenly purple, “would have estranged Damon and Pythias.”
mi pipi es tan grande que al final es mas palida por que no corre sangre a la punta y cada que se me para me da un infarto por que nesecita mucha sangre para poder pararse.
Concerning Jack the Ripper, I believe Author C. Doyle was Jack the Ripper, he had the where with all, as a practice Doctor, who learned surgery. He walked the streets of Lime House area, he had a dominating mother, who he hated & was a person who liked... to pick up girls of the night, & was arrested for the same a couple times, but charges were dropped after the police found out who he was, but it did make it to the News paper, without a name, just, "Interesting Person"
![[FULL EP.73] เปิดบ้าน 70 ล้าน "แป้ง Zbing" ยกมาทั้งญี่ปุ่น l เคหสถานบานปลาย l One Playground](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YBnJhTt07Pg/mqdefault.jpg)
Who’s watching for schoolwork ‘at home’ (2021) 3rd lockdown
xD
@@qwaazy9881 what
@@imthefishygod5225 Same
That'll be me!
What many people miss about "Jekyll and Hyde" is that it is not a good vs evil story, because Jekyll is not good, he was never good. He was always evil! He created Hyde as a way of committing acts of evil and get away with it, and not have to worry about ruining himself as Jekyll. While he is physically Hyde, he is mentally Jekyll, so he knows what he is doing. Hyde is technically not even a character. He is a "shell" for Jekyll to wear.
Could Hyde also be a victim of Dr. Jekyll's? Hyde would never have been born had Jekyll not brought time into existence. The story leaves much room for interpretation; we can just go deeper into the meaning of the story; getting more knowledge, etc., makes the story more entertaining and us perhaps a bit wiser?
I've seen several adaptations- the one with Jack Palance was my favorite- (he was also my favorite Dracula behind Lugosi) and I felt as you do but failed to verbalize so well as you. Congrats!
He's not evil per se. He's a hypocrite, composed of both good and evil like all people. Instead of owning up to his inequities, he tries to excuse and purge them by creation of Hyde. It has surprising depth for such a short book.
He is a shell in which Jekyll can hide -- hence, his sound-alike name.
A shame so many young students on here were "forced" to watch this by their teacher. I loved watching these documentaries when they first aired, and I was a 13. As a fan of classic horror I've always loved Fraylings work. When something becomes part of a curriculum it can sometimes lose its potency. I blame boring teachers
I'd have loved to have been forced to watch these episodes by my teacher. When I was at school we weren't encouraged to watch anything, except for Shakespeare so this would have been a pleasure.
Yep i have to write about this and macbeth for my gcses
The greatest tutor I had while I was a university student was Christopher Frayling. On the TV. I owe him a true debt.
One of my favorite novels . Amazing that he managed write some of his greatest novels in his short life . Since he died in 1894 at the age of 44 on the Island of Samoa
love the people who are doing this for school or fun... then there's me doing uni work and figured this would be handy to watch and fun!
you are really bored
who's watching with no shoes on
William Cheal I am!
6:52 She also enthralled him with stories of William Brodie,who was the actual basis for Jekyll and Hyde because of his double life as a cabinet maker and tradesman by day and criminal by night. He became obsessed with him and tried to live a bohemian life that mirrored that of the deacon as he was called. But then he suffered a massive relapse of his lung disease and was confined to his bed and depended upon his father’s money. He even cited the deacon as inspiration for his novella in his journals about the dream.
He actually had a dresser drawer made by Decan Brodie which had his name burnt into it..
I was raised in Westbourne, and went to school in R.L.Stevenson Avenue, the road opposite Skerryvore. I visited that house many times between 1980 & 2007. I did a Mr.Hyde makeup for a student film and photographed the Actor in the makeup outside Skerryvore in honour of RLS.
Sounds a really great thing to do. Love to see the photos.
Old Town Edinburgh is absolutely fascinating! I would recommend anyone interested in history to visit. It is so rich in history. You can visit Greyfriars kirk yard if you dare. And Holyrood House, the Heart of Midlothian the site where people were executed. And the closes where Burke and Hare did their evil deeds. It is all there for you to see. Real history
In the brilliant words of the genius Christopher Hitchens-- “Religion poisons everything”.
Many a horror, both fiction and all too real, is born of it.
Lucy Worsley has a wonderful bit on this
watch on 1.75 speed and you will do the work faster
"Over work" doesn't sound like a medical diagnosis for the author's death
Utterly masterful.
Thanks for the video!
The clips didn't really show just how brilliant Fredrich Marsh was. He really deserved the Academy Award for Best Actor.
Perhaps it is understandable that the Freudian psychologist drew parallels. If you consider the novel it would seem on surface to be about the ID and the SUPER EGO.
And if you consider occurrences in authors real life (If they are to be believed) e.g Calling his childhood nurse Cummy "My second mother my first wife." Then later referring to his wife Fanny Osbourne as "Mother" , might be considered evidence to Freudian's of the Oedipus complex.
However this is merely an observation on my part. Not necessarily my opinion
18.18
I lived in the cream house across the road, in the background
its Alum chine road.
Mungo Jerry lived 5 houses around the corner on RLS road
I was the stage manager for Pontins at Christchurch..
absolutely beautiful place
I'm wondering what year the neighbour, Clive Holland recorded his voice for the BBC. He must have been fairly old. He would have been there between 1885 and 1887.
What a banger
I really enjoyed this documentary. Anyone bored by it isnae listnin'.
Aside from the people who may have influenced Robert Louis Stevenson, such as Deacon Brodie, there is a literary precursor for The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. And that is the novel, The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner by James Hogg; an earlier Scottish writer. It concerns a staunch Calvinist, Robert Wringhim, who, under the influence and persuasion of a sinister and mysterious stranger, called Gil-Martin, believes that he is saved and one of the elect, and is justified in murdering people who he believes have been damned by God. Critics have speculated that the stranger, Gil-Martin, might be the devil, or even, more plausibly, another, darker manifestation of Mr. Wringhim's personality, like Mr. Hyde, in Stevenson's novel. The novel didn't have much success at the time of its publication, but has since become a literary classic, with writers like Andre Gide expressing how much they were impressed by it. It has been described as an early modern crime novel, though written from the viewpoint of the criminal, rather than a detective. Stevenson is on record as having read and admired the novel; and it might also have been an influence on him in creating that famous work. You might be interested to know that I have written a comic take on Jekyll and Hyde, entitled, A Serpent in Eden, that can be seen at the website: www.inkitt.com/stories/horror/183677
Sou do Brasil, por acaso assisti esse programa. Maravilhoso. O episódio do Frankestain é meu predileto.
Vontade de ter esse DVD. Obrigado por compartilhar.
“Well, it was this way,” returned Mr. Enfield: “I was coming home from some place at the end of the world, about three o’ clock of a black winter morning, and my way lay through a part of town where there was literally nothing to be seen but lamps. Street after street, and all the folks asleep-street after street, all lighted up as if for a procession and all as empty as a church-till at last I got into that state of mind when a man listens and listens and begins to long for the sight of a policeman. All at once, I saw two figures: one a little man who was stumping along eastward at a good walk, and the other a girl of maybe eight or ten who was running as hard as she was able down a cross street. Well, sir, the two ran into one another naturally enough at the corner; and then came the horrible part of the thing; for the man trampled calmly over the, child’s body and left her screaming on the ground. It sounds nothing to hear, but it was hellish to see. It wasn’t like a man; it was like some damned Juggernaut. I gave a view-halloa, took to my heels, collared my gentleman, and brought him back to where there was already quite a group about the screaming child. He was perfectly cool and made no resistance, but gave me one look, so ugly that it brought out the sweat on me like running. The people who had turned out were the girl’s own family; and pretty soon, the doctor, for whom she had been sent, put in his appearance. Well, the child was not much the worse, more frightened, according to the Sawbones; and there you might have supposed would be an end to it. But there was one curious circumstance. I had taken a loathing to my gentleman at first sight. So had the child’s family, which was only natural. But the doctor’s case was what struck me. He was the usual cut-and-dry apothecary, of no particular age and colour, with a strong Edinburgh accent, and about as emotional as a bagpipe. Well, sir, he was like the rest of us; every time he looked at my prisoner, I saw that Sawbones turn sick and white with the desire to kill him. I knew what was in his mind, just as he knew what was in mine; and killing being out of the question, we did the next best. We told the man we could and would make such a scandal out of this, as should make his name stink from one end of London to the other. If he had any friends or any credit, we undertook that he should lose them. And all the time, as we were pitching it in red hot, we were keeping the women off him as best we could, for they were as wild as harpies. I never saw a circle of such hateful faces; and there was the man in the middle, with a kind of black, sneering coolness-frightened too, I could see that-but carrying it off, sir, really like Satan. ‘If you choose to make capital out of this accident,’ said he, ‘I am naturally helpless. No gentleman but wishes to avoid a scene,’ says he. ‘Name your figure.’ Well, we screwed him up to a hundred pounds for the child’s family; he would have clearly liked to stick out; but there was something about the lot of us that meant mischief, and at last he struck. The next thing was to get the money; and where do you think he carried us but to that place with the door?-whipped out a key, went in, and presently came back with the matter of ten pounds in gold and a cheque for the balance on Coutts’s, drawn payable to bearer and signed with a name that I can’t mention, though it’s one of the points of my story, but it was a name at least very well known and often printed. The figure was stiff; but the signature was good for more than that, if it was only genuine. I took the liberty of pointing out to my gentleman that the whole business looked apocryphal, and that a man does not, in real life, walk into a cellar door at four in the morning and come out of it with another man’s cheque for close upon a hundred pounds. But he was quite easy and sneering. ‘Set your mind at rest,’ says he, ‘I will stay with you till the banks open and cash the cheque myself.’ So we all set off, the doctor, and the child’s father, and our friend and myself, and passed the rest of the night in my chambers; and next day, when we had breakfasted, went in a body to the bank. I gave in the check myself, and said I had every reason to believe it was a forgery. Not a bit of it. The cheque was genuine.” 9
“Tut-tut,” said Mr. Utterson. 10
“I see you feel as I do,” said Mr. Enfield. “Yes, it’s a bad story. For my man was a fellow that nobody could have to do with, a really damnable man; and the person that drew the cheque is the very pink of the proprieties, celebrated too, and (what makes it worse) one of your fellows who do what they call good. Black-mail, I suppose; an honest man paying through the nose for some of the capers of his youth. Black-Mail House is what I call that place with the door, in consequence. Though even that, you know, is far from explaining all,” he added, and with the words fell into a vein of musing. 11
From this he was recalled by Mr. Utterson asking rather suddenly:” And you don’t know if the drawer of the cheque lives there?” 12
“A likely place, isn’t it?” returned Mr. Enfield. “But I happen to have noticed his address; he lives in some square or other.” 13
“And you never asked about the-place with the door?” said Mr. Utterson. 14
“No, sir: I had a delicacy,” was the reply. “I feel very strongly about putting questions; it partakes too much of the style of the day of judgment. You start a question, and it’s like starting a stone. You sit quietly on the top of a hill; and away the stone goes, starting others; and presently some bland old bird (the last you would have thought of) is knocked on the head in his own back-garden and the family have to change their name. No, sir, I make it a rule of mine: the more it looks like Queer Street, the less I ask.” 15
“ A very good rule, too,” said the lawyer. 16
“But I have studied the place for myself,” continued Mr. Enfield.” It seems scarcely a house. There is no other door, and nobody goes in or out of that one but, once in a great while, the gentleman of my adventure. There are three windows looking on the court on the first floor; none below; the windows are always shut but they’re clean. And then there is a chimney which is generally smoking; so somebody must live there. And yet it’s not so sure; for the buildings are so packed together about that court, that it’s hard to say where one ends and another begins.” 17
The pair walked on again for a while in silence; and then, “Enfield,” said Mr. Utterson, “that’s a good rule of yours.” 18
“Yes, I think it is,” returned Enfield. 19
“But for all that,” continued the lawyer, “there’s one point I want to ask: I want to ask the name of that man who walked over the child.” 20
“Well,” said Mr. Enfield, “I can’t see what harm it would do. It was a man of the name of Hyde.” 21
“H’m,” said Mr. Utterson. “What sort of a man is he to see?” 22
“He is not easy to describe. There is something wrong with his appearance; something displeasing, something downright detestable. I never saw a man I so disliked, and yet I scarce know why. He must be deformed somewhere; he gives a strong feeling of deformity, although I couldn’t specify the point. He’s an extraordinary-looking man, and yet I really can name nothing out of the way. No, sir; I can make no hand of it; I can’t describe him. And it’s not want of memory; for I declare I can see him this moment.” 23
Mr. Utterson again walked some way in silence and obviously under a weight of consideration. 24
“You are sure he used a key?” he inquired at last. 25
“My dear sir…” began Enfield, surprised out of himself. 26
“Yes, I know,” said Utterson; “I know it must seem strange. The fact is, if I do not ask you the name of the other party, it is because I know it already. You see, Richard, your tale has gone home. If you have been inexact in any point, you had better correct it.” 27
“I think you might have warned me,” returned the other, with a touch of sullenness. “But I have been pedantically exact, as you call it. The fellow had a key; and what’s more, he has it still. I saw him use it, not a week ago. 28
Mr. Utterson sighed deeply but said never a word; and the young man presently resumed. “Here is another lesson to say nothing,” said he. “I am ashamed of my long tongue. Let us make a bargain never to refer to this again.” 29
“With all my heart,” said the lawyer. “I shake hands on that, Richard.”
Shut up
The original Incredible Hulk
Stan Lee once said that he created The Incredible Hulk as a combination of "Frankenstein" and "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde."
@@willmfrank yup
36:06 what adaptation is that from? And why would she be scared of Edward when she clearly slept with Edward? Did they switch it to Edward Jekyll and Henry Hyde?
What was they about to do😳😏
It's from the 1980 BBC TV adaptation starring David Hemmings.
She's so frightened because he's stuck in mid-transformation.
No, they didn't switch the names. She was engaged to Henry Jekyll but was sleeping with Edward Hyde.
I think this one may still be on TH-cam.
I think its sort of disingenuous of Christopher Frayling to state that there is no insinuation of Hydes evil beyond the fact that he 'seems' evil...of course there was a limit to what Stevenson could write in those days...but the fact that he does prowl Soho and the fact that he savagely knocks over and beats a woman at the start of the story...I think the reader is meant to infer that he gets up to much worse, although it can't be explicitly stated...possibly the spectre of homosexuality could linger over Hyde, as I believe Utterson initial theories about Jekylls involvement with Hyde leans towards blackmail (and this is inferred in a way that Victorian readers could have inferred as such because there is an emphasis on Hyde being 'younger' than Jekyll) and of course Danvers Crew is murdered by Hyde in Soho, known for male as well as female prostitution...what was Danvers carew doing in a back alley at that time? Hyde doesn't just 'seem' evil...he actually does get up to evil actions but a lot of it is left up to the reader to imagine...and of course the public imagination was dominated by the Ripper so, of course, that tended to colour more interpretations of the story at the time.
He doesn't knock over and beat a woman at the start of the story. He tramples a child. And the murder of Danvers Carew did not take place in Soho. Hyde's house was in in Soho, but the location of the murder wasn't specified, except that it took place near the river. And the notion that blackmail implies homosexuality is completely unsupportable. Any implication of homosexuality in the story is a fantasy that you've gone out of your way to concoct.
*****
That's not a defense for firmly asserted falsehoods and unsupported conjecture.
BelatedCommiseration
Open to interpretion? To me, it's straight forward the description of drug abuse. In Stevenson's time, opium was the downfall of many young gentlemen, and I'm sure he has to observe some of his friends mental decline due to the addiction.
Stevenson had been addicted to Opium or Laudanum since he was a child. He suffered from respiratory problems in which he was given many addictive substances. He stayed inside by himself all the time..
J and h is one of my favs
Why do they avoid saying the word "tuberculosis"?
MR. UTTERSON the lawyer was a man of a rugged countenance, that was never lighted by a smile; cold, scanty and embarrassed in discourse; backward in sentiment; lean, long, dusty, dreary, and yet somehow lovable. At friendly meetings, and when the wine was to his taste, something eminently human beaconed from his eye; something indeed which never found its way into his talk, but which spoke not only in these silent symbols of the after-dinner face, but more often and loudly in the acts of his life. He was austere with himself; drank gin when he was alone, to mortify a taste for vintages; and though he enjoyed the theatre, had not crossed the doors of one for twenty years. But he had an approved tolerance for others; sometimes wondering, almost with envy, at the high pressure of spirits involved in their misdeeds; and in any extremity inclined to help rather than to reprove. 1
“I incline to, Cain’s heresy,” he used to say. “I let my brother go to the devil in his quaintly: “own way.” In this character, it was frequently his fortune to be the last reputable acquaintance and the last good influence in the lives of down-going men. And to such as these, so long as they came about his chambers, he never marked a shade of change in his demeanour. 2
No doubt the feat was easy to Mr. Utterson; for he was undemonstrative at the best, and even his friendship seemed to be founded in a similar catholicity of good-nature. It is the mark of a modest man to accept his friendly circle ready-made from the hands of opportunity; and that was the lawyer’s way. His friends were those of his own blood or those whom he had known the longest; his affections, like ivy, were the growth of time, they implied no aptness in the object. Hence, no doubt, the bond that united him to Mr. Richard Enfield, his distant kinsman, the well-known man about town. It was a nut to crack for many, what these two could see in each other, or what subject they could find in common. It was reported by those who encountered them in their Sunday walks, that they said nothing, looked singularly dull, and would hail with obvious relief the appearance of a friend. For all that, the two men put the greatest store by these excursions, counted them the chief jewel of each week, and not only set aside occasions of pleasure, but even resisted the calls of business, that they might enjoy them uninterrupted. 3
It chanced on one of these rambles that their way led them down a by-street in a busy quarter of London. The street was small and what is called quiet, but it drove a thriving trade on the week-days. The inhabitants were all doing well, it seemed, and all emulously hoping to do better still, and laying out the surplus of their gains in coquetry; so that the shop fronts stood along that thoroughfare with an air of invitation, like rows of smiling saleswomen. Even on Sunday, when it veiled its more florid charms and lay comparatively empty of passage, the street shone out in contrast to its dingy neighbourhood, like a fire in a forest; and with its freshly painted shutters, well-polished brasses, and general cleanliness and gaiety of note, instantly caught and pleased the eye of the passenger. 4
Two doors from one corner, on the left hand going east, the line was broken by the entry of a court; and just at that point, a certain sinister block of building thrust forward its gable on the street. It was two stories high; showed no window, nothing but a door on the lower story and a blind forehead of discoloured wall on the upper; and bore in every feature, the marks of prolonged and sordid negligence. The door, which was equipped with neither bell nor knocker, was blistered and distained. Tramps slouched into the recess and struck matches on the panels; children kept shop upon the steps; the schoolboy had tried his knife on the mouldings; and for close on a generation, no one had appeared to drive away these random visitors or to repair their ravages. 5
Mr. Enfield and the lawyer were on the other side of the by-street; but when they came abreast of the entry, the former lifted up his cane and pointed. 6
“Did you ever remark that door?” he asked; and when his companion had replied in the affirmative, “It is connected in my mind,” added he, “with a very odd story.” 7
“Indeed?” said Mr. Utterson, with a slight change of voice, “and what was that?” 8
its was not bad they need to do more on jekyll and hyde I just dont know alot about it
How to save time - playback speed and then choose a time faster so you get through the video quicker - your welcome :)
@Winning Grinn I noticed the people that didn't seem to enjoy this documentary have difficulties expressing themselves in writing.
It's "you're welcome". If you're being forced to watch this for English class, it's for your own benefit.
The poor students who have been "forced" to watch this by their English teacher should count themselves lucky...and going by some of their unintelligible comments they need to spend more time studying and less time moaning on here 😆
Hannah Williams agreed I’m 14 and I’m loving reading and watching this
@@allisonspencer8768 I'm glad. My mum got me into The Pan books of horror when I was young, they're full of short stories, some written at the early part of the 1900's. My daughter enjoyed them too. If you're interested in old school horror they're worth a look 👍
Hannah Williams ooh I’ll check it out
I guess I would've resented being forced to watch this for schoolwork. But I'm watching now purely out of interest, particularly for Christopher Frayling whose books, especially on film, are fascinating and deeply insightful.
11:41 what does he say? Sounds like damanarts or something not sure. Can someone help me out?
Down-and-outs
bk randy kids are 5 times of 9 wowness
The solemn butler knew and welcomed him; he was subjected to no stage of delay, but ushered direct from the door to the dining-room where Dr. Lanyon sat alone over his wine. This was a hearty, healthy, dapper, red-faced gentleman, with a shock of hair prematurely white, and a boisterous and decided manner. At sight of Mr. Utterson, he sprang up from his chair and welcomed him with both hands. The geniality, as was the way of the man, was somewhat theatrical to the eye; but it reposed on genuine feeling. For these two were old friends, old mates both at school and college, both thorough respecters of themselves and of each other, and, what does not always follow, men who thoroughly enjoyed each other’s company. 4
After a little rambling talk, the lawyer led up to the subject which so disagreeably pre-occupied his mind. 5
“I suppose, Lanyon,” said he “you and I must be the two oldest friends that Henry Jekyll has?” 6
“I wish the friends were younger,” chuckled Dr. Lanyon. “But I suppose we are. And what of that? I see little of him now.” 7
Indeed?” said Utterson. “I thought you had a bond of common interest.” 8
“We had,” was the reply. “But it is more than ten years since Henry Jekyll became too fanciful for me. He began to go wrong, wrong in mind; and though of course I continue to take an interest in him for old sake’s sake, as they say, I see and I have seen devilish little of the man. Such unscientific balderdash,” added the doctor, flushing suddenly purple, “would have estranged Damon and Pythias.”
20:20
#flankpatrol
An American voice over for Fanny?
well, she was American!
Six nine this and six nine that
anyone else here because their teachers forced them to?
yes
this person is earning money now
Looooool
haha
I'm bored -.-
Bet that anyone will guees this
Resolution is crap, maybe not your fault, but, it's crap....
mi pipi es tan grande que al final es mas palida por que no corre sangre a la punta y cada que se me para me da un infarto por que nesecita mucha sangre para poder pararse.
What up my Gs
Concerning
Jack the Ripper,
I believe
Author C. Doyle was Jack the Ripper, he had the where with all, as a practice Doctor, who learned surgery.
He walked the streets of
Lime House area, he had a dominating mother, who he hated & was a person who liked... to pick up girls of the night, & was arrested for the same a couple times, but charges were dropped after the police found out who he was, but it did make it to the News paper, without a name, just,
"Interesting Person"
That's retarded.
Hahaha Syed 🍛🤣🤣🤣😂🤣🍛🍛
I only watched this crap as it is part of my homework
When you're a little older you'll realize that 'this crap' is the basis for just about EVERY horror film you'll ever see - be patient
first
soy gay
Ben Godman: Who else here stopped watching 10 minutes in and just used google?
You're here too ben?
@@greatgamer058 yep boi
@@greatgamer058 so did you?
and the moral of the story: fundamentalist christianity - NOT EVEN ONCE!