Loughran 1
Steven Loughran
Professor Dr. Kidd
Humanities 234E
Spring 2010
Social Science and Character Creation in Victorian Fiction
One of the reasons we read fiction, and to some extent, non-fiction, is to
experience another world and stimulate our imaginations. For example, the fascination with
the dark side of human nature, good people gone bad, and the pursuit of criminals by members
of either law enforcement or private eyes in detective stories make for a fun read, while
simultaneously drawing us into a world most would never go to in real life. Today police
procedurals, a genre of crime fiction, continues to be popular with authors like Michael
Connelly, Dennis Lehane and Joseph Wambaugh frequently showing up on bookshelves as well
as bestseller lists. An important part of the art of storytelling is the creation of interesting and
believable characters. Granted, many characters in fiction are based on real people thereby
relieving the writer from the need to create one entirely from his or her imagination. Still, the
author must create dialogue, scenes and interaction between characters that are, like I said,
believable and interesting.
One way this is done is to utilize knowledge and information gleaned from the science
community of the period in which the story takes place. Just as modern crime fiction authors
draw on current developments in forensics as well as behavioral sciences like psychology to
inform their writing; Victorian authors Arthur Conan Doyle, Charles Dickens, and Robert Lewis
Stevenson employed their knowledge of the science of their period, including the emerging
Loughran 2
social sciences to do the same. This essay focuses on how the social sciences, a fairly new
science during the Victorian period, made its way into, and influenced the creation of some of
the fictional characters of the time. In particular, I will be looking at the three writers just
mentioned, focusing most of the attention on Doyle and Dickens, and observe how this new
science may have made an impact on their work.
In modern times we tend to take for granted that the study of human behavior is a
legitimate and respected science. Most students in the United States, at some point during
middle or high school, are required to take a social studies class. Indeed, nearly every college
and university now offers as a major field of study the discipline of Sociology, with even the
possibility of acquiring Ph.D. in the field. However, when compared to those referred to as the
hard sciences, such as chemistry, physics and biology, the study of human social interaction and
individual behavior has only gained legitimacy fairly recently. For example, the study of
astronomy and medicine in Western culture can be traced as far back as the ancient Greeks
with the teachings of Aristotle and Galen, respectively. Furthermore, most scholars point to
Isaac Newton, and his publication of Principia in 1687, as the beginning of modern physics. By
comparison, sociology, as a genuine science, did not appear on the scientific landscape until the
middle of the nineteenth century. Less than two hundred years ago.
It is generally accepted by those in the field that social science had its beginning in the
early 1800s and credit French philosopher Auguste Comte as the discipline’s founder. David
Cohen remarks in his essay “Comte’s Changing Sociology” that:
[Comte’s] work has usually been regarded as an early step toward an empirical science
of society, where we find the application of scientific method to social phenomena
Loughran 3
united with a theory of scientific and social progress. (168)
Compte’s ideas were presented to the public in a series of lectures during the years
from 1824-1840, however his defining work, Positive Philosophy, was not published in written
form until 1853. In it he states:
Now that the human mind has grasped celestial and terrestrial physics,—mechanical
and chemical; organic physics, both vegetable and animal,—there remains one science,
to fill up the series of sciences of observation,—Social physics. (466)
It is entirely possible, even likely, that Comte’s new science would have been part of the
curriculum, if not taught, surely discussed, in universities during the time both Arthur Conan
Doyle and Robert Louis Stevenson were receiving their educations later that century at the
University of Edinburgh. These two authors-to-be were both in an academic environment two
or three decades after Comte published the ideas he had formulated and had lectured on for
some time.
Stevenson entered Edinburgh in 1867, whereas Doyle attended from 1876-1881. As
students of the period, it is almost certain that these young Victorians were exposed, not only
to Comte’s theories, but also those of two other intellectuals of the time; Cesare Lombroso, and
Robert Knox, the latter an anatomist, while Lombroso was an Italian philosopher and
considered an early practitioner of criminology. I will remark on these men shortly.
When we discuss the subject of writing fictional stories, particularly the creation of the
characters, and what inspires and influences the author, we enter territory that can be a
challenge to articulate. Without direct access to the writers themselves we are left to
Loughran 4
speculation. That said, often we can analyze the text and make use of hindsight to consider
what may have informed the author in such areas as a character’s look and behavior.
We know that when Arthur Conan Doyle created Sherlock Holmes he intended to
produce a character that was familiar with scientific method. Indeed, in the introduction to his
collection of Sherlock Holmes stories, John Hodgson comments, “the model for Sherlock
Holmes [was] Dr. Joseph Bell, who lectured on clinical surgery…” (4). The widely accepted
methodology in scientific research at the time employed the concept of rationalism. First
conceived by Rene´ Descartes in the early 1600s, rationalism is usually defined as a system by
which reason and observation are the only sources of knowledge, not emotional experience, or
as was strongly advocated by the Church, divine revelation. When Doyle created Holmes his
intention was to develop a character who used the rational method, and had a working
knowledge in more than one discipline. Again in the introduction to his collection, Hodgson
says, “Sherlock Holmes…was a rationalist model for the late Victorian and Edwardian period.”
Yet immediately adds, however, that “unlike Holmes, Doyle did not confine himself to
rationalism”(5). As it happens, despite his training in medicine, Doyle himself embraced the
very unscientific ideas of spiritualism. The point here is to illustrate an example of a fiction
writer, in this case Doyle, when developing a character that Victorian readers could relate to,
and also make believable, drew on ideas, even rhetoric that would have been recognizable to
his, predominately, middle class, well informed audience. It speaks to his talent as an artist
that, even though he accepted the non-rational, non-scientific philosophy of spiritualism, Doyle
nevertheless applies his knowledge of scientific ideas of his time when spinning his tales, and
creating characters to populate them.
Loughran 5
The social sciences are a discipline that focuses its attention on human beings. It is not,
however, confined simply to an analysis, or an observation, of human behavior alone. It also
attempts to explain why certain behaviors exist. In her anthology of nineteenth century
literature, Laura Otis places alongside essays by Comte in the section under the heading “Social
Sciences,” works by Cesare Lombroso and Robert Knox whom I mentioned above. Both these
men commented on physical traits, and theorized about their impact on human behavior. As
we will see, the ideas promoted by these thinkers also found their way into the fiction of the
period.
In 1850 Robert Knox published The Races of Men. There are a couple of interesting
things about Knox that are worth mentioning. To begin with, he was an anatomist by trade, and
perhaps not so coincidentally, lectured at the University of Edinburgh where both Doyle and
Stevenson did their medical studies years later. Secondly, despite being a rather popular figure
in the Edinburgh community, he left in disgrace because, Otis tells us, “his name was linked to a
scandal involving the source of cadavers for medical student’s dissections” (475). The details of
his life are not important for our purposes aside from the fact that he taught at Edinburgh so
his work was part of the scientific lexicon of the Victorian period. This meant that his ideas were
accessible to at least two of the authors we are looking at, possibly more.
In The Races of Men Knox attempts to make an argument for the inferiority of “the dark
races” based on what he believed to be scientific evidence. In a passage that to modern ears
sounds blatantly racist he claims,
First, as regards mere physical strength, the dark races are generally much inferior to
the Saxon and the Celt; the bracelets worn by the Kaffers [term for natives of South
Loughran 6
Africa], when placed on our own arms prove this. Secondly, in size of brain
they seem to be also considerably inferior to the above races…Thirdly, the form of the
skull differs from ours, and is placed differently on the neck… (476)
With this in mind, we can consider one of Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories The Yellow Face, and
notice this attitude revealed in the text.
The story involves a married couple in which the wife asks the husband for money from
her husband without telling him what it’s for, then makes several visits to a small home where a
strange, unnaturally white face can be seen, on occasion, looking out the window. The husband
then hires Holmes to find out why his wife is making these visits. We discover through the
narrative that the face in the window is that of the woman’s daughter from a previous
marriage, wearing a mask. Doyle writes, “Holmes, with a laugh, passed his hand behind the
child’s ear, a mask peeled from her countenance, and there was a coal black negress with all
her white teeth flashing…”(487). Immediately following this the woman produces a locket
containing a picture of her former husband. Doyle describes “a portrait within of a man,
strikingly handsome…but [italics mine] bearing the unmistakable signs of African descent”
(487). The woman goes on to relate the circumstances surrounding her previous relationship
and remarks, “It was our misfortune that our child took after his people rather than mine…and
little Lucy is darker far than her father was”(487).
Furthermore, earlier in the story when Holmes is sharing his thoughts with Watson on
the mystery thus far, regarding the woman’s first husband he theorizes’ “Her husband
developed some hateful qualities, or, shall we say, that he contracted some loathsome disease,
and became a leper or an imbecile” (484). This passage raises an interesting question, and
Loughran 7
points to the process of using hindsight to analyze the possible motives of a writer of fiction.
Since Doyle knew the character of the first husband was of African descent, though at this place
in the story the readers do not, why would he chose words like “hateful qualities,” “loathsome
disease,” “a leper,” and “an imbecile?” This essay attempts to show how social science can be
used to inform an author of fiction in the creation of characters. Not to defend his choice of
words, one possible answer to the above question could be that, based on the work of
scientists like Knox, as well as other Victorian scientists studying race and the behavior of those
of other cultures, Doyle may have simply concluded as fact, as many did, that the “dark races”
were indeed, inferior. This would also explain the woman in the story keeping her daughter
hidden, wearing a mask, and long white gloves to hide her dark skinned arms.
This attitude toward people of African descent would not have been considered unusual
amongst the middle and upper classes, or the lower classes for that matter, in Victorian
England. In an 1870 edition of The British Medical Journal, the author of a review of a Robert
Knox biography writes’
…we, more than once, have heard quoted as a serious truth the story which Knox used
to tell in his playful moods, that when in Kaffraria [South Africa] he never lacked a
subject for his anatomical researches, as he could always take his gun out and shoot
down the first Kaffir that came before him. (581)
Often times this perspective towards other cultures, particularly African, took on a less mean
spirited, yet, still patronizing element and is amusingly parodied in Charles Dickens’s ninth
novel Bleak House with the character Mrs. Jellybe.
Loughran 8
Unlike Doyle and Robert Louis Stevenson, Dickens did not have a science education or
background, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that he was unaware of ideas that were being
discussed within the social science community. In his anthology of British Literature, David
Damroch remarks that Dickens “was actively involved in public affairs and charitable projects
including a home for fallen women” (1463). Furthermore, Dickens was known to be a voracious
reader so it is not too difficult to envision Dickens as being someone who was, as they say, up
on things, including popular attitudes, and scientific theories concerning the “dark races.” In
fact, many of the periodicals and magazines of the period published scientific essays alongside
fiction and even poetry. It does not strike me as too much a stretch to imagine Dickens reading
his own works published alongside an article by Knox, as well as other social scientists.
Dickens introduces the reader to Mrs. Jellybe at the same time that the character
Esther, one of the books narrators, along with her companions Ada and Richard also meet her
for the first time. Prior to their face to face introduction, the character Mr. Kenge describes her
to Esther saying:
[Mrs. Jellybe] is a lady of remarkable strength of character, who devotes herself entirely
to the public. She has devoted herself to an extensive variety of public subjects, at
various time, and at present (until something else attracts her) devoted to the subject of
Africa; with the general cultivation of the coffee berry—and the natives—and the
happy settlement, on the banks of the African rivers, of our superabundant home
population. (44)
Loughran 9
The key phrase here is “cultivation of the…natives.” Here is just one example of the mind-set
that some, if not most, Victorians held toward the populations they believed were
unsophisticated and uncivilized.
Later in the story, after Esther, Ada and Richard have met Mrs. Jellybe and spent some
time with her, she indulges herself in describing more details of her African project. She tells
them:
The African project at present employs my whole time. It involves me in correspondence
with public bodies, and with private individuals anxious for the welfare of their species
all over the country… We hope by this time next year to have from a hundred and fifty
to two hundred healthy families cultivating coffee and educating the natives of
Borrioboola-Gha…(47,48)
Many Victorians, though certainly not all, felt it as their Christian duty to make an effort to
civilize the native people of nations the British Empire was in the process of colonizing. In
creating Mrs. Jellybe as a way to satirize this sentiment, Dickens gives us possible insight into
his own perspective on the issue. However, and as I speculated about Doyle, one could argue
that these two writers, as well as their intended audiences, educated in the social sciences or
not, may have deferred their opinion to “experts” in the field such as Knox, and simply took for
granted that Anglo- Saxon people were, in fact, superior to others. Mrs. Jellybe is another
example of an author, this time Charles Dickens, drawing on the social science of his time to
develop a character his readers would easily recognize.
Similar to Knox’s Race Science in its placement under the heading of social science in
Otis’ anthology, Degeneration, and specifically Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso’s
Loughran 10
contribution, strikes modern readers as, at worst offensive, and at best downright silly. Still,
when we look at some fictional characters created during this period, despite our modern
views, we gain some appreciation for how and when authors used these theories in their
creation.
The term degeneration is accurately categorized as a social science since it explores, and
speaks to human conditions becoming worse, literally degenerating, morally, politically and
socially, and Lombroso’s main ideas concern criminals and the concept he is best known for;
the “born criminal.” It’s unclear, but likely that Otis includes Lombroso because the mere
existence of crime in Victorian England may have been viewed as a clear example of
degeneration, and Lombroso was attempting to study, in a scientific way, what makes one a
criminal, in the hope of reducing their population. In any event, Lombroso is often considered
one of the founders, and early practitioners of the branch of social science termed criminology.
Indeed, in his article, “Pioneers in Criminology: Cesare Lombroso,” Marvin Wolfgang mentions
that “More has been written by and about Lombroso than any other criminologist…” and
continues by saying that Lombroso “has been called ‘the father of modern criminology’” (361).
The work he’s best known for among non-criminologists, and useful here is The Criminal Man,
first published in 1876.
Just as readers today find Knox’s views on the “dark races” somewhat ridiculous,
likewise Lombroso’s theories about crime, in particular who becomes a criminal come across as
far-fetched. In short, based on autopsies he performed on convicted criminals while employed
as a doctor at the Asylum in Pavia, he concluded that most, if not all, criminals share common
traits that are easy to recognize. Such things as “the scanty beard as opposed to the general
Loughran 11
hairiness of the body, prehensile foot…the excessive size of the orbits [eye sockets]…” and so
on “point to one conclusion, the atavistic origin of the criminal…”(581). The choice made by
Lombroso to use the term atavistic is worth noting as it is usually meant to describe the act of
reverting back to more primitive behavior, which is precisely what happens to Dr. Jekyll when
he becomes Mr. Hyde in Robert Louis Stevenson’s famous The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and
Mr. Hyde first published in 1886.
It is not difficult to see the connection between Lombroso’s description of criminals, and
the creation of Stevenson’s Mr. Hyde. In the section of the story titled “The Crew Murder Case,”
Hyde is seen engaging with an elderly gentleman in what quickly deteriorates into a rather
heated conversation. At one point “Mr. Hyde broke all bounds and clubbed him into the earth.
And the next moment, with apelike fury, he was trampling his victim under foot and hailing
down a storm of blows…”(1949). Compare this passage with Lombroso, when he describes the
skull of a criminal dubbed “the Italian Jack the Ripper,” and mentions a formation at the base
“like that found in the lower types of apes…”(571).
Later, after an eye witness, a house maid, is questioned about the attack, and it
becomes clear that the perpetrator is indeed Mr. Hyde, Mr. Utterson asks the police officer, “Is
this Mr. Hyde a person of small stature?” To this the officer replies, “Particularly small and
particularly wicked looking…”(1949,1950). Furthermore, in the final chapter of the story,
“Henry Jekyll’s Full Statement of the Case,” Jekyll describes his transformation into Hyde and
says “I was suddenly aware that I had lost in stature”(1969). These passages are interesting
when read alongside Lombroso’s claim that “it was easy to understand why the span of the
arms in criminals so often exceeds the height…characteristic of apes…”(518). So once more we
Loughran 12
see instances that display a storyteller, this time Stevenson, employing a theory drawn from the
world of social science, in this case criminology, to inform the creation of a fictional character.
My introduction stated that this essay would examine the art of storytelling, specifically
the creation of characters by authors of fiction, and remarked that one of the tools often used
by writers to aid them in doing this is to draw on the science of the period. In Victorian times a
new science was emerging; the social sciences. As we have seen, the three authors of focus,
Arthur Conan Doyle, Charles Dickens and Robert Louis Stevenson, two of whom were in fact
educated in the medical sciences, indeed used their knowledge of social science to aid in their
creations. Pulling from theories of Robert Knox, Cesare Lombroso and, to a lesser degree,
Auguste Comte these writers were able to mold characters that were recognizable and
believable to Victorian readers, and for that matter, modern audiences as well.
Loughran 13
Works Cited
Anonymous. “Review: Robert Knox the Anatomist.” The British Journal of Medicine. Vol. 2,
No.517. BMJ Publishing Group. Nov. 1870.
Cohen, David. “Comte’s Changing Sociology.” The American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 71, No. 2
University of Chicago Press. Sept. 1965
Comte, Auguste. “Positive Philosophy.” Otis
Damrosch, David, et al,ed. The Longman Anthology of British Literature. 3rd ed. Vol 2B.
New York: Longman, 2006. 3 vols.
Dickens, Charles. Bleak House. Introd. and ed. Stephen Gill. Oxford University
Press. New York. 2008.
Doyle, Arthur Conan. “A Study in Scarlett.” Hodgson.
---“The Yellow Face.” Hodgson.
Hodgson, John A. Sherlock Holmes: The Major Stories with Contemporary Critical Essays.
Bedford/ St. Martins. Boston/ New York 1994.
Knox, Robert. “The Races of Men.” Otis.
Lombroso, Cesare. “The Criminal Man.” Otis.
Otis, Laura, ed. Literature and Science in the Ninteenth Century: An Anthology. Oxford
University Press. New York. 2008
Stevenson, Robert Louis. “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.” Damrosch, et al.
Wolfgang, Marvin E. “Pioneers in Crimonology: Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909).”
The Journal of Criminal Law, Crimonology, and Police Science. Vol. 52. No 4.
Northwestern University Press. Chicago 1961
Loughran 14