Fear as Ideological Fiction in H. G.

Wells' The Island of

Doctor Moreau

The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) is a science fiction

novel written by H. G. Wells. It explore the psychological,

ethical and political consequences of vivisection. The

narrator, Edward Prendick, survives the sinking of a ship in

order to be rescued by Montgomery, a mysterious man

appointed on a mysterious island to do unknown biological

work. Prendick soon meets Dr. Moreau, a vivisectionist

performing hybridization of animals and humans.

Throughout the novel, fear plays an important role, both in

the narrator's life, and the lives of Dr. Moreau's remade

subjects.

This paper will examine fear as an ideological fiction in

the world of the novel. This will be carried out in two

steps: analyzing the role of fear in subduing the Beast Folk

created by Dr. Moreau, and Dr. Moreau's own utilization of

political fear as a means to ensure control over subjects

who, in theory, posses more (physical) power than him.

The theoretical framework used is derived from Corey

Robin's Fear: The History of a political idea. In his book,

Robin discusses the evolution of political fear thorough the

writings of different philosophical thinkers, including

Thomas Hobbes and Montesquieu.

Thomas Hobbes perceived fear as the precondition of

civilization, and a trait of rational subjects. According to

him, before fear united men they lived in constant conflict,

which he describes as the state of nature. By " state of

nature", Hobbes means "a situation of radical conflict

about the meaning of words and morals, producing

corrosive distrust and open violence" (32). In this state,

men lived as individuals unable to reconcile their different

points of view. However, once they were unified in fear of

death, people started to unite in the interest of self-

preservation. They achieved this by agreeing to submit to

a contract to the state, giving up rights which they fairly

possessed. Thus, Hobbes believes that fear "has to be

created" (33). This is done by introducing fear as "a

rational, moral emotion, taught by influential men in

churches and universities." (33). Hobbes, then, views

political fear as an idea promoted and instilled in subjects

by the state.
 An important characteristic of political fear as

elaborated by Hobbes is theatricality. He states that "

Political fear depended upon illusion, where danger was

magnified, even exaggerated, by the state." (33). This

means that political fear does not have to carry out

punishments and acts of violence as much as maintain the

illusion of their existence. Fear then becomes an elaborate

performance done by the state to keep its citizens docile.

Hobbes' conception of fear was also a way to defeat the

revolutionary tendency of his time.

Hobbes also believes that fear is a compromise between

passion and reason. fear is seen as a passion which

"carried the necessary energy to fuel human action and

the requisite rationality to direct that action to its proper

end, self-preservation" (36). Thus, fear, or more

accurately, political fear had the unique quality of

motivating the body and soul. Hobbes goes on to argue

that there are two types of passions governing humanity:

appetite and aversion. He also speaks of an ambiguity

between good and evil when it comes to fear "Fear was a

neutral instrument of a persons good; it took no stand on

the inherent worth of that good" (36). Elevating fear in

relation to morality seems to Hobbes an effective way in

which the state could control its subjects. Values such as

"courage", "pride", and "heroism" are seen as foolish. A

rational and sensible person would prioritize self-

preservation over these values. In this way, Hobbes views

fear as " instrument of an autonomous self" (41). A

subject under the rule of the state, seeking self-

preservation, is one in full control of his rational faculties.

Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brde et de

Montesquieu, wrote in an entirely different historical

period than Hobbes. Montesquieu viewed political fear as

despotic terror which was " devoid of rationality and

insusceptible to education. It was an involuntary, almost

physiological response to unmitigated violence" (52).

Accordingly, the terrorized are seen as incapable of

rational thought or moral distinction. So, whereas Hobbes

understands fear as political tool that benefitted both

state and subjects, Montesquieu understands terror as

suited to the benefit of the despot alone. He also opposed

Hobbes' absolutism, favoring political moderation and

personal freedom.

Montesquieu follows Hobbes in viewing fear as a

foundation for politics. However, Montesquieu's

conception of fear as a political foundation focuses on the

terror of the despot as a means to initiate his liberal state.

Robin comments that even though liberalism was opposed

to terror, it also supports it. Similarly to Hobbes' political

fear, Montesquieu's terror "could serve as the negative

foundation of liberal government." (54). Montesquieu's

liberalism has also been criticized because it "relies on

terror and thereby misconstrues it" (55). This could be

linked to Hobbes' political fear as illusion.

Montesquieu's conception of fear has five important

features. First, First, fear is "not antithetical to reason. It

thrives on an instrumental, cost-benefit analysis" (59). So

people subjected to fear are likely to weigh the costs and

benefits accompanying it. They view the risks as far

greater than the rewards of revolting against the depot's

rule. Second, " fear arises from and is connected to the

broad range of sympathies, desires, and aspirations that

ordinarily motivate men and women." (59). The fearful are

submissive precisely because they have morals like honor,

love or courage. Third, "fear is not solely aroused by

cruelty or sadistic violence. Kindness and well-meaning

compassion help create and sustain it. " (59). In order to

stay aware of the advantages of submission, the fearful

subjects have to be shown kindness as well as cruelty.

Fourth, "despotic power need not be arbitrary,

concentrated, or centralized, and it need not be free of

legal or moral restrictions" (59). The multiplicity and

interconnectedness of power is what grants it its illusive

quality. It can be shared hierarchically through multiple

enforcers. Fifth, "the social universe underlying despotic

power has all the characteristics of pluralist spheres,

multiple associations, and hierarchical elites that

Montesquieu and his followers later will claim are checks

against despotic fear." (59). In short, claims of plurality

and multiplicity are not incompatible with despotic rule.

Montesquieu's ideas about freedom described an

absence of fear. This is a free spaces where everyone

enjoys political security and tranquility. Terror, according to

him is " a great nullifying force, so oriented toward

destruction and negation it could not sustain anything

suggesting presence or concreteness." (61). He goes on to

say that the most characteristic trait of terror is silence: "

the desolation of verbal space signaling both the

dissolution of men capable of speech and the

disappearance of a world capable of description" (61). This

is the ultimate product of fear as terror, a devaluation of

the human subject into an unspeaking animal. Thus terror

finds its best prey in the person "stripped of selfhood",

morality and hope.

The paper examines the idea of fear as "ideological

fiction" in the sense of Hobbes's theatricality, and

misconstruing of terror in Montesquieu. It is seen here

specifically as an illusion performed by Dr. Moreau and his

companions in order to control the Beast Folk. This is seen

in the religious way in which he shows himself to them. His

ritualistic, and sacred rules as spoken by the Sayer of the

Law, the Beast Folk's leader is a perfect example. They are

required to recite words like:

Not to go on all-fours; that is the Law. Are we not Men?

 Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not Men?

(71).

Thus, Dr Moreau's initiation of the beasts into the human

world started with the application of political fear.

Fear, according to Hobbes, is a rational feeling. Dr.

Moreau's Beast Folk fear him, and his House of Pain, where

he performs the painful vivisection on them, precisely

because they are rational. Their rationality can even be

seen as the reason of their oppression. If they were not

capable of rational thought, anticipating pain, they would

certainly not fear a small group of men.

The animals are taken away from the state of nature,

understood here in Hobbes' sense of total conflict, and are

taught morality and rationality by Dr. Moreau. However, as

Hobbes also states, rationality cannot ultimately win over

passions. So, the Beast Folk are in a constant state of

instability, threatening to revert to their bestial nature at

any moment.

The fear experienced by the Beast Folk achieves a

certain autonomy for them as individuals. They are seen

as "people" only when they comply to the rules created by

Dr. Moreau, out of fear.

The protagonist's view of the beast folk can be

described in terms of Freud's conceptualization of the

uncanny. Before he finds out about their true nature,

Prendick is disturbed and mystified by members of the

Beast Folk. During one particular moment he believes he

saw the eyes of one of the Beast Folk shine with pale

green light:

"The thing came to me as stark inhumanity. That black

figure with its eyes of fire struck down through all my adult

thoughts and feelings, and for a moment the forgotten

horrors of childhood came back to my mind. Then the

effect passed as it had come." (22)

So, before even being introduced to the terrifying

experiments of Dr. Moreau, Prendick's contact with the

Beast Folk is influenced by fear. A better word to describe

this is Freud's "uncanny". According to Freud, the

uncanny" happens when the familiar becomes frightening

(76). It also describes the feeling of being confronted with

the return of the repressed (96). So, Prendick's fear of the

Beast Folk, before knowing how they were created by Dr.

Moreau, can be called "uncanny" because he recognizes

both human and bestial aspects in their appearance.

Similarly, the bestial aspect can be seen as the repressed

side of humanity. It is a side most civilized people will

repress. So, seeing this combination of human and animal

threatens Pendick beyond the mere thought of physical

danger, they are threats to his own humanity.

Dr. Moreau is a very interesting figure. He is best

understood in terms of Montesquieu's despotic ruler. He is

a man of science who believes in progress. He also

believes wholeheartedly that his work is for the good of

humanity. However, he remains blind to the consequences

of his actions. His miscalculation of the situation which he

created is best exemplified by his sudden death by the

hands of the Half-Finished Puma-Woman, one of the

animals tortured by him.

One of the most applicable part of Montesquieu's

argument is the idea that political fear, or here, terror,

only benefitted the despot. He implemented these

techniques of fear in order to protect himself. This

becomes clear as we realize that the process of civilizing

the Beast Folk never took the form of imparting knowledge

or teaching morality. The one body of rules that the Beast

Folk had to live by was written by Dr. Moreau himself in

order to suppress their animal instincts.

Montesquieu's political terror is a more visceral concern

than Hobbes' fear. According to Montesquieu: " terror was

an entirely nonpolitical or antipolitical affair,

circumventing political institutions and sidestepping the

political concerns of men" (54). The fear the Beast Folk

had of Dr. Moreau is purely physical. Although he attempts

to instill in them a moral sense of pride when they act like

humans and not animals, this morality is just something

they recite to remind themselves of the pain which awaits

them if they disobey. House of Pain, Dr. Moreau's

laboratory, is the place where he made them, and the

place in which they experienced the most amount of pain.

And they are always met with the threat of returning to it,

should they disobey his commands. It is a fate even the

novel's protagonist perceives as worse than death. The

Leopard-Man breaks the law by running on all fours, and

would have returned to the House of Pain, had the

protagonist not shot him, out of pity.

Montesquieu's view of terror included moments when

the despot was not only violence, but kind as well. The

figure of Dr. Moreau has dual characteristics for the Beast

Folk: he is the one who inflicts unimaginable pain on them,

and he is the one who provides medical assistance when

they need it. He is their tormentor and their liberator,

leading them from the darkness of bestiality to the light of

civilization. This can be seen in the Beast Folk's chants:

His is the House of Pain.

His is the Hand that makes.

His is the Hand that wounds.

His is the Hand that heals. (72).

So, the figure of Dr. Moreau exhibits many of the

characteristics of Montesquieu's despots.

Political terror/fear in the novel is closer to

Montesquieu's conception of it as a destructive force, than

Hobbes' ideas, which credits fear with the beginning of

civilization. According to Montesquieu, terror is "a great

nullifying force, so oriented toward destruction and

negation It could not sustain anything suggesting

presence or concreteness." (61). Dr. Moreau's project on

the pacific island reflects this destructive nature. His

creation of this supposedly "new race" only involved

processes of negation. He negates the Beast Folk's animal

instincts without teaching them human ones (outside of

what they ought and ought not to do). He also negates

their capacity for rational thinking, which he supposedly

provides them with, in the course of his experiments. They

are reduced to obeying bodies, in constant fear of pain

and death. Additionally, Montesquieu believes that

"Everything around despotism . . . was empty" (61). This

reflects in Dr. Moreau, who is only concerned with

immediate results. He seeks the success of his

experiments at all costs, ignoring the consequences.

These consequences are the Beast Folk's society of

repressed, angry and confused hybrids who are ready to

erupt at any moment. His complete misinterpretation of

the situation ends up with him being killed by one of the

hybrid, and the ultimate destruction of the compound by

the Beast Folk.

 Works Cited

Freud, Sigmund. "The Uncanny." Fantastic Literature: A Critical Reader. Ed.

David Sandner. Westport: Praeger, 2004. 74-101. Print.

Robin, Corey. Fear: The History of a Political Idea. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2004.

Print.

Wells, H. G., and Patrick Parrinder. The Island of Doctor Moreau. London:

Penguin, 2005. Print.