Hi everyone, my name's Ms. Keller.

I'm so glad you could join me for today's lesson.

We are going to be taking a deep dive into Robert Louis Stevenson's "The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde." And in this session, we are going to be focusing on moral decay and respectability.

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 analyse how Stevenson's depictions of Hyde convey the impact of the Industrial Revolution on Victorian behaviour.

So at today's key words then, we have: facade, debauchery, vice, impulses, and moral decay.

So I would just like to draw your attention to that word there at the bottom, moral decay, because we're gonna see that quite frequently in today's lesson.

And that refers to the decline of ethical standards and values within a society or individual.

So decay is when something slowly rots away, it slowly erodes away.

And here with moral decay, it refers to how perhaps somebody's moral behaviour or moral attitude could slowly rot or erode away.

So do take a moment before we move on to make sure you are really familiar with all of these keywords because we are going to be encountering them quite frequently in today's lesson.

So how is today's lesson going to look? Well, we're going to start off by exploring the wider context of the Industrial Revolution and its links to moral decay.

By then, we are going to dive into some extracts from "Jekyll and Hyde", analysing "The Carew Murder Case" So I'd like to start off with a quick discussion.

So take a moment to read the following statements about the Victorian era.

And then, I would like you to decide which of them you think are true and which of them you think are false.

So take some time to have a think, perhaps discuss it with the people around you or make some notes if you're working on your own.

Pause the video here and click Play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Welcome back, so let's just run through and see if each was true or false.

So the first, most people behaved according to Christian values; was true.

Modesty, sobriety and hard work were encouraged; was also true.

Indulgence and excess were frowned upon; also true.

Wealthy people were expected to behave morally while many viewed poor people as morally inferior or criminals; was also true.

And people were strict about their values and immoral behaviour was uncommon; and this was false.

Actually, immoral behaviour was really common in Victorian society, but it was often done in secret because of these strict moral values or moral codes of behaviour that existed.

And as a result, many people adopted public and private personas.

So vice, let's explore the idea of vice.

Now, vice are like immoral habits perhaps or obsessions that people have.

So the Industrial Revolution transformed cities like London into bustling hubs of commerce and industry.

So I'd like to think about what effect this had on the class divide.

So how do you think this might have affected life for poor people and for those in the middle and upper classes? So pauses the video while you have a think.

Take some time to discuss it.

And when you're ready for us to feedback together, click Play.

Welcome back, so let's have a think about the class divide during the Industrial Revolution.

Well, the Industrial Revolution began with the invention of the steam engine, which brought about the introduction of factories and mechanised manufacturing.

And this meant that products could be made much faster and more cheaply than before because now, we were using machines to make them.

And this meant that the rich got richer.

The factory owners saw their profits soaring during the Industrial Revolution.

And this also meant that more people ascended to the middle classes.

So factory owners, people that may have owned small business for suddenly again saw their profits rocketing.

Unfortunately, this wealth did not trickle down to the poorest in society and work in living conditions of poorer Victorians grew worse.

And as a result of this, more people found themselves engaging in immoral vices.

So why do you think the both wealthy and poor people engaged in immoral behaviours? Because it's interesting actually that these immoral behaviours seem to transcend the different social classes.

So why do you think that it is? Pause the video here and click Play when you're ready to discuss it together.

So let's start by discussing the poorest people in society.

So working class life was tough.

Many people engaged in drinking or drugs to escape the horrors of poverty, and some terms to a life of crime in order to avoid deathless prison or life in a workhouse.

So for poorer people, vice and immoral behaviour was as a result of this difficult life.

It was an escape or it was a means of solving financial troubles.

What about for the middle and the upper classes? Because their life wasn't something that they necessarily wanted to escape.

Excessive, debaucherous behaviour was a way of showing off wealth and status.

It allowed wealthy Victorians to let off steam and escape the strict moral codes expected of the upper/middle classes.

So there was this expectation on the upper/middle classes to be seen as paragons of respectability.

So this was a way for them to perhaps escape those strict expectations.

So although moral decay crossed class boundaries, it manifested itself very differently across the different social classes.

So for working class people, vice was mainly survival based.

Women were often driven to prostitution to make money, and men were associated with heavy drinking, gambling, and violence because we've got that idea of it being an escape or a desperate means to survive financially.

For middle class people, reputation was important.

So vices were often kept very discreet.

People perhaps visited prostitutes in secret.

They conducted extramarital affairs, which quite often led to public scandals, and they engaged in private drinking at home.

Whereas for the upper classes, the very wealthy had access to exclusive vices.

So they were able to attend or hold lavish, debaucherous parties.

They perhaps drank and gambled in private members clubs that only the very upper class people were able to attend.

And men often kept mistresses for affairs.

And actually, when it came to public scandals with the upper classes, they had the means to buy their anonymity.

So quite often, people were bribed or paid off so that they wouldn't publicly discuss what they knew.

So let's move on to discuss the idea of hypocrisy and the Victorian gentleman.

So what do I mean by that? Well, Victorian society idealised this figure of the Victorian gentleman who is civilised and morally upstanding.

However, this was often a facade to cover up moral decay.

So quite often, the Victorian gentleman was outwardly modest while very privately indulgent.

Many Victorian gentlemen were philanthropists helping poor and vulnerable people, while on the flip side, making money through exploitative low wages and poor working conditions.

And many Victorian gentlemen look down on the lower classes as morally inferior or as criminals while engaging in those immoral vices themselves behind closed doors.

So the private nature of this immoral behaviour, meant that Victorians were often the subject of very public scandals.

And two years after the publication of "Jekyll and Hyde", Victorian London was rocked by a very public scandal, the murders of Jack the Ripper.

So Jack the Ripper was known to have murdered five women, all of whom were thought to be prostitutes in the Whitechapel area of London during the autumn of 1888.

And Whitechapel was an area predominantly known for being a working class area.

All of the attacks were particularly savage and brutal, which was how he got the name Ripper.

The media sensationalised the attacks, causing widespread fear and exposing the harsh reality of life in the slums. And Jack the Ripper's true identity was never discovered, though many people suspected that he could have been wealthy.

So can you identify any links here to "Jekyll and Hyde"? Can we see any similarities perhaps between this figure of Jack the Ripper and perhaps some characters from the novella? So pause the video here while you have a think.

Take some time to discuss it.

And when you're ready for us to feedback together, click Play.

Welcome back, so well done if you picked up on the idea that like Jack the Ripper, Hyde's attacks were brutal and violent.

They were known for their aggressive, animalistic violence.

Also like Jack the Ripper, Hyde inspired fear and panic in those who encountered him.

And also like Jack the Ripper, his true identity remained hidden.

So let's pause and check our understanding so far.

True or false? Victorian gentlemen didn't exhibit any immoral behaviour because most engaged in philanthropy, helping the poor and vulnerable.

Pause the video here while you take some time to 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 false.

So why is that? Many Victorian gentlemen did engage in philanthropy, this much is true, but this was often a facade to cover up for their moral decay, especially given that their wealth often came from exploitative low wages and poor working conditions.

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

So I'd like you to think about the contextual information that we've been discussing so far.

And I'd like you to complete the table below, seeing if you can find important links between each piece of information and the novella.

So grab your copy of the text if you haven't already and take some time to think really carefully about how this contextual information is relevant to "Jekyll and Hyde." Pause the video here and click Play when you're ready for us to go through it together.

Welcome back, so let's explore how we could have made some links to "Jekyll and Hyde." So this first piece of contextual information then: Immoral behaviour was common and often took place behind closed doors.

So we could link this to Dr.

Jekyll's transformation into Mr. Hyde because this allows him to engage in immoral acts without the constraints of his respectable identity, or at least for a while before people begin to grow suspicious.

Second row then, wealthy Victorians found it easier to keep their vice a secret and avoid scandals.

So onto that second row then, wealthy Victorians found it easier to keep their vices a secret and avoid scandals.

So Jekyll uses his money and social status to protect his reputation.

His wealth provides him the space and the money to conduct experiments in private and avoid the consequences.

For example, in chapter one, when Hyde is able to pay off the girl's family to avoid that public scandal.

And finally then, immoral behaviour crossed class boundaries, yet poor people were the ones thought of as more inferior.

So Hyde transcends social class.

He lives in luxury with lots of fine things, yet he enters the house via the dilapidated door and lives in a sorted area of London.

And in terms of his behaviour, he is uncivilised, which is something that Victorians often associated with the poor.

So we've got lots of links there between the novella and this wider contextual information.

How did this match up to the examples that you managed to identify in the text? Do make a note of any great examples here that perhaps you didn't think of.

So now we've explored the wider context, it's time to take a deep dive into "The Carew Murder Case." So we're going to be analysing an extract from chapter four.

So let's recap our knowledge of this part of the text before we do.

What happens in this chapter? So pause the video, grab your copy of the text if you haven't already, and remind yourself of what happens in this chapter.

Perhaps discuss it with the people around you or make a few notes on your paper or on your laptop.

Pause the video here and click Play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

So arguably, this chapter can be split into four key parts.

Firstly, the attack: A maid is looking out of her window and she witnesses someone brutally assaulting Sir Danvers Carew, a well-respected member of parliament.

He's beaten to death with a cane.

And then, we have the aftermath of the attack.

So she faints at the site of such a vicious assault.

And later, she wakes up and calls the police.

They arrive on scene and find half a broken cane.

Then, we have the investigation.

So the police interview Utterson and he identifies the cane as Jekyll's and he recognises Hyde from the maid's description of the attacker, and he takes them to Hyde's home in Soho.

And then finally, the search for Hyde.

So they gain access to Hyde's rooms and they find them deserted.

He has fled, leaving behind the other half of the broken cane and the burnt remains of papers and a cheque book.

So now we've explored what happens in this chapter, let's really think about why it's so significant to our understanding of the novella.

So take a moment to think, make some notes, discuss this with the people around you.

And when you're ready for us to feedback together, click Play and we'll continue.

Okay, welcome back.

So arguably, this chapter highlights Hyde's lack of morality and his capacity for extreme violence because Stevenson really emphasises the brutality of this attack.

Danvers Carew is not perhaps simply murdered, simply poisoned, for example.

No, he is beaten to death.

This is a very vicious attack.

And arguably, Stevenson strengthens the connection between Jekyll and Hyde since Jekyll owns the murder weapon.

So here he begins to raise questions about Jekyll's responsibility for Hyde's actions because it is precisely with Jekyll's cane that Hyde conducts this attack.

And also Carew's murder highlights the consequences of Hyde's existence.

The repercussions of Jekyll's experiment threaten both his personal reputation but also Victorian society.

So not only is Jekyll's experiment ultimately going to bring about his downfall, but also people are getting hurt.

It's actually having an effect on other people.

They're being drawn into the chaos that Jekyll is creating.

So we're going to explore how Stevenson presents Hyde in each part of this chapter.

So we're going to start with Extract 1 where the maid witnesses the attack.

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

So take a moment to read the extract carefully.

And then, I'd like you to ask yourself the following question: How does Stevenson present each man? How does he present Hyde? And how does he present Sir Danvers Carew? So pause the video here while you read.

Have a think, make some notes, and when you're ready for us to discuss it together, click Play.

Okay, welcome back.

So here are some key quotations from the extract then that describe each man.

So let's start with Sir Danvers Carew.

We've got this description of him as an aged, beautiful gentleman with white hair, and how the older man bowed and accosted the other with politeness, and how the old gentleman took a step back with the air of one very much surprised and a trifle hurt.

So we're getting a certain impression of Danvers Carew there.

And then when it comes to Mr. Hyde, we've got this description reiterated that we see quite a lot in the novel of him being very small.

We've also got this idea that the maid has taken a dislike to Mr. Hyde, which again is a running theme.

People often take a dislike to Mr. Hyde.

Stevenson also describes his ill-contained impatience and how he broke out in a great flame of anger and stamping his foot.

And then, we have these descriptions of how he's like a madman.

He has this ape-like fury, trampling his victim, hailing down a storm of blows.

So again, we're getting a very specific depiction of Mr. Hyde.

So now, it's time for us to really compare how each man is presented here.

So what words would you use to describe each character? So pause at the video here where you look over the quotes and see if you can think of some great descriptive words that summarise the presentation of each character.

Pause the video here and click Play when you're ready for us to discuss it together.

Okay, welcome back.

I've heard lots of really fantastic suggestions there.

So let's just summarise some of the great ways that we could describe each of these characters.

So first of all, Sir Danvers Carew.

We might describe him as frail.

We've got lots of descriptions that linked how he's a much older man.

He's polite and friendly, civilised, respectable and dignified.

We've got lots of descriptions here that really emphasise his morally good character, that he's a really civilised and respectable member of society.

And then by contrast, we've got lots of descriptions of Mr. Hyde that emphasise his cruel, maniacal, aggressive, and ruthless side.

And then also when it comes to the attack itself, really emphasises that wild, animalistic, out-of-control nature to his character.

So really different depictions of each character here.

So why do you think it is that Stevenson depicts each man so differently? So pause the video here while you have a think, perhaps make some notes, discuss it, and when you're ready for us to feedback together, click Play.

Okay, welcome back.

So why does Stevenson depict each man so differently? Well, arguably by depicting Carew as vulnerable, Stevenson encourages the reader to sympathise with him.

He's a nice person.

He's a morally good person who doesn't deserve what is about to happen to him.

And by doing this, he's able to emphasise the brutality of the attack and make us dislike Hyde even more, viewing him as a ruthless villain.

Mr. Hyde is not necessarily attacking someone that deserves it.

He is attacking somebody who we are supposed to view as innocent.

He also depicts Carew as civilised and dignified, perhaps to highlight his respectability and high status as we've just been discussing.

Because by contrast, this then emphasises Hyde's wild, uncivilised behaviour, both the attack and his rudeness to Carew beforehand.

So it really shows a contrast between those two characters.

And this also highlights Hyde's ruthlessness and impulsivity as they would surely be far greater consequences for attacking such a high status individual in society.

So this is perhaps very different to the attack that takes place in chapter one on somebody who is a poor person and perhaps would not have caused such a public outcry as the murder of a very well-respected member of parliament.

So let's pause and check our understanding at this point.

Which of these words could you use to describe Sir Danvers Carew? So pause the video here while you have a think and click Play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, welcome back and well done to those of you who said B and D, civilised and respectable.

Stevenson highlights Carew's civilised and dignified nature, emphasising Hyde's wild, uncivilised behaviour by contrast.

So now, let's explore the aftermath of the brutal attack.

So read Extract 2 carefully.

Here, Stevenson describes the crime scene in detail.

So the question I'd like you to ask yourself this time is, what does his description of the crime scene imply about Hyde and the nature of the attack? So pause the video here while you take some time to read carefully, have a think, make some notes.

And when you're ready for us to discuss it together, click Play.

Okay, welcome back.

So let's have a look at this section in a bit more detail.

So the first thing that we learned then is that the attack was frenzied and incredibly violent because we have this description of how Carew's body is incredibly mangled.

And also, we have this idea that the murder weapon, which is meant to be quite substantial, very tough with heavy wood, has been broken under the stress of Hyde's cruelty.

And then later on, we also learn a little bit about Hyde's motives.

He doesn't seem to be motivated by greed, simply by fury and his desire for violence.

Because actually, the purse and gold watch that Carew was carrying with him are still found on the body.

So Hyde hasn't actually thought to rob his victim.

Okay, so let's move on to Extract 3.

So this is where the police have approached Mr. Utterson.

So here, Stevenson describes Utterson's reaction to learning of the attack on Carew.

So do take a moment to read this extract.

And then, ask yourself this question: Why do you think Stevenson repeatedly emphasises how small Hyde is? And if you see there in green, I've highlighted the particular section where that occurs in this extract.

So pause the video here while you read this extract carefully, have a think, discuss it and make some notes.

And when you're ready for us to feedback together, click Play.

Okay, welcome back.

So why do we think that Stevenson keeps repeatedly emphasising how small Hyde is? Well, arguably, it might suggest that he has inhuman strength.

We may not expect him to be able to so easily attack people who are much larger than him.

So it really emphasises perhaps how abnormal, how inhuman Hyde actually is because he's so vicious, so brutal, so seemingly strong in the way that he attacks people, tramples people, and beats them to death despite being much smaller than them.

It makes him seem much more formidable.

So let's explore Hyde as a symbol of this moral decay that we were discussing earlier in the lesson.

So why do you think Stevenson chose to portray Mr. Hyde in this way? Why does he come to represent moral decay in the novella? So pause the video here while you have a think.

Take some time to discuss it and click Play when you're ready for us to feedback together.

Okay, welcome back, a really interesting discussion there.

I was particularly impressed by the way that people were starting to link that contextual information for the first half of the lesson to our analysis of the text in this part of the lesson.

So well done if you were starting to do that in your discussions or in your notes as well.

So why do you think Stevenson chose to portray Mr. Hyde as a symbol of moral decay? Well, arguably, Hyde's actions reveal the moral decay lurking beneath polite society, challenging the idea that social class ensures moral superiority because Jekyll, as we know, is a member of upper class society.

He's perhaps not someone that Victorians would expect to behave in such an immoral way.

So Hyde here could definitely be symbolising that secret immorality that was hiding in a lot of respectable Victorians.

Hyde arguably embodies the darker impulses the Victorian society often suppressed.

By portraying him as violent and immoral, Stevenson illustrates the consequence of ignoring one's true nature and of living a double life.

So perhaps, Stevenson is linking to this idea here of the public and the private persona.

And perhaps, he's trying to warn his readers of the consequences of behaving in an immoral way in secret.

And Stevenson arguably shows how succumbing to immoral behaviour leads to destruction and chaos, demonstrating that unchecked desires can result in moral decay.

So again, we are getting this idea of a warning because many people in Victorian society were not choosing to not behave in immoral way.

They were just doing it in secret.

And here arguably, Stevenson is implying that doing that can have catastrophic consequences as it does here for Dr.

Jekyll.

So let's pause and check our understanding again.

What is significant about the fact that Hyde leaves Carew's wallet and gold watch behind? Pause the video while you have a think.

And when you're ready for me to reveal the correct answer, click Play.

Okay, welcome back.

So what is significant then about the fact that Hyde leaves the wallet and the gold watch behind? It shows that Hyde is motivated by violence rather than greed.

He doesn't want to rob Carew.

He simply wants to attack him.

Okay, so now it's time for the final practise task of today's lesson.

So some people have argued that Utterson also displays examples of immoral behaviour.

So I'd like you to discuss this topic in detail, or if you're working on your own, make some notes, perhaps do a mind map.

So the following questions I'd like you to consider.

Number one, what is Utterson's role in "The Carew Murder Case"? Two, how does he behave towards Jekyll and Hyde afterwards? Three, do you think Utterson is a morally good character overall? And four, can you explain or think of any examples from the novella where Utterson demonstrates immoral behaviour? So pause the video here, take some time to discuss this, make some notes, mind map your ideas.

And when you're ready for us to feedback together, click Play.

Okay, welcome back.

Can I just say a massive well done? I overheard some really, really fantastic and quite fascinating discussions taking place there.

So Andeep and Sofia, our pupils, are discussing Utterson's involvement in the case of Carew's murder.

So Andeep says, "Utterson is key to identifying Hyde's involvement in Carew's murder.

He tells the police where to find Hyde and goes with them to his rooms." So actually, Andeep thinks that Utterson is quite key in order to solve the murder.

So therefore, Utterson perhaps is playing a morally good role in the whole investigation.

"Yet," says Sofia, "even though he instantly recognises Jekyll's cane as the murder weapon, he chooses not to tell the police.

Perhaps he's trying to protect Jekyll's reputation despite his suspicions." So actually, Sofia's picked up on a really interesting point here.

Even though he does do the right thing by taking the police to where they can find Hyde, he does know that that came belongs to Jekyll and he chooses not to divulge this piece of information to the police.

They move on to discussing whether they think Utterson is a morally good character overall.

So Andeep thinks that, "Utterson is morally good because he's loyal and responsible.

He cares for his friends, especially Jekyll, and tries to protect Jekyll's reputation.

His reluctance to confront Jekyll may come from respecting his privacy.

Despite his flaws, his actions show concern and decency." Whereas Sofia takes a slightly different view.

She says, "Utterson's moral goodness is questionable because he's too passive.

He avoids confronting the truth, letting things get worse with Jekyll and Hyde.

By valuing reputation over doing what's right, he contributes to Jekyll's downfall and shows the hypocrisy of Victorian society." So again, we're getting really quite different views there.

Yes, Utterson does have some morally good characteristics, but perhaps this moral goodness doesn't go far enough.

He misses opportunities to do the right thing.

Stevenson questions Utterson's morality throughout the novella with examples of his immoral behaviour.

So here are some of the examples that you may have picked up on.

So in chapter one, he says, "I let my brother go to the devil in his own way." So this is one of the very first things we learn about Utterson and it's his belief in non-interference.

He doesn't like to get involved.

And as we all know, sometimes standing by and doing nothing is equally as immoral as doing the bad thing yourself because you could have prevented it and you chose not to.

After the murder of Sir Danvers Carew, he says, "I would say nothing of this paper.

If your master has fled or is dead, we may at least save his credit." And here it seems that Utterson is more concerned about protecting Jekyll's reputation than uncovering the truth.

So again, we've got another example of him choosing not to do the right thing, perhaps choosing the easy path or the path that is perhaps more selfishly the right thing to do for his friend rather than the right thing to do in general.

So over to you for one final discussion.

Compare Hyde's and Utterson's immoral behaviour that we've been exploring in this part of the lesson.

How does Stevenson present immorality across the different social classes? So pause the video here and click Play when you're ready to continue.

Okay, so you've made it to the end of today's lesson.

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

Vice was common in Victorian society.

The wealthy could hide it while the poor faced harsher judgement.

Poorer people often turned to drinking, violence or crime, while the rich indulged in debauchery and illicit affairs.

The philanthropic Victorian gentleman often served as a facade to cover up the wealthy's moral corruption.

Hyde symbolises Victorian moral decay, embodying Jekyll's darker impulses.

He is cruel, wild, and aggressive.

And Utterson's refusal to confront Jekyll about Hyde can also be seen as an example of moral decay.

So thanks for joining me in today's lesson and I hope you feel a bit more confident when it comes to discussing moral decay and respectability.

Have a fantastic day and I look forward to seeing you again soon.