Henry Kissinger Essay Example for Free

Henry Kissinger Essay Henry Kissinger is remembered and revered for his well-documented contributions to American foreign relations. The fact that he remained in office under two US Presidents, Richard Nixon and his successor Gerald Ford is a manifestation of his success in the political arena. His political and diplomatic maneuvers earned him a reputation across the political spectrum as one of America’s great statesmen of the 20th century. Kissinger was born in Furth, Germany in 1923 and as a Jew he fled Hitler’s anti-Semitic ideology, finding refuge in New York City in 1938. Kissinger demonstrated early signs of perseverance. Once he was settled in New York with his family Kissinger attended high school at night and took on daytime employment at a factory. After graduating from high school, Henry Kissinger enrolled at City College, New York in 1943 and from there he was drafted into the military and his career as a German interpreter began during World War II. Following Germany’s surrender, Kissinger continued to hold various positions within the military. Following his discharge from the US military, Kissinger became fully matriculated as an undergraduate at Harvard University, graduating summa cum laude with a B.  A. in 1950. He continued his studies at Harvard and graduated in 1954 with both a M. A. and a Ph. D. By the year 1962, Kissinger was a professor at Harvard and simultaneously served as an advisor to both Governor Nelson Rockefeller and the Council on Foreign Relations. Kissinger’s flair for American foreign policy and diplomacy became a matter of public record when a book written by him titled ‘Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy’ was published. The publication gained Kissinger a reputation as a scholar of foreign policy. It was in this book that Kissinger publicized his theory that the success of America abroad was not solely dependant upon her military prowess, but also in her ability to effectively identify and respond to aggression. In 1968 when Richard Nixon took office as US President, Kissinger formed a part of the Nixon administration. He was initially appointed to the office of National Security Advisor and was subsequently elevated to the position of Secretary of State. He continued to serve as Secretary of State throughout both Nixon and Ford’s administration. In his capacity as Secretary of State, Kissinger’s role in US foreign diplomacy, although active was secret. A secret trip in July 1971 to Beijing helped prepare Nixon for his February 1972 trip to China which thawed US relations with the Chinese Republic. Kissinger continued his secretive work negotiating the terms and conditions of the 1973 Paris agreements which truncated the US involvement in the Vietnam War and resulted in the coveted Nobel Peace prize in 1973. The prize was shared with North Vietnamese peace advocate Le Duc Tho. Kissinger admired the principles and ideology of realpolitik, which is a German term for political polices based on practical concepts as opposed to idealistic concepts. Realpolitik is aligned to realism. Using realpolitik ideals, Kissinger organized a short term period of detente with the Soviets which involved the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Kissinger also organized and negotiated an end to the Yom Kippur war in 1973. The Yom Kippur war had began with the invasion of the Sinai Peninsula by Egypt and the invasion of Golan Heights by Syria. What followed was an era in US/Middle East relations that was characterized by Kissinger’s intensive diplomatic peace negotiations and the aftermath that shapes the current US/Middle East relations. With Kissinger’s advice and cunning Egypt and Israel agreed to the terms of a peace treaty in 1979 following the Camp David meetings which were engineered by then President Jimmy Carter the previous year. But Kissinger’s most controversial conduct was in December of 1975 when he and President Gerald Ford met with Indonesia President Suharto and gave him US approval that country’s military invasion of East Timor. Approximately 200,000 Timorese natives were killed during the invasion that followed and Kissinger’s critics advocated for him to be brought up on war crime charges. Previously there had been similar accusations and cries for prosecution against Kissinger for essentially ‘authorizing’ the Cambodian bombing in 1969. When Jimmy Carter was elected President of the United States in 1976, Kissinger resigned his office. He did however continue to play a minor role on an advisory basis to both Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush. In 2002 President George W. Bush appointed Kissinger to the chair of a committee that investigated the September 11 attacks on the US. As a result of criticism from both Democratic and Republican party members particularly with reference to his previous secret conduct and attitude toward the public together with his refusal to disclose his financial records, Kissinger resigned from the committee in December 2002. The Arab-Israeli Conflict The Arab-Israeli conflict refers to the ongoing political struggles spanning over one hundred years over the State of Israel’s endeavor to establish itself as a Jewish nation. The Arab-Israeli conflict also involves the strained relations between Israel and Arab nations. The Arab-Israeli conflict developed at beginning of 1917 following the fall of the Ottoman Empire when World War I ended. At that time British forces occupied the area known as Palestine and there was an influx of Jewish immigrants to the area. An atmosphere of Arab hatred toward the Jewish immigrants, fueled by encouragement from Muslim religious leaders helped to generate violent conflict. By the end of the Second World War, the conflict garnered international attention. The United Nations with input from the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States developed and introduced ‘two-state solution,’ which was essentially a plan to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict. The United Nations called for a partition of the region and the plan was put into motion in 1948. But rather than resolve the conflict, it only contributed to make matters worse and the first real Arab-Israel war erupted with Israel winning. A number of wars followed namely, 1956 Suez War, the 1967 Six Day War, the 1970 War of Attrition, the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the 1982 Lebanon War. There have been innumerable conflicts of less intensity than the all out military conflicts and two major Palestinian uprisings called intifadas. Henry Kissinger and the Arab-Israeli Conflict Following the Yom Kippur war of 1973, Kissinger gave new meaning to the term ‘foreign diplomacy’ with his practice of ‘shuttle diplomacy’ within the Middle East. ‘Shuttle Diplomacy is a tactic most often used when two primary parties do not formally recognize each other but want to be involved in negotiations in order to disengage opposing armies as well as to promote a lasting truce’. By this method, a third party will typically liaise between the two conflicting parties. The third party spends a great deal of time ‘shuttling back and forth between the feuding parties. ’ The term ‘shuttle diplomacy’ originated out of Henry Kissinger’s mediation efforts in the Middle East during his term as U. S. Secretary of State from 1973 to 1977. ‘Kissinger was famous for primarily using shuttle diplomacy to mediate conflicts in the Middle East throughout the1970s, specifically those between Israel and Arab States following the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Kissinger implemented ‘shuttle diplomacy’ to initiate a ceasefire following the 1973 Yom Kippur war. His reason for employing this method of mediation was to stifle and outwit the Soviet Union’s mediation efforts in the ceasefire negotiations. While Kissinger played a key role in bringing an end to the conflict between Israel, Syria and Egypt, he stepped up his efforts to intervene and mediate the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict from 1973 to 1975. Kissinger’s attitude toward the Arab-Israeli conflict was obviously one of forced conciliation. As late as 2001 he said as much when asked about the ongoing conflict. Kissinger said, ‘the Arab-Israeli conflict went from an irreconcilable cultural clash to a belief that maybe it was all a terrible misunderstanding and that if only the psychological barriers could be removed, a final settlement would be quite easy. This is what led Clinton to organize Camp David, in the belief that in one session you could finish the peace process. It turned out that there were deeply religious and philosophical obstacles. As a result, both parties have trapped themselves and have pushed the situation almost back to the point where it was when the peace process started. I think we have to go back to a much more modest understanding. We have to get back to coexistence. ’ Kissinger’s peace-making tactics during the Arab-Israeli conflict manifested itself in the days and months following the Yom Kippur war. After the ceasefire efforts primarily negotiated on behalf of the United States by Henry Kissinger, Israel was able to recapture the territory it had previously lost when the war began. In fact, Israel had acquired new territory from both Syria and Egypt. These new acquisitions included land in east Syria forming part of the Golan Heights as well as land on the west bank of the Suez Canal. Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger persuaded Israel to forfeit some of the new territory back to the Arabs and as a result the first seeds of peace between Israel and Egypt were sewn. Kissinger’s efforts also contributed to the ebbing of bitter relations between the US and Egypt, a situation that had started in the 1950s when Egypt adapted a pro-Soviet ideology. Kissinger’s peace-making strategies with Egypt came to fruition in 1976 under the Camp David Accords, spear-headed by then US President Jimmy Carter. During the Camp David Accords, Israel agreed to cede Sinai back to Egyptian control provided Egypt agreed to recognize Israeli sovereignty and put an end to the conflict. William Viorst is of the opinion that Kissinger’s peace-making efforts in the Middle East during his tenure as Secretary of State was colored by an anti-Soviet agenda. Viorst’s contention is not without merit. Kissinger made no secret of his disapproval of America’s primarily moralistic approach to the Soviet Union and advocated for a more pragmatic approach to the superpower. He acted as foreign policy advisor to both the Johnson and Kenney administrations and is said to have been ‘the main intellectual force behind JFK’s flexible response strategy, which advocated maintaining both conventional and nuclear forces to respond to Communist aggression, rather than resorting to threats of massive nuclear retaliation. ’ Viorst maintains that when Kissinger commenced his mediation following the Yom Kippur War he was forced to balance two objectives. These two objectives were ‘pressing for concessions from all sides to establish some permanent negotiated settlement, and ensuring Israel came out of the agreement strong enough to act as the U. S. proxy in the area against Soviet threats. ’ Viorst said that in order for Kissinger to knit together an exchange that called for the ceding of territory by Israel and the Arabs agreeing to a non-violent response meant that Kissinger ‘had to commit the U.  S. to crucial involvement. ’ Meanwhile, President Nixon was back in Washington hanging onto the fringes of a discredited office with Watergate scandals exposed. On the other side of the world a ‘PLO massacre of 24 children in Ma’a lot’ left Israel demanding that Syria make a promise forbidding terrorists to cross the Golan into Israel;’ Syria’s Hafez Assad, loyal to his Arabic culture to a point that interfered with his ability to agree to such a pledge fearing he might be seen as weakening to the will of the Israelis. It seemed that both sides had reached a stalemate. Kissinger responded by sending a letter to the Israeli authorities averring that it mattered little what position they took against terrorist encroaching on Israeli territory. The United States would indorse whatever position they took in that regard. Viorst observes that Kissinger’s letter meant that ‘no future president would withhold American economic or military assistance as punishment for antiterrorist reprisals. It committed Washington to support such attacks before the world, most notably at the United Nations. In effect, it imposed a serious new limitation on Americas ability to compel restraint within the cycle of violence that so often ran amok in the Arab-Israeli struggle. ’ Two weeks after Yitzhak Rabin took office as Israel’s Prime Minister, President Nixon, with his presidency in tatters embarked upon a tour of the Middle East. Nixon’s goal was to ‘establish himself in the public mind as indispensable to peacemaking in the region. ’ While the Egyptians received Nixon warmly, and the Saudi’s were respectful, the Israeli reception was rather cool. Rabin had previously claimed to be grateful to the Nixon administration for ‘opening America’s depots to Israel’ and America in general for coming to the country’s aid in two previous wars. However, Rabin did not hesitate to tell Nixon that he was not at all pleased with the present US policy in connection with the Arab-Israeli conflict and moreover ‘Rabin said candidly he did not want Kissinger to press Israel to make further concessions for peace. He much preferred the old relationship with the U. S. , Rabin said, in which Israel was supplied with all the arms it wanted, while sitting on the diplomatic status quo. Nixon, encouraged in the Arab capitals to intensify peacemaking efforts, received from Rabins new government a sharp signal to slow them down. ’ Kissinger remained adamant in his resolve and was not to be persuaded to change tact for fear that his agenda would be compromised. He feared that if he stopped his shuttling efforts, the Egyptians and Syrians would seize the moment and ‘gravitate back to the Soviet camp’. Kissinger responded by turning his attention to Jordan where he stressed that it was imperative that the Jordanians ‘reestablish’ some sort of presence on the West Bank. His reason for this suggestion was said to be that he felt that there ‘could be no progress toward a Palestinian settlement, which he now considered fundamental to reaching his goal’. Rabin did not agree with this proposition for any number of reasons, but his main objection was predicated on his belief that the Palestinian issue was not germane to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Rabin however, had an agenda of his own. He wanted to establish Israel as a strong military presence in the Middle East and saw the United States as a means of achieving that goal. Moreover, peacemaking efforts was the way to get the United States to help Rabin realize his objective for the military strengthening of Israel. ‘He reasoned that Kissinger, itching to preside over an American-brokered peace, would pay heavily to get it. ’ When Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 and Gerald Ford took office as the US’s next president, Henry Kissinger remained in office as Secretary of State. Soon after the new Presidency commenced Kissinger began a renewed barrage of shuttle diplomacy. His first shuttle took him to Jerusalem. Rabin had a new demand he would only negotiate with Egypt. ‘He acknowledged candidly was the prospect of separating Egypt from the rest of the Arab world. Rabin stated he wanted peace with normalization. But the objective he really wanted was acceptance by the Arabs of permanent changes in Israels boundaries. ’ Rabin also made it clear, that negotiations would be on his terms or not at all. Kissinger feeling, he had no choice agreed on Rabin’s terms. By February 1975 when Kissinger revisited the Middle East he found that negotiations had declined sharply. Egypt’s president, Anwar Sadat was adamant that he was only interested in negotiating if it involved significant territorial increases for Egypt. Rabin on the other hand was not interested in parting with Israel’s territory. Jordan and Syria had grown distrustful of Sadat fearing he was only looking after Egypt’s interest. OPEC was considering another round of oil sanctions against Israel and the Soviets ‘were waiting in the wings for the opportunity to cement together the pieces of their old Middle East power base. ’

The Foils in Shakespeares Hamlet :: GCSE English Literature Coursework

Foils in Hamlet A foil is a minor charater in a literary work that compliments the main character through similarities and differences in personality and plot. Among all the foils in Shakespear[e]'s "Hamlet," [Titles] Laertes has the biggest impact on Hamlet's character. While Hamlet maintained his status as prince, it was Laertes that represented the well bred son of the royal family and the traditional revenge hero. [The thesis does not cover the essay.] Some similarities in Laertes and Hamlet were that they were both students. Laertes and Hamlet were dutiful sons that [who] were outraged and felt personally wronged by their fathers' deaths. They swore to get revenge against the assailant. Laertes and Hamlet both blamed Claudius for the deaths of their fathers'. [no '] Also, Hamlet and Laertes posed a threat to Claudius because of their potential for becoming king. They go above the law in order to seek justice, which discredits the honorable basis of their actions. There was a shared love for Laertes's sister, Ophelia. Hamlet and Laertes have seen the ghost of Hamlet's father. [?] One of the differences in Laertes and Hamlet was that Laertes allowed his anger and grievance of his father's death to be known. Whereas when Hamlet's father died, he secretatively [sic] ran [?] and was deemed crazy. Laertes goes to school and indulged in a Parisian lifestyle, as Hamlet chose to study at Wittenburg in a more subdued environment. [Interesting point] Laertes has a lot of passion whereas Hamlet has none. Laertes was only raised by his father as Hamlet had a mother and father to raise him. Also, Laertes was portrayed as the well bred son of the counselor of a royal family and Hamlet portrayed [?] the role of a commoner. The ghost of Hamlet's father would talk to Laertes as he would to Hamlet. [Not true] Being an ambitious young prince was a similarity in Fortinbras and Hamlet. They are both on a mission of revenge. Also, both Fortinbras and Hamlet lost their fathers'. [no '] Ironically Denmark is a similarity because it was initially controlled by Fortinbras' father, then Hamlet[' H-50]s' father, then Hamlet, and finally returning to Fortinbras. [Nice point] Fortinbras had a family tie with Hamlet's love Ophelia. [This needs a citation from the play -- I don't remember it.

Blanche and Stanley in a Streetcar Named Desire Essay

Blanche and Stanley, two characters of Tenessee Williams’ play A Streetcar Named Desire, represent two very conflicting personalities. Stanley, Blanche’s sister Stella’s aggressive husband, portrays strong tones of anger, rage, and frustration. However, although his behavior is without a doubt over-bearing and rough, in a way he displays realism and truth as well. On the other hand, the play’s true protagonist Blanche exerts enthusiasm, spunk, and elaborate nostalgia. These characteristics don’t really come out in a positive or attractive way, but instead verify her insanity near the play’s end. Together, Blanche and Stanley represent true inner conflict, each in their own way, and the tension among the two is an exciting and driving force to be reckoned with. Stanley exudes the stereotypical â€Å"wife beater† husband of the 1930s. Dressed almost always in the era’s staple guiney-tee, his rash actions and aggressive episodes towards his wife are frightening to say the least. On the surface, he seems to despise the fact that Blanche is always around, intruding on his and Stella’s life together. Multiple times throughout the play he throws a fit, destructing the kitchen table, bedroom, or whatever he can get his hands on. His crudeness towards Stella is arguably a portrayal of his self-deemed superiority over women. However, despite his awful rage and somewhat abusive actions, Stanley amazingly represents a good trait as well. His morals are all about honesty, truthfulness, and realism. He really clashes with Blanche so much because she is so fixated on the past, and it drives him towards ultimate frustration because he’s such a realist. Each time Blanche brings up a thing of her past, he fills with rage and goes off on one of his trademarked episodes. Therefore, on the surface Stanley’s rough personality definitely is a tough wall to see past, but his actions really come from his â€Å"honesty policy†, and his realism. With that said, Blanche’s personality is uniquely opposite than the hard, rough, â€Å"real life† Stanley. Blanche is a beautiful woman of her mid-thirties who basically is experiencing a mid-life crisis a bit too early. Her â€Å"perfect life† comes crashing down after losing her young husband, estate, and money. With this, she can’t seem to really accept much in her current life, but instead lives through the past. By living with her sister, Stella, she imposes intrusion without really realizing it on her and Stanley’s lives, and even though she could start over and create a life of her own, she can’t really let go and move on. She is even proposed by Stanley’s sensitive poker friend Mitch, but she refuses him. Mitch represented to me Blanche’s last glimmer of hope, and when she denies him in marriage, the rest is a downward spiral. As the play progresses from there on out, Blanche’s sanity slowly deteriorates more and more. It becomes evident that she has a drinking problem, and liquor becomes her go-to aid for all mental problems she begins to have. One scene I found interesting was when she asked a young suitor who comes to her house to deliver something for a kiss. I felt in kissing this younger man she was testing her charm and lust skills, which she obviously believes to be useless and rusty, for lack of a better word. When the young man leaves and she quickly becomes embarrassed, it is established that she just isn’t the young girl she used to be, and that she must move on to make the most of what she is left with in life.

The Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde - 1326 Words

British Modernism, which dates from 1890-1945, is one of the strongest and revolutionary movements of all time, affecting great change in art, music, and literature. Approaching the end of the Victorian Era, an overlap with early Modernism arises, as writers began resisting this sense of order and questioning accepted roles and beliefs. Robert Louis Stevenson’s novel, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde was published during the late Victorian era, but he clearly brings into question the acceptance of Victorian philosophies, especially the belief that one truth exists and that we can identify good and evil as separate entities. The names Jekyll and Hyde have become synonymous with multiple personality disorder. This novel can be†¦show more content†¦Roving beyond its place above the water is the ego, the conscious, rational division of the mind. Beneath the waters of consciousness, the hidden expanse of the iceberg divides into the superego and id. The superego , or â€Å"the moral part of us† lays the grid work for and reinforces rules. Farthest from the shore of consciousness, the id embodies the individual’s desires: the most primal part of the mind developed during the prenatal months. Dr. Jekyll is the conscious ego attempting to maintain balance between his id, or Hyde, and his superego, or the Victorian morality of his society. Jekyll, the ego, undergoes a tragedy of imbalance wherein the morals, imposed by a Victorian superego, overwhelm the psyche. Struggling under the impossible standards placed on humanity, he enlists the help of science to physically extract the repressed human needs, or id, from his tormented mind whose physical form is that of Hyde. Exemplifying Hyde as the consequence of society restraint, Robert Louis Stevenson attempts to expose the devastation and hypocrisy Victorian society creates in the gentleman. In the passage where Jekyll notes that Hyde was â€Å"knit† to him â€Å"closer than a wife, closer than an eye† (Stevenson). The use of the term â€Å"eye† is a pun for the word â€Å"I†. In this sentence Jekyll concedes that Hyde is in fact a part of his character and not a distinct, malicious alter ego squatting in Jekyll’s mind until he springs forth into Hyde.Show MoreRelatedThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde1675 Words   |  7 PagesThe Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde Essay Robert Louis Stevenson’s novella, â€Å"The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,† is a type of Gothic literature. In the beginning of the story when Stevenson is describing the lawyer, one â€Å"Mr. Utterson,† the mood is a bit dull. At first glance the reader may think that this story would be a bit boring and drab. Stevenson’s story is far from being another dull piece of British English literature. The setting and mood of this novella are more complexRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde Essay975 Words   |  4 PagesStevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a novella that follows the basic outline established by Mary Shelley in Frankenstein. However, Stevenson’s monster is not created from body parts but comes from the dark side of the human personality. In both novels, a man conducts a secret experiment that gets out of control. The result of these experiments is the release of a double, or doppelgan ger, which causes damage to their creator. While most people think that The Strange Case of Dr. JekyllRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde1440 Words   |  6 Pagescomplexity of human nature in his books, especially in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and Kidnapped. The former is about a lawyer named Mr. Utterson seeking out the truth of Dr. Jekyll’s very strange will. He finds out that Jekyll was transforming himself into Mr. Hyde so that he could have the freedom to do whatever he wanted no matter how evil. By the time Utterson finds all this out and findsJekyll, he is too late and Jekyll has already killed himself. The latter is about David BalfourRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde1196 Words   |  5 Pageswhich do let control you? The good or evil? This was a question that Dr. Jekyll from the book, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, could not answer. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a book about a man who cannot control the two sides of himself, causing him to do terrible things and not even be aware of it. The theme of this book is good versus evil. Dr. Jekyll is fighting his evil side, known as Mr. Hyde, throughout the book. Some people believe that the book’s theme hasRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde938 Words   |  4 PagesVictorian Hopes and Fears Involving Science as Found in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde During the Victorian Era there was a great race to use science to alleviate the suffering of the ill, specifically for those patients who were suffering from ailments of the mind. While some of the methods used to diagnose and treat such afflictions would be considered barbaric in nature by today’s standards, they were considered cutting edge medical science during the time of the Victorian Era. It was also consideredRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde964 Words   |  4 PagesThe Strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, written by Robert Louis Stevenson was published in 1886. The story is published during the Victorian era, the Victorian era was an age of repression, there was no violence, no sexual appetite, and there was no great expression or emotion. In the story, Dr. Jekyll creates a potion that turns him into Mr. Hyde, Mr. Hyde is the complete opposite of what people are in the Victorian era. At first, Dr. Jekyll is in control of Mr. Hyde, but towards t he end MrRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde1505 Words   |  7 PagesDuring the latter portion of the nineteenth century, Robert Louis Stevenson published his novella, The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. The fin de sià ¨cle saw the rise of different thoughts and ideas surrounding science and society. These concepts and interpretations sparked the discourse surrounding the theory of degeneration; which was the concern that civilization would fall to a lower state of being. This chapter will be reading multiplex personality as a manifestation of this broader culturalRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde1739 Words   |  7 Pagesnovel â€Å"The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde† by Robert Louis Stevenson, the novel â€Å"Frankenstein† by Mary Shelley, the short story â€Å"The Monkey’s Paw† by W.W Jacobs and the short story â€Å"Yellow Wallpaper† by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. These four texts convey this theme through the use of gothic conventions such as death, madness and darkness. In the novels The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson and Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll are wronglyRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde1351 Words   |  6 PagesThe Personas of Henry Jekyll Every person is born with bright and dark personas that people moderate due to the standards of society. In The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Jekyll and Hyde battle for the power to stay alive in the story. As Jekyll continues to try and take over his evil persona, Hyde tries to stay alive and cause evil in the world. In our society, many people will struggle with self control and Dr. Jekyll has trouble controlling his alter ego by performing his evil pleasuresRead MoreThe Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde884 Words   |  4 PagesThe Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a fiction novella written by Robert Louis Stevenson. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde illustrates an investigation of what it is like living in the nineteenth century where appearances, and maintaining your standing of those who are around you is important. Stevenson emphasizes that appearance mattered in the late nineteenth century, and this intertwine a quote, â€Å"In peace there’s nothing so becomes a man As modest stillness and humility;