The Island of Doctor Moreau

Wells’s novel functions in some ways as an allegory (a narrative or other type of artistic representation that conveys a secondary meaning which is not explicitly expressed). While ostensibly the events of the novel take place on a remote island in the Pacific, Wells is invested in offering a social critique of English culture in the late Victorian era. (Notably, Great Britain is also an island; while the novel’s title refers to the isolated island where Moreau conducts his experiments, it also hints that England is not as different as it might initially seem). Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels is a prominent example of an author using a fictional travel narrative to engage in social critique and satire, and Wells utilizes this technique as well. Particularly once Prendick goes to the village where the Beast People live, he steps into the role of a traveler observing unfamiliar cultural norms. The conventions of the Beast People appear to Prendick as parodies of the human social customs he is familiar with, demonstrating The Illusory Nature of Reason and Civilization.

By creating hybrid “beast-people” Moreau engages in a form of artificial reproduction. Particularly in the 19th century, when most people in England subscribed to some form of Christian religious faith, Moreau’s actions might also have been perceived as undermining the divine right of God to be the sole creator of life (in the Christian tradition, God created both human beings and animals). Moreau usurps a quasi-divine status by not only striving to create sentient beings, but also by exercising complete authority over them. Prendick observes a society held together solely by Moreau’s rigid and despotic authority, and the apparent precariousness of this society immediately begins to reveal the limitations of Violence and Fear as Strategies to Maintain Control. The system by which Moreau maintains power relies on strict edicts, enforced through fear of painful punishment. The Beast People are forbidden from engaging in specific acts that might awaken aggressive or rebellious impulses; ironically, the edicts forbidding actions such as walking on all fours or consuming flesh offer the starkest reminders that the Beast People are not actually fully human: if they were, there would be no danger in their engaging in these acts.

Prendick observes the quasi-religious rituals enacted by the Beast People with confusion and revulsion, feeling “laughter and disgust struggle[ing] together” (59), when they speak “incomprehensible gibberish […] about Him, whoever he might be” (59). Since these rituals are recognizable to most readers as a parody or exaggerated form of Christianity, in which adherents are taught to simultaneously revere and fear a strict and punitive deity, Prendick’s bemusement and disgust reveal a critique of organized religion, and moreover, imply that these systems of belief exist primarily to enforce social conformity and obedience to systems of power. Moreau symbolizes the fusion of religious, political, and patriarchal power, and in his society these forms of power all feed into one another. Moreau’s absolutism is important because he and Montgomery are physically weaker than and vastly outnumbered by the Beast People (although they do possess guns). If the Beast People did not willingly submit to Moreau, they could easily rise up and overpower him. As an allegory, the social organization of the island reveals how oppressive systems of power typically rely on ideologies of fear: Moreau is only able to maintain his hold on power because the Beast People defer to him as an authority figure and fear his displeasure and punishment.

When Moreau finally speaks openly about his pursuit of transforming animals into humanoid creatures, his motivations provide significant character development. Moreau explains to Prendick that, “sometimes I rise above my level, sometimes I fall below it, but always I fall short of the things I dream” (78), explaining how his ambition fuels his obsessive quest. Moreau is frustrated that he is unable to create an entity that operates in a purely rational way and is not impacted by “cravings, instinct, desires that harm humanity” (78). Ironically, given his education and obvious intelligence, Moreau is unable to see that the reason he cannot eradicate these traits from his creations is because they are also present in all human beings. Moreau falsely assumes a binary between animals and humans, and longs to make “a rational creature of my own” (78) without realizing that humans are not wholly rational either.

Moreau also advocates for a form of moral relativism as a means of justifying the physical pain that results from his experiments. Moreau coldly explains to Prendick that “to this day I have never troubled about the ethics of the matter. The study of Nature makes a man at last as remorseless as Nature” (75). His physical isolation on this remote island makes it possible for him to follow this ideology without fear of reprisal. He believes that in leaving England and “civilization” behind he has liberated himself from the irrational moralism of his fellow English people, but Prendick’s growing horror suggests that Moreau’s trajectory is in fact one of Isolation and the Loss of Identity. In severing himself from community and abandoning morality, Moreau has lost his humanity. Moreau regards rationalism as the essence of humanity, and as a result he neglects the equally important human quality of compassion. Meanwhile, his obsessive and reckless pursuit of his goals calls even his vaunted rationalism into question. He emphasizes the mind over the body to an extreme degree, arguing that any concern with physical sensation is “primitive.” He explains to Prendick that as organisms become more and more sophisticated, they place less and less emphasis on physical sensation and suffering: “pain and pleasure –they are for us, only so long as we wriggle in the dust” (75). While Moreau is a complex character who does not occupy the traditional role of a villain, his cold, selfish, and ruthless view of the world shows the dangers of rationalism when taken to excess.