Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.2 AVERAGE
3.2 AVERAGE
Too long and wordy. The ending felt like a deus ex machina way of tying all the loose threads together, and I don’t understand why Hawthorne couldn’t have used the fifteen or so pages describing Hepzibah getting dressed to, you know, write a complete plot. However, some of the writing was clever, if overdramatic. Very clear imagery (because of all that unnecessary description!).
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
N/A
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I am not a huge Hawthorne fan but this book was okay. Much better than the Scarlet letter.
Well, I rushed to read House of the Seven Gables after enjoying the heck out of The Scarlet Letter and because a student told me this one was "far better." Instead I found this to be a disappointingly mediocre novel. But I'm going to blame E. A. Poe for it, the sly devil.
Allow me to explain:
After finishing The Scarlet Letter and dragging all of my Hawthornian tomes down from that high H shelf, I was perusing my nifty Norton edition of Nathaniel's Tales (a kind of greatest hits edition with the usual Norton cornucopia of notes, essays, letters, and contemporary reviews. Well, I flipped--with much interest--to E. A. Poe's 2 short assessments of Hawthorne's works. In a nutshell, they are rather passive/aggressive. Poe proclaims Hawthorne a genius! Also, it appears that Poe detested the Transcendentalists who had taken young Hawthorne under their wing and to whom the young New Englander had dared to express gratitude in the dedication of Mosses from an Old Manse. Whether through jealousy or because he really did dislike whatever spiritual gobbledygook these North woods sophists were peddling, Poe declared Hawthorne to be a budding master whose work will at last achieve the acme of sublimity when he a) frees himself from the clutches of Transcendentalism and b) eschews his excessive use of symbolism for honest Yankee naturalism.
This is where I do the neck-wrenching usual double-take that Poe's criticism forces one to do. Yes, Poe consistently claims, in his criticism, that symbolism reeks and naturalism smells as sweet as roses. And, well, although perhaps that swinging pendulum, or repetitive crow, or his"man of the crowd" are not simple allegorical figures... But, for heaven's sake, naturalism plays no noticeable role in the greatness of Poe's best writing! It's all bloody symbolism, the wackier the better! What the hell is he on about, naturalism??? And the same goes for Hawthorn, as much as I have read him. I'm not sure if Poe was serious and I just don't get it, was "having us on," as the Brits say, or, when he turned his hand to write lit. crit. was dictated to by his own "imp of the perverse." Search me. I can only relay the wonder, not explain it.
Now, in this same Norton edition of Hawthorne's tales I passed on to read a story I teach fairly often in my Gothic or "Idea of Italy in Anglo-American Literature" course, "Rappaccini's Daughter." Unlike other editions of the Mosses from an Old Manse the Norton prints a brief introduction to the tale as it was in its day published in The Democratic Review. (which I had previously read--I'd highlighted phrases even--but had then forgotten about.) There, in humorous fashion, Hawthorne does the Gothic trick of treating his own work as a found manuscript and pens a little mini-literary biography as if he were an obscure french author, M. de l'Aebépine. (French for Hawthorne obviously.) The author seems there to defend himself against Poe's injurious accusations by proclaiming the work having but "The faintest possible counterfeit of real life" as well great art should--and that goes for both Poe and Hawthorne, and I daresay Melville as well (I'm about 250 pages into Moby Dick at the moment and its realism is easily the least interesting thing about it but I guess why so many find it boring when it's a veritable explosion of rhetorical devices, techniques, and literary fireworks of all kinds. I mean, "The Whiteness of the Whale" is ALL about what the whiteness symbolizes. The fact of the whale actually being white is the merest aside.)
But the boring, endless, boring, repetitive descriptions of people's dress, their boring habits, trees, ponds, flowers, and shop patrons that drags out this ten (ok, maybe 15) page tale of three generations of blood-chocking misers into a 400 page novel???? methinks Hawthorne decided to take Poe's bait and it produced this mediocre novel where we could--and should!--have had a rip-rousing romance.
My theory therefore is that after the amazing triumph of art over realism of The Scarlet Letter: A Romance (as it is rightfully titled!) and the two fabulous books of tales, Hawthorne took Poe's criticism to heart, and wrote this practically endless piece of pseudo-Gothic drivel. I did enjoy the anti-establishment, anti-propriety and greed stance, but only chapter 17 was entertaining to read, the rest was a slog.
Allow me to explain:
After finishing The Scarlet Letter and dragging all of my Hawthornian tomes down from that high H shelf, I was perusing my nifty Norton edition of Nathaniel's Tales (a kind of greatest hits edition with the usual Norton cornucopia of notes, essays, letters, and contemporary reviews. Well, I flipped--with much interest--to E. A. Poe's 2 short assessments of Hawthorne's works. In a nutshell, they are rather passive/aggressive. Poe proclaims Hawthorne a genius! Also, it appears that Poe detested the Transcendentalists who had taken young Hawthorne under their wing and to whom the young New Englander had dared to express gratitude in the dedication of Mosses from an Old Manse. Whether through jealousy or because he really did dislike whatever spiritual gobbledygook these North woods sophists were peddling, Poe declared Hawthorne to be a budding master whose work will at last achieve the acme of sublimity when he a) frees himself from the clutches of Transcendentalism and b) eschews his excessive use of symbolism for honest Yankee naturalism.
This is where I do the neck-wrenching usual double-take that Poe's criticism forces one to do. Yes, Poe consistently claims, in his criticism, that symbolism reeks and naturalism smells as sweet as roses. And, well, although perhaps that swinging pendulum, or repetitive crow, or his"man of the crowd" are not simple allegorical figures... But, for heaven's sake, naturalism plays no noticeable role in the greatness of Poe's best writing! It's all bloody symbolism, the wackier the better! What the hell is he on about, naturalism??? And the same goes for Hawthorn, as much as I have read him. I'm not sure if Poe was serious and I just don't get it, was "having us on," as the Brits say, or, when he turned his hand to write lit. crit. was dictated to by his own "imp of the perverse." Search me. I can only relay the wonder, not explain it.
Now, in this same Norton edition of Hawthorne's tales I passed on to read a story I teach fairly often in my Gothic or "Idea of Italy in Anglo-American Literature" course, "Rappaccini's Daughter." Unlike other editions of the Mosses from an Old Manse the Norton prints a brief introduction to the tale as it was in its day published in The Democratic Review. (which I had previously read--I'd highlighted phrases even--but had then forgotten about.) There, in humorous fashion, Hawthorne does the Gothic trick of treating his own work as a found manuscript and pens a little mini-literary biography as if he were an obscure french author, M. de l'Aebépine. (French for Hawthorne obviously.) The author seems there to defend himself against Poe's injurious accusations by proclaiming the work having but "The faintest possible counterfeit of real life" as well great art should--and that goes for both Poe and Hawthorne, and I daresay Melville as well (I'm about 250 pages into Moby Dick at the moment and its realism is easily the least interesting thing about it but I guess why so many find it boring when it's a veritable explosion of rhetorical devices, techniques, and literary fireworks of all kinds. I mean, "The Whiteness of the Whale" is ALL about what the whiteness symbolizes. The fact of the whale actually being white is the merest aside.)
But the boring, endless, boring, repetitive descriptions of people's dress, their boring habits, trees, ponds, flowers, and shop patrons that drags out this ten (ok, maybe 15) page tale of three generations of blood-chocking misers into a 400 page novel???? methinks Hawthorne decided to take Poe's bait and it produced this mediocre novel where we could--and should!--have had a rip-rousing romance.
My theory therefore is that after the amazing triumph of art over realism of The Scarlet Letter: A Romance (as it is rightfully titled!) and the two fabulous books of tales, Hawthorne took Poe's criticism to heart, and wrote this practically endless piece of pseudo-Gothic drivel. I did enjoy the anti-establishment, anti-propriety and greed stance, but only chapter 17 was entertaining to read, the rest was a slog.
dark
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This is a novel where I can definitely recognize its merits…but also its pitfalls. To me, it lacks the suspense aspect of gothic literature.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Murder
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I wanted to read another one of Hawthorne’s novels, since I wanted a redemption from reading The Scarlet Letter. I enjoy his short stories, and I love gothic novels.
But golly, this was longer than needed. This story stretched beyond its point. I think it would had better off as a short story than novel length. As much plot as there was, it felt appropriate for it to be in a shorter format than something longer. The language is a bit dense and wordy (like saying 5 words to mean 1 thing). I felt bored because of it. It was slug to get through and I’m glad it’s all finally over. Maybe I won’t revisit another Hawthorne novel.
But golly, this was longer than needed. This story stretched beyond its point. I think it would had better off as a short story than novel length. As much plot as there was, it felt appropriate for it to be in a shorter format than something longer. The language is a bit dense and wordy (like saying 5 words to mean 1 thing). I felt bored because of it. It was slug to get through and I’m glad it’s all finally over. Maybe I won’t revisit another Hawthorne novel.
All I can say is wow! By far my favorite thing I have read so far in 2024. At times frightening, sad, gorgeous, bewildering, pensive, touching, subtly hilarious...its a romantic novel in the truest sense. Although Hawthorne uses his characters to flesh out his theories and ideas on such things as death, art, and beauty, we never lose sight of them as full-blooded participants within the narrative. He truly cares about them. The greatest character of them all is the Seven-Gabled manse. It undulates and creaks with all generations of the Pyncheon lineage, and holds them hostage in their own sort of limbo. The characters who are supposed to be alive in the story feel at times as if they are dead, and vice versa. Hawthorne manufactures a tear in the fabric between the land of the living and the dead, and the House is the conduit. And his turns of phrase! The dude can turn what seems like five minutes of exposition into a philosophical treatise, and I never tired of it. I have to seek out some of his other work. So good.