Quote:

Chapter 2, pg 43:

“Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish, he gave an impression of deformity without any nameable malformation, he had a displeasing smile…but not altogether could explain the hitherto unknown disgust, loathing and fear with which Mr. Utterson regarded him.”

Comment:

What I found to be extremely interesting in reading these first section of the novel was the continued inability to describe exactly what Mr. Hyde looks like and why both Enfield and Utterson find him so repulsive. Hyde assumes the role of being the monster in this story by his actions as well as appearance and as we have learned people have a tendency to define someone or something as monstrous as being different from them. But if it was so easy to define Hyde as a figure of disgust, why couldn’t they provide that description. Could it possibly be that he wasn’t so different from the other characters. This is what I would think of as an example of someone being a monster that looks just like everyone else. That’s why it was so hard for Utterson to actually describe him as a monster because he didn’t like he would be a monster. The novel begins as a form of mystery novel with Utterson wanting to understand the connection of Jekyll to Hyde and their relationship, why does Utterson dig so deep into their connection? He felt like there was something wrong but even when Jekyll tells him to leave it alone he goes against his wishes, it becomes a quest for Utterson to expose Jekyll and his connection to such a monstrous person. 

Question:

Why during this time period was it so hard for people who look just like us to be murderers and monsters, why could that be so unsettling?