Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.19 AVERAGE
3.19 AVERAGE
This book was, in my opinion, very mediocre; I feel fairly neutrally towards it. It progressed fairly slowly, and nothing much occurred, but it did offer interesting insight into the two different ways main characters dealt with their sins. One suffered by exposing their mistakes to the world and being harshly shamed for those mistakes, and the other by keeping them secret and wishing he had the courage to divulge them. Some things were never fully explained which leaves me feeling somewhat cheated and unsatisfied, but overall it was a decent novel. I do somewhat fail to see why it is such a lasting and prominent classic, but I'm sure it will become clear to me eventually.
challenging
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I read this novel for the first time when I taught it in 2014 to my 11th graders. I have to say that Hawthorne's short stories were always difficult for me to get through in high school and college, and it was a bit tedious to teach The Scarlet Letter because a lot of description in Hawthorne's writing style makes one forget to follow the thread of the story.
However, I did enjoy reading Hester's story and how she kept her silence for a man who did not deserve her love. She remains loyal to not only her ex-husband but also to the father of her child. One thing that bothered me the most and is always a fun topic to discuss with my students is if Hester Prynne can be considered a heroine, and in my opinion she can't. At the end of the day she put not only herself but her daughter second. I think Hester didn't really respect herself or know her self worth, but if we look at the Puritan society then we know that it's not all her fault.
Hawthorne did a fantastic job in illustrating the changes that each character undergoes and that's one of the reasons I enjoyed reading this. He also touches upon timeless themes (Ambition, Guilt and hypocrisy) that we can find in all our literature today.
It is a bit hard to get through due to the language and his descriptions sometimes, but overall it is a great novel to read.
However, I did enjoy reading Hester's story and how she kept her silence for a man who did not deserve her love. She remains loyal to not only her ex-husband but also to the father of her child. One thing that bothered me the most and is always a fun topic to discuss with my students is if Hester Prynne can be considered a heroine, and in my opinion she can't. At the end of the day she put not only herself but her daughter second. I think Hester didn't really respect herself or know her self worth, but if we look at the Puritan society then we know that it's not all her fault.
Hawthorne did a fantastic job in illustrating the changes that each character undergoes and that's one of the reasons I enjoyed reading this. He also touches upon timeless themes (Ambition, Guilt and hypocrisy) that we can find in all our literature today.
It is a bit hard to get through due to the language and his descriptions sometimes, but overall it is a great novel to read.
I had read this once before, but I didn't remember how it all turned out, and I found that it kept me engaged in that regard. Hawthorne also raises some interesting moral questions, but I didn't get that invested on an emotional level.
challenging
dark
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
My god it was a difficult read because of the old-fashioned language, what makes this book unreadable. And the damn first chapter, you can do yourself a huge favour and skip it. What really bothered me was how unfairly Hester Prynne was treated. She faced public shame for her sin, while Dimmesdale kept his part hidden and remained respected. Despite everything, Hester stayed strong and dignified, while the men around her were consumed by guilt or revenge. The story made me realize how much more resilient she was compared to them. I didn’t love the style, but the message stuck with me.
Ignore the introduction entitled 'The Courthouse' and ignore the comments of irate highschoolers. Yea, it is indeed possible to like this book.
Do not expect the liberal hogwash you saw in the film with the admittedly very good Gary Oldman (while Demi Moore tries to fool us she's from anywhere else other than the US). I was partly disappointed, or at least surprised, that the book did not at least contain some of the better themes of liberal thinking found in the film; say themes of feminism or at least signs of independent thought.
Firstly, both Hester Prynne and the Revered Dimmesdale are overcome by an extremely burdensome, gnawing guilt. The way Hawthorne twines their stories of guilt occasionally feels too artificial, as though he painted too sensitive, too detailed a picture of the human psyche. Neither Hester nor Dimmesdale has any sense of independence or a sense of morality beyond the (obviously) arbitrary morality of the Puritans. It is only later on that Hester realises the arbitrariness of her position not only as the bearer of the Scarlet Letter but also of her inferior social position as a woman.
This sense that Hawthorne is painting you an almost nauseatingly detailed portrait of consciousness forms the largest part of the book. If you get into the novel without any prior knowledge of the story and without reading the back description, then I would expect the reader would be a bit confused finding a long series of character studies without much hint as to what the relation is between them. If the book kept on to this course for several other chapters, I think I would have abandoned it eventually, yet of course it does not, and thankfully Hawthorne manages to do a great deal with very little space. This economy with words, with very little sense of sacrifice (a tad more backstory was wanting), is one of the more admirable qualities of the novel.
Hawthorne's tone and intent is at times very difficult to decipher; I expected a radical and unabashed critique of Puritan society but instead I find comment on Puritan society that is occasionally almost emphatic while the main characters whom I expected would represent the last bastion of individual, independent and critical thought are two withering creatures with very little moral strength. The fact that Hawthorne himself at times sounds as moralistic as the Puritans (see his descriptions of 'the witch' or his long descriptions of both Dimmesdale's and Hester's guilt).
On the other hand one can interpret Hawthorne's unforgiving cruelty to both Hester and Dimmesdale because the society itself was cruel and unforgiving; I hope that his intent was that in presenting a bleak picture of society we ourselves can at least learn to ease whatever cruelty our society probably inevitably inflicts. Perhaps Hawthorne was all too concerned with the prudishness of his own Victorian society. Undoubtedly this latter interpretation has some value since we know that Hawthorne, descended from Puritan society never quite forgave himself for the harshness of his forefathers. Yet also it taught him a great deal about guilt; something that he undoubtedly applied to the very emphatic yet weak Dimmesdale. Perhaps it is also worth noting that Hawthorne shows us a decadent civilisation at the very borders of civilisation: the wilderness of the forest and the 'Indians' only helps to highlight how arbitrary, senseless and indeed meaningless human justice/cruelty can be.
What wins this novel the extra star is how everything falls together, or falls to pieces, in the end. Each and every infinitesimal note about the personal consciences of the three main characters is used to build up a dramatic, yet not artificial, end. How all this can be irrelevant to contemporary times, I cannot fathom.
Do not expect the liberal hogwash you saw in the film with the admittedly very good Gary Oldman (while Demi Moore tries to fool us she's from anywhere else other than the US). I was partly disappointed, or at least surprised, that the book did not at least contain some of the better themes of liberal thinking found in the film; say themes of feminism or at least signs of independent thought.
Firstly, both Hester Prynne and the Revered Dimmesdale are overcome by an extremely burdensome, gnawing guilt. The way Hawthorne twines their stories of guilt occasionally feels too artificial, as though he painted too sensitive, too detailed a picture of the human psyche. Neither Hester nor Dimmesdale has any sense of independence or a sense of morality beyond the (obviously) arbitrary morality of the Puritans. It is only later on that Hester realises the arbitrariness of her position not only as the bearer of the Scarlet Letter but also of her inferior social position as a woman.
This sense that Hawthorne is painting you an almost nauseatingly detailed portrait of consciousness forms the largest part of the book. If you get into the novel without any prior knowledge of the story and without reading the back description, then I would expect the reader would be a bit confused finding a long series of character studies without much hint as to what the relation is between them. If the book kept on to this course for several other chapters, I think I would have abandoned it eventually, yet of course it does not, and thankfully Hawthorne manages to do a great deal with very little space. This economy with words, with very little sense of sacrifice (a tad more backstory was wanting), is one of the more admirable qualities of the novel.
Hawthorne's tone and intent is at times very difficult to decipher; I expected a radical and unabashed critique of Puritan society but instead I find comment on Puritan society that is occasionally almost emphatic while the main characters whom I expected would represent the last bastion of individual, independent and critical thought are two withering creatures with very little moral strength. The fact that Hawthorne himself at times sounds as moralistic as the Puritans (see his descriptions of 'the witch' or his long descriptions of both Dimmesdale's and Hester's guilt).
On the other hand one can interpret Hawthorne's unforgiving cruelty to both Hester and Dimmesdale because the society itself was cruel and unforgiving; I hope that his intent was that in presenting a bleak picture of society we ourselves can at least learn to ease whatever cruelty our society probably inevitably inflicts. Perhaps Hawthorne was all too concerned with the prudishness of his own Victorian society. Undoubtedly this latter interpretation has some value since we know that Hawthorne, descended from Puritan society never quite forgave himself for the harshness of his forefathers. Yet also it taught him a great deal about guilt; something that he undoubtedly applied to the very emphatic yet weak Dimmesdale. Perhaps it is also worth noting that Hawthorne shows us a decadent civilisation at the very borders of civilisation: the wilderness of the forest and the 'Indians' only helps to highlight how arbitrary, senseless and indeed meaningless human justice/cruelty can be.
What wins this novel the extra star is how everything falls together, or falls to pieces, in the end. Each and every infinitesimal note about the personal consciences of the three main characters is used to build up a dramatic, yet not artificial, end. How all this can be irrelevant to contemporary times, I cannot fathom.
challenging
emotional
informative
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes