You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.19 AVERAGE
3.19 AVERAGE
Historically important in the literature world, a bit of a slog to get through these days.
A better examination of the horror of sin and it's consequences I have not read. This was definitely one of those books which, as Lewis says, brings a breath of fresh air from the past. It's climax was the complete opposite of that which would be written today, and I loved Hawthorne for it.
I read this as a student 30 years ago and am reading it as a teacher (5 times) with my 11th grade American Literature classes. It's not a easy read; Hawthorne is wordy and his writing style is difficult to parse. My students have a hard time following the story because of these issues.
However, the story and it's themes are classic and adaptable to our current time, and students have understood those themes.
However, the story and it's themes are classic and adaptable to our current time, and students have understood those themes.
dark
medium-paced
dark
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I was assigned this as summer reading for school, and I went into it grudgingly (partly because I at first thought the assignment was to read Huck Finn and had to switch to The Scarlet Letter halfway through). Then I started to read it. I was surprised by how un-boring it was! My classmates would disagree, but the writing kept my interest, the characters were complex, and my nerdy self was so excited by all the symbolism and themes! I can see how some people would think the writing was confusing (Hawthorne uses big words and long sentences), but overall a great book with a great theme about hypocrisy and the effects of sin.
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
This was my first ever reading of The Scarlet Letter and I have some thoughts on it. Firstly, I am deeply aware this book creates strong emotions of like or dislike in the majority of its readers; however, I personally found myself perplexed as I read. While the story and concept are good the language was taxing and caused this book to take me longer to complete than anticipated. Additionally, some parts could have done with more thought and revision (in my non-writer opinion though I do understand this was stylistic at the time).
Hester Prynne is without a doubt the strongest and most developed character in this book. I enjoyed her chapters (even though some of them made me angry or sad for her). She was a mother, a wife who was abandoned, and greatest of all a strong woman, given her circumstance. However, her chapters do not account for the entirety of the novel.
The rest of the characters fell flat for me everymen or caricatures of what they represented (maybe this is on purpose). As a very character-driven reader, this was disappointing.
The religious commentary and symbolism were interesting and well done despite some fumbling in certain moments.
Is this novel a classic? Yes. Is it necessary to read in the literary canon? I don't think so. Personally, it will be a very long time before I pick this one back up.
2.5 stars rounded down ( I changed my mind after digesting it some more).
Hester Prynne is without a doubt the strongest and most developed character in this book. I enjoyed her chapters (even though some of them made me angry or sad for her). She was a mother, a wife who was abandoned, and greatest of all a strong woman, given her circumstance. However, her chapters do not account for the entirety of the novel.
The rest of the characters fell flat for me everymen or caricatures of what they represented (maybe this is on purpose). As a very character-driven reader, this was disappointing.
The religious commentary and symbolism were interesting and well done despite some fumbling in certain moments.
Is this novel a classic? Yes. Is it necessary to read in the literary canon? I don't think so. Personally, it will be a very long time before I pick this one back up.
2.5 stars rounded down ( I changed my mind after digesting it some more).
If Nathaniel Hawthorne were alive today, I would attend one of his readings and say, "Nathaniel Hawthorne, go fuck thyself."
According to the Centre for Learning and Teaching of Literature, The Scarlet Letter is one of the top ten most taught books in American high schools (2008). I won't even make the argument that this list needs to be updated to include more contemporary novels, as I've read plenty of classics that are equally as compelling as modern literature (anything by the Bronte sisters, Tale of Two Cities, etc.). An adolescent's developing love of literature is too precious to be subjected to the cumbersome dreck that is this book. If I were to use The Scarlet Letter as a baseline for evaluating the quality of classics and literature in general, I would never want to read again. I'm glad I escaped my own adolescence unmolested by this text.
Join me in reading this sentence, wherein Hawthorne indulges in some masturbatory wordiness that I'm sure made him feel quite satisfied with himself:
"The young divine, whose scholar-like renown still lived in Oxford, was considered by his more fervent admirers as little less than a heaven-ordained apostle, destined, should he live and labor for the ordinary term of life, to do as great deeds for the now feeble New England Church, as the early Fathers had achieved for the infancy of the Christian faith."
F. My. L.
To recap the story, Hester Prynne is sent ahead of her husband to New World Massachusetts, where she is to establish their home in preparation of their new life in Salem. Some times goes by, and Hester's ugly old husband never shows up. So she takes it upon herself to get some badly needed ass in the form of Rev. Dimmesdale, one of Salem's most respected Puritan leaders. Unfortunately, the townspeople know she's a married lady waiting for her husband -- but she scandalously gets pregnant with the reverend's child. The book opens with Hester's release from prison after giving birth to her daughter and refusing to name the father. What follows is a recounting of how guilty everyone feels while Hester's husband befriends Dimmesdale so he can slowly kill him with ... herbs? evil telepathy? (Who cares?)
I begrudgingly admit that The Scarlet Letter was probably considered an important book in its time, if only due to controversy. The book boldly explores the inner sexual conflict of a woman who chooses to rebel against oppressive social convention, and I can see it looking to skewer prudish Victorian attitudes toward female sexuality. However, I WISH WISH WISH Hawthorne had not been the one to write a book with such an important purpose. His message is obstructed by his pathetic need to prove himself as a refined artist despite having been the descendant of the very Puritans he criticizes. While reading I could picture him behind me, pointing at each sentence and saying, "See what I did there? That's called foreshadowing." *cue pretentious chuckle*
I'm asking myself why this book is considered a classic. Is it because it was deemed ahead of its time? Is it because it caused controversy when it was first published? Is it because the writing is ... "intricate"? Who decided it WAS a classic? (As in who let this happen? Because I'd like a word with them.) I think "experts" may have let their haughty expectations get the best of them when including The Scarlet Letter on the roster of important literature. Just because a book INTENDS to do something important doesn't mean it actually DOES something important. Hawthorne's critical intentions are obvious, but he's too busy jerking himself off with big sentences and long digressions to actually accomplish anything.
American high schools need to tune this out. I can just imagine how much potential passion for reading has been snuffed out by Hawthorne. Never, ever read this book.
According to the Centre for Learning and Teaching of Literature, The Scarlet Letter is one of the top ten most taught books in American high schools (2008). I won't even make the argument that this list needs to be updated to include more contemporary novels, as I've read plenty of classics that are equally as compelling as modern literature (anything by the Bronte sisters, Tale of Two Cities, etc.). An adolescent's developing love of literature is too precious to be subjected to the cumbersome dreck that is this book. If I were to use The Scarlet Letter as a baseline for evaluating the quality of classics and literature in general, I would never want to read again. I'm glad I escaped my own adolescence unmolested by this text.
Join me in reading this sentence, wherein Hawthorne indulges in some masturbatory wordiness that I'm sure made him feel quite satisfied with himself:
"The young divine, whose scholar-like renown still lived in Oxford, was considered by his more fervent admirers as little less than a heaven-ordained apostle, destined, should he live and labor for the ordinary term of life, to do as great deeds for the now feeble New England Church, as the early Fathers had achieved for the infancy of the Christian faith."
F. My. L.
To recap the story, Hester Prynne is sent ahead of her husband to New World Massachusetts, where she is to establish their home in preparation of their new life in Salem. Some times goes by, and Hester's ugly old husband never shows up. So she takes it upon herself to get some badly needed ass in the form of Rev. Dimmesdale, one of Salem's most respected Puritan leaders. Unfortunately, the townspeople know she's a married lady waiting for her husband -- but she scandalously gets pregnant with the reverend's child. The book opens with Hester's release from prison after giving birth to her daughter and refusing to name the father. What follows is a recounting of how guilty everyone feels while Hester's husband befriends Dimmesdale so he can slowly kill him with ... herbs? evil telepathy? (Who cares?)
I begrudgingly admit that The Scarlet Letter was probably considered an important book in its time, if only due to controversy. The book boldly explores the inner sexual conflict of a woman who chooses to rebel against oppressive social convention, and I can see it looking to skewer prudish Victorian attitudes toward female sexuality. However, I WISH WISH WISH Hawthorne had not been the one to write a book with such an important purpose. His message is obstructed by his pathetic need to prove himself as a refined artist despite having been the descendant of the very Puritans he criticizes. While reading I could picture him behind me, pointing at each sentence and saying, "See what I did there? That's called foreshadowing." *cue pretentious chuckle*
I'm asking myself why this book is considered a classic. Is it because it was deemed ahead of its time? Is it because it caused controversy when it was first published? Is it because the writing is ... "intricate"? Who decided it WAS a classic? (As in who let this happen? Because I'd like a word with them.) I think "experts" may have let their haughty expectations get the best of them when including The Scarlet Letter on the roster of important literature. Just because a book INTENDS to do something important doesn't mean it actually DOES something important. Hawthorne's critical intentions are obvious, but he's too busy jerking himself off with big sentences and long digressions to actually accomplish anything.
American high schools need to tune this out. I can just imagine how much potential passion for reading has been snuffed out by Hawthorne. Never, ever read this book.