Good Vs. Evil In Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde

Throughout the history of mankind, philosophers have unceasingly explored the influence human nature exerts upon human behavior. As a result, the theme of good versus evil has been timelessly scrutinized in practically every form of literature. In cultures influenced by Abrahamic and Manichaean beliefs, evil is typically regarded as the antithesis to good. According to that same belief, good should always triumph over evil. Consequently, both beliefs subscribe to the notion of ethical dualism, the idea that one force is entirely evil and the other entirely good. Although Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Tell-Tale Heart” and Robert Stevenson’s “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” both establish the theme of good versus evil through the moral

He tells the story, presumably, to the police, and although his insanity is certain, the details of his story are not. Throughout the story, the narrator repeatedly attempts to prove his sanity rather than disprove his crime. In fact, “while he acknowledges having [committed] the vile act, he suggests that he has been driven to do so by forces beyond his control” (Sova), supposedly by the old man’s eye. He devotes extreme detail to his description of how he murders the old man, frequently complimenting himself: “Madmen know nothing. But you should have seen me. You should have seen how wisely I proceeded --with what caution --with what foresight --with what dissimulation I went to work!” (Poe 1). By continually praising himself, the narrator tells a biased story that ignores reality. In actuality, the narrator is fearful of sin, which is exhibited by the “low, dull, quick sound” (Poe 2) that appears twice within the story. In the first occasion, before the narrator murders the old man, he hears the sound and assumes it to be the heartbeat of the old man. Not only that, but the narrator reveals that he is familiar with the sound, stating that he “knew that sound well” (Poe 2). In the second occasion, before the narrator confesses to the police, he hears the same sound again,

In doing so, the narrator establishes the dominance of insanity over ethics. Yet when the policemen visit his home, the narrator’s heart begins to beat rapidly, causing him to admit to the crime. In this case, the narrator is overcome with guilt and unable to remain calm, signifying his ethics overwhelming his insanity. Moreover, the narrator tells his story in first-person, repeatedly using “I” as an indicator of his obsession with the old man’s “eye,” causing the narrator’s identity to become synonymous to that of the old man. As a result, the death of the old man also indicates the death of the narrator’s identity (Werlock). Previously, the narrator’s identity revolved around insanity. But with his ethics overpowering his insanity by allowing guilt to compel him to confess, the narrator’s identity is replaced. In some aspects, “the old man and the narrator [can be viewed as] as psychological doubles representing two parts of the human self or mind. This viewpoint is suggested by comments the narrator makes that explicitly link him and the old man. The narrator sees the old man's fears on the night of the murder as identical to his own” (Amper). In response to this identification, the narrator may have murdered the old man under the assumption that killing him would release the narrator from his own fears. Essentially, the interaction between the narrator’s insanity and morality