The Island of Doctor Moreau by H. G. Wells

Blurb:

Ranked among the classic novels of the English language and the inspiration for several unforgettable movies, this early work of H. G. Wells was greeted in 1896 by howls of protest from reviewers, who found it horrifying and blasphemous. They wanted to know more about the wondrous possibilities of science shown in his first book, The Time Machine, not its potential for misuse and terror. In The Island of Dr. Moreau a shipwrecked gentleman named Edward Prendick, stranded on a Pacific island lorded over by the notorious Dr. Moreau, confronts dark secrets, strange creatures, and a reason to run for his life.

While this riveting tale was intended to be a commentary on evolution, divine creation, and the tension between human nature and culture, modern readers familiar with genetic engineering will marvel at Wells’s prediction of the ethical issues raised by producing “smarter” human beings or bringing back extinct species. These levels of interpretation add a richness to Prendick’s adventures on Dr. Moreau’s island of lost souls without distracting from what is still a rip-roaring good read.

Review:

To me, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: Or The Modern Prometheus is the pinnacle of classic horror and science fiction. That being said, I do feel that The Island of Doctor Moreau comes close. This is a pretty old book, so keep that in mind when you read it because it does have some era-appropriate issues. That being said, let’s get on with it.

SPOILERS AHEAD!

What I liked:

The Island of Doctor Moreau is an epistolary novel, starting with a letter that chronicles the discovery of a shipwreck survivor, which then proceeds to a first-person account of the survivor—Edward Prendick. Prendick’s psyche goes from deluded in the middle of nowhere, to feeling the relief of rescue and survival, to suddenly realizing the horror into which his life has plunged once he disembarks on the eponymous island. 

You really feel like you’re in the protagonist’s shoes, experience the eerie atmosphere of the dark and twisted island like it were a vacation destination full of macabre. While the science behind the vivisection and consequent Beast Folk isn’t as clear, the philosophical implications of the unnatural human intervention does get its due. Moreau himself embodies the mad ideals of “victory at all costs”, the victory being an advancement of science, and the cost being suffering of those deemed unworthy of empathy.

The more that Prendick discovers Moreau’s machinations, the more it poses questions of ethics and morals. After all, what Moreau does in his island isn’t all that different from some real-life horrors that we’ve seen in history. From Unit 731 to the Rawalpindi Experiments, to even the experiments in concentration camps, we’ve seen the powerful use their power to exploit their captives and slaves. Just as colonizers and occupiers didn’t see their colonies as human, Moreau too doesn’t see his ‘animals’ as more than fodder for his frenzied experiments.

But the Beast Folk aren’t just mindless animals now deformed. The whole point of the experiments is to make them human. And what does it really mean to be human? Does blind faith in dogma make them human? Does a want and a need to be happy make them human? Does revolting against their tyrants reveal a deeper human desire to be free? All this, and many more pertinent questions find a fertile ground to grow within this classic horror tale. 

In many ways, Moreau’s ‘taming of nature’ highlights the colonizer mindset, overlooking their exploitation in favor of their many gains, irrespective of the death toll. Even the way the book ends, with the Beast Folk, after overthrowing their tyrants, return to their primal states, as if without their colonizer, they weren’t anything more than savages. 

As much as The Island of Doctor Moreau reflects over philosophical dilemmas, it also unintentionally gives insight into colonial minds and their race to conquer the whole world. If not for the atmospheric horror or the deeply troubling, and touching, narrative, then for the ponderings and insights that this book presents, I believe this is an absolute must read.

What I didn’t like:

I don’t think there was anything major that I did not like about The Island of Doctor Moreau. The problems I had with the book are staples to the era it was written in, which are problems only from the modern lens. But problems are problems, so here they are: 

The immediately noticeable issue with the book is the lack of female characters. I don’t think there was even a single female character, except for some in the Beast Folk. But they don’t get any character development as such, meaning the only characters who play vital roles are men. Specifically white English men. That myopic perspective is quite evident the more you read through the protagonist’s POV, and learn more and more about the mindset of these men. 

There is the female puma, whose vivisection ends up reversing and who herself represents the spirit of nature untamable. But, does that really speak against misogyny, or was it just an extension of the ‘mother nature’ metaphor, which sees women as the ‘lesser of two sexes, unable to control themselves with a stoic demeanor’?

I’m not one to demand a ban of such books, though. I’d argue that such texts highlight everything that was wrong about that era, from its casual misogyny to its blindness towards colonial exploitation. I didn’t like reading the parts that were overtly racist, but it does reflect the spirit of its time. 

Other than that, not much. The prose and writing can feel dated at times, but it’s still surprisingly easy to read. 

Conclusion:

Frankenstein-Lite, this short book brilliantly explores profound themes of human interference with nature, the effects of trauma & more through a horror lens.

TL;DR:

WHAT I LIKED: Almost everything

WHAT I DIDN’T LIKE: Some era-appropriate issues like lack of female characters and dated prose that can be a challenge at times.