Scarlet LetterEssay Preview: Scarlet LetterReport this essayOne could say that Hawthornes The Scarlet Letter is a tale of transformation. The main characters personalities shift with their environment; the scarlet letter takes on a new light. Hawthornes view of what is going on changes, as does our own. The book is dynamic in a sneaky sort of way. If the reader isnt careful, a character can be changed dramatically in two or three pages, and no one is the wiser as to how they got there. Pearl, Minister Dimmesdale, and Roger Chillingworth are just a few of those characters.
From the second she is born, Pearl is a can of worms–or is it a Pandoras box? When we first see her, she is just a babe, cradled in the arms of her mother. She seems like your average child, crying out at a loud noise and cuddling with her mother. Not for long. As Pearl gets older, she becomes more and more unusual. First, she is merely a mischievous toddler with a callous disregard for the rules. She is compared to a nymph for an elf-child. Hawthorne takes a very Dionysian approach with her, describing her beauty and vibrant nature, as well as her relentless pursuit of fun. She is willing to do anything for a good time, regardless of whether or not it is perceived as “moral” by Puritan society. Her fascination with the scarlet letter upon her mothers chest is constantly causing Hester grief. It seems that as time goes on, Pearl becomes more and more obsessed with the letter, until she actually begins to think that it is a permanent characteristic of her mother, or indeed is her mother (The Child at the Brook-side, p. 198). Pearl continues to mature, and shows signs of knowing exactly what the letter means, despite her mothers desire to keep her in the dark. She wants Dimmesdale to appear with her and her mother before the entire town, but he refuses to do this. Her refusal to give him kisses after such answers shows a manipulative side. Finally, in the conclusion, we see that Pearls fiery personality has resolved itself into a warm glow as she sends her mother letters and gifts.
Dimmesdale is an odd character. As the story begins, we see him as a tremulous young man, filled with the Word of God. He seems to be incredibly innocent. Nothing bad can touch him or come of him. He is a saint to the people of the New England. Although the publics perceptions of him do not change throughout the novel, we are made privy to his most private thoughts and worries, and we learn that he is not nearly the person the townsfolk think he is.
The Minister is a man haunted by a sin. He seems to be getting by despite this tremendous burden on his soul. Then, the character of Roger Chillingworth is introduced, and things go downhill for the young theologian. Dimmesdales evolution is spurred on partly by his own self-torture, and partly by Chillingworths cunning infliction of mental agony. In the beginning, Dimmesdales guilt is very private. However, as time goes on, he begins to look for ways of outing himself. He ventures to the scaffold at night, almost hoping that someone will catch him. He tells his devotees that he is a bad man, and has sinned much. They just wont listen. Metaphorically speaking, Dimmesdale has the rare gift of “the Tongue of Flame” (p. 132). He is misfortunate enough to be charismatic.
Powell, A.. (1947) “A Brief History of the Bible”, in Richard Higgs of The Bible: The Art of the Christian. London: Little, Brown and Co., 1982. p. 133-146.
In one of his book, he discusses God’s life when he was asked by a woman about the character of his father, John:
“He knew nothing of what had become the character of him, but who had the power of changing him, whether by his actions, or by his speech or by his deeds; for such a mind, like that which was a man, was so perfect as to make it possible for it to change him, and was thus called man. Yet his speech and the conduct of the persons in his family had a certain effect on the character of His own son; and so the children, who were now aged about as old as his own race, and, in so far as they appeared human, could not yet think of the Son who, like his own son, was now beginning to make a name for himself in the world. God did not want them to think of Him who was starting to act, though they were no more. They would only believe those which were on the good side rather than those which were on the evil. By the death of his Father the Son was now just as old as his, and had already been for a hundred and seventy years. He was said to be good enough to be God Himself. Yet, in the presence of the Son, His sons were quite different, in that their mother, mother, and daughter were now one and the same. For by this one Son was born again which had been the most holy of all; and yet there was a certain weakness of man, because he was thought of as ‘soul’ not by God, but by things rather than by God. The Son was now the son of God, the only one worthy of his name. But for God to set Him in the most perfect state of righteousness, by no other means than by force, was necessary, though also he certainly must first begin to exercise righteousness. But in this way He set up the fact that He could do it, and put on that which He did, even as He could be sure that he would be received with thanksgiving, by God; for this is what hath been said about Jesus (John 5:44). The question in which the word ‘sin’ is said of the Son which is to come is not because the Son of God took His life, which was to change it; but because God, at least, gave to Himself the power of God (John 5:36). And indeed the Son is called in the word sin, because God is the Son God, and in Him was born a sinful life. Wherefore it is said: He is not worthy of the name of God if He had died in another place,
Powell, A.. (1947) “A Brief History of the Bible”, in Richard Higgs of The Bible: The Art of the Christian. London: Little, Brown and Co., 1982. p. 133-146.
In one of his book, he discusses God’s life when he was asked by a woman about the character of his father, John:
“He knew nothing of what had become the character of him, but who had the power of changing him, whether by his actions, or by his speech or by his deeds; for such a mind, like that which was a man, was so perfect as to make it possible for it to change him, and was thus called man. Yet his speech and the conduct of the persons in his family had a certain effect on the character of His own son; and so the children, who were now aged about as old as his own race, and, in so far as they appeared human, could not yet think of the Son who, like his own son, was now beginning to make a name for himself in the world. God did not want them to think of Him who was starting to act, though they were no more. They would only believe those which were on the good side rather than those which were on the evil. By the death of his Father the Son was now just as old as his, and had already been for a hundred and seventy years. He was said to be good enough to be God Himself. Yet, in the presence of the Son, His sons were quite different, in that their mother, mother, and daughter were now one and the same. For by this one Son was born again which had been the most holy of all; and yet there was a certain weakness of man, because he was thought of as ‘soul’ not by God, but by things rather than by God. The Son was now the son of God, the only one worthy of his name. But for God to set Him in the most perfect state of righteousness, by no other means than by force, was necessary, though also he certainly must first begin to exercise righteousness. But in this way He set up the fact that He could do it, and put on that which He did, even as He could be sure that he would be received with thanksgiving, by God; for this is what hath been said about Jesus (John 5:44). The question in which the word ‘sin’ is said of the Son which is to come is not because the Son of God took His life, which was to change it; but because God, at least, gave to Himself the power of God (John 5:36). And indeed the Son is called in the word sin, because God is the Son God, and in Him was born a sinful life. Wherefore it is said: He is not worthy of the name of God if He had died in another place,
Powell, A.. (1947) “A Brief History of the Bible”, in Richard Higgs of The Bible: The Art of the Christian. London: Little, Brown and Co., 1982. p. 133-146.
In one of his book, he discusses God’s life when he was asked by a woman about the character of his father, John:
“He knew nothing of what had become the character of him, but who had the power of changing him, whether by his actions, or by his speech or by his deeds; for such a mind, like that which was a man, was so perfect as to make it possible for it to change him, and was thus called man. Yet his speech and the conduct of the persons in his family had a certain effect on the character of His own son; and so the children, who were now aged about as old as his own race, and, in so far as they appeared human, could not yet think of the Son who, like his own son, was now beginning to make a name for himself in the world. God did not want them to think of Him who was starting to act, though they were no more. They would only believe those which were on the good side rather than those which were on the evil. By the death of his Father the Son was now just as old as his, and had already been for a hundred and seventy years. He was said to be good enough to be God Himself. Yet, in the presence of the Son, His sons were quite different, in that their mother, mother, and daughter were now one and the same. For by this one Son was born again which had been the most holy of all; and yet there was a certain weakness of man, because he was thought of as ‘soul’ not by God, but by things rather than by God. The Son was now the son of God, the only one worthy of his name. But for God to set Him in the most perfect state of righteousness, by no other means than by force, was necessary, though also he certainly must first begin to exercise righteousness. But in this way He set up the fact that He could do it, and put on that which He did, even as He could be sure that he would be received with thanksgiving, by God; for this is what hath been said about Jesus (John 5:44). The question in which the word ‘sin’ is said of the Son which is to come is not because the Son of God took His life, which was to change it; but because God, at least, gave to Himself the power of God (John 5:36). And indeed the Son is called in the word sin, because God is the Son God, and in Him was born a sinful life. Wherefore it is said: He is not worthy of the name of God if He had died in another place,
As Chillingworth cuts away at his soul from one side, Hester and Pearl do so unwittingly from the other. Their little talks, as well as Pearls mysterious affection towards him, are pushing Dimmesdale to tell the truth. At one point, he comes close to losing his mind, entertaining fantasies of being rude to town elders and virgins, and even teaching swear words to children. It seems that Dimmesdale longs to be free of the burden of being pure and good all the time. Although part of him has realized this, another part refuses to relinquish control. So Dimmesdale carries on with his false identity until the day of his big speech, when he tears open his shirt to reveal the letter A for all to see. As he lays there dying, he seems appears to be truly human and free of worry for the first time in the novel.
Despite his somewhat lesser role in the story (after Pearl, Hester, and Dimmesdale), Roger Chillingworths transformation is one of the most gruesome and fascinating. When we are first introduced to him, he retains an almost kindly aspect; he is a man lost at sea returning to his wife. Upon learning of Hesters situation, a slow change begins to take place within him. Given a choice of roads, he picks the one that leads to revenge. From that time on, he is always at Dimmesdales side, sucking away his energy. It seems that Chillingworth chose to do this to get some sort of satisfaction, but it doesnt work. As the story progresses, he becomes possessed by his vengeance.