The Scarlet Letter

Nathaniel Hawthorne, a descendant of Puritan settlers in the early 1800’s, is a key figure in the Romantic Era of American Literature. In both The Minister’s Black Veil, a short story from his collection of The Twice Told Tales, and in The Scarlet Letter, Hawthorne incorporates shifting trends in American Literature to produce both Romantic ideals and Romantic failures, closely integrated into and within the rigid boundaries of Puritan Society. While The Minister’s Black Veil is often considered a parable (a story teaching a moral lesson), both pieces contain a significant message regarding one of mankind’s most ancient trials – the battle with sin. Also significant to note is the fact that Hawthorne wrote in an age predated by the use of emblems, or objects signifying one meaning, but wrote instead with emerging symbolism, or the use of objects signifying multiple meanings. By implementing this one specific trend of the shift of key objects from emblems to symbols, Hawthorne produces a unifying theme between the two pieces: the downfall of isolation.

The first emblem-to-symbol of the two used by Hawthorne in these pieces, chronologically to the years he wrote them, is the black veil in The Minister’s Black Veil. In this story, the main character, Minster Hooper, first sees his veil as a mask from the mortal sins of men – a visible reminder of the black veils that all men wear because of their universal sin. In this way it is an emblem; it represents this single idea. However, in the progression of the story, the veil comes to a dual-meaning by representing the Minister’s obsession that has taken over his life and thus detached him from it. The Minister sees himself being removed from his life, but is too concerned with the next world to remain in this one; to his wife (who would leave him following this conversation) he says that “this dismal shade must separate me from the world” (356). By taking on this dual meaning, and thus becoming a symbol, the black veil has become a symbol for, above all, the theme of disconnection and isolation Hawthorne finds disturbingly prevalent in Puritan society – in this case, one the Minister has brought upon himself.

The other emblem-to-symbol Hawthorne uses, however, is the one thrusted upon the Romantic antagonist, Hester Prynne and her Scarlet Letter in The Scarlet Letter. Because Hester has an affair with a man in her town (Puritan Boston circa 17^th century), Hester is compelled by the town overseers to wear, for the rest of her life, a Scarlet Letter “A”, denoting adultery. This is the meaning of the original emblem of this piece. As the novel progresses, however, Hester, in proud defiance of her label, through her actions and the way she carries herself, transforms the letter to also represent her individuality and inner strength to overcome adversity; it becomes a part of who she is, and in doing so, shifts from emblem to symbol. The quintessential proof of this symbolism comes in one of the final passages of the novel: “But, in the lapse of the toilsome, thoughtful, and self-devoted years that made up Hester’s life, the scarlet letter ceased to be a stigma which attracted the world’s scorn and bitterness and became a type of something to be sorrowed over, and looked upon with awe, and with reverence, too” (238-239). Her lover, the Minister Dimmesdale, however, fails to accept the Scarlet Letter for more then the emblem it once was. He dies with the same emblem burned on his skin, a painful reminder, like the black veil, of a sin that could not be forgotten, and could not be overcome – an obsession that disconnected him and falsified his identity to the point of his downfall. This obsession continued right up until his revelation and death, where “at this last moment, [doing] what, for his own heavy sin and miserable agony-[he] withheld [himself] from doing seven years ago,” (230) he finally comes to term with recognizing his sin, thus granting him a death without the secretiveness of isolation. Hester’s downfall, instead, was the inescapable judgement of society, forcing her to remain isolated through her life, and into her death – a “tribute” to Puritan hypocrisy and failure.

That contrast between the paths of the main antagonists is the most complex and interesting pattern to be found interweaving Hawthorne’s technique. Both of the pieces are actually quite paradoxical, yet still parallel. For example, in The Minister’s Black Veil, the Minister attempts to encompass all of Man’s sin and wear the veil in everlasting shame and remorse in this mortal world; instead, the Minister arrives at a Romantic failing – by obsessing over the sins of Man, he forsakes his identity and loses his own life, left in isolation, even in death. Indeed, “still veiled they laid him in his coffin, and a veiled corpse they bore him to the grave” (388). On the other hand, Hester Prynne, the antagonist of The Scarlet Letter, arrives at the same, harsh isolation, but instead of using her symbol to hide herself, she uses it to express herself - in defiance of society’s label.

Nevertheless, she dies alone (we assume), her burial bearing the same disquieting loneliness as the Minister’s: “it was near that old and sunken grave, yet with a space between, as if the dust of the two sleepers had no right to mingle” (239). In either piece’s outcome, the critique of Puritan society’s isolationism remains steadfast.

The major conclusion that can be drawn from the comparison of these two works is that, in them, Hawthorne accomplished two major ideas: the implementation of a pattern of emblem-to-symbol that would become a significant movement in the trends of American Literature, and, through that, the depiction of the failure of Puritan society by producing isolationistic outcasts – both the self-produced and the community-produced. Hawthorne acknowledges the inevitable flaws and sins of mankind, but emphasizes the need for forgiveness and compassion in the face of this timeless battle. It is not a battle that can be fought and won through hatred, shame or avoidance – it is one that must be fought and won through fellowship, community and love.