In Jekyll and Hyde, the character of Edward Hyde comes about through Jekyll's desire to create for himself two separate beings. What really interests me here is Hyde's mentality and understanding of his heinous crimes and actions (assaulting a young girl, killing Sir Danvers, etc.) And I believe that Hyde completely and utterly does not understand what he's doing or if he's mentally there at all. I mean he is described as primitive, ugly, and ape-like so basically he's a metaphorical animal. But if he is an animal, then who's going to take the blame for his actions because animals aren't rational, they just do what they need to do to survive. Jekyll straight up refuses and is all like "It wasn't me, it was Hyde." Yet Jekyll has been known to basically "clean/cover up" for Hyde's actions. Also, I found it kind of odd that Hyde just did these crimes without a motive. There's always motive. In the words of Elle Woods from Legally Blonde, "Happy people just don't kill their husbands. They just don't." In a sense, this is pretty accurate. You could think of every villain in the history of villainy, and they all have some type of motive. Something just has to snap in someone's brain for them to go as far as killing another being. And for Hyde, I just didn't see any motive, besides the fact that he is described as "pure evil." Although, Hyde's actions might have stemmed from Jekyll's suppressed history which isn't really stated in the book, and being the thorough readers that we are, we can't assume anything. So to me, it seemed like Hyde was just an outburst of Jekyll without any motive to go gallivanting around the city.
In The Silence of the Lambs, the serial killer, Buffalo Bill, is almost the complete opposite of Edward Hyde. He understands everything that he is doing (Note: he skins women in order to make a women's suit for himself. Really this movie is better than it sounds, it won Best Picture.) but I'm pretty sure that Buffalo Bill's mental state is not ok since he's, you know, a serial killer. Even when Clarice Starling is going over the case file, she describes him stating, "He's got real physical strength combined with an older man's self-control. He's cautious, precise. He's never impulsive. He'll never stop." And here's where I start comparing Buffalo Bill to Hyde because Hyde is almost exactly this. "He's got real physical strength," Yes because Hyde is very primitive and ape-like and would obviously be strong. "He'll never stop." I completely agree and believe this true for Hyde. He already doesn't take responsibility of his actions nor does he understand them so why should he stop? I don't think he can stop. And if Jekyll kept going with the transformation, I'm pretty sure Hyde would take over and then all hell would break loose. Which is why somebody had to stop him. Luckily, that person was Jekyll who realized what he needed to do before it was too late. The same goes for Clarice with Buffalo Bill. She found him at home, alone, and she arrived at his home, alone. She already had him in her grasp and she knew that she had to kill him when given the opportunity.
In conclusion, Edward Hyde from the novel, Jekyll and Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson, and Buffalo Bill from the film, The Silence of the Lambs directed by Jonathan Demme, strongly exhibit the same nature characteristics. They're both strong, and never ceasing. Unless someone is willing to stop them and put an end to this madness.
No comments:
Post a Comment