Story has it, that Stevenson, who suffered from nightmares throughout his life, wrote the novel in one session, only to have his wife throw it into the fireplace out of horror. Not so much because of the tone of the novel, but perhaps more, because Stevenson had this dual personality within him. If she, as some stories tell, later encouraged him to rewrite it, or if he did it by himself, is unknown. But rewritten it was and today it is considered one of the classic horror tales, alongside Dracula and Frankenstein.

Unlike the other tales, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is based upon man himself, the duality of man, part good, part evil. As such, Mr. Hyde is a wordplay on the word “hide”, which again suggests repression of character, which again lead to various interpretations of the motif.

In Rouben Mamoulian’s 1932 version, the conflict is thus between the modern (civilised) and the primitive man, where Hyde was given the characteristics of a Neanderthal. This had nothing to do with the popularity of apes in 30’s horror, but was a visual representation of the primitive forces that drives man. Opposite of this, Victor Fleming’s 1941 version saw the conflict between good and evil, thus making it a matter of morality and reason. The opening sequences of both films stresses the approach: In the 1932 version, Jekyll lectures at the university, in the 1941 version, a priest lectures the congregation.

Another significant difference between the two versions is, that the 1932 version is overtly sexual, while the 1941 version is very much toned down. Not only does Miriam Hopkins strip naked in front of the camera, she even licks the cloth of Hyde (a most provocative image) and is a prostitute. Contra to this, Ingrid Bergman is decent and promoted to barmaid. In fact, Fleming’s version is extraordinary decent, only having a few “risky” sequences, like the now restored and inserted dream sequence, where Hyde whips naked Turner and Bergman as horses.

Henrik Sylow