The company finally closed a deal, and a big one -- hopefully another will be closing in two or three weeks. It's a relief. It's so nice not to have a money market account in negative numbers
( Read more... )
Yeah, I always read it more as a treastise on the intrinsic nature of man and the stresses of public acceptability vs. personal desires. The latter can be expanded into an allegory of homosexuality, but I honestly find no basis in the text itself to feel it was an implicit component. Though sexual indulgence of some sort is implied (mostly through its lack of explicit statement), I'd say there's more basis on social pressures -- for example, the murder of the MP was brought about by Hyde becoming enraged by having to listen to banal pleasantries.
Besides, the Victorian style of writing was a bit ambivalent in that respect . . . it's hard to read any letters from that time period that don't involve a man referring to a male friend as his dearest and beloved.
Yeah, and Hyde is described as more animalistic (hairier, impulsive, much quicker -- rather like a primate). And according to one source it seems Stevenson himself visited brothels at one point and renounced Christianity as well, so I can see how the low/high dichotomy might interest him.
Strangely, I find it "feels" very much like, say, Frankenstein -- there's endless violations of Show, Don't Tell by virtue of multiple first-person narrators, but I think that choice actually adds to the complexity. (Although Frankenstein did it in something of a different way, such as Victor's perceptions of his own actions being contrasted with, well, his actions.)
It's quite short and available in full on Project Gutenberg (which is how I originally read it). Rather pleasantly approachable, all things considered.
B) IIRC, the only real "evidence" for it being a coded tale about homosexuality are statements by Stevenson's wife who was vehemently against its publication.
Yeah, I think I heard the latter -- she called it immoral or something. Then again, it's hard to throw a stick without hitting immorality in Victorian England.
Comments 12
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Besides, the Victorian style of writing was a bit ambivalent in that respect . . . it's hard to read any letters from that time period that don't involve a man referring to a male friend as his dearest and beloved.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Strangely, I find it "feels" very much like, say, Frankenstein -- there's endless violations of Show, Don't Tell by virtue of multiple first-person narrators, but I think that choice actually adds to the complexity. (Although Frankenstein did it in something of a different way, such as Victor's perceptions of his own actions being contrasted with, well, his actions.)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
B) IIRC, the only real "evidence" for it being a coded tale about homosexuality are statements by Stevenson's wife who was vehemently against its publication.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment