 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Non-fiction and essays |
|||||||||||||
| University essays |
|||||||||||||
| American Studies First Year |
|||||||||||||
| Introduction to American Literature 103 |
|||||||||||||
| A Close Reading of “The Scarlet Letter” by Nathaniel Hawthorne (Chapter 18: ‘A Flood of Sunshine’, “So speaking…bright in Arthur Dimmesdale’s!”) (AMST 103, Autumn, 2001) In the passage describing the encounter in the forest between Hester Prynne and Arthur Dimmesdale, Hawthorne demonstrates to the reader several of the major themes of the novel as a whole. We are able to witness the effects of the Scarlet Letter on Hester, as she is described when she is wearing it, and when she briefly discards it. It demonstrates the gloom and despair that is associated with the letter and the sense of relief and freedom when it is gone. Further themes are developed in the relationship between the characters and nature, particularly Hester, and the descriptions of the letter itself. It is possible to consider the Scarlet Letter as the main character in the novel, as it is ‘reflected, refracted and duplicated throughout the story.’# This passage makes reference to the contradictions involved with the letter, and questions whether it is indeed something to be ashamed of or to be proud of.# A further aspect that is touched on in the passage is the relationship between Hester and Dimmesdale, a passing reference, but one that foreshadows the climax of the book. The Scarlet Letter provides its bearer with unhappiness and trouble, as demonstrated by the descriptions when Hester first dispenses with it. When it nearly lands in the stream, it almost gives “the little brook another woe to carry onward.”(172)# It continues with this theme of gloominess, when it describes someone who happened to pick up the letter as an “ill-fated wanderer” who would be “haunted by strange phantoms of guilt, sinkings of the heart, and unaccountable misfortune.”(172) It is only when the “stigma”(172) is gone that Hester feels able to relax and feel comfortable. Clearly in this instance, the letter represents something to be ashamed of. However, it is interesting to note that the letter lands a “hand’s breadth” (172) away from the river, which seems to suggest that as much as Hester wants to be rid of the letter, she cannot escape it entirely. Whether this is a pure accident, or done subconsciously by Hester is not clear. What is clear though is the contrast between Hester with the Scarlet Letter and without. As this is the only occasion within the book where Hester does not wear the Scarlet Letter, Hawthorne provides glimpses of the way she was before the punishment condemned her to her current situation. In the first moments after removing the letter, the burden of shame and anguish departed from her spirit. O exquisite relief! She had not known the weight until she felt the freedom!(173) This shows the extraordinary release that Hester experiences, she has carried the letter around for so long that she has forgotten how it feels to be rid of it. This is followed up by further descriptions that illustrate this new state of emotions. She feels “a happiness before unknown”(173) and these overwhelming emotions are summed up towards the end of the passage: Love, whether newly born, or aroused from a deathlike slumber must always create a sunshine, filling the heart so full of radiance that it overflows upon the outward world.(173) The outward showings of Hester’s happiness can be seen in the narrative description of her appearance, which appears to be radically altered following the letter’s removal. The first “impulse” she feels is to remove “her formal cap that confined her hair”(173), which can be interpreted as a metaphor for her emotional confinement imposed by the Puritan community through the letter. This letting down of her hair, both literally and metaphorically changes her whole appearance, and imparts “the charm of softness to her features”, allowing her “a radiant and tender smile”(173). She seems to be transformed back into the woman she was before the adultery had occurred, before she was an outcast from society: Her sex, her youth, and the whole richness of her beauty, came back from what men call the irrevocable past, (173) It seems to suggest that beneath the grim public face that Hester is forced to present because of the letter, she is still a woman, and capable of being attractive. It appears that in this instance, she is no longer the “far from commonplace” heroine# that she represents throughout the novel. As readers, we are made to feel much more sympathy for her at this moment, a sense of what could have been if the adulterous incident had not happened. The effect on Hester seems to reverberate to her surroundings, with several references to the changes seen in the forest around her: “the objects that had made a shadow hitherto embodied the brightness now”(173) suggesting that as Hester’s mood becomes one of happiness, so the forest becomes more welcoming. This sentiment is further illustrated by the “wood’s heart of mystery, which had become a mystery of joy” (173). These ideas reflect the depiction of nature as free and untamed that permeates the whole novel. It often shows comparison between the freedom of the forest, especially for Hester and Dimmesdale, that they are not able to feel in the community. Such was the sympathy of Nature - that wild, heathen Nature of the forest, never subjugated by human law, nor illumined by higher truth – with the bliss of these two spirits!(173) The use of personification of “Nature” rather than ‘nature’ adds to the sense of solidarity between Hester and her surroundings. The “two spirits” would seem to refer to Hester and Dimmesdale, and their relationship together towards the world around them. This idea of their togetherness had been referred to earlier in the passage: And, as if the gloom of the earth and sky had been but the effluence of these two mortal hearts, it vanished with their sorrow.(173) The other “mortal heart” would appear to be that of Dimmesdale, who seems at this point to be sharing Hester’s sense of freedom following the letters removal. However, the last sentence of the passage gives a possible indicator that these two hearts will not remain together. Had the forest still kept its gloom, it would have been bright in Hester’s eyes, and bright in Arthur Dimmesdale’s!(173) At first glance, this sentence merely emphasises their shared happiness, that they would see light even in darkness. However, it is worth noting that each is named separately, when it could have read ‘it would have been bright in their eyes’. This suggests that even though they appear to be together here, and may well be, they cannot be together when they go back to the community. They will remain separated in society, until the last tragic act of the book, where on admitting his love for Hester, Dimmesdale will go ‘to his death with a capital A burned on his breast and another flaming in the sky’.# It is a subtle and effective way of reminding the reader that despite this brief respite, there will not be a happy ending for the couple. The significance of the A on Dimmesdale’s breast is a culmination of the myriad appearances and meanings the Scarlet Letter presents. For the minister, it represents his inner torment and guilt, although how it manifests itself is left as a mystery. For Hester, its meaning changes from ‘Adulteress’ to ‘Able’ (137) and perhaps even ‘Angel’ (134) as she becomes more accepted in the society. In this passage, its descriptions, although brief, demonstrate the contradiction between its appearance and what it originally represented. When it is ‘glittering like a lost jewel’ (172), one could be mistaken for thinking it was a prized possession, but this ‘embroidered letter’ (172) represents possibly the most heinous crime imaginable for the Puritan community. This small excerpt illustrates the fact that Hester, being a skilled seamstress, crafted a very beautiful letter that seems to be an act of defiance against the community. However, relating to the fact that she couldn’t seem to throw the letter far enough away to lose it completely, it is also conceivable that she wanted a glaring reminder to herself of what she did. Such are the ‘subtle ways in which sin works out its retribution.’# The duality of the Scarlet Letter, the outward gaiety as opposed to its true meaning of sin, has parallels with the natures of both Hester and Dimmesdale. Whereas Dimmesdale is outwardly independent and free, a highly revered member of the community, self-loathing and his guilty conscience torture him within. In stark contrast is Hester, publicly facing the disgust and condemnation of society, but she is able to retain her freedom and independence inwardly. Indeed, this is a somewhat autobiographical representation of Hawthorne himself, trying to remain a writer in the face of his ancestors, the “stern and black-browed Puritans”.# This passage appears to represent a microcosm of the novel as a whole, containing glimpses of the major themes. Hawthorne is able to demonstrate the effects the Scarlet Letter has had on Hester, most ably illustrated by the contrast shown when the letter is gone. While he tries to create sympathy for her throughout, here it allows the reader a different view of Hester, one not tainted by the constant reminders of the letter. She is finally able to look the part of the heroine he has tried to portray throughout the novel. In this short time, we are allowed to see Hester and Dimmesdale as a couple, relieved of their shared burden and at their element among the trees of the forest. However, in the final sentence, we are shown that this idyllic scenario is only temporary, and will not play out to a happy ending. They can never be truly together in the harsh world outside the forest, and only the death of Dimmesdale will bring their love into the open. It appears that no matter how the appearance seems, whether the beautifully crafted letter, or Hester regaining her beauty, the underlying effect of the true meaning will come to the surface in the end. Bibliography Baym, Nina, The Scarlet Letter: A Reading, (1986) Beers, Henry A, Short History of American Literature, (1906) Hawthorne, Nathaniel, The Scarlet Letter, (1850), Penguin Popular Classics, (1994) Knight, Grant C, American Literature and Culture, (1972) Nichol, John, American Literature: An Historical Sketch 1620-1880, (1882) To what extent has American literature been evasive in its response to slavery and abolition? (AMST 103, Autumn, 2001) The story of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn concerns a white boy and a runaway black slave and their ‘adventures’ as they travel down the Mississippi River. As it is set before the Civil War of the 1860s, but written twenty years afterwards, it could be interpreted as a commentary on slavery and the abolition movement in America. However, according to Greg Camfield, the ‘books advocacy of racial equality, though buried in irony, is almost completely sentimental.’# This therefore suggests Mark Twain perhaps didn’t always deal with the subjects as he could, or should have done. The term evasive would seem to indicate a reluctance to confront the issue, often being reduced to stereotypical views rather than providing different ways of viewing the issue. It is evident from the text that at times he has been evasive in either the general narrative, or often in the relations between the characters. That is not to say he never deals directly with the subjects of slavery or abolition, but it isusually a case of reading into passages deeper to extract the points. The first example of the evasion of slavery involves the way slaves are portrayed as property, a stereotypical view that evades a different interpretation of slaves as people. When Huck’s Pap is ranting about the state of the country, how the government is inadequate he says: They call that a govment that can’t sell a free nigger till he’s been in the State six months.(78)# Pap represents the stereotypical poor white, a drunk who beats Huck, and here he gives the stereotypical view of the black man, a ‘nigger’ who should be sold as soon as possible as if he were just a beast of burden. Twain here makes no commentary on the slavery issue; he just represents the views of a character and allows the reader to be disturbed by it. He removes his responsibility, clearly evading the issue. However, Pap is not the only character to talk about slaves in this way. Huck, the supposed hero and Tom Sawyer, another of Twain’s protagonist each talk about slaves in such nonchalant terms. When Jim is sold back into slavery by the Duke and the King, Huck tries to decide whether to tell Miss Watson where Jim is, and makes the statement: “everyone naturally despises an ungrateful nigger”(281). The important word here is ungrateful which suggests that slaves were happy being slaves, a common notion among the whites to make themselves more comfortable with the situation. Tom reinforces this soon afterwards, when one of the other slaves contemplates running away: I wonder if Uncle Silas is going to hang this nigger. If I was to catch a nigger that was ungrateful [my emphasis] enough to run away, I wouldn’t give him up, I’d hang him.(308-9) Again ungrateful is used, and this repetition strengthens the casual acceptance of slavery amongst the characters. Whether this is conscious evasion of slavery as a normal part of life, or a subtle method of highlighting the prevalent attitudes among his contemporaries, Twain never seems to make any direct commentary on it. Perhaps the fact that it is told in the first person makes such commentary difficult, as it requires the co-operation of Huck; a white boy who has grown up considering blacks as slaves and more simply as niggers. One of the most striking examples of the white characters regarding blacks as barely worth thinking about comes in chapter thirty-two. Huck is talking to Aunt Sally about how he came to be there and fabricates a story about a blown cylinder head on the riverboat: ‘Good gracious! Anybody hurt?’ ‘No’m. Killed a nigger.’ ‘Well, it’s lucky; because sometimes people do get hurt.’(291) Even thought the story is not true, the response of Aunt Sally is another example of the way black people are thought of as expendable, when they are even thought about at all. This is summed up succinctly by Arthur Pettit: ‘Jim can be freed from bondage but not from the disability of being black.’# The use of the term ‘nigger’ is another example of the stereotyping of characters in the novel. Used by whites, it is a degrading term, among blacks, often a term of endearment. In fact, the relationships between slaves are a direct representation of the evasive nature of the novel. They never talk about things directly, but must always use stories or pretend to know nothing in order to protect themselves from the watchful eyes and ears of their masters. There are several examples of this use of ‘masking’ by Jim and other slave characters. When Jim creates the story of being ‘rode by witches’ it enables him to gather other slaves and in effect preach to them, under the disguise of simply telling the tale. Niggers would come from all around there and give Jim anything they had, just for a sight of that five-center piece; but they wouldn’t touch it, because the devil had had his hands on it. Jim was most ruined, for a servant, because he got so stuck up on account of having seen the devil and been rode by witches.(55) While on the surface this may seem like an insignificant event, the very fact that slaves were moving from their plantations to see this one black man was a form of subversion. It gives Jim a certain power, but again, this is not made obvious. The fact that he is ‘ruined’ as a slave also demonstrates his increased influence, he is more aware of his position. There is always the slight evasion in the representation, a supernatural tale in this case, that means the true significance is hidden, and must be looked for carefully. Another example of masking is demonstrated when Huck is taken in by the Grangerfords, and the slaves hide Jim. Huck is taken to see Jim by one of the slaves, but he does not refer to Jim as a person, he disguises the true meaning to protect himself from being overheard and punished. ‘Mars Jawge, if you’ll come down into de swamp, I’ll show you a whole stack o’ water-moccasins’…Then he stopped right along and went away, and pretty soon the trees hid him.(170) Jim is called ‘water-moccasins’, so the slave is hiding that fact, and when Huck finally finds Jim, the slave runs away and hides, not wishing to be caught with the fugitive slave. These examples demonstrate the propensity for evasive actions by the slaves themselves, employing masking to get messages across without endangering themselves. This is an evasive method to get the slaves’ viewpoints across, such as the times when Jim tries to educate Huck. When they are talking about the Solomon story, Huck thinks he is trying to get the point across to Jim. In reality it is Jim who sees the story as a metaphor for slavery and attempts to get Huck to see this. ‘ Doan’ talk to me ‘bout Sollermun, Huck, I knows him by de back.’ ‘But I tell you you don’t get the point.’ ‘Blame de pint! I reck’n I knows what I knows. En mine you de real pint is down furder – it’s down deeper. It lies in de way Sollermun was raised.(134) Jim’s insistence that the real point is ‘down deeper’ reveals his attempt to show Huck the true meaning of the story. This again shows the use of masking by blacks to communicate ideas of the true nature of slavery. According to Peter Messent: ‘Evasions, passivities, silences, are the defining features of black discourse in a slave-holding culture.’# It is by its very nature evasive, and increases the sense of the novel itself being evasive towards slavery In terms of abolition, the attitude to it presented by the novel is a very negative one. In this respect it does not appear to be evasive, just not very supportive of the movement. As we see the world through Huck’s eyes, we are often shown his feelings with regards to Jim. When they are approaching Cairo, the chance for freedom gets to Jim, and Huck responds in a negative way: Jim said it made him feel all over trembly and feverish to be so close to freedom. Well, I can tell you it made me all over trembly and feverish, too, to hear him, because I begun to get it through my head that he was most free – and who was to blame for it? Why me.(145) The key word here is blame, it suggests the act of freeing a slave is something to be ashamed of, and it is repeated later in the passage to emphasise Huck’s disappointment at himself. I tried to make out to myself that I warn’t to blame, because I didn’t run Jim off from his rightful owner; but it warn’t no use… I got to feeling so mean and miserable I most wished I was dead.(145) Huck feels the weight of the ‘blame’ so much, he wishes he was dead: a rather disturbing thought when concerned with the action of setting someone free. Clearly it shows any attempt to free slaves as something to be condemned. There are numerous examples of Huck contemplating whether or not to give Jim in. On Jackson’s Island when they first escape, he eventually returns to flee with Jim from the slave hunters then later on the river when they encounter more slave hunters, he tells them the person on the raft is contagious so they leave him alone. All the while he is on the river, Huck is wrestling with his conscience over what the right thing to do is, with regards to Jim. However, when he eventually decides to rescue Jim after he is sold back into slavery, he makes the decision seemingly against his better judgement: I was a trembling, because I’d got to decide, forever, betwixt two things, and I knowed it. I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself: ‘All right, then, I’ll go to hell’ – and tore it up. It was awful thoughts, and awful words, but they was said.(283) In finally deciding to help Jim, Huck feels he must ‘go to hell’ in order to achieve this. However, I would argue that he is doing this as Jim’s friend, not as an abolitionist, which make the action of helping Jim so difficult. As Steven Mailloux puts it: ‘Huck’s feelings triumph over his conscience; friendship wins out over racism.’# There could therefore be an argument that this is a final evasion of abolition: Huck making the choice to help Jim, while not admitting to himself that he acting as an abolitionist. The ending of the book provides a major source of evasion; in fact it is probably the biggest evasion of all. While there were instances of evasion in the story leading up to the capture of Jim, there was enough groundwork laid to provide a telling commentary on slavery. The friendship that developed between Huck and Jim, a white boy and a black man could have been taken further and demonstrated the failings of the situation between the races at the time. However, the ending of the book, with the freeing of an already free black man and the return of Tom Sawyer to ‘save the day’ means the serious themes are lost amidst the farce. Leo Marx declares that the reader is: [F]orced to put aside many of the mature emotions evoked earlier by the vivid rendering of Jim’s fear of capture, the tenderness of Huck’s and Jim’s regard for each other, and Huck’s excruciating moments of wavering between honesty and respectability. None of these emotions are called forth by the anticlimactic final sequence.# With Jim submitting to the degrading actions of writing in his own blood, forced to live with all kinds of creatures and other such tortures, he becomes less than human. He is no longer the educator of Huck but a figure of fun. Huck seems to lose the attractive features that made him a hero, and in general, the ending seems like a way of avoiding a direct conclusion on the issues of slavery and abolition raised by the rest of the novel. So with reference to The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, it seems apparent that American literature has proved rather evasive in its treatment of slavery especially, and to a slightly lesser extent, abolition. The reader is presented with a stream of stereotypical views of slaves as superstitious buffoons, with little or no characterisation. The only truly noble character in the novel is Jim, but his development as a person is seemingly abandoned halfway through, evading the ramifications of a slave becoming something other than a stereotype. Abolitionists are seen as ‘low-down’ and to help a slave escape is something to be ashamed of. The issue of Huck acting as an abolitionist is again avoided by making it an act of friendship rather than a fundamental ideology he possesses. The final evasion is presented in the ending of the book, with the characters reduced to low comedy, almost destroying the growth Jim and Huck had undergone as characters in the narrative. This idea was summarised by Pettit as follows: Mark Twain’s constant shuffling between sympathy, pathos, disinterest, and even hostility toward Jim suggests he could not make up his mind about where this black man stood in his scheme for the novel.# What could have been a commentary on the effects of slavery was lost amid the farcical climax, and it is left to the reader to try to unearth the underlying serious themes Bibliography Camfield, Greg, ‘Sentimental Liberalism and the Problem of Race in Huckleberry Finn’, Nineteenth Century Literature, 46 (1991) Mailloux, Steven, ‘Reading Huckleberry Finn: The Rhetoric of Performed Ideology’, in New Essays on Huckleberry Finn, ed. By Louis J. Budd, (1985) Marx, Leo, ‘Mr Eliot, Mr Trilling, and Huckleberry Finn’, in Norton Critical Anthology, (1997) Messent, Peter, New Readings of the American Novel: Narrative Theory and Its Applications, (1990) Pettit, Arthur G, Mark Twain and South, (1974) Twain, Mark, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, (1884), Penguin Classics, (1985) |
|||||||||||||
| Non-fiction |
|||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |