Talk:Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Wikisource version
There is now a Wikisource version The Annotated Strange Case Of Dr Jekyll And Mr Hyde that contains text annotations (footnotes and wikilinks). Just like Wikipedia, it is open to anyone who would like to add additional annotations. If your at all interested in the work please check it out. It is also the first annotated project completed at Wikisource.-- Stbalbach 18:39, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Misc
The relationship of Ergot to Stevenson I don't doubt, but LSD wasn't invented yet, nor is it synonymous with Ergot. (Ergot is still used in some cases to treat migraines.) Anyone with pharmacological insights? User:Marta.Paczynska
- See ergot and LSD. But yes, the claim as written in the article was false. I've rephrased it. Andrewa 06:43, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please could someone write the author's suggested pronunciation in IPA or some other pronunciation scheme. As it stands, it is unhelpful - is the "g" hard or soft? Which syllable carries the stress? — Paul G 17:14, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I believe it's (UR-gaht). Applejuicefool 13:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- Or (UR-guht) (more correctly, (UR-gət).Applejuicefool 14:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Removed text:
He decided to commit suicide as Utterson and the butler entered the lab.
I don't think that is actually in the original plot. Utterson and the butler (Poole) have no way of knowing Hyde's last thoughts; The last communication they have from Jekyll is of course the letter written under the influence of what he knew to be his last effective dose of the antidote, written some time before. Andrewa 02:16, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Stevenson was being treated with the fungus ergot at a local hospital.
Local to where? London? Edinburgh? --Chips Critic 18:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Utterson's first name?
Why is Utterson's first name given as Charles here? In the book, his full name is Gabriel John Utterson. - Kooshmeister
[edit] Vagueness
- "It is currently believed that Stevenson wrote this novel in six days while on a cocaine binge. It has also been suggested that this book was written under the influence of a psychedelic drug."
Could these claims be firmed up with sources? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:42, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
I modified the trivia section, posting information about the cocaine binge, complete with citation. However, I did not modify the main article. Stevensons behavior during the writing of the book was obviously that of someone on cocaine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.197.247.156 (talk • contribs) . 21:00 27 February 2006
- This is not the first time I've heard this, it's also mentioned in the book review here, but without knowing where this information comes from, it very well could be speculation, and not based on factual evidence. The life of RLS has entered mythic proportions with 100s of biographies and just about every angle has been explored; if this is standard history, or gossipy sensationalism, I'm not sure. The standard history, according to the accounts of his wife and son (and himself) who were there, say he was bed ridden and sick while writing it. -- Stbalbach 05:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
There is another rumor in the trivia section that he was using ergot and/or LSD while writing the book. I suppose he could have been supposed to have been drinking wine since we know he died a few years later while opening a bottle. So ergot, LSD, cocaine and wine -- anything else, morphine and opium and ether ? -- Stbalbach 05:29, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jack The Ripper
The Jack the Ripper murders took place within two years of the publication of the book, and some thought Jack had been inspired by it. Does anyone else know if it is true, and if so, could they add it to the article? Ryubread 16:48, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] similarity to the matrix
I would like to add In The Matrix, Neo is offered the choice between a red pill and a blue pill, to see "how far the rabbit hole goes". This scene bears strong resemblence to the final meeting between Dr. Lanyon and Mr. Hyde, where Mr. Hyde offers Dr. Lanyon a way out.
Stbalbach pointed out ("the rabbit hole" is an obvious reference to Alices Adventures in Wonderland)
I will try to clarity: the similarity is the choice between gaining powerful/dangerous knowledge and backing out to preserve an "ordinary world" viewpoint. My point was not the "rabit hole" allusion.
In The Matrix, Neo was offered a red pill- the choice to extend his knowledge beyond normal bounds, and a blue pill- a way to back out. This scene bears strong resemblence to the final meeting between Dr. Lanyon and Mr. Hyde, where Mr. Hyde offers to show Dr. Lanyon the results of his secret experiment, as well as the option to leave without any gain in knowledge.
does this sound better? Turidoth 01:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- I dont disagree that the analogy could work, but honestly it sounds like original research. Is there any factual evidence that the authors of the Matrix were intentionally influenced by Jekyll and Hyde in that scene? If there is, it belongs in this article, to show how J&H has influenced other works. If not, it's literary criticism about the Matrix, and that belongs in the Matrix article. -- Stbalbach 03:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Psychology
Is Dr. Jekyll's loss of control over Mr. Hyde a result of his own denial of being Mr. Hyde (and the shock caused by his own actions as Mr. Hyde) and the tranformation itsself more of psychological than physical nature? Maybe Mr. Hydes actions in the first place are more a result of the repression of drives retained in Dr. Jekyll's psyche and a silent impulse drives him to do things which he could not possibly do with his appearance as Dr. Jekyll without fearing the consequences? Or am i way off?
Yes. It could be that he is reacting to the rigidity of Victorian society. At the time, there were lots of new cultures being discovered, what with the British Empire at its peak, and people may have secretly wanted to go wild a bit. However, that was stricly against the unwritten rules of the middle class. 62.253.142.61 17:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pronounciation
Do we have a source for Note #2, on the JEEK-ull versus JEK-ull pronounciation? It seems like a rather bold claim to make without any source.OkamiItto 06:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. Removed the "Stevenson insisted" part, sounds pretentious. If that's true than there is more to the story that needs to be discussed (why did he insist, and insist of who?). -- Stbalbach 12:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Title
Restored the definite article to the title (The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde) in the text: the fact that it was first published without "The" is adequately footnoted; however, the form with "The" is the one now most used, sentences read oddly without it, and it corresponds to the page title. -- Picapica 10:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. The correct title is without the "the" - most scholars believe he did that for a reason, so that it does read "oddly" - this is in the spirit of the of the work, which is stylistically like that (Richard Drury recently wrote an annotated version that points out all the odd grammar and words and meanings). The title has the definitive because we are supposed to use a title that most people are familiar with, but I don't see why we can't stick with what he intended in the text. -- Stbalbach 12:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
And I'm not sure why -- due note having been taken (as it has) of the difference between the original title and the one now most commonly used -- we cannot respect the Wp naming convention in the body of the text too. (To be scrupulously accurate, the work was not first published, in any case, as "Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde", but as "Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde". Stevenson did not publish it either: that was done by Longmans, Green in London and Scribners in New York.)
I would prefer the article to begin:
The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (originally entitled Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) <reference> ...
Have restored the "and" to the first sentence: R. L. Stevenson was not first published in 1886; his novella was. -- Picapica 09:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah I guess it comes down to respecting and honoring the wishes and intention of the author, or that of an arbitrary and generic Wikipedia guideline which is not set in stone and open to interpretation on a per case basis. Also there are some in-print editions currently that don't use "The" -- generally the more professional and serious editions drop the definitive. I don't see why we can't aim for that level also. -- Stbalbach 13:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sure that accurate titles are more important than Wikipedia convention? Band names do this (See the page on the Ramones; not The Ramones), and literature certainly should. The title is Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Wikipedia convention should not compel anyone to place the article under an incorrect name. --Switch 13:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. Although there was at least one editor not in support of the new name, it wasn't because of any virtue of the old name, which was just incorrect, so this move is an improvement, whether or not it's now perfect. -GTBacchus(talk) 05:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde → Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde — This is the actual original published title of the novella; the definite article is superfluous and not in line with wikipedia guidelines, so there is no reason for it to be included; similarly, regarding the periods following the characters' titles, this respects the original publication title and (I think) British English standards, as opposed to converting the title of a Scottish author's novella to fit into American punctuation conventions. Switch t 06:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
- Support. It is, strange but true, the correct title of the book. -- Stbalbach 06:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Support as above. -Switch t 07:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Support If RLS didn't want a "The", who are we force it on him. Not sure about the "."s though. -- Beardo 07:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- None of the above. I think it should be moved to "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." My interpretation of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (books) is that the most familiar, most likely to be searched for title should be used, and I believe that to be it. --Groggy Dice T|C 19:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- It is unclear what the most likely or familiar name would be. Some people may use dots, some may not. Some may include "strange", some may not. Some may have "the", some may not. In cases where it is ambiguous, the guideline says this: "For these books, try to determine, for the in the English-speaking world widely spread versions of the book, which of them was the most authoritative original". -- Stbalbach 21:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- To me, that passage seems to be talking about foreign titles translated into English, not native English works. --Groggy Dice T|C 02:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- See link for the full passage. It's not about foreign titles, although it could be (thus the "English" qualifier). -- Stbalbach 14:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- I have read the full context, I just have a different interpretation of it. The preceding section is about translated foreign titles, and the following paragraph is an example citing a work first published in French. --Groggy Dice T|C 03:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yesm but it is in a different section than "Title translations", not a subsection of it. It clearly applies to all titles, not just those translated, or it would be a subsection in "translations", not its own section. It simply follows up the loose ends previously; I see no reason to think it can only be applied to translated titles. -Switch t 06:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- In most cases, it is convention to use the most well-known title. That is hard to determine in this case - Is it Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde? Or Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde? Or just Jekyll and Hyde? I have heard all of these used to describe the general story or its concept in some form, but referring to the actual novella, people generally seem to include the "Strange Case". Regardless of that, in cases that can be confusing, it is recommended to use the "authoritative original" publication's title. In this case, that would be Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. That an be applied to originally foreign-language works, but it is also to be applied to English language works. The qualifier regarding the English-speaking world is to keep people from giving articles obscure, foreign-language titles. -Switch t 16:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Support, in view of the to me startling evidence from Stbalbach in Discussion below. Andrewa 13:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
- Add any additional comments:
- The Dots. I have a facsimile of the first edition title page and there are no dots. I don't think there should be dots. I can scan and upload if it would help. -- Stbalbach 15:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Okay. We'll have it moved to Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde then, no periods. Thanks for pointing that out. We'll get the page moved to the actual title sooner or later! -Switch t 18:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think a scan of the fascimile of the first edition title page would be a good addition to the Notes section. Andrewa 13:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- OK. -- Stbalbach 19:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I had to replace the Penguin fair use image as I believe Fair Use only counts if a free version is unavailable and since there is now a free version it might be hard to justify. I'll let someone write up a fair use rationale for the Penguin cover if they want to restore it to the article and in the mean time tag it as orphan and notify the original uploader. -- Stbalbach 21:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit] Separate Page
I think that a separate page should be made on the character Dr.Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. Son of Kong —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.69.137.15 (talk) 05:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC).