Essay on The Island Of Dr. Moreau
635 Words3 Pages
In 1896 H. G. Wells had the first edition of ' The Island of Dr. Moreau'; published. The book took place primarily on an island in the Pacific Ocean. On this island Dr. Moreau and his assistant ( Montgomery) performed dangerous, secret experiments on humans and animals. When Wells wrote this he knew nothing about DNA, cloning, or chromosomes but he did use his scientific imagination. Wells realized that society was beginning to rely on science too much in the late nineteenth century. He wrote this book to issue a stern warning for future societies against their own scientific advancements. He knew that just like his society others will want to quench their appetite for this tasty treat called vivisection or cloning. He knew that…show more content…
It has created a whole new atmosphere in which to read this book one in such Wells predicted by writing this book. Wells would be disappointed at our disregard of his warning.
Another important theme that Wells tried to convey to us was that doing experiments on humans and animals were unethical. He at first tells us of the locked room where these animals and humans were being operated. He shows that they wanted to keep it a secret until they could trust their scientific advancements in the hands of the public. It is just like today because when you find a new formula or anything you have to keep it a secret before others find out. When others find out they will and can take their ideas and experiments and I think that is why Dr. Moreau secluded himself from the public. Dr. Moreau also knew that people would not approve of his scientific studies especially in the late nineteenth century. Wells was trying to show us that Moreau was just a scientist not a mean psychotic out of control person. He wanted what every scientist wanted and that was success but he took it a little past what his culture viewed as normal. If Moreau had executed his experiments in the light of his peers in the science world he would have been persecuted. Wells tried to let this doctor run free with his experiments but found
Examine Doctor Moreau's island society with its rules and punishments as a system of government. Does this government promote any virtues, or does it merely aim to stamp out vice? What is the import of the disaster of the Beast Folk's revolt?
How does Wells create an atmosphere of bleak hopelessness, and how does this tone function in conveying a moral or spiritual point of view?
Prendick says he finds "a strange wickedness" in Moreau's choice of the human form as the form he will try to recreate. What about the Beast Folk's struggle to become human makes them tragic? Does the ability to become a tragic feature extend to animals? How does their struggle reflect fundamental differences between humans and animals?
How does Moreau take on the character of a godlike figure? How do the rest of the characters fit in this theological context? Does Wells appear to project an opinion about any aspects of religion?
What is the significance of Prendick's abstinence from alcohol in comparison with Montgomery's alcoholism?
The first-person narrative engages readers in a decision about how much to trust the account told by the narrator. What boosts or weakens Prendick's credibility? Does his credibility matter for readers to understand what Wells himself is saying through the text?
There are few female beings in the novel. Do they (the puma, the Bear-Vixen, and the other Beast Women) represent a female essence any more or less than the various male beings represent a male essence, or is sex generally irrelevant to the novel? Does it make sense to draw out a statement about women or feminism from the female beings and their relationship with the males?
How does Prendick's gentility or upper class background affect his experience on the island? How does it affect his interactions with Moreau, Montgomery, and the Beast Folk? What kind of social stratification exists in the island society?
To what extent do Moreau's experiments suggest the dangers of toying with nature? If humans are always experimenting with nature and using technology, by what standards should we judge that a scientist has crossed a moral boundary?
Moreau's idea about transforming animals into humans suggests an acceptance of Darwin's proposals regarding evolution. How does the story as a whole serve engage the theme of biological transformation, by natural and artificial means? Why is it that Wells chooses to make the Beast Folk gradually regress to bestiality? Are humans constantly fighting the tendency to become like animals, or are we naturally on the way up to something better?