Discussion Prompt: Frames? Letters?
Choose ONE of the following topics and respond with a full and detailed paragraph. You MUST provide specifics and details for this our second half of the discussion on a novella.
1. What is the impact of ending the novella with these two narratives—by Lanyon and then by Jekyll? Does the story feel incomplete to you because we do NOT return to Utterson at all, or would it have been unnecessary—superfluous?—to have to return to Utterson at that point? Briefly—in one full paragraph—and clearly argue your case. With this question, you are being asked to consider both the aesthetic (ie, the artistic, literary) aspects combined with the thematic (ie, about the issues being discussed) aspects of a narrative that ends thus.
2. In a related question, briefly—in one full paragraph—and clearly compare the impact of the two different narrative styles in Frankenstein (first person narratives with closure, coming back to Walton) and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (third person narrative and then ending with two confessional narratives). This question isn’t ultimately about which you PREFERRED (though that could obviously play a role in how you respond) but rather about the different cause-and-effect of the two styles.
The text to refer to: Robert Louis Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886)