Book Review, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson

Photo Attribution: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jekyll_and_Hyde_Title.jpg

Book Review, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson

This book isn’t logical.  How can Jekyll feel any pity for Hyde if he’s a doctor with nothing of the pure evil he created in the monster?  Besides, a story of this nature has to do with supernatural figures (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) who can’t display much on power and reaction.  Stevenson did create the popular monster by the name of Hyde but failed to demonstrate his gross nature.  A problem with this book is that it was made on pedantic notions.  What this means here is that pictures are just assumed in the minds of readers when they’re not there, so, between Jekyll and Hyde, I can’t sum up the fashion without putting in bias, yet even the bias is hardly explicated in special vocabulary to make our case as apparent as fiction’s true strength.  More words have to be possible here!  Or maybe we could use different words other than the normal terms of God and Satan.  For example, “blasphemies” are mentioned although no more than a plea of friendship is expressed and felt by Hyde, a scientific mutant who can’t face the violent police after Jekyll released him as the pure evil the monster was.  So many readers like this book because they’re mostly mistaken.  Hyde is not a creature with mixtures of good and bad traits; he’s a slow stream of darkness, or at least that’s what he’s supposed to be in spite of any and all sorts of goodness and virtue.  Really, pity?  Jekyll must have had evil intentions.  And what exactly can be meant by “pity” when there’s hotel customs and inferior drugs he participates on with gusto he doesn’t prove as his total wall of light?  On my first taste of this book I enjoyed the story; however, after observing a story of this nature on a second or third taste it’s become apparent Stevenson was less than appetizing in terms with virtue and vice, correction and forced error, vision and aggression, despite his sadistic philosophy for which there may be applause on his characters when they’re not made up well.  Members of the public need to try making sense of the text with what’s on Stevenson’s plate compared to our imaginary assumptions.  Honesty is the best policy.  This review ought to clear things up and put sense into readers who don’t get much in the way of context of meaning in place for the physical objects that are absolutely not there.  Please be concerned about the talk and not simply pay attention to the characters’ bodies.  For that matter, without verifications, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has been a joke to public and fashion alike.  Groups all over the world just assume this book has truth when they didn’t pay attention to its verifications of which there are none.  Do you want to draw Mr. Hyde?  Fine!  Just know well on the ideas as much as drawing.  Even Stevenson himself would argue through Poole that Hyde was not Jekyll, which suggests he was not human, a fact that makes the whole storytelling for not, for waste of time and privilege when we’re trying to uncover religion and science together. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Case_of_Dr_Jekyll_and_Mr_Hyde