March/Wells Book: 'The Island of Dr Moreau'

I haven't finished the book yet (still some chapters to go) but I was very taken aback by Chapter 12 - 'The Sayers of the Law':

Quote:

---

Not to go on all-Fours;that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to suck up Drink;that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to eat Flesh nor Fish;that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to claw Bark or Trees;that is the Law. Are we not Men?
Not to chase other Men;that is the Law. Are we not Men?

---

I find these very chilling and cannot help wondering if it is a reference to God and religious teachings. I agree with Genevova that Moreau is playing the God on his island and the rules set by him are very similar to those that are imposed by religions in nature. Moreau creates these half animal creatures but expects them not to act upon their 'animal' sides; force them to go against their nature and instincts.

In religions as well, we humanbeing (who are created and programmed by God) are expected not to do things which are in our nature and not to act on our instincts... Don't be greedy, jealous etc etc. Like God, Moreau also creates these creatures with certain characteristics but then force laws upon them so that they should learn ignoring these.

Disclaimer: I am not being critical of God or religions here but just pointing out a similarity, I believe, exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

the rules set by him are very similar to those that are imposed by religions in nature.

In religions as well, we humanbeing (who are created and programmed by God) are expected not to do things which are in our nature and not to act on our instincts... Don't be greedy, jealous etc etc. Like God, Moreau also creates these creatures with certain characteristics but then force laws upon them so that they should learn ignoring these.

---

Yes, I too was taken aback by "The Law". In addition to the similarities with the structure of religion, I thought this law and the law creator can also be compared to Government, and the laws it demands of its citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genoveva

An afterthought: It's interesting Darwin's choice of title: The Descent of Man- as in descending...going down. His title was not the Ascent of Man!

---

I think he was using the word root as it is used in 'descendent', referring to how man came to be in his present evolutionary state. Although he may have been hinting at what you say, I don't think too much should be read into there.

In reading over other's posts, I think perhaps people are reading a little much into the story that is not really there. The general premise that if you begin to preform experiments that are beyond nature, to force the "hand of God" or evolution, you are playing with fire I would agree with. Having then made this race of pseudohumans, Moreau then finds that although you can change the outside surgically, the basic nature of the creature still remains the same. In other words any evolutionary process has to change both the outside and inside of a chreature for true change to occur. He is unwilling to admit that this is a process that could take time, or the hand of a higher power. So he makes his "Sayer of the Law", his "Moses", if you will. But the creatures, already unable to grasp any but simple things, quickly turn Moreau into their God. "His is the stars in the sky...His is the deep blue sea..." And for all of his science, they are degrading back into what they once were, for he could not give them greater intelligence, but tried to force them to be different.

It is not just an allagory against playing God by using science, but by forcing people to believe certain moral codes and living practices. Force does no good. The old "Lead a horse to water" adage comes to mind. If he's thirsty, he'll find the water, probably before you get the chance to lead him to it. When the student is ready, the master will appear. I have been the "force-fed" way, and I'm sure many of you have. It doesn't work very well. But a journey of discovery will send one to ask questions of one who may know.

And that is the lesson of "The Island of Doctor Moreau." Force things to be different and you end up with madness. :nod:

First, without reading the rest of the posts, my opinion about the book. I really enjoyed reading it, interesting story. It's written well and you want to finish it, because you want to know what will happen to this strange Beast Men. It also scared me. I don't know if it's really possible in todays sience to create such creatures, but they are terrible. The end is a little bit unconvenied, kind of boring finish of the story. But it really made me think about the unwanted possibilities of science.

The thing I didn't like about the book, as I noticed it before with Wells, that he's writing in a story-teller perspective. Just somebody telling his story afterwards.

Then, some reactions on some posts in this topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genoveva
Wells definately weaves in things into the text to suggest what Moreau is doing is bad, devilish, dark, diabolical. From this, Wells must be saying something about science. It seems as if Wells does not think science should interfere with or try to change nature (God?).

---

Good point, didn't think about that. But now I read it, it can be.

I don't know if Wells is really critisizing Darwin. Darwin doesn't speak about human interference, but about how evolution went naturally (not read "The origin of species" yet, but still want to). It more looks like an attack to science, but I don't know what they were doing that day. Seems to fit today more, with cloning and replacing faces (happened in France a couple of months ago).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade
I find these very chilling and cannot help wondering if it is a reference to God and religious teachings.

---

Also thought that when reading this and I didn't like the idea of Moreau placing himself at Gods place. But later on I understood why he did it, otherwise the Beast Men would be to dangerous. (I don't say I agree with this way of acting and this is also not the way how it goes in accepted religions)
SPOILER
Prendick also goes on with this behaviour, by telling that Moreau is still watching.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genoveva

Yes, I too was taken aback by "The Law". In addition to the similarities with the structure of religion, I thought this law and the law creator can also be compared to Government, and the laws it demands of its citizens.

---

The Government/State interpretation is also possible, I guess, but what I find important here is that God and Moreau actually themselves create the creatures and then expect them not to act upon their basic instincts. The State, on the other hand, does not 'create' its citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erna

Also thought that when reading this and I didn't like the idea of Moreau placing himself at Gods place. But later on I understood why he did it, otherwise the Beast Men would be to dangerous. (I don't say I agree with this way of acting and this is also not the way how it goes in accepted religions)

---

Yes, I agree that Moreau tries to supress the Beast Men's animal instincts by making them learn these laws (in a way trying to condition them). It is, however, of little use. This all reminds me of ourselves as well. even though we are 'civilised' and conditioned to act in a certain way, it would take very little for us to put it all aside and turn to our 'savage', animal selves.