Introduction
Analyzing the nature of animal-human hybrid, as a phenomenon frequently recurring in various types of literature, it can be seen that such phenomenon is not new. The occurrence of such hybrids in literature can be dated back to ancient mythology, taking such examples as Minotaur, Centaur, and other mythological creatures. In that regard, it can be stated that the occurrence of such creatures in literature can be differently interpreted, depending on the type of the work and the literary and philosophical functions of these creatures in the texts. In that regard, this paper compares and contrasts the nature of the animal-human hybrids based on their literary and philosophical functions in two texts, “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” (1595) by William Shakespeare and “The Island of Doctor Moreau“(1896) by Herbert George Wells.
Analysis
Literary Functions
In the Wells’ text, it can be seen that the main purpose of including animal-human hybrids can be seen through the genre of the work, which is science fiction. As literary instruments human-animal hybrids in the play are like a narration about people who were killed in a war literature, i.e. they are a demonstration of the consequences of the man wrongdoing. In Shakespeare’s work on the other hand, given the nature of the work being a comedy, the Bottom’s transformation into an “ass” serves as a practical joke to make the audience laugh. In the latter, the choice of an object of transformation is directly connected with its purpose, where the ass (a donkey) can be seen as comic reference. The passage itself containing the reaction on the transformation process is a direct evidence of Shakespeare’s intended reaction,
SNOUT: O Bottom, thou are changed. What do I see on thee?
BOTTOM: What do you see? You see an ass head of your own, do you?
QUINCE: Bless thee, Bottom, bless thee! Thou art translated! (A Midsummer Night’s Dream III.1.109-14)
Additional point of comparison can be seen through the change of the animal in both plays, where changing the animals in the Wells’ work, e.g. using a cow instead of a leopard, would not have changed their literary functions in the novel, whereas changing the ass into a dog or a wolf, for example, would not have served the initial purpose of the author, i.e. making people laugh.
Philosophical Functions
In terms of philosophy, it can be seen that the aforementioned works have totally different functions and accordingly different interpretations, which go far beyond the genre of each work. In Wells work, it can be seen that hybrids indicate the distinction between the animal and the human characteristics, where combining them lead to that the origin prevails; “Some carnivores of yours remembered its old habits” (Wells 79). The interpretation of these creatures can be seen in that people cannot be involved in the work of God, and even if they did everything will return to its origins. In Shakespeare’s work, despite the obvious comic intention, the text might contain a philosophical reference, where the animal part might represent a human characteristic, following which make human like animals. In the case of the play such characteristic can be seen as stubbornness, related to Titania not giving her child to her husband. In that regard, such function can be interpreted in a way that adopting a feature characteristic of animals turns people into animals. In the play rather than turning Titania into an animal, Shakespeare made her fall in love with him.
Conclusion
It can be seen that human-animal hybrids, despite being mentioned many times in literary works, they serve different purposes depending on the nature of the work and the intention of the author. In case of the literary functions, it can be seen that they were dependent on the genre of the work, while the philosophical functions might be more related to the authors and their views.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William. A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Ed. Brooks, Harold F. 1979.
Wells, H. G. The Island of Dr. Moreau. New York: Garden City Publishing Company, 1896.