Introduction
The psychological aspects of human beings have always fascinated the arts. How can humans fail to be masters of their desires and destinies, despite all their technology and rationality? What exists within us beyond our conscious thoughts?
These questions are renewed and revitalized in the literary work that provides the background for this paper. “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” is a 130-year-old Gothic novella by the Scottish writer Robert Louis Stevenson, among the precursors of science fiction and among the books most frequently adapted for stage and screen. Since 1886 it has appeared in radio adaptations, comics, animated productions, music, films faithful to the original, and parodies. Remakes from various countries range from drama and horror to comedy, such as the contemporary “The Nutty Professor.” According to the author, the story’s theme came to him in a dream. Surely, to inspire such fascination and enduring resonance, this work speaks masterfully of essential elements of the human soul (STRANGE CASE OF DR JEKYLL AND MR HYDE 2017; SUPPIA 2005).
Among its many versions, this analysis uses the 2003 film directed by Maurice Phillips, available in Portuguese on YouTube under the title “O Médico e o Monstro”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssrniMvmf3I&index=18&list=PLaub_q6OvquQD3zrwW3pcwmlJC0OgvPSL&t=4s. The hypothesis of this paper is that, because of the archetypal force of its premise, the film offers a valuable illustration of Carl Jung’s theory of psychological complexes, as will be shown below.
Development
In Analytical Psychology, psychological complexes are “clusters of emotionally charged ideas in the unconscious (…which act as) specific factors disturbing the normal psychic process” (JACOBI 1995, pp. 16–17). When activated, they “become (…) capable of openly opposing the intentions of the conscious ‘ego,’ disrupting its unity, separating from it, and behaving as though they were a foreign body (…) within the conscious sphere” (JACOBI 1995, p. 18).
This idea seems an affront to the setting of the 2003 British film “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.” Victorian London was marked by a gulf between wealthy industrialists and the impoverished “wretched.” The gentry considered themselves superior by nature, justifying and naturalizing their supremacy. This outlook is illustrated by Mrs. Rachel Carew at a social dinner attended by Dr. Jekyll (00:15:10): “It is ridiculous to say that we are all equal. Not everyone has criminal tendencies. And we are not all animals. There is a world of difference between my daughter and her maid. A world of education.”
The period’s emerging criminal psychology sought to identify a criminal nature, failing to see social circumstances as factors in criminalization or the psychological similarities between people of all classes. Faith in reason, praised by the Enlightenment and more recently by positivism, left no room to suspect that something uncontrollable might exist within human beings, bringing us closer to animals or to one another. This age of noble titles and courtly etiquette exalted behavior “according to impeccable standards,” as Sir Danvers tells Dr. Jekyll on another occasion. In this society, the conscious ego reigns alone, as though it were the only element of the psyche. It ignores the power of complexes.
Jung first noticed this power while conducting the Word Association Test at the Burghölzli Hospital in Zurich. Through straightforward empirical observation, he found that patients’ verbal and nonverbal responses showed clear interference, disrupting the normal course of associations and relating unmistakably to each patient’s history of illness (HOPCKE 2012, p. 28). He called this a “feeling-toned complex.” The term “complex” had already been used by other scholars, including Herbart, Mach, Breuer, and Freud, but in Jung it denotes a structure linking representations, thoughts, and memories with a strong emotional charge (PIERI 2002, p. 101).
These structures possess considerable autonomy within the psyche, leading Jung to declare that, at times, they have us:
“The existence of complexes seriously calls into question the naive assumption of the unity of consciousness, identified with the ‘psyche,’ and of the supremacy of the will. Every constellation of complexes implies a disturbed state of consciousness, and the intentions of the will become more or less difficult, if not altogether impossible. Memory itself (…) is profoundly affected. (…) Indeed, an active complex places us for a time in a state of unfreedom, of obsessive thoughts and compulsive actions for which, under certain circumstances, the legal concept of diminished responsibility would be the only valid one” (JUNG 1986, pp. 30–31).
Dr. Henry Jekyll offers the clearest illustration of Jung’s statement. Living in 1846, he is a gentleman, the son of a physician in society, who has chosen to follow his father’s career. In the film, he himself says that he suppressed his true feelings to occupy his proper place in society as one of the most respected members of his profession. Yet Jekyll insists on discussing and pursuing research into a chemical compound he is trying to develop, which will separate good from evil within human beings.
The hospital board reprimands him for speaking of “his own medical theories,” since “his opinions may make a bad impression on the public” (00:06:04), conflicting with his image as the son of the hospital’s founder. Already in this scene we see the conflict between old and new, individual and collective, persona and shadow. Social rules, the cult of image, conformity, and appearances are the board’s arguments for inhibiting Jekyll’s personal and creative restlessness. The committee therefore suspends funding for Henry’s research. This may be seen as a metaphor for psychic conflict and the ensuing stagnation of energy: the ego is left without resources to continue.
Although sensitive to inner issues, Jekyll tries to control them with chemical compounds, something comparable to the medicalization of psychic concerns today. Like a patient determined to obtain a drug that will eradicate a symptom, he refuses to examine what troubles him and to recognize his relationship with this “foreign body.” Dr. Jekyll makes this clear in his speech at a social dinner (00:14:17): “If I could separate our two natures… and control them, then man could be free of everything that corrupts him in this world.” Despite his sensitivity, Jekyll is dominated by his ego’s thirst for control. He thereby denies that the shadow—his own and the world’s—has potentials or purposes in psychic development.
Moreover, a colleague accuses him of wanting to “play God” with his experiments, to which he replies: “What if God does not exist?” Jekyll denies dignity not only to the shadow but, unconsciously, to every other element of the psyche, such as the Self. Although his stance exposes the fragility of his society’s ego-centered thinking, he too uses the logic of ego hegemony to relate to his inner world.
Jekyll is then seized by the complex’s compulsion. As he says, “like a moth flying toward the light,” he cannot wait to be granted a human patient and tests the drug on himself after seeing it apparently work in animals. From this point onward, Jekyll’s life becomes a profound illustration of Jung’s “obsessive thoughts and compulsive actions.” By day, Dr. Jekyll is compulsively engrossed in scientific experiments that go increasingly wrong. On subsequent nights, Mr. Hyde emerges, Jekyll’s other personality, given to the worst social practices, addictive pleasure, torture, and heinous crimes that recur with increasing severity.
An interesting figure appears at this point: a boy, Ned Chandler, one of Dr. Jekyll’s servants. He alone knows about Jekyll’s two personalities and conceals them in order to blackmail him. The boy becomes increasingly brazen and insolent, even stealing whisky and cigars from the house, while Jekyll, obsessed with his experiments, can do nothing. This image offers another compelling metaphor for the complex: seized by obsession, the house of “consciousness and will” is disturbed. The ego ceases to own its personality, and a boy reigns in its place. Elements of the personal unconscious, often originating in childhood and associated with deeper archetypal elements, drain the ego’s energy, leaving it invaded and too weak to take responsibility for its actions and thoughts.
Conclusion
Despite his remorse after each of Hyde’s attacks, Jekyll says that Hyde’s appearances make him feel revitalized. Yet the physician cannot assimilate this influence of the shadow and its resulting energy. He is its victim, like someone invaded, physically illustrated in the scene at 01:32:40. In Jekyll’s hallucination, the monster grabs the exhausted doctor, almost bites him, and enters his body, saying “welcome.” The complex has grown so much that it weakens and steals energy from the ego complex. If another definition of a complex is a partial personality, its growth may lead to the complete disintegration of the psyche (JACOBI 1995, p. 21).
The more Jekyll tries to eliminate Hyde’s influence, the more he succumbs and weakens, since he does so through projection. With perception and memory impaired by the complex, as Jung states (1986, pp. 30–31), Jekyll cannot become aware in time or prevent it from destroying his profession, reputation, and relationships. A similar situation is commonly encountered in clinical practice: patients overcome by their complexes describe the complex-dominated period as though watching a storm sweep through their lives.
Jung says that complexes can be weakened only when brought into consciousness, something crucial to therapy. Otherwise, their numinosity leads the individual into “inert devotion” (JACOBI 1995, p. 20). We may believe this happened to Dr. Jekyll because of his ego’s childishness and weakness. “The weaker the ego’s capacity to assert itself against the torrents of internal and external psychic influences,” the more vulnerable it becomes to the action and personification of complexes, even experiencing them through projection “as a (…) threatening entity,” as in ideas of persecution and paranoia (JACOBI 1995, pp. 24–25).
Jekyll sees no escape from, or punishment for, Hyde other than suicide. He poisons himself to eliminate Hyde. Although authentic, Jekyll’s attempt to “je kyll”—“I kill,” combining French and English—to kill what was hidden, “to hide,” was not the healthiest way out (BBC 2014). The wordplay reveals the meaning. Plugging the volcano did not prevent its eruption. The fragmentation and death of consciousness followed. A beautiful work for illustrating the diversity of psychic contents within every human being.
References
BBC. The names Jekyll and Hide. In: English Literature, Bitesize. 2014. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/english_literature/prosejekyllhyde/3prose_jekyllhyde_themerev4.shtml. Accessed August 2, 2017.
HOPCKE, Robert H. Guia para a obra completa de CG Jung. 3ª ed. Petrópolis: Vozes. 2012.
JUNG, Carl Gustav. A natureza da psique. 2ª ed. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes. 1986.
JACOBI, Jolande. Complexo, arquétipo e símbolo na psicologia de CG Jung. 10ª ed. São Paulo: Editora Cultrix, 1995.
PIERI, P. F. Dicionário junguiano (I. Storniolo, trad.). São Paulo: Paulus. 2002. Entry: Complexo (pp. 101–109).
STRANGE CASE OF DR JEKYLL AND MR HYDE. In: WIKIPÉDIA, a enciclopédia livre. Florida: Wikimedia Foundation, 2017. Available at: <https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Strange_Case_of_Dr_Jekyll_and_Mr_Hyde&oldid=49219398>. Accessed July 5, 2017.
SUPPIA, Alfredo Luiz. O médico e o monstro: há 120 anos, uma história inspiradora. Cienc. Cult., São Paulo, v. 57, n. 4, pp. 56–57, December 2005. Available at: <http://cienciaecultura.bvs.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0009-67252005000400032&lng=en&nrm=iso>. Accessed August 1, 2017.
Footnotes
1 Paper presented in the postgraduate program in Analytical Psychology, UNIFENAS (2017). Academic supervisor: Professor Denise Amorelli Silveira, PhD – CRP 04/1777.