Dr. Moreau And Harriet Jacobs: A Literary Analysis

2212 Words9 Pages
The oppressed and the oppressor have the same set of freedoms, but it is what they do with them that can be either immoral or moral. In the atmosphere of H.G. Wells’ The Island of Dr. Moreau and Harriet Jacobs’ Incidents in the life of a Slave Girl, Dr. Moreau and Linda both are in situations where their freedoms are questioned by each of their societies. Their situations are vastly different but that does not stop their societies from oppressing their individuality and characterizing their freedom as immoral. Dr. Moreau’s freedoms are that of an oppressor and such that his freedoms are immoral. Linda’s freedoms are that of the oppressed but even then her desire to be free is considered immoral. The two characters each have their separate freedoms…show more content…
Moreau’s laboratory. Prendick said, “They may have once been animals. But never before did I see an animal trying to think.” (69). Prendick’s statement illustrates that through inflicting pain on the Beast Folk, Dr. Moreau has made them rebel against their own animal instincts, ergo going against nature. When Dr. Moreau said “I never yet heard of a useless thing, [pain], that was not ground out of existence by evolution sooner or later.” (74), he allows his freedom as a researcher to rationalize his…show more content…
Moreau has denounced his research, until he has not tried to mess with nature, until he has stopped his pursuit of creating something unnatural, society will continue to think the freedom he possesses is immoral. Thus, society views Vivisection as immoral. Upon first meeting Dr. Moreau, Prendick struggles to recollect why Dr. Moreau’s name sounded oddly familiar. And so, Prendick remembers reading a pamphlet that was distributed to the masses and in the pamphlet, Dr. Moreau’s experimentation on animals was uncovered. The pamphlet signified the end of Dr. Moreau’s career since he was forced out of England. The pamphlet turned public opinion against Dr. Moreau because it contained the journalist’s account, in which the nature of Dr. Moreau’s experimentation was described as “wantonly cruel”. In addition to the disapproval of society, his fellow investigators and scientific friends deserted him. However, Dr. Moreau could have “purchased his social peace by abandoning his investigation, but he apparently preferred the latter.” (34). Dr. Moreau had the chance to condemn his research, but he decides to continue even though it meant being ostracized by society. The act of shunning Dr. Moreau portrays society’s thoughts on his experiments on animals. To society, the act and practice of vivisection was wrong but as Dr. Moreau is exercising his freedom to research the plasticity of living forms, he sees nothing wrong with what he is

    More about Dr. Moreau And Harriet Jacobs: A Literary Analysis

      Open Document