does it get better?

[dwdean]

picked up dr jekyll & mr hyde ($2, thank you Reader's Corner), and i've been plodding through it. with most classics i can't put them down, with Stevenson i just can't seem to muster the fortitude to last longer than 10 minutes (enter sex joke here). extremely bored, a bit disappointed. only on chapter 4, "Incident of the Letter."

does it get better?

[Venerable Bede]

Well, I don't really know what to tell you. I loved the entire work from start to finish and never found it boring. So, for me it didn't really get better since I was loving it from the outset. I would say that if you're not hooked on it yet, you probably won't be later either.

[dwdean]

i stand so humbly corrected...

the beginning was dry (coming off of Frankenstein, Stevenson cannot be blaimed for my disinterest), but once i got to Dr Jekyll's explanation i became enraptured with the story.
well done Stevenson, well done.
the duality of man... what a philosophy to ponder.
this work will be counted among my most favored.

"I became, in my own person, a creature eaten up and emptied by fever, languidly weak in both body and mind, and solely occupied by one thought; the horror of my other self."

[Dark Muse]

I think my enjoyment of this book was hampered by the fact that I already knew what was going to happen before ever picking it up because hell even Loony Tunes did a play on Jekyll and Hyde. So the main plot point, mystery, surprise I knew from the get go which made reading the story a bit anticlimactic for there really was no build up of anticipation.

[dwdean]

Dark Muse,

i find that many great works have been reduced in value due to mainstream renditions which are impossible to avoid. such a shame really, but it seems to be something which cannot be helped.

[Dark Muse]

Dark Muse,

i find that many great works have been reduced in value due to mainstream renditions which are impossible to avoid. such a shame really, but it seems to be something which cannot be helped.

Yes that is true, but in most cases I think that the books usually offer so much more that it does not have that much of an impact upon my enjoyment. But something about Jekyll and Hyde, I really felt that it would have been a great benifit if I could have been able to go into that one blind.

[G L Wilson]

Yes that is true, but in most cases I think that the books usually offer so much more that it does not have that much of an impact upon my enjoyment. But something about Jekyll and Hyde, I really felt that it would have been a great benifit if I could have been able to go into that one blind.

Pride and Prejudice is said to have the same fault.

[dwdean]

i wholeheartedly agree...
while the movie industry is not something which should be completely done away, i believe some classics should be left to script and not film. jekyll and hyde must be a groundbreaking work for anyone lucky enough to enter those pages with no preconceived idea.

talking with my sister tonight we approached the topic of "just how is it that the movie, while based on the book, may seem so different than the experience of reading said book?" i believe it really goes back to that element of literature which gives the reader the freedom to view the scenes portrayed in any book how they desire. this is contrasted with a hollywood rendition of, say Dracula. The movie follows Stoker's text very well, but it seemed so much darker than the original text. i have read and reread Dracula many times, but it has never actually scared me. it seems odd that i gleaned such intense enjoyment from reading the book, but i couldn't finish the movie because it honestly scared the hell out of me.

Dark Muse, i would appreciate your thoughts on another thread which i started, http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62901

thanks