The Scarlet Letter (Nathaniel Hawthorne)

Hester Prynne committed adultery in seventeenth century New England. As part of a Puritan community, she is forced to wear a scarlet letter 'A' for the rest of her life. Ostracized and outcast, she lives with her daughter on the outskirts of town and spends her days producing top-quality sewing, showing deference to all detractors, and dedicated to good works. But who was the man in this terrible affair? Hester refuses to reveal the secret, but all will become plain in time. For the man is himself tortured by his sin, and cannot bear the weight of such guilt. In either case, how long must one suffer for sin?

-----------

Hawthorne published this in 1850 as an account of Puritan America from 200 years prior. If there is any accuracy in his portrayal, the community's reaction to Hester's sin is a horrible distortion of the gospel. There is no forgiveness, no faith, no future. Only a works-based righteousness that denies a grim reality: all fall far short of the glory of God. We all sin grievously and need forgiveness. We rest alone on Christ and His work—not our own. No amount of good works can earn us heaven, but in Christ, no amount of sin can estrange us from His love.

Hawthorne's portrayal is heartbreaking for the reason I expound above. It is hard to look upon a society claiming Christ by creed but denying Him by deed. It seems woefully akin to the Pharisees of Jesus' day, whose dispositions were so soundly condemned that one would thinks the Puritans, knowing Scripture well, would know better than to imitate such madness. And yet, it is the human tendency to  put up a front. I guess I'm ranting . . . back to the story. 

Hawthorne seems to have two points here:

1) "Be true! Be true! Be true! Show freely to the world, if not your worst, yet some trait whereby the worst may be inferred!" Alongside other truths of the gospel, this is correct. We are free (and commanded) to confess our sins because our righteousness is in Christ. The man in the novel who lives under the burden of unconfessed sin for years would have done better to confess outright.

2) Don't linger on the past. There are many sins, and some bearing the same (or greater) weight than adultery. This is also true, so long as true restoration has happened, which needs forgiveness (from the offended) and confession/repentance (from the offender). There may be an implication here, however: some commentators argue that Hawthorne is implying that sin isn't that bad (or that you can save yourself with good works). If that is the implication, then that is a false conclusion and stains an otherwise commendable work. I couldn't tell (see the next paragraph).

The story was solid; the delivery was difficult. Hawthorne writes in paragraph-long sentences. Though eloquent and skilled, the meandering style incorporates far too any asides or qualifications for me to fully follow. I could have teased it out (had I given it more thought); as it stands, I tried to get the gist and move on. I liked it better than The House of Seven Gables, but only just. Ultimately, the worth of this work hangs on my point 2 above: if there is an implication that sin is okay, the work is diminished in my mind. But if the focus is on confession and repentance and restoration, then the work is to be highly esteemed. 

Rating: B