I just finished early this morning.
I began the book oblivious to the theme, then midway smiled at the clever reveal of it, then by the end rolled my eyes a bit at the heavy-handedness of it.
Perhaps my observations are obvious, but I felt the theme was mostly one big allegory on religion, especially Christianity, and human nature. The island is a microcosm of our world.
Moreau is God. At first I thought the relatively gentle Montgomery was Jesus, but after his death, Prendick "The One Who Wades Into (i.e. Walks On) Water" and his disciple seem better suited. Or, Montgomery could be Jesus Pre-Crucifixion while Prendick is the Resurrection. Montgomery even had a last supper with wine and followers. Of course, for Moreau, Montgomery and Prendick, there's also the Holy Trinity.
I saw Moreau's random cruelty being representative of the God of the Old Testament in particular, but in general the random cruelty of life and of the world that one must accept as being allowed by a Creator, in any religion.
I think the decline of the animals' "humanism" symbolises the view of a slow decline in culture in civilisation which many people have lamented since the times of the highest costumes and manners from hundreds of years ago. Of course more generally, it's saying that animalistic instinct is in all of us, waiting, hidden only by our humanity and willing to spring back out again when or if we ever allow it or descend past the point of being able to resist.
It's interesting to me that in a way, Wells could be arguing for the necessity of religion, and in a way, he could be arguing for its futility and artificiality. Or maybe both, saying that while ultimately futile and artificial, religion serves a necessary purpose for society.
Quote:
|
My days I devote to reading and to experiments in chemistry, and I spend many of the clear nights in the study of astronomy. There is - though I do not know how there is or why there is - a sense of infinite peace and protection to the glittering hosts of heaven. There it must be, I think, in the vast and eternal laws of matter, and not in the daily cares and sins and troubles of men, that whatever is more than animal within us must find its solace and its hope. I hope, or I could not live.
|
Was Wells an atheist? I know nothing about him and this is the first of his I've read. I didn't expect it all to be so...overly thematic. I thought I was getting myself into a 19th century sci-fi horror novel about the perils of men messing with nature, and not a treatise on religion!
It's also interesting to think of how very different yet in many ways how similar it is to "Lord Of The Flies".
I'd like to ponder it some more now. Ultimately I thought it was a good book, interesting. Not scary but thoughtful. A quick read. It could've done with a much lighter thematic touch near the last third of the book, but nevertheless I liked the theme.