Hello everyone.

My name's Ms. Keller, and welcome to today's lesson.

In this session, we are going to be taking a deep dive into Robert Louis Stevenson's novella, "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde." And in particular, we're going to be focusing on how we could read this novella as a critique of unchecked scientific ambition.

So grab your copy of the text and let's get started.

So by the end of today's lesson, we will be able to explain how Stevenson draws on Victorian anxieties about unchecked scientific progress in his depictions of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

So here are today's keywords.

We have unethical, archetype, transcend, unchecked, and succumb.

So do pause the video here and make sure that you are familiar with the definitions of all of these words, because we are going to be encountering them quite frequently in today's lesson.

But I would just like to draw your attention to a couple of really important words.

First of all, unethical, which means acting against moral principles or accepted standards of conduct.

It means going against what we as a society consider to be the morally right way to behave.

So perhaps we can already begin to see how Dr.

Jekyll's scientific experiments could be classed as unethical, particularly if he were conducting these experiments on somebody other than himself.

And then also I'd like to draw your attention to unchecked because that word is in our lesson title, unchecked scientific ambition.

And unchecked means not restrained, controlled or regulated, nobody is checking in on this progress, on this ambition.

So do bear that in mind as we go through the lesson because we will be seeing that word quite a lot.

So how is today's lesson going to look? Well, first of all, we are going to explore the wider issue of scientific progress versus ethics, particularly in Victorian society.

And then in the second half of the lesson, we're gonna dive into the text analysing the transformation of Jekyll and Hyde.

So I'd like to start off with a discussion.

Which of these things existed before the Victorian era? So take a look.

We've got the telephone, x-ray, typewriter, electricity, anaesthetic, and the camera.

So have a think, perhaps discuss it with the people around you, and when you are ready for me to reveal the correct answer, click, play.

Welcome back.

So let's see which of these things existed before the Victorian era? Well, actually it was a bit of a trick question because none of these things existed or were discovered before the Victorian era.

So that's really important to remember.

And actually, in fact, they were all invented and used in the height of the Industrial Revolution.

So during the 1800s, all of these things suddenly became a part of everyday life.

So let's think more widely then about innovation during the Industrial Revolution because it was a time of great change.

So during the height of the Industrial Revolution, Victorian society saw significant advances in the fields of chemistry, physics, and medicine to name a few.

So in chemistry, breakthroughs in chemical processes saw the introduction of cheaper steel production and the use of chemical dyes, both of which revolutionised manufacturing.

And this was important because not only did the cheaper steel production mean that the actual manufacturing processes could be improved, things could be made faster, more things could be made, perhaps more complicated things, but also, the use of chemical dyes really changed how these products looked, things were brighter, perhaps they were more appealing.

In physics, groundbreaking discoveries in electromagnetism and thermodynamics laid the foundation for the future of electrical engineering and telecommunications.

So here we're starting to see how we end up with a world run by electricity, a world run where we communicate using telecommunications, the telephone, and now later we use online messaging.

And medicine, significant advances in medicine such as the development of anaesthetic and vaccines, as well as a greater understanding of human biology drastically improved surgical procedures and public health.

So these life-changing innovations contributed to a sense of boundless scientific potential during the 1800s.

So I'd like to hand over to you at this point, what do you think is meant by this phrase, boundless scientific potential? So pause the video here where you have a think, discuss it, make some notes, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Welcome back.

So the life-changing impact of these developments led to the widespread belief that science and technology could achieve almost anything, and that's what is meant by that word, boundless.

When it comes a result, Victorian society was characterised by four key things.

First of all, rapid progress.

Impossible, so problems were solved quickly, leading into this belief that science could solve anything.

There was also an optimism for the future because people saw society rapidly improving in front of their eyes, people were living longer, they were living easier and happier lives, society was ever changing during this period, science reshaped everything that Victorians had made, changed, manufacturing, transport, communication, everything started to look very different in front of people's eyes and this contributed to a mindset shift.

People no longer viewed the world as static, viewing it instead as able to be shaped and changed because science had solved so many of these seemingly impossible problems, the sky was the limit as far as many Victorians saw it.

So over to you again then.

Yes, there were lots of advantages to this boundless scientific ambition, however, what consequences do you think there might have been? So pause the video here while you have a think, discuss it, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Welcome back, some really interesting responses that I overheard there in your discussions.

So let's talk about this idea of unchecked scientific ambition and perhaps these consequences.

A really important one being that many of the discoveries that were made during the Victorian era, while they were life changing, while they had so many positive outcomes for people living in Victorian society, they came as a result of unethical testing or experimentation.

For example, anaesthetic.

Early trials of ether and chloroform, which were chemicals used as anaesthetics, were used on patients without full understanding or ability to consent, and actually patients were often vulnerable people or prisoners.

So we're already getting this idea that a lot of what we know about anaesthetic today might have actually come out of this unethical testing on people who didn't really understand what they were getting themselves in for.

Also X-rays, they were initially used without thorough testing to learn about the long-term effect of radiation, meaning that actually many early patients suffered significant health issues later on.

So again, these innovations were being used without any real understanding of the long-term effects.

And also dissection and vivisection.

So Victorians learn much about human biology and medical surgery using these two practises, which would actually be considered very unethical today.

So let's explore what they are.

So dissection is when doctors and scientists learn about human anatomy through dissecting cadavers, which are recently dead bodies.

Now, they were often obtained unethically through grave robbing or using body snatches like the infamous Burke and Hare who actually murdered people and then stole their corpses to sell to medical professionals.

So again, a lot of what we know about human biology and medical surgery has come out of this unethical experimentation and vivisection.

Vivisection was a way that medical professionals learn about the processes, bodily processes, and how they work.

And this involved cutting open live animals to explore perhaps how the blood travelled around the body or how respiration worked using the internal organs.

Now as you can imagine, this caused a great deal of pain and suffering to those live subjects, and we can immediately see how this wouldn't be considered ethical today.

So over to you again then.

Medical knowledge obtained through these unethical practises led to advancements in surgeries and vaccines.

Was the cost of these methods worth the progress? So pause the video here where you have a think, maybe debate with the people around you and click play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Welcome back.

Quite an ethical debate for you there.

And actually, Victorian ethical debates really characterised this period of history and particularly this period of the Industrial Revolution with many people questioning important aspects of society, such as is it worth sacrificing people's lives for medical knowledge to save others? Was the convenience and wealth brought by early machinery and technology worth endangering the lives of those who worked with it? And was scientific progress more important than damaging the environment with pollution and chemical waste? So let's pause here and check our understanding.

Much of the scientific progress during the Victorian era was achieved through what experimentation and practises.

So take a look at the words below, decide which one you think best fills the gap and click play when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer.

Welcome back, and well done to those of you who said D, unethical.

So the anxieties that many Victorians had about these ethical issues were often reflected in literature and artworks through the archetype of the mad scientists.

And I'm sure many of you have heard of this character type before.

So let's just explore some of the common features that we would expect to see in this archetype.

So there's someone who engages in unethical or reckless experimentation.

They're often driven by an obsession with knowledge, power, or a desire to transcend natural boundaries.

So to go above perhaps what normal people might consider as boundaries.

They're often consumed by their work leading to a disregard for ethical considerations.

They're often work alone or they're ostracised by society, reflecting a disconnect from social norms, perhaps they don't necessarily fit in with everybody else.

And they undergo a physical or psychological change from their experiments illustrating the dangers of unchecked scientific ambition.

Okay, let's pause again and check our understanding.

So the mad scientist archetype depicts a character who what? How would you finish this sentence? Press pause while you have a think and click play when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer.

Welcome back, and well done to those of you who said A and C, they often work alone or are ostracised by society, and they're often driven by an obsession with knowledge.

So now it's time for the first practise task of today's lesson.

And what I would like you to do is read and annotate Extract 1, noting how Jekyll and his work is presented here by Stevenson.

So you can find a copy of this extract in the additional materials.

And in this extract, Dr.

Lanyon describes the contents of Jekyll's private cabinet in Chapter 9, "Doctor Lanyon's Narrative." And once you've read and annotated the extract, I'd like you to take some time to discuss or make some notes on your annotation.

How is Jekyll and his scientific work presented here? Do you think he conforms to the archetype of the mad scientist and why or why not? So pause the video here while you take some time to read, annotate, and discuss your ideas, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Welcome back.

So back, I hope you had a chance there to get to grips with the text.

So let's go through the extracts together and see how you might have annotated it.

So the first thing that really stuck out to me were the descriptions of these chemicals.

And remember that we are getting this account from another scientist, a doctor, so somebody that is actually familiar with chemicals.

And Lanyon notes, "What seems to me a simple crystalline salt of a white colour, a blood red liquor, highly pungent.

It seems to me to contain phosphorus and some volatile ether." And the impression that I got from these descriptions is that even to another doctor, these chemicals are mysterious.

They imply that Jekyll's experiments are unusual and perhaps unnatural, they're not things that Lanyon perhaps would've expected to see in another scientist's cabinet.

And then as the extract continues, we begin to see a little bit more about Jekyll's working process.

So Lanyon finds a book and it contains a series of dates that covered a period of many years, which could imply that Jekyll is obsessive and consumed by his work.

And we see later on that perhaps there are several hundred entries in total.

So this implies that Jekyll has done this experiment hundreds of times over many years.

He is obsessive, he's dedicated to this cause.

And then at the end here, this use of punctuation, this is Jekyll's writing.

So we're getting an insight into perhaps what he thinks about his scientific experiment.

The three exclamation marks there perhaps show us his determination.

Because he's had such an emotive reaction to total failure, they perhaps illustrate his disappointment, his frustration at not being able to get it right.

So here's how our Oak pupils responded when they were discussing their annotations.

So Sam said, "Dr.

Jekyll conforms to the archetype of the mad scientist, drew his obsessive pursuit of knowledge and experimentation.

His desire to separate his dual nature reflects a dangerous ambition to transcend the limits of conventional morality and understanding.

This is evident when he states, 'I learned to recognise the thorough' and primitive duality of man, his creation of a potion that transforms him into Mr. Hyde showcases reckless experimentation as he ignores the consequences of unleashing his darker self.

Jekyll's downfall marked by the chaos caused by Hyde aligns him with the classic mad scientist archetype who becomes consumed by his own creation." So here Sam really does think that Jekyll conforms to this mad scientist archetype.

However, Alex isn't quite as convinced, and he says, "While Dr.

Jekyll exhibits some characteristics of the mad scientist archetype, he does not fully conform to it.

Unlike typical mad scientists who are often portrayed as unhinged or malicious, Jekyll is motivated by a genuine desire to understand human nature and improve himself.

His experiments stem from scientific curiosity, rather than a thirst for power or destruction.

For example, Jekyll believes his work could help resolve his duality, claiming, I'm painfully situated, Utterson, my position is a very strange one." This internal reflection shows that Jekyll grapples with the ethical implications of his experiments indicating a moral consideration that sets him apart from conventional mad scientists.

However, his eventual loss of control hints at the darker consequences of unchecked scientific ambition.

So Alex thinks there are certainly some similarities between Jekyll and the mad scientist, but he might not completely conform to this archetype.

So over to you again then.

Whose response do you think was most compelling here? Who are you more convinced by their argument? Pause the video while you have a think, discuss it and click play when you're ready to continue.

So we've made it to the halfway point.

It's time for us to dive into the text.

So we're gonna be analysing how Stevenson depicts Jekyll's transformation into Mr. Hyde.

So I'd like to just start off by thinking about these two characters.

So take some time to make some notes or discuss with the people around you, how are the two men similar and different, and what do you think each man could symbolise? So pause the video here while you have a think, discuss it, make your notes and click Play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Welcome back.

So here are some words that you might have said to describe each of these characters.

So first of all, Jekyll, we're really getting these positive descriptions coming through.

He's respectable, he's kind, he's friendly, he's charitable.

Whereas on the flip side, Hyde could not be more opposite.

He is immoral, violent, cruel, ruthless.

He's impulsive, he acts on these primitive desires.

And then we've got those words in the middle there that perhaps we could use to describe both men.

They're both conflicted, they're both ambitious, uncontrollable and secretive.

So what could each man symbolise? Well, arguably, Jekyll symbolises the public persona, a dignified, well-respected, and intelligent member of society.

Whereas Hyde arguably symbolises Jekyll's private persona, the immoral impulses and desires that he keeps hidden from the world.

So now it's time to explore the connection between these two characters focusing on how Stevenson depicts the transformation from one to the other.

So take some time to read Extract 2 carefully.

You can find a copy of it in the additional materials.

And in this section of the novella, it describes Lanyon's account of witnessing Hyde transform into Jekyll.

So once you've read the extract, I would like you to ask yourself the following question, how does Stevenson depict the transformation here? So pause the video, take as much time as you need to read, have a think, make some notes, and when you're ready for us to discuss it together, click play.

Welcome back, so let's explore this part of the text together.

So the first thing that really stuck out to me in this extract is the use of verbs, reeled, staggered, clutched, staring, gasping, all of which imply that the transformation seems to cause Hyde pain, he's very shocked and surprised by what he is experiencing.

So do you get the impression that Hyde is in physical pain or emotional pain? So pause the video while you have a think and click play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Welcome back.

So what do we think, physical or emotional pain? Well, real, staggered, clutched, perhaps these all suggest physical pain because it's affecting his ability to stand up straight.

Whereas staring and gasping almost suggests that he's haunted or he's disturbed by something.

There's something there perhaps that is shocking him that he can maybe see in front of him, perhaps he's hallucinating.

So my next question then, how does Lanyon react to what he's seeing? So pause the video, take some time to have a think, discuss it, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click play.

Welcome back.

So let's explore Lanyon's reaction.

So he seems very much that he's utterly horrified.

He springs to his feet, he leaps back, he raises his arms in front of his face to shield him, and he screams, "O, God, O, God,' again and again.

How do you interpret Lanyon's fear? What do you think he's seeing? What do these specific actions and what he says or contribute, how do they, what impression do they give us? Pause the video here and click play when you're ready for us to discuss it together.

Welcome back.

So what impression then did we get? What do we think Lanyon can see? Well, some people may argue that he thinks he seen a demon or the devil because he seems to be scared of the thing in front of him and not just scared by the transformation that he's seen, he shields himself in fear.

He is worried about this creature that he's now witnessing or what he's seeing happen and he screams out for God.

So now we've explored others' perceptions of this transformation, let's compare it to Jekyll's own account of what it was like to become Hyde.

So we've seen an account of Hyde becoming Jekyll, let's look at it in reverse.

So now it's time to read Extract 3.

Again, you can find a copy in the additional materials, and once you've read it, I would like you to consider the following question.

How could we read Jekyll as an example of the mad scientist archetype in this extract? And underneath, I've just put a reminder of some of the important aspects of this character type.

So pause the video here while you read the extract carefully, and when you're ready for us to analyse it together, click play.

Welcome back.

So let's annotate or analyse this extract together.

So first of all, let's think about the transformation process because if you remember, it seemed to cause Hyde lots of physical and psychological pain, and we can see that again here, which really does help us to read in this mad scientist archetype because we know that an aspect of this character type is that they undergo physical and psychological changes as a result of the experiment.

So he experiences racking pangs, grinding in the bones, deadly nausea, and this psychological horror of the spirit.

Arguably, Stevenson emphasises the intensity of these changes.

So really drawing out that idea that the pain he's experiencing is a consequence of transcending natural boundaries because he actually says it cannot be exceeded at the hour of birth or death, he links it to agony and he describes this nausea as deadly.

So he is really starting to reference these human limits, the birth and the death, the boundaries of life.

So really emphasising how Jekyll might be transcending this.

So have a think about this account.

How is it different from Lanyon's account? So you're gonna have to compare both extracts now.

So pause the video, have a look at both extracts, have a discussion with the people around you, make some notes, and when you're ready for us to discuss it together, click play.

Welcome back.

I certainly overheard some people discussing a really important difference.

So well done if you picked up on this idea as well.

Well, actually it was different because once the pain subsides, Jekyll admits he feels strange, but he enjoys it.

"There was something strange in my sensation, something indescribably new and from its very novelty, incredibly sweet." So actually it's not a wholly negative experience for Jekyll.

So how do you think that becoming Hyde is actually a positive experience? Because we see at the bottom that he describes how it delighted him like wine.

So have a think, what could be positive for Jekyll about becoming Hyde? So pause the video here, have another look over the extract and click play.

when you're ready for us to discuss it together.

Welcome back.

So how could this be a positive experience? Well, first of all, Jekyll feels younger, lighter, and happier, so he's less worried perhaps overall, and he's also freed from moral expectations.

He has this heady recklessness, a solution of the bonds of obligation.

So we've got this idea that perhaps he feels as though he has been freed from the moral expectations of being a respected and civilised member of society.

He's liberated perhaps from that.

He knows that Hyde is the evil part of him, he describes him as my original evil, and actually, feels delighted to succumb to this part of himself to give into these immoral desires that perhaps have always lived inside him.

Over to you again then.

How does Jekyll conform to the mad scientist archetype here? So pause the video, take some time to discuss it and hit play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Okay, welcome back.

So we could argue that Jekyll's unchecked ambition has led him to unethical practises.

And we know this because he admits that Hyde is evil.

He knows that Hyde is an immoral creature, yet he continues time and time again to inflict him on society.

So we could argue here that Jekyll is behaving in an unethical way.

He knows that there is a chance that Hyde could cause harm to other people, and in fact, he does, yet he continues with his experiments.

So let's pause here and check our understanding.

True or false.

Lanyon and Jekyll both describe the process of transformation in the same way.

Pause the video here where you have a think and click play when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer.

Okay, welcome back and well done to those of you who said false.

So why is that? Well, yes, there are similarities in their descriptions, both describe the physical and psychological pain that the transformation causes, but Jekyll also recalls a positive, freeing aspect of the change, whereas Lanyon describes it as a purely negative experience as an observer.

So now it's time for the final practise task of today's lesson.

So what I would like you to do is write paragraph answering this question, how does Jekyll's experiment and subsequent transformation reflect the Victorian fear of science overreaching its moral and ethical limits? So things you could consider in your response, how Jekyll described that transformation, how others perceived it, for example, in the extract with Dr.

Lanyon, how this reflects Victorian attitudes to scientific progress and ethics, and how Stevenson makes use of the mad scientist archetype and why you think does this.

And make sure that you support your response with evidence from the extracts that we've analysed today.

So pause the video here, take as much time as you need to give this a really good go aiming to write in lots of detail and click play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Okay, or welcome back.

So let's explore an example of how you could have answered this question.

Jekyll's experiment, in "The Strange Case of Dr.

Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" reflects Victorian fears of science, overreaching, moral and ethical limits, embodying the anxiety that progress could disrupt nature and human integrity.

His transformation into hyde, described as physically painful and spiritually disturbing, shows the grotesque results of tampering with forces beyond human control.

Jekyll experiences grinding in the bones and horror of the spirit illustrating both physical and moral decay.

Lanyon's horrified reaction to the transformation crank, 'O God' at Hyde's melting face.

Underscores how it defies natural law and morality, this reflects Victorian concerns.

The unchecked scientific ambition could violate ethical and religious moral codes.

Jekyll embodying the mad scientist archetype becomes a slave to his original evil, warning that scientific ambition without restraint can lead to disaster and the loss of humanity.

Stevenson critiques the dangers of pursuing knowledge without ethics, showing its catastrophic potential.

So now it's time for you to review your response considering these all important questions.

So have you considered how Jekyll and others described that transformation? Have you considered how it reflected Victorian attitudes to scientific progress and ethics? Have you considered how and why Stevenson uses the Mad Scientist archetype? And have you supported your ideas with evidence from the text? So pause the video here while you take some time to review your response and click play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, so we've made it to the end of today's lesson and well done for all your hard work.

So let's just summarise what we've covered today.

Significant scientific advances during the height of the Industrial Revolution often used unethical practises.

Stevenson draws on the mad scientist archetype to emphasise how the pursuit of knowledge can lead to a loss of humanity.

Jekyll represents the respectable public face, whereas Hyde represents the repressed desires that he keeps hidden.

Lanyon's Horror at Hyde's transformation reflects Victorian fears, the unchecked ambition led to horrifying outcomes.

Jekyll describes his transformation as painful, yet enjoyable because it frees in for moral expectations.

So thanks for joining me in today's lesson.

I hope you've enjoyed it as much as I have, and I look forward to seeing you again soon.