Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson

We are in our humanity so inherently sinful. It is a constant struggle then: the human condition playing the wickedness of the heart against an opposing desire to be good. If we are Christ-lovers, we daily renew ourselves against the struggle so that we may rise above our sin. What if, for a short time, we allowed our sin to lead our behavior? What if a man could free his inner-monster and just let it run amuck without remorse, without conscience, without regrets, without consequences? If he did, could he control it? Turn it off and on at will and in essence live as if two lives separate from each other? Could a person accomplish this?

These questions Robert Louis Stevenson answers by way of a fantastic character named Dr. Henry Jekyll. The literary classic Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a poignant tale about a man’s struggle: good or evil?  Dr. Jekyll believes that choosing to be good or evil is more than simply a matter of choice as his friends argue:  Choosing to be good means always being good. Jekyll revels in the possibility that the sides of one’s personality are closer together than contemporary psychology allows and that there is only a matter of finding the transcendental key to unlock the door that lies between the sides. He could control which side of his personality would show. He could choose, if he had the key.

The good Dr. Jekyll is an upstanding, responsible, and in all counts by his peers a trustworthy and noble individual. But Jekyll has long held a secret desire to behave maliciously and he is weary, even bored, with the effort of squashing it. He wants to cast off his mask of respectability and shed his polite kindness to society. Yet, he abhors the idea of losing his comfortable standing in society. He wants to play at being bad, but he doesn’t want to lose anything for it; to be free of his conscience, but not enough to construct the change for himself and then live with the results of his change.

Jekyll is a scientist by hobby and dedicates himself to the point of obsession to concoct a chemical formula that may open his psyche thereby granting him the ability to manipulate his personality. He accomplishes this feat and so believes he has control, the key, to commanding the change. Ironically, the control Jekyll celebrates through the course of his scientific experiments proves to be an illusion. By unlocking and freeing his inner-monster, he ultimately loses control of his life as his monster consumes him. 

 

The Hunger Games Trilogy

Suzanne Collins' trilogy is a story told before in other places; places distanced as much by centuries of history and geography as by even its media (literature, reality television, and film). It is a fundamental error of Man to believe that we ever create anything truly and authentically new. Take for instance the premise of the Hunger Games -- the combatants are selected by a totalitarian government, forced to battle to the death, and then are glamorized by the entertainment value promoted by the capitol. A selection process as tainted as the Ancient Romans used. Their gladiators comprised most of the amusement craze for their insatiable immoral and inhumane desires.

What Collins accomplishes in her books The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay is a literary cobbling of history, classic mythology, and universal human depravity. She employs a proven formula of plot development: take the character through conflict. Good old-fashioned conflict. Internal, external and so many possible mixtures of both. Collins crafts a plot bombarded by an onslaught of conflict. And her characterization is plausible. Katniss, for all of her strong sense of self-reliability, her wrestling with the questions of morality and ethics, her self-doubt regarding emotional attachments, all of this a reader can accept as possible.

Many aspects of the story were discussed amongst my family, but Katniss' act of sacrifice and the weave of ethical struggles seen throughout the series were those we dissected. How does Panem's society construct and the Capitol's mandates and subsequent oppression of the people compare to our global history? In what ways do we treat others in similar fashion? Do we carry an attitude of self-righteousness where it's our way or no way?

I picked up a review of The Hunger Games some time back and now have some words to offer as an articulate response. The review targeted Katniss' act of sacrifice and her role as the savior of Panem. The review compared her action as similar to our Savior Jesus Christ. Misguided! And so misleading. Katniss took her sister's place, yes, but her later actions leading the rebellion to overthrow the Capitol and restore the goodness of Panem's humanity were part of a path she hardly chose for herself, obediently or otherwise. She was clouded by enormous malcontent, propelled by vengeance, and moved with disobedience to rules and structure -- and she lost her sister in the end.

The Hunger Games, Catching Fire and Mockingjay are stories of humanity -- depraved, broken, and in itself, its own hero and savior (tenets of humanism).  Self-reliability, trust in no one, conditional morality, and judgment based in momentary feelings are all shaky foundations to construct a life; an exhausting effort chasing those moving targets.

A piece of fictional literature survives the test of time if it causes its readers to think. Thumbs up to Suzanne Collins for provoking my mind and for the discussions it generated with my children.