Author: watson

One element that connects many of our texts is the explicit binary between science and the supernatural. This becomes especially apparent if one compares Robert Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Bram Stoker’s Dracula. Stevenson’s Dr. Lanyon – a minor characters in the narrative that still serves an immense purpose in its progression – does not believe in the supernatural. He is the voice of reason in an essentially mystical Victorian London. Dr. Jekyll – like Dr. Lanyon – is a respected and successful doctor but he chose a different path. Unlike his colleague Dr. Lanyon, he experiments with the human soul which Dr. Lanyon dismisses as “unscientific balderdash” (17).  In this regard Lanyon reminds me a lot of the other – often medically or otherwise scientifically – inclined male characters in our class readings. Examples include Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes and Dracula’s Dr. Seward. While Holmes’ disbelief in the supernatural is confirmed when the apparently supernatural hound in The Hound of the Baskervilles turns out to be nothing more than an illusion, Dr. Seward and Dr. Lanyon are equally confronted with the actual presence of the supernatural in their Victorian world. Both men are medical doctors who doubt the spiritualism of some of their contemporaries – in this case mainly represented by Stoker’s Van Helsing and Stevenson’s Dr. Jekyll respectively. The main difference between Seward and Lanyon, however, is how these two men deal with their new knowledge of the supernatural. Dr. Seward learns about the existence of bloodthirsty vampires and without hesitation joins Van Helsing and Jonathan Harker in finding and fighting Count Dracula. In Dr. Lanyon’s letter towards the end of the narrative, we are told that Lanyon is in fact the first person to observe the transformation of Mr. Hyde into Dr. Jekyll. Being present and observing this mystical transformation makes Lanyon’s whole worldview collapse, his “life is shaken to its roots” (102). He tells Utterson that he “sometimes think[s] if we knew all, we should be more glad to get away” (56). Accordingly, Dr. Lanyon prefers to leave a world in which the supernatural exists and suspends science and reason – the main principles that govern his life.

Overall, ‘men of science’ can be found in most of our Victorian readings. Due to the established binary of science and the supernatural, these men’s’ principles are usually tested and pushed to their limits. Yet, the characters react to this revelation in very different ways. Dr. Seward takes action and fights the supernatural vampire, Dr. Lanyon becomes passive and resorts to silence. He chooses not to speak about what he has observed and only tells his friend Utterson about it in a letter that Utterson may read after Lanyon’s death. The reason for these varying reactions to the supernatural might be found in the general setups of the two narratives. In Stoker’s Dracula, Dr. Seward plays a crucial role and can be considered one of the main characters. Stevenson’s Dr. Lanyon, however, is only a minor character that has few appearances in the narrative. Accordingly, he does not become an essential part of the story’s resolution like Dr. Seward in Dracula. Generally, one can say that Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde does not have a resolution at all. After the confessions of Dr. Lanyon and Dr. Jekyll, the narrative ends and there is no climactic ending in which the evil supernatural being is hunted down and killed. Thus, Dr. Lanyon reacted to the supernatural in a very different way than Dr. Seward because the two men, despite their similarities, serve very different purposes in two rather differently structured narrative.

 

Works Cited:

Stevenson, Robert. Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. C. Scribner’s Sons, New York: 1886. Print.

One of the central themes in Christina Rosetti’s poem Goblin Market is the “fruit forbidden” (Rosetti 478) – sold by the goblin men – that both Laura and Jeanie eat. After giving in to the temptation both women start to waste away. Jeanie, who appears in the poem only as a cautionary tale of the past, even dies and on her grave “no grass will grow” (Rosetti 158). Laura can, however, be saved by her sister’s actions and eventually survives. The main question remains: Why do these women have to suffer for tasting the goblins’ fruits? What do these fruits actually stand for?

An obvious explanation could be a reference to the biblical tale of Adam and Eve. As the original woman, Eve is tempted by the snake, tastes the forbidden fruit and therefore causes God to ban humanity from paradise. This parallel implies that Jeanie and Laura equally commit a sin when they eat the goblin’s fruits. This would also account for the fact that Jeanie’s grave seems to be cursed in a way. Jeanie might remind us of Mina Harker in Bram Stoker’s Dracula, who becomes ‘unclean’ after one of the Count’s attacks. Jeanie dies in sin and therefore never receives redemption. She, like Mina, is unclean and never regains her original purity.

Still, the question remains: Why do the goblins’ fruits represent a sin in the Victorian context? A possible explanation is that the fruit – and more specifically the act of eating the fruit – is heavily sexualized in Rosetti’s poem. The author describes it as follows:

“She [Laura] sucked and sucked and sucked the more
Fruits which that unknown orchard bore;
She sucked until her lips were sore.” (Rosetti 134-136)

This language (especially the words ‘sucking’ and ‘sore lips’) imply connotations of oral sex. Giving in to the goblins’ temptations therefore does not only mean eating fruit but somehow seems to equal partaking in sexual relations. Since Laura and Lizzie are described as unmarried “maids” (Rosetti 2), these premarital sexual relations would have conflicted with the prevailing Victorian ideals of womanhood.

Interestingly, Christina Rosetti’s own views on the position of women in the Victorian society are said to have been “usually far from conservative and often questioning, challenging and potentially subversive” (Avery). Why, then, would Rosetti have written a poem like Goblin Market that seems to strengthen the general Victorian belief that women who give in to their sexual temptations like Jeanie and Laura committed sin and would die because of it? Possibly, Rosetti’s goal was to highlight the fact that, even though Laura makes a mistake by giving to the goblin men, due to Lizzie’s efforts she survives and receives redemption. Rosetti implies that Victorian women are not either pure and virtuous or entirely promiscuous. Rather, they can make the wrong decision at some point and still, later in their lives, fulfil the ideal of a Victorian woman who is married “with children of [her] own” (Rosetti 545).

Sources:

Avery, Simon: “Christina Rossetti: gender and power”.  <<https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/christina-rossetti-gender-and-power>> (12 Nov 2017)

Rosetti, Christina: “Goblin Market.” Goblin Market and Other Poems. 

A motif that features prominently in Bram Stoker’s Dracula is that of sleeping and dreaming. The act of sleeping itself becomes congruent with various meanings. Apart from the traditional associations of ‘eternal sleep’ as a metaphor for death, a good night’s sleep, for example, is considered to be “deep, tranquil, life-giving, health-giving’’ (202). However, for Lucy Westenra and Mina Harker, their nights turn into “presage[s] of horror” (201) that do not grant the two women rest and peace but leave them “feel[ing] terribly weak and spiritless” (419). The reader knows that both women feel weakened in the morning because Count Dracula visits them at night to feed on their blood. Sleep therefore also becomes a human (and predominantly female) weakness in Stoker’s novel. It takes men like Dr. Seward, Professor Van Helsing and Jonathan Harker to protect these two women in their sleep. Dracula only ever manages to come close to Lucy and Mina when, for some reason, none of the men is close by. What seems especially interesting in this context is the fact that the male characters in Stoker’s novel desperately need sleep to mentally and physically strengthen themselves in order to defeat the antagonistic Count Dracula. Prioritizing their own sleep, however, forces them to abandon Lucy and Mina which in turn, leaves the women defenseless and therefore weakens the novel’s female characters.  Thus, Stoker creates a framework in which male strength equates female weakness.

All in all, by falling asleep and transgressing into an unconscious state, Stoker’s (female and male) characters lose all capabilities of taking active agency for themselves. Therefore, they surrender themselves to Dracula. In Jonathan Harker’s case, by falling asleep in a different room in the Count’s castle (Chapter 3), he similarly surrenders himself to the three female vampires. The very idea and practice of nightly sleep is therefore inverted by monsters that walk the night. To be even more precise: the sheer existence of a supernatural creature such as Bram Stoker’s vampire contorts the natural order of Victorian England including the traditional human activity of sleeping.

After reading the first eight chapters of Conan Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles, I argue that – with his famous character Sherlock Holmes – Conan Doyle contrasted his own beliefs and convictions about the supernatural. While he was a spiritualist and believer in the supernatural himself, Sherlock Holmes is a strictly logical and scientific person who usually dismisses supernatural explanations for problems.

In Conan Doyle’s novel, the protagonist and detective Sherlock Holmes is represented as a highly rational and logical individual who “balance[s] probabilities and choose[s] the most likely” (Conan Doyle 48). His usual method of investigation includes the close examination of objects or circumstances which then allows him to “reconstruct” (Conan Doyle 8) a person or their behavior.

In The Hound of the Baskervilles specifically, Holmes and his companion Watson are introduced to a case that challenges this mindset of Holmes. As Dr. Mortimer pays a visit to Baker Street and recounts the legend of the ‘Curse of the Baskervilles’ that has allegedly only recently killed Sir Charles Baskerville, Holmes’ first reaction to this story of a murderous “hell-hound” (Conan Doyle 34) is to consider it a “fairy tale[…]” (Conan Doyle 23). Holmes does, however, take on the case and is continuously confronted with ideas about ‘the otherworldly’. Dr. Mortimer, for instance, strongly believes in the myth of the “dreadful apparition” (Conan Doyle 34) that killed Sir Charles Baskerville. To him, the incidents surrounding his friend’s death “are hard to reconcile with the settled order of Nature” (Conan Doyle 34).

This represented binary between the natural and the supernatural seems to be highly relevant when considered in the biographical context that is known about the novel’s author, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Conan Doyle himself was known to have been rather interested in spiritualism during his lifetime. Accordingly, Conan Doyle is said to have been a strong believer in supernatural beings such as fairies and practices such as séances (cf. Davies 20), which led to many critics considering him to have been “gullible” (Davies 20). These beliefs and convictions of Conan Doyle allegedly even resulted in his own “feelings towards the character he had created in Sherlock Holmes [being] famously mixed” (Davies 12).

Knowing this makes it even more interesting to consider why Conan Doyle chose to create a character such as Sherlock Holmes who “confine[s] [his] investigations to this world” (Conan Doyle 34) and who wishes to “exhaust all other hypotheses before falling back upon” (Conan Doyle 40) the supernatural explanations of Dr. Mortimer.

Finally, what seems most revealing about this observation is that a number of characters that the reader is introduced to in the first eight chapters of The Hound of the Baskervilles is represented as being scientific, educated characters of high intellect: Sherlock Holmes, of course, being the legendary detective; Dr. Watson and Dr. Mortimer, two medical doctors; and Stapleton, a naturalist and former schoolmaster.  Still, the novel suggests that at least one of them – Dr. Mortimer – believes in supernatural causes for Sir Charles’ death. Holmes himself challenges this contradiction by asking him how “[Mortimer], a trained man of science, [can] believe it to be supernatural?” (Conan Doyle 34). In the character of Mortimer – a believer in the supernatural – Conan Doyle therefore successfully creates a foil to his famous detective – the man of science. A final question that arises from this observation is why Conan Doyle chose to contrast his own beliefs and convictions about the supernatural and to thereby highlight the tension between myth and reality.

 

Sources

Conan Doyle, Arthur. The Hound of the Baskervilles. Harpenden: Oldcastle Books, 2013. Print.

Davies, Stuart David, et al. « Introduction ». The Sherlock Holmes Book. London: Dorling Kindersley Ltd, 2015. 10-31. Print.

“No more dependence, no more drudgery, no more humiliations,” she said; “every trace of the old life melted away – every clew to identity buried and forgotten – except these, except these.”

---

In this passage, taken from the first chapter of Mary Elizabeth Braddon’s publication called Lady Audley’s Secret, the reader is introduced to the inner thought processes of one of the novel’s protagonists by the name of Lucy Graham. Only moments before, Sir Audley had asked the young woman to marry him and she had accepted his proposal.

On a formal level, the critical reader may notice several linguistic features standing out in this passage. For one, the initial repetition of the letter ‘d’ in “dependence” and in “drudgery” causes the passage to sound rhythmic. The same effect is created by the repetition of the word “every” and the repetition of the final phrase “except these”. The entire passage – from beginning to end – almost sounds like a chant.

Moreover, on a content level, the critical reader is also confronted with certain particularities. What appears most striking is the passage’s reference to an “old life” which “melt[s] away” and an “identity” that is “buried and forgotten”. These formulations sound cryptic and seem to be pointing towards a mystery within the narrative’s plot. Considering the context in which these words are uttered by Lucy, they appear odd as well. Having just accepted a marriage proposal, Lucy’s words and thoughts seem to be consumed with negativity. She speaks of “dependence” and “humiliation” and does not choose happy words to signal her optimism for her future as a married woman.

Essentially, what this passage may indicate is that Lucy Graham might be hiding a secret concerning her true identity which will most likely be the center of the whole narrative.