1983. From a novel or play of literary merit, select an important character who is a villain. Then, in a well-organized essay, analyze the nature of the character's villainy and show how it enhances meaning in the work. Do not merely summarize the plot.
What is the root of evil? Such a simple question has stumped us all for quite some time. The reason behind its ability to confuse us is its generality, evil is different in everyone. The nature of Mr. Hyde’s villainy is pure humanity, and it enforces the meaning of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by starting to illustrate Stevenson’s idea of humanity and evil.
In Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Stevenson really investigates humanity, evil and how they intertwine. The premise of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is that Dr. Jekyll, a scientist, makes a drink that turns him into another part of himself. This other part of himself is evil and goes by the name Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde looks different than Dr. Jekyll, because he is basically a different person. He is described as very ugly, as though he has an obvious deformity, but it’s all internal. The evidence we have or calling him evil is that he murdered people and tried to take Dr. Jekyll over. As Dr. Jekyll makes sure we understand, he isn’t pure good while Mr. Hyde is pure evil, it’s about a 90 to 10% ratio, which is probably why Mr. Hyde looks human at all.
Mr. Hyde is not your typical villain; he doesn’t have some sob story about his childhood that made him the way he is, unlike most super villains. The reason that he can’t is because Mr. Hyde suddenly came into being, he didn’t have a childhood to attach a sob story to. So, the reason that Mr. Hyde can be so horrible is, quite simply, that he’s human. More people than there should be in the world are murderers, and those people have the same ratio as you and I of good and evil (assuming that Jekyll is right about his good vs. evil ratio), they just succumb to the 10% of badness. Now multiply that human dispassion by 9 and just try to imagine the result. Imagining that someone could be like that all of the time is frightening, but Stevenson imagines it anyway. He uses it to show us how horrible humans could be. He uses it to show us that we shouldn’t be evil.
Jekyll in the end starts getting taken over by Hyde even without the draught, Hyde just inherits his body and wreaks havoc on London. Jekyll fights Hyde, but to no avail he can’t overpower the evil inside him. And that’s the point that Stevenson uses to get his meaning across, that if we allow evil to thrive, even if only for a very short period of time it will overtake us. The evil will continue to thrive unbidden and cause us the people we love harm. Why? Because we are merely human, and humans aren’t strong enough to stop what we start. So the nature of Mr. Hyde’s evil, that being his humanity, is how Stevenson gives us the meaning of the novel.
Your analysis on this essay is really really good. I haven't read the novel, but I find it really interesting how the author made a villian simply out of the evil of a normal human. You related the evil in the novel well to the overall meaning- that all humans have evil in them and it will take over if we let it. This actually made me want to read the book! You're on the verge of a little too much plot summary, and it got a little jumbled when you started getting into the details of the percents of good and evil, so just make sure you keep a clear point in mind. Excellent job on this one!
ReplyDeleteNice! You did an awesome job of describing evil as it is presented in the novel, however I think you could have done a better job with HOW this helps the meaning of the novel.
ReplyDeleteMaybe a little less plot summary! I like some of the things you mentioned, like the ratios, but you might want to relate it better to your point or leave it out next time!
Good hook this time, but it may be too general; consider relating a funny or short anecdote about evil (I know you've got something in there, ha). The second sentence seems redundant, and you may benefit from omitting it or consolidating it with the first. There is again no background in the intro paragraph and the thesis lacks that foundation, but this time the thesis does outline the logical flow of the essay by identifying what exactly you are going to explain (steven's idea of humanity and evil), but still does not present what exactly that thing is.
ReplyDeletesecond paragraph
You may wish to call the book 'his book' or something of that sort; the repetition of the title makes comprehension difficult. The final sentence does not seem grammatically sound, you may wish to add a missing word or two that would correct that; I am particularly put off by the sentence part " he isn’t pure good while Mr. Hyde is pure evil, it’s about a 90 to 10% ratio, which is probably why Mr. Hyde looks human at all."
third and fourth paragraphs
there is a lot of plot summary, and while what you go on to say does do a great job of answering the goals of the prompt (analysis of the character) you do not discuss in depth the contribution to the overall meaning of the work because there is again an absence of any quotations, literary technique references or subsequent effects/meanings that are so essential to the structure of AP Lit essays. I would recommend that you generally attempt to integrate quotes, DIDLS -> effect -> meaning logical flows into your essays to better communicate your knowledge to the AP examiners.