Hawthorne`s Feminine Voices: Reading

Transcription

Hawthorne's Feminine Voices: Reading "The Scarlet Letter" as a Woman
Author(s): Suzan Last
Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Journal of Narrative Technique, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Fall, 1997), pp. 349-376
Published by: Journal of Narrative Theory
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30225475 .
Accessed: 29/01/2013 11:15
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Journal of Narrative Theory and Department of English Language and Literature, Eastern Michigan
University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Narrative
Technique.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:15:23 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Hawthorne'sFeminineVoices:ReadingThe
ScarletLetteras a Woman
SuzanLast
A greatdeal of recentcriticismof NathanielHawthorne'sTheScarlet Letter
has focused on the two generalareasof narrativetheoryandfeminism.Feminist readingsof the novel have aboundedsince Nina Baym opened the subject up to debate in 1982 (Murfin282); and, whetherfeminist, materialist,
psychoanalytic,deconstructionist-or any combinationof these and moremost critics devote considerablescrutinyto the "conflicted"and equivocal
quality in the novel's narrativetechnique.'The narrator's"equivocal"style
has inspired much critical speculationas to the novel's "underlyingideology," including debate over whetherthe novel is a seminal work of protofeminism orjust the opposite. Nevertheless,the equivocationin TheScarlet
Letteris not merelya dialecticof two contradictoryvoices; the narratorseems
to speak in many voices, to present multiple points of view, and to share
sympathieswith them alljust as muchas he revealsthemflawed. The lack of
a single guiding voice is, perhaps,what gave Mrs. Hawthorneher famous
headache.However,it is also the qualitythatmakesthe novel remarkableand, I would like to assert,remarkablyfeminine.Althoughthe narrativecontains many passages that characterisethe narratoras a championof patriarchal values, Hawthornealso makes use of what can be labelled "feminine"
narrativetechniquesandstyles, with the effect of creatinga narrativeof radical sympathyfor women sufferingunderpatriarchaloppression.While all of
the voices are not consistentin voicing this sympathy,the polyphonyof contradictoryvoices-both masculineand feminine-can, in itself, be labelled
a femininetechnique,as it is inclusiveratherthanrestrictive.It includes
marginalisedperspectives and allows the reader a range of interpretation
ratherthan one unified, coherentand "authoritativetruth"in the text.
350
1
N
T
Gendered Discourse?
Let me acknowledge,before proceedingany further,that the distinction
drawnbetween "masculine"and "feminine"discourse is entirely problematic, and necessarily artificial.The habit of binaryopposition in the sociolinguistic sphere has led to an identificationof non-genderedobjects and
ideas with eitherthe masculineor femininegender.In addition,the male half
of the binarypairhas been privilegedover its feminine counterpart,with the
effect of creatingassumptionsof "natural"male superiorityand female infe-
becomesproblematic-indeed,it begsdeconstructionriority.This"habit"
whendiscussingliterature,for writingitself is consideredthe "feminine"
halfof the speech/writing
pairof binaryopposites.
Whilefeministcriticshavebeenableto identifyanddefine"masculine"
formsof discourse(easilydonesincetheyarethe ones thathavebeenrecommendedin languageandrhetoricmanualssincePlato),theyhavemuch
discourse.VirginiaWoolf,
moredifficultydescribingordefining"feminine"
withoutever stoopingto vulgardefinitions,presentsthe "femininesentence"-throughexample-as one thatcannotbe limitedto a single perspectiveorthought,butinsteadleadsto multipledigressions.H6l1neCixous
assuresus that,whileit maybe "impossibleto definea femininepracticeof
writing,"that "doesn'tmean thatit does not exist. But it will always surpass
the discourse that regulatesthe phallocentricsystem" (340). Many critics,
nevertheless,have managedto make some defining observationsregarding
gendereddiscourse.It is importantto keep in mindthatthese distinctionsare
only arbitrary,and necessarily artificial,based on social constructions,not
biology; silence, for instance, may be no more inherently"feminine"than
sunlightis inherently"masculine,"except thatwe have been conditionedto
thinkof it as so:
MasculineDiscourses
man as subjectof language
speech (Aristotle/Plato)
speech/writing/authority
coherent/unified
logic/reason
head/mind/intellect
beginning-middle-end
one subjectperspective
FeminineDiscourses
woman as subjectto language
writing(Derrida)
silence; semiotics
"goes off in all directions"(Irigaray)
intuition;streamof consciousness
"body"(Cixous)
centre,outward,centre
"other"or many perspectives(Woolf)
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
linear progressof time
objective/historic
one meaning/logos
public
351
cyclical; "monumental"time (Kristeva)
subjective;subversive
pluralityof meaning
private
This schema by no means provides a complete, or even adequate,list of
distinctions.SusanLanser,for instance,cites "power"as anotherof the fundamentaldifferencesbetween "masculine"and "feminine"speech patterns:
powerless(feminine)speechis "polite,emotional,enthusiastic,gossipy, talkative, uncertain,dull, chatty,"while powerful(masculine)speech is "capable,
direct, rational,illustratinga sense of humor,unfeeling, strong (in tone and
wordchoice) andblunt"(617). She argues,consequently,thatBakhtin'sconcept of polyphony,a multi-voicedqualityoperatingin all narratives,is "more
pronouncedand more consequentialin women's narratives"(618). "Polyphonic"can easily describethe multiplevoices in the narrativeof TheScarlet Letter
If one follows JonathanCuller's suggestion and reads The Scarlet Letter
"asa woman"-that is, resistingthe tendencyto "readas a man"2-feminine
discoursesand techniquesseem to emerge from the novel in profusion.My
first reading of the novel was, perhaps,a "masculine"reading, as I found
that the narrativegave me, as it is said to have given Mrs. Hawthorne,a
headache.The lack of consistency and coherence in voice and vision was
confusing and even irritating.Only in a second-perhaps more "feminine"
reading-did this perceived "lack"become rife with expression and meaning. This "feminine"readingreveals the many "feminine"characteristicsof
the narrative,and suggests-at the very least-the ambivalentattitudetowardspatriarchaloppressionof women displayedin the text, and possibly a
much more profoundsympathywith female oppressionthanis usually to be
found in a male text. The multiplevoices presentmultipleperspectivesand
ideologies, or an anti-logos narrative, rejecting the possibility of one
logocentrictruthor one phallocentricview of history.
The Sting
In the bitinglyironic"Custom-House"
sketch,the narrator(who most
of thesketch,if only "theediis
the
author
that
he
at
least
certainlyimplies
tor,or verylittlemore"[23]of TheScarletLetter)insinuateshimselffirmly
352
J
N
T
into the historicalsettingof his "found"story.He implies thathe is Nathaniel
Hawthorne,author,and familiarto the readersthroughhis stories writtenin
an "old manse."He traceshis ancestryback to early Puritantimes, when his
forefatherswere communityleaders,not unlike those rulingover the Salem
of Hester Prynne.While entrenchinghimself in this masculine world, he is
also distancinghimself from it, not only throughhis ironic descriptionsof
the "venerablepersonages"(52) of the custom-house,butthroughothernarrativetechniquesas well. The writingof TheScarletLetteritself is a distancing act, and he imagines the sternrebukeof his Puritanancestorsat his chosen vocation of story-telling(27). He chooses not to recorda "respectable"
historyin truepatriarchalfashion-which he well mightdo, given the nature
of the "authorizedand authenticated..,. document"he has found (44, emphasis added);nor does he choose to transcribethe heartilymasculinetales
of seafaringdirectlyfrom the sailorsfrequentingthe custom-house.Instead,
he chooses to writea romance.In addition,he employs the conventionof the
"foundstory,"a respectableliteraryconventionof the time, but in this case
his use of it can be takenfor little less thana patentlie, which undermineshis
authorityand reliabilityfrom the start.For in the same paragraphhe undermines his own convention when he admitsthathe has not confined himself
to Pue's "halfdozen sheets of foolscap,"but has allowed himself "nearlyor
altogetheras much license as if the facts hadbeen entirelyof my own invention" (44). This equivocationresults in a fundamentalproblemof reading:
how is the readerto respondto the expectationscreatedby the use of generic
literaryconventions that are underminedby a narratoralmost in the same
breaththathe has constructedthem?
While insisting on the authoritativehistoricityof his tale with one voice,
he calls it a romancewith another.Because writingromanceswas not altogether a manly occupationin Hawthorne'sday, it is one that many modern
critics have come to regardas revolutionary.3Michael Davitt Bell, for instance, arguesthatto "indulgein the delusion of romancewas to undermine
the basis of psychological and social order,to alienateoneself from [as Thomas Jeffersonso prosaicallyput it] 'thereal businessof life'" (37). A change
in the political weatherhas resultedin the author/narrator
being fired from
his position withina frozenmasculineworldthathas effectively numbedhis
creativeside. The "wretchednumbness"resultingfromhis tenurein the custom-househas affectedhis creativityto the extentthathis characters"would
not be warmedandrenderedmalleable,by any heatthatI could kindle at my
intellectualforge"(45). The politicaloustinghas enabledhim to rekindlehis
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
353
imaginativefires. He rejectsthe masculinemilieu in orderto enterthe world
of imaginationand creativity.However,he abjuresthe more acceptable"realistic"form of the novel (ruledin his day by verisimilitude,or "probability"
and convention),in favourof a form thathe saw as having more freedomto
indulge in the fantasticand marvelous,freedomto present"thetruthof the
human heart"in a mannerof his own choosing. HeatherDubrow suggests
that "if writing in a form that is not in vogue is a way of distinguishing
oneself from the dominantliterarycultureof one's age, it can also be a way
of aligning oneself with a subculture,with the rebellioussons who are chalfathers"(13). Inthiscase, Hawthornemaybe aligning
lengingthe authoritarian
himself with the rebelliousdaughters-the "scribblingwomen"(he calls himself a "scribbler"at the end of the CustomHouse sketch)-rather than with
the male novelists of his time. In telling the storyof the scarletletter,he has
chosen to tell a woman'sstory;and in choosing a "feminine"formto present
it, he has adoptedwhathave come to be thoughtof as "feminine"techniques.
This discussionof the CustomHouse sketch,nevertheless,remainsproblematic, for it leaves out a great deal of contraryinformationgiven by the
narrator.The most consistentcharacteristicof the narratoris thathe is rarely
consistent on any topic. The story could never be mistakenfor a univocal
manifestoof proto-feminism.The narratordoes not simply rejectthe masculine milieu; he leaves it reluctantlyand somewhatbitterly,referringto himself as "decapitated"by the political powers that have ousted him from his
masculineprofession(and symbolicallycastratedhim). Janis Stout notes an
"innerdualityregardingconventionalmoralstandards"in the narrative(234);
but the conflict is expressedas more than a simple "duality."A multiplicity
of conflicting voices oppositely and convergentlynarratethe story.In entering the "feminine" world of romance, the narratoragrees to give his
"predecessor'smemorythe creditwhichwill be rightfullyits due"(44). Since
Pue's manuscriptis an obvious fiction, this vow may signal an intentionto
attendfaithfullyto historicalrepresentation.He vows, for instance,to be the
"representative"of his Puritanancestors while writing his story (27). He
admits that "strongtraits of their naturehave intertwinedthemselves with
mine."He wantsto take on their"shame,"andperhapsremove the cursethat
has seemingly been laid upon them for theirceaseless oppressionof women
(27). He wants to redresshistory's selective remembranceof Puritanseverity, andits neglect of their"betterdeeds, althoughthese were many"(27). He
calls them "earnest"and "energetic";he appreciatesthe simplicity and seriousness of their morality(59); and he admirestheir attemptat creatingthe
354
1
N
T
"new Jerusalem."This connection with his past has moved HenryJames to
comment on the narrator'srelationshipwith the Puritanheritage as it pervades the novel:
Puritanism,in a word, is there, not only objectively,as
Hawthorne
triedto placeit there,butsubjectivelyas well,not
in anyharshnessof
I mean,in hisjudgmentof his characters
prejudice,orin theobtrusionof morallesson;butin thevery
qualityof his ownvision.(51)
At the same time he incorporatesa "Puritanvoice" into his narrative,however, the narratoralso wants to acknowledgethe motivationsand feelings of
characterswho have sinned and brokenthe laws of this Puritancommunity.
It is the juggling of the multiplevoices, perspectives,and ideologies that
makes the narrativeof The Scarlet Letterspeak with a feminine sensibility.
The narratormaintainsa constantpush-pullrelationshipwith his past, one
moment identifying with his patriarchalancestorsand co-workers,the next
condemning them. This endless equivocationis the fundamentalnarrative
technique used throughoutthe novel, as the narratorrarely states anything
frequentlyallowing a varietyof interpretationsandpoints
straightforwardly,
of view (two possible explanationsfor the existence of the rose bush [54];
severalreasonsfor the popularityof Hester'sneedlework[77]; threereasons
why Hester remainsin New England [75]; four explanationsfor the marks
on Dimmesdale's chest [197]; and innumerable "whether...
or..."
con-
structionsliberally pepperedthroughoutthe novel). His narrativeauthority
certainly"goes off in all directions."If thereis an "authorial"phallogocentric
voice in the narrative,it is not the only-nor even the primary-voice of the
omniscient narrative"truth."The many voices and perspectives allow for
multipleandeven contradictoryinterpretations,as readerscan choose which
voice they want to give "authority"or predominance,and which perspective, if any, holds a poetic "truth."
The equivocationprominentin the narrationof TheScarlet Letterundermines the logocentricconceptof a singularmeaningandconfoundsa totalizing phallocentricinterpretation;in the logic of binaryopposition,this technique rests decidedly on the feminine side of the scale. Ignoringthe many
meta-discourseequivocationsin the Custom-Housesketch, the story itself
begins with the narratorofferingus alternativeandheterodoxinterpretations.
The narrator'scanonisationof Ann Hutchinsonat the opening of the story
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
355
revealsan unorthodox
inclinationfromthe start.He undermines
the ideaof
withthedescriptionof the"practical
necessities"of the
thePuritan"utopia"
cemeteryand prison(53). At the doorof the prison-indeed, at the very
"thresholdof our narrative"-weare given the imageof the rose bush,a
symbolof beauty,contrastingwith the sterncolourlessnessof the Puritan
of its
landscape.Weareallowedto chooseforourselveswhichinterpretation
origin we prefer:the supernaturalbelief thatit has sprungup underthe "foot-
whichthenarrator
assuresus "thereis
stepsof thesaintedAnnHutchinson,"
fair authorityfor believing,"or the more prosaicexplanationthat it "merely
survivedout of the sternold wilderness"(54). Obviouslythe latteris the
butthenarrator
seemsto preferthe
morereasonableandlogicalexplanation;
He urgesthereaderto do the sameby
former,moreromanticinterpretation.
andby pluckingoneof theflowersfromtherose
givingit a "fairauthority,"
bushandpresentingit to the reader,thatit mighteither"symbolizesome
sweet moralblossom, thatmay be found along the track,or relieve the darkening close of a tale of humanfrailtyand sorrow"(54). This act, fraughtwith
gendersignificance(as mentraditionally
give womenflowers),it couldbe
said, interpellatesthe readerto "readas a woman"andresistover-thematizing
the story in a masculinemanner.By favouringthe supernaturalreadingover
the logical one, the suggestionin the opening passage of the narrativeprivileges a "poetic truth"of romanceratherthanhistoricalrealism, and a feminine perspectiveratherthan a masculineone.
The "Problem" of Interpretation
The constantnarrativeequivocationpresentsobvious problemsfor interpretation-perhaps more clearly to recent critics steeped in the ambiguities
of receptiontheory,feminism, deconstructionism,and postmodernambivalence, thanto Hawthorne'scontemporaries.Earlycriticswere not as eager to
recognise the text's refusalto be interpretedin a singularway.The novel was
alternatelylauded and decried by those critics as a work of either supreme
didacticism-whether pro or anti-Puritan--orcomplete immorality,"unfit
for the subjectof literature"(Brownson36). E. A. Duyckinck's great admiration for Hawthorne's"psychologicalromance"comes from its "moral,"
which, "thoughsevere, is wholesome, andis a sounderbit of Puritandivinity
than we have been of late accustomedto hear from the degeneratesuccessors of CottonMather.... The spiritof his old Puritanancestors,to whom he
refers in the preface, lives in Nathaniel Hawthorne"(24-25). In contrast,
356
J N
T
George Bailey Loringfound thatthe tale "properlyexposed the inhumanity
of Puritanism, which repressed the sensuous element in human nature"
(Murfin207). GeorgeRipley,in his discussionof the novel's "moral,"comes
closer to a modernperspectivein assertingthat"themoralof the story-for
it has a moralfor all wise enough to detect it-is shadowedforthratherthan
expressed in a few brief sentences near the close of the volume" (26), but,
perhapswisely, Ripley refrainsfrom specifying what this singular"moral"
might be.
The first critics mentionedseem to have heardonly the "public"voice of
the narrator,the one seeking to be authorial,direct,and "illustratinga sense
of humor."Perhaps,readingas men, they only heardthe masculinevoices in
the narrative.PerhapsRipley hearda more privatenarrativevoice, one underminingthatpublicstanceof masculineauthority.However,even thatpublic
voice was heardto speakcontradictorily-to which the opposing interpretations of Brownson and Duyckinck attest-indicating that the "voices" are
not limited to a simple oppositionof "public"and "private."The narratoris
not merelyjumping back and forthbetween his constrainedPuritanpersona
and a mid-nineteenth-century
modem thinker.The focalizationis constantly
and
privatevoices and perspectives,as well as
shifting among many public
among the characters.In the opening scene of the novel, the narratorcreates
a point of view for himself throughthe "earlyseverityof Puritancharacter,"
throughwhose perspective he imagines the many possible spectacles that
might be beheld on the scaffold of early PuritanSalem (54). A few pages
later,the narratorimagines how a "Papist"might perceive the woman and
child on the scaffold, as an image of Divine Maternity,"butonly by contrast"since in this image was "the taint of deeper sin in the most sacred
qualityof humanlife, workingsucheffect, thatthe worldwas only the darker
for this woman's beauty,and the more lost for the infantthatshe had borne"
(59). This harshjudgment seems straightforwardand "authorial"until one
remembersthatit is focalized throughthe pointof view of the "Papist."This
double-voicedqualityobscuresthe intentof the statement.
andperhapsmostpublic,voice-the one whichseems
In his contemporary,
most "authorial"-the narratortendsto generaliseandjudge didacticallyand
overtly.SusanLanser'sdistinctionbetweenpublicandprivatenarrativevoices
is based on the narrateeimplied by the voice. A privatenarrative,the traditionalareato whichwomenwriterswererelegated,positsa particularnarratee,
usually in diary or letter form. The public voice hails a public audience. It
inhabitsthe same narrativelevel as the reader,and can often be seen as an
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
357
"author/narrator"
(Lanser617). The narratorof TheScarletLetteradmirably
fits Lanser's descriptionof the public narratorwhen he adopts his authorial
tendency to generalise andjudge. He speaks directlyto the implied reader,
andbecomes overtly generalisingandjudgmentalwhen he characterizesthe
early Puritanwomen as stronger,more solid and forceful, and even more
beautifulin their"substantial"way thantheirdescendants-his own female
contemporaries(55). But in the scene that follows, he undermineshis own
authorialperspectiveby allowing these "hardvisaged dames"to show themselves harsh, even shrewish, and certainly unattractivein their desire for
more extreme punishmentof Hester than that decreed by the magistrates.
One "autumnalmatron"assertsthat "atthe very least, they should have put
the brandof a hot iron on HesterPrynne'sforehead"(56). Anotherwoman,
"the ugliest as well as most pitiless of these self-constitutedjudges," adds
that"thiswoman has broughtshameupon us all, andought to die" (56). The
narratorrendershis own diegetic summaryof these women unreliableby
presentingthem mimeticallyas contradictinghis generalisationof early Puritanwomen.
Monika Elbertcharacterizesthese post-menopausalwomen as mimicking the patriarchsof theircommunity.They areno longermaternal,andtherefore have no value in a patriarchalsystem, except whatthey can appropriate
for themselves as faux men. They have denied their gender,their maternal
power, and have no recoursein a patriarchalsociety but to adopt masculine
power: "These antagonisticwomen see Hester's sexuality in the way men
conventionallyhave viewed it, as a threat"(175), and have dealt with that
threatby "becomingmoremale,morehard,thanthe toughestpatriarch"(176).
The only female voice thatspeaksout sympatheticallyfor Hesteris the young
motherin the crowd.The unnamed,undescribed,unpresentedbut still present
"Puritan"focalizer,whom the narratoroccasionally allows to speak through
his narrativevoice, must feel some uneasiness before the heartlessnessof
many of the PuritanGoodwives aroundthe scaffold;for, indeed,the narrator
has a man in the crowd chastise the women for theirharshness:"Thatis the
hardestword yet! Hush, now, gossips" (56). This anonymous"man in the
crowd"speaksfor the narratoron morethanone level: he silences the women
who are underminingthe public narrator'sattemptto resurrectthe "better
deeds"and more noble traitsof the Puritans;at the same time he is the sympathetic,yet socially orthodoxvoice thatcondemnsthe methodand severity
of judgment,if not thejudgmentitself. As a characterandnot overt narrative
358
J
N
T
voice, he is partof a mimetic-thus more "objective"-presentation of the
harshnessof Puritanjudgment.
Raising the "Fallen Woman" to a New Art
JanisStoutobservesthatthe novel's conflictedauthorialvoice challenges
the patriarchalstereotypeof the fallen woman and the Puritantreatmentof
her, but never questions the reality of Hester's sin or guilt. She hears no
ironyor double-voicedqualitywhen the narratorspeaksof Hester'ssin, guilt
and shame, and asserts that "howeverstronglyhe may deplore the narrowness and insensitivity of the self-righteousPuritansystem, he must choose
law over the tracklesswildernessof moralchaos"(237). Althoughthe narrator seems to abhortheirmethods,he seems fundamentallyin agreementwith
the Puritanphilosophy,and thus, in Stout's view, he "cannotleave unchallenged the radicalsocial ideas he attributesto her"(238). Stout does not cite
a page numberor state specifically to which passage she is referring,but the
following excerpt seems to be an appropriateexample to highlightthe contreatmentof Hesterandherradicalism.
flicted natureof the author/narrator's
It is the strongest of several passages in which Hester voices passionate,
unorthodoxopinions and feelings, and which the narratorconsistently follows with a seemingly negativejudgment.While the narrator'schallenge to
Hester's radicalsocial ideas may seem authorialbecause of theirplacement
immediatelyfollowing Hester'sthought-and, therefore,carrythe authority
of "thelast word"-these judgmentsarenot only ambiguous,butare heavily
outweighed by the narrator'sassignmentof an eloquentpassion in the freeindirect-discourseblend of his and Hester'svoice (italics indicatingFID are
my emphasis):
Indeed,thesamedarkquestionoftenroseintohermind,with
referenceto the whole raceof womanhood.Wasexistence
worth accepting, even to the happiest among them?As con-
cernedher own individualexistence,she had long ago decidedin thenegative,anddismissedthepointas settled.(134)
Subsequentto this passage aboutHester'sinnerturmoil,the narratorprovides a generalisationabout women. It is writtenin the presenttense, making Hestera kindof"everywoman,"andtherefore,interpellatingfemale readers to agree, while creating a kind of sympatheticunderstandingfor male
readers:
Hawthorne's
Voices
Feminine
359
A tendencyto speculation,
thoughit maykeepwomanquiet,as
it doesman,yet makeshersad.Shediscerns,it maybe sucha
hopelesstaskbeforeher.As a firststep,the wholesystemof
societyis to be torndown,andbuiltup anew.Then,the very
natureof theoppositesex,oritslonghereditary
habit,whichhas
becomelikenature,is to be essentiallymodified,beforewoman
canbe allowedto assumewhatseemsa fairandsuitableposition.(134)
This passage, commonly attributedto Hester,is quite clearly spoken by the
narrator;it is he who voices the radicalideas, in a profoundempathy with
Hester'sstateof mind,andwith the perception,as suggestedin the passage,of
women in general.He is addinghis own voice to her complaint-not in the
ambiguousformof freeindirectdiscourse,butplainlyin his "public"personagivingit the weightof"authorial"conviction.Thejudgmentfollowingthe revolutionarypassagefocuses not on Hester'sradicalideas, but on her thoughtsof
suicide:
Thus,HesterPrynne,whosehearthadlostitsregularandhealthy
of mind;
throb,wanderedwithouta clew in the darklabyrinth
nowturnedasideby aninsurmountable
precipice;nowstarting
backfroma deepchasm.Therewaswildandghastlysceneryall
aroundher,anda homeandcomfortnowhere.
Attimes,a fearful
doubtstroveto possesshersoul,whetherit werenotbetterto
sendPearlat onceto heaven,andgo herselfto suchfuturityas
EternalJusticeshouldprovide.
Thescarletletterhadnotdoneits office.(134)
Beginning with the word "thus,"the narratorsubsumeshis radicalsympathy
with Hester undera generalguise of psychonarration-implyingthat he has
been merelypresentingHester'sthoughtsall along.The public "Puritannarrastatementof judgment,distor,"with a simple, if not exactly straightforward,
avows the fragile sympathyhis alter("Other")ego created.This "public"persona aligns himself with the Puritanpatriarchalsystem in judging Hesternot
only as a sinnerbut as a revolutionary;but the moreprivateor subversivenarratorhas unquestionablyshownhis allegiancewithHester'sradicalism,even if
he is conflictedaboutthe moralnatureof the "sin"thathelpedproduceit.
360
J
N
T
While severalcriticshave noted that"itis throughHester'svoice..,. that
Hawthornespeaks as a revolutionary"(Martin128), an even more tangible
subversionis enactedthroughHester's silence and non-verbalcommunication. The narrativecalls attentionto the "feminine"discourseof silence and
gives it a power as greator greaterthanthe logos of patriarchy.Herrefusalto
name the fatherof her child confounds the leaders of the community.This
refusalto be boundto a "father,"even if beyond the laws of marriage,gives
Hestera greaterindividuality.She does not conformto an acceptablemodel
of womanhoodthatreflects the man to whom she might belong; she belongs
to no man in her community,and thus projectsher own meaning. She belongs to the communityas a whole-as the negativeexample,as the abjected,
sin-infected "other"-but, in the eyes of the community,she is no man's
wife, sister, mother,daughter.She is simply Hester Prynne, wearer of the
scarletletter.The letterthey have "sentenced"herto wear attemptsto define
her as a transparentsign-as a transgressorof man's laws, if not as a lawful
reflectorof a man. The attempt,however, backfires-Hester's needle subverts the interpretivecode.
ShariBenstock observes thatHester'sembroidery"makesa spectacle of
femininity,of female sexuality,of all thatPuritanlaw hopes to repress"(289).
Hester subverts the patriarchalsign by adding a non-linguistic feminine
subtextto it, makingthe symbol standfor "woman."Patriarchallaw effectively defines woman as the "outlaw"or "other,"and withinpatriarchallanguage, she can rarely find the words to defend herself. In representing
"woman,"Hester's sign does not simply brandwomen as "other,"but condemns patriarchyand its system of languagefor its inabilityto express and
conceive of women as anythingmore thaneithertransparentstereotypesor
outlaws.
Whenthe communityfirstviews the embroideredletteron Hester'sbreast
on the scaffold, one womanindignantlyinterpretsHester'sembroideryas an
attemptto make a "prideout of what they, worthy gentlemen, meant for a
punishment"(58). However,the narratorreveals this interpretationto be an
over-simplification,if not a complete misreading.WhateverHester's motive, the effect of her artis the transformationof the intendedmeaningof the
letter;instead of hiding her shame, she drawsthe gaze more intently to the
symbol on her breast, pronouncingher separatenessmore loudly than the
pronouncementsof the magistrates.The letter,"so fantasticallyembroidered
andilluminateduponherbosom..,. hadthe effect of a spell, takingher out of
the ordinaryrelationswith humanity,and enclosing her in a sphere by her-
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
361
self" (58). Slowly, she subvertsthe intentof shame by transformingthe object of law into an objectof art,with its own semiotic system of meaning.By
going beyond the sumptuaryregulations,the symbol becomes lawless instead of representativeof the law. She has obscuredand confused the legal
intent of the symbol by making it an illegal accessory.The narratornever
raises the question of Hester's motive, but his and Hester's silence on this
subject-combined with the attemptsof other charactersto read and interpret her intent-allows the symbol itself to speak volumes. Indeed, the intended signifier of the scarlet letter-"Adulteress"-is never mentionedin
the narrative.However,like Dimmesdale'sdouble-voicedsermons,and like
the narrator'smultifariousnarrative,the variousandtransitorymeaningsthat
the symbol absorbsas it slides its way aroundthe text and onto othercharacters is a subjectof endless speculation.
Withoutbenefit of a suitablelanguage,Hestercommunicatesthroughher
feminine artistryof needle-work-an artistrythatthe narratorrecognises as
"almostthe only one within a woman'sgrasp"(76). The women in the community recognise her non-verbal, feminine form of communication, and
therebyrecognise-perhaps nothingso definiteas theirown "outlaw"status
as women underpatriarchalrule-but possibly a vague sense of the insufficiency of the patriarchalsystem of languageandlaw to adequatelyrepresent
and to serve the "unspeakable"needs and desires of women. They come to
her with "theirsorrowsandperplexities,"seeking hercounsel and sympathy
as someone who has been a publicvictim as they areprivatevictims. Only in
this non-verbal,semiotic system can she begin to take control, to some degree, of her identity;andonly throughthe use of this semiotic power can she
subvertthe patriarchalsymbol of punishmentplacedon herbreast,as well as
the patriarchalpower placed over all women in the community.
The narrator/author-ashe characteriseshimself-associates Hester,as
he does Pearl, with artistry,creativity,and imagination,and by doing so,
implies a connection with his own artistryas a writer.When Hester rejects
the joy (jouissance?) she receives from her art of embroideryas a sin, the
narratoris quick to correctthis view, saying that "this morbidmeddling of
conscience with an immaterialmatterbetokened..,. somethingthatmightbe
deeply wrong, beneath"(78). While the public narratormay be conflicted
aboutthe masculine world view of being a "writerof story-books,"the private voice cannothelp but affirmthe "jouissance"of creativeexpression,be
it Hester's embroideryor his own writing. Hester's "morbidmeddling of
conscience" is temporary,for by the end of the narrativeHester is joyfully
362
1
N
T
"embroideringa baby-garment,with such a lavish richness of golden fancy
as would have raised a public tumult,had any infant, thus apparelled,been
shown to our sombre-huedcommunity"(200). Hestercontinuesto write her
rebellion in lace, outside the boundariesof law-as Hawthornewrites his in
romance,outside the boundariesof patriarchalconvention.
As a writer,the narrator,like Hester and Pearl, is outside the patriarchal
community.Nina Baym sees Hesteras a symbol of Hawthorne'sown rebellion against his politically motivated firing, which resulted in his ousting
frommasculinesociety. In writingTheScarletLetter,he has, in effect, puton
the scarlet letter and shown his affinity with Hester.RobertK. Martin,in a
similarvein, sees in TheScarletLetterHawthorne's"reworkingof the figure
of the strongerotic woman artist"and an expressionof his own anxieties"anxieties [that]were as much about his intrusion,as a man, into a female
world as aboutwomen's intrusionsinto his male world"(122). The narrator
practicallysays as muchin the Custom-Housesketchwhen he finds the scar-
let letterin theheapof papers-althoughit takessometimeforhimto resist
"readingas a man."First,he describeshis absurdlymasculine"examination"
of thecloth,perceivingthatit "assumedtheshapeof a letter.It wasthecapital letterA. By an accuratemeasurement,each limb proved to be precisely
three inches and a quarterin length" (42-43). However, he soon finds that
this examinationdoes not reveal the "deep meaning in it, most worthy of
interpretation..,. which..,. streamedforthfrom the mystic symbol."While
it evaded
themeaning"communicated"
itselfto his(feminine)"sensibilities,"
"theanalysis"of his (masculine)"mind"(43). Only by "readingas a woman"
does he effect a solution to this riddle. Placing the cloth on his breast produces a profoundeffect: "It seemed to me,-the readermay smile, but must
not doubt my word,-it seemed to me, then, that I experienceda sensation
not altogetherphysical, yet almost so, as of burningheat;and as if the letter
were not of red cloth, but red-hot iron" (43). He has brandedhimself, as
Hesterhas been branded,as an outsider,an Other,living on the edge of patriarchalsociety. An empathy-indeed, a physical sympathy-with Hesterhas
been establishedthroughthe semiotic power still vested in the letter.In establishing his semiotic connection with Hester throughher symbol, he has
brandedhimself not only as a writer,but as a writerof a woman's story,told
in a womanlyway.Afterthis branding,the narratoradmits,"Ishuddered,and
involuntarilylet it [the scarletletter]fall uponthe floor."One can understand
a certainreluctanceon the partof a manto take up the voice of the "m/other."
He is still a man living in an oppressivepatriarchalsociety, and the patriar-
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
363
chalvoice, too, is partof him andcannotbe ignoredor silenced.It speaks
alongwiththemanyothervoicesof thenarrative.
Pearl the Elf/Child
The symbolism of the scarletletteris most obviously and repeatedlyassociatedwith Pearl.She is "thescarletletterendowedwith life" (90), both in
her appearanceand her function. Like the letter, Pearl is the constant reminderto Hesterof her sin, but also of her redemption;the child is her punishment and her reward.For if Pearl is identified with the lawlessness that
Hesterhas embroideredaroundthe letter,she is also identifiedwith the law
within, which determinesthatPearlmust,in some way, be Hester'spenance.
It is difficult not to readPearlallegorically,as the narratorrepeatedlyinsists
on her symbolic significance. Nina Baym sees Pearl as Hester's id, acting
out her unconsciousrebellionagainstthe unfairnessof Puritanjustice (138).
The doubling of Hester into two charactersof ego and alter ego makes her
more acceptably sympathetic-at least to the more puritanic ethic of
Hawthorne'scontemporaries.
RegardingHester's behaviour,the narratorassertsthat
it is remarkable,
thatpersonswho speculatethe mostboldly
oftenconformwiththe mostperfectquietudeto the external
of society.Thethoughtsufficesthem,withoutinregulations
vestingitselfin thefleshandbloodof action.So it seemedto
be withHester.Yet,hadlittlePearlnevercometo herfromthe
spiritualworld,it mighthavebeenfarotherwise.(133-34)
Outwardly,Hesterconformsto the standardsof her society, while Pearlembodies the "flesh and blood" acting out the repressedfantasies of rebellion.
WithoutPearl to act out her unconscious desires, Hester,the narratorconfides, "might have come down to us in history, hand in hand with Ann
Hutchinson,as the foundressof a religious sect" or, more likely, as a fellow
victim to Mistress Hibbins. Lois Cuddy notes that "in each scene Hester
behaves in one way, according to Puritanprinciples, but her feelings are
often in conflict with her externalappearance"(102). However,the narrator
rarelygives us such an explicit characterisationof Hester'sfeelings. We only
surmisethather feelings are in conflict, partlybecause we believe they must
be-the narrativeexplicitly throwsa glove in the unrelentingface of Puritan
364
J N
T
law-but mostly because of the symbiotic relationshipbetween Hester and
Pearl.Throughthe repeatedscenes of allegorising,we come to see Pearl as
representingHester's unconsciousdesires. Perhapsthis is why Hester does
not censure Pearl's "anti-social"behaviour.Like her embroidery,Pearl's
behaviouris one of the few outlets for expressing repressedfeelings that
Hesterhas. Not surprisingly,Pearl'sbehaviour,as representativeof Hester's
repressedand unconsciousurges, is seen as malevolentby the Puritancommunity,given the Puritan'ssystematicrepressionof inner desires and passions.
Pearlis seen by the townspeople-and even by hermother-as a "demon
offspring"(88), an "infantpestilence"(90), an "impof evil" (84), a "fiend"
(87), and other such demonic images. These perceptions,however, are consistently correctedby the narrator.He remindsthe reader,in his "authorial"
historian'svoice, that Lutherwas also considereda demon offspring, "according to the scandal of his monkish enemies"; "nor was Pearl the only
child to whom this inauspiciousorigin was assigned among the New England Puritans"(88). He constantlybelies Hester's anxieties about Pearl's
naturewith marvelousdescriptionsof her,characterisingher as an extraordinary, but not malevolent child. He applies imagery of witchcraft in an
approbatoryway, associatingit with the imaginationandcreativityof a solitaryperson, therebynegatingits connotationswith evil:
Athome,withinandaroundhermother's
cottage,Pearlwanted
Thespellof life
nota wideandvariouscircleof acquaintance.
wentforthfromherevercreativespirit,andcommunicated
itselfto a thousandobjects,as a torchkindlesa flamewherever it may be applied.The unlikeliestmaterials,a stick,a
bunchof rags,a flower,werethe puppetsof Pearl'switchcraft,and,withoutundergoing
anyoutwardchange,became
spirituallyadaptedto whateverdramaoccupiedthe stageof
her innerworld.Herone baby-voiceserveda multitudeof
imaginarypersonages,old andyoung,to talkwithal.... It
thevastvarietyof formsintowhichshethrew
waswonderful,
herintellect,withno continuity,indeed,butdartingup and
activity.... It was
dancing,alwaysin a stateof preternatural
likenothingso muchas thephantasmagoric
playof thenorthernlights.Inthemereexerciseof thefancy,however,andthe
sportivenessof a growingmind,theremightbe little more
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
365
thanwasobservablein otherchildrenof brightfaculties;exceptas Pearl,in the dearthof humanplaymates,wasthrown
moreuponthevisionarythrongwhichshecreated.(85-86)
It is the Puritanethic thatsees the solitaryandimaginativeas evil. The narrator rescues this impish image-an image presumablyoriginatingin Pue's
(fictional) manuscript-by characterisingher as an extraordinarybut essentially naturalchild. The narratorseems to take great delight in his descriptions of Pearl.These passages are withoutdoubtthe brightestin the sombre
novel. They seem, nevertheless,to be overshadowedin the minds of many
readersby the darkperspectivesof Hesterand the Puritancommunity.
The image of Pearlthatseems to dominateis the one of imp. HenryJames
describes a paintinghe saw as a child of Hesterand Pearl, in which Pearlis
an "elfish-lookinglittle girl"standingbetween her mother'sknees, glancing
"strangelyout of the picture"and "maliciouslyplaying"with the scarletletter on Hester's breast (49-50). The image persists in art as well as critical
commentary. On the other hand, Ann Abbot, a contemporary critic of
Hawthorne,sought a differentperspectiveof Pearl:
Let the authorthrowwhatlight he will uponher,fromhis
magicalprism,sheretainsherperfectandvividhumanindividuality.Whenhe wouldhave us call herelvish andimplike,we persistin seeingonlya capricious,roguish,untamed
child,suchasmanya motherhaslookeduponwithawe,anda
feelingof helplessincapacityto rule.(33)
Abbot seems to have heardthe voice of the privatenarratorwithoutrealising
it. For when one separatesthe narrator'sdescriptionsof Pearl from those
descriptionsstronglyfocalized throughothercharacters,thatis precisely the
light thatis thrownon Pearl.She is the rose, pluckedby the narratorfrom the
rose bush, and handedto the readerat the beginningof the novel. She is the
"sweet moralblossom" (54) thatrelieves the excessive darknessof the tale;
but she is also "a lovely and immortalflower"sprung"outof the rankluxuriance of a guilty passion." She is naturalinnocence-a "noble savage"but also the emblem of sin. This double view of Pearlemphasisesthe nature
of perception-of the tendency to see what one expects or is told to see.
Perhapssomeone "readingas a man"will be more likely to accept the "demonized"Pearl,as she is so forcefully characterisedby her Puritancommu-
366
1
N
T
nity, and as James's descriptionsuggests; whereas someone "readingas a
woman"might be morelikely to resist this demonization,and see Pearlsimply as a child, as Abbot does.
The twinning of Pearl also reveals the narrator'sconflict regardingthe
natureof the sin that producedher.The narratorcharacterisesHester's attitude towardher "sin"as conflicted: "She knew her deed had been evil; she
could have little faith, therefore,that its result [Pearl] would be for good"
(81); but she also exclaims to Dimmesdalethat"whatwe did had a consecration of its own"(154), and,togetherat the brookside,HesterandDimmesdale
contemplatePearlas "theliving hieroglyph..,. the onenessof theirbeing...the
materialunion, andthe spiritualidea, in whomthey met"(162). If Hester'sis
the revolutionaryvoice in the novel, then Pearl'sis the romantic.However,
such high romanticismseems hardlycompatiblewith the Victorianprudery
exhibitedelsewhereby the narrator.Indeed,the narratorundermineshis own
romanticimagerywhen Pearl,roamingthe forest, and charmingall the wild
animals into a harmoniousaccord of untamedsympathies,happensupon a
wolf, whose wild natureshe subdueslong enough for him to offer "his savage head to be patted by her hand,"compelling the narratorto admit that
"herethe tale has surely lapsed into the improbable"(161). Yet the narrator
still implies the romanticconnection between the "mother-forest"and the
"kindredwildness in the humanchild" (161). While the text resists a completely fixed reading,the narrator'stechniquein presentingPearl suggests
thatthe demonizedperceptionof Pearlis surely an equally improbableone.
Manycritics have foundHawthorne'sdescriptionsof his own childrenin
his notebooks to correspond-at times exactly-with the descriptions of
Pearl,4suggesting that, unless he found his own children demonic, he intended the characterisationto be a positive one. The persistenceof the evil
imagery surroundingPearl, however,has less to do with damningher than
with condemning the narrowperspective of Puritanand patriarchaljudgment, and its morbideffect on Hester.Pearlallows Hesterto grow imaginatively andphilosophically.Pearlis not only the evidence of the sin for which
Hester has been cast out of her society; she is also a source from which
Hesterimbibes identity.Seeing her unconscious,repressedemotions played
out publicly in Pearl, Hester's identity takes on a greatercomplexity. Any
remnantsof the stereotypical"fallenwoman"thatmight have remained,despite the narrative'sattemptsto sweep them away,disappearin the complex
renderingof Hester'spsychologicaldrama.LikePearl,who behavesas though
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
367
she could "bea law untoherself,withouthereccentricitiesbeing reckonedto
her for a crime"(113), Hesterrealises that "theworld's law was no law for
her mind" (133)-at least not the law of the Puritanworld. Pearl's unrestrainedimagination,as much as her own outcast state, awakens Hester's
mindto a varietyof philosophicalpossibilities,andto judgmentsof her own.
MistressHibbinsand HistoriographicMetafiction
The narrator'spresentationsof MistressHibbinsalso shatterstereotypes,
but in a much differentway from those used to portrayHester and Pearl. It
seems at casual glance thatthe narratorimplicateshimself in the guilt of his
ancestorsby overtly portrayingMistress Hibbinsas an evil associate of the
"BlackMan."However,a closer look at the fourscenes in which she appears
and the five referencesto her by othercharactersreveals that the narratoris
playing with the presentationsof this characterin ways that undermineher
historicalrepresentationas a witch.
David Ketterer,discussingwitchcraftin the novel, observesthatto "judge
fromthe meagrecriticalcommentarythatexists on the matter,the portraitof
Mistress Hibbins, sister of GovernorBellingham and the resident witch in
mid-seventeenth-centuryBoston, would appearto vindicatethe persecuting
spiritof JohnHawthorne"(295). MistressHibbinswas presumablybased on
the historical Ann Hibbins, who, less than a year after her husbanddied,
leaving herimpoverished,was executedas a witch by the Salem magistrates.
The chargeswerebroughtby neighbours,who, accordingto historicalrecords,
and"odious"(Ketterer296). Mistress
foundher "turbulent,""quarrelsome,"
Hibbins is the first charactermentionedin the story: an observerof events
aroundthe scaffold might suppose "a witch, like old Mistress Hibbins, the
bitter-temperedwidow of the magistrate,was to die upon the gallows" (54).
In this allusion,the narratornot only reassertsthe qualityfor which the Puritans are perhapsbest known-persecution of witches-but also introduces
this intriguingcharacterinto the narrative.
In her first appearance,a purelymimeticnarrativepresentation,Mistress
Hibbins acts exactly like we would expect a stereotypicalwitch to actindeed, exactly in accordancewith how we might expect SurveyorPue to
have presentedher. She accosts Hester as she leaves the Governor'shouse,
afterDimmesdalehas arguedin favourof herkeeping Pearl,andtemptsher:
368
1 N
T
"Hist,Hist!"said she, while her ill-omenedphysiognomy
seemedto cast a shadowover the cheerfulnewnessof the
house."Wiltthougo withus to-night?Therewill be a merry
companyintheforest;andI wellnighpromisedtheBlackMan
thatcomelyHesterPrynnewouldmakeone."(100)
After Hester politely declines the invitation,the narratorconsiders whether
we should"supposethisinterviewbetwixtMistressHibbinsandHesterPrynne
to be authentic,and not a parable"(101), for how could such a preposterous
event be true?He not only subvertsthe witch stereotypeby ridiculingit, but
he also reverses the hierarchyof Platonic and Aristotelianrhetoricthat has
privilegedmimesisover diegesis (presenceover absence;speakingover writing; history/tragedyover fiction/poetry).Mimetic presentationpresumably
readsas "objective"and, therefore,"true,"while diegetic summaryis suspiciously taintedby subjectivity.Here, the reverse is true.The mimetic scene
is impossibly ludicrous,while the diegetic implicationof a "parable"is far
more plausible.
The other three scenes in which Mistress Hibbins appearsmake use of
the same or similartechniquesto underminethe validity of historicalrepresentation.Duringthe minister'smidnightvigil on the scaffold,his cry awakens the governorand his "sourand discontented"sister:
Beyond a shadow of a doubt, this venerable witch-lady had
heardMr.Dimmesdale'soutcry,andinterpreted
it, with its
as the clamourof
echoesandreverberations,
multitudinous
thefiendsandnight-hags,withwhomshe waswellknownto
makeexcursionsintotheforest.(123,emphasisadded)
This passage is highly reminiscentof the ironyin the Custom-Housesketch,
especially regardingthe much-repeateduse of the word "venerable."The
ironic overstatement,"beyonda shadow of a doubt,"underminesthe validity of Mistress Hibbins's characterizationas a witch, and reflects more on
Dimmesdale's state of mind than on the state of Mistress Hibbins's soul.
When the governor and his sister cease their peering into the night,
Dimmesdale observes thatthe governormerely "retiredfrom the window,"
whereas "possibly, [Mistress Hibbins] went up among the clouds" (123).
During Dimmesdale'swalk home from his forest encounterwith Hester,he
meets MistressHibbins,who seems to know all abouttheirrelationship.His
Feminine
Hawthorne's
Voices
369
meeting with the "witch-lady"is the final catalystthat causes Dimmesdale
to wonder if he has sold himself "to the fiend whom, if men say true, this
yellow-starchedandvelveted old hag has chosen for herprinceand master!"
Following their dialogue, the narratorassertsthat "his encounterwith Mistress Hibbins, if it were a real incident,did but show his sympathyand fellowship with wicked mortals"(173, emphasis added). Again, questioning
the historicalrealityof the incident,the narratorunderminesboththe historical identity of Mistress Hibbins as a witch, and Dimmesdale's excessively
morbidmoralising.The narratorcannotgo so faras to proclaima "truth"that
the modernworld sees as self-evident:that Mistress Hibbins standsfor the
victims of outrightandsystematicmurderof women who were not underthe
protectionof a man;of women who chose to espouse unorthodoxviews and
behaviour;of women who were simply irritating.He can (and does), however, underminethe historicalrepresentation.By underminingthe authenticity of Pue's manuscript,he throwsa subversivelight over the "truth"of history, and its systematicoppressionof women.
The Endings...
Critics-particularly New Critics-have devoted considerablepraise to
the novel's "perfection"of structure.They applaudthe symmetryof the three
scaffold scenes, and extol otherexamplesof the novel's "thoroughlyfused,"
"whole," "complete,"and "balanced"form (Murfin 212). It is no coincidence thatcritics who see perfectionin the plot line also see Dimmesdale as
the central character of the novel. How could a novel of such central
importance to the American literary canon be "about a woman"? But if
Dimmesdale's final scene on the scaffold is the climax of the novel, the
narrator'sadherenceto Aristotelianplot structureseems a bit strainedin view
of the multipleendings he provided.
Even in the first ending, Dimmesdale's,the narratorgives us many possible perspectives and interpretationsof Dimmesdale's last minutes on the
scaffold, includingthe source of the scarletletteron his breast:
SomeaffirmedthattheReverendMr.Dimmesdale...hadbegunhis courseof penance...byinflictinga hideoustortureon
himself.Otherscontended...oldRogerChillingworth...had
theagencyof magicandpoisoncausedit to appear...through
ous drugs.Others,again,-and thosebestableto appreciate
370
1
N
T
theminister's
theirbelief,that
peculiarsensibility..,whispered
the awfulsymbolwas the effectof the ever activetoothof
andatlast
remorse,gnawingfromtheinmostheartoutwardly,
judgmentby the visiblepresmanifestingHeaven'sdreadful
ence of the letter.Thereadermaychooseamongthesetheories.(197)
While giving the readera choice, the narratortells us implicitlywhich theory
to choose; who but the readeris "bestable to appreciatethe minister'speculiar sensibility" after the narratorhas taken such pains to present it to us?
Among the versions we are not given to choose from is the "singular"version that
on [Dimmesdale's]
breast
deniedtherewasanymarkwhatever
.... Neither... had his dying wordsacknowledged,noreven
remotelyimplied,any,the slightestconnection,on his part,
withtheguiltfor whichHesterPrynnehadso long wornthe
scarletletter.(197-98)
On the natureof this interpretation,the narratorstates,
we must be allowed to consider this version of Mr.
Dimmesdale'sstory as only an instanceof that stubborn
fidelity with which a man's friends-and especially a
clergyman's-will sometimesupholdhis character;when
proofs,clearas themid-daysunshineon thescarletletter,establishhima falseandsin-stainedcreatureof thedust.(198)
This statementemphasises the perversityof wilful and ideologically motivated interpretation,and warnsthe readeragainstfalling into a similartrap.
At the same time, the narratorlays a trap for the readerin articulatingthe
moral:"Amongthe manymoralswhichpressuponus fromthepoorminister's
miserable experience, we put only this into a sentence: "Be true! Be true!
Show freely to the world,if not yourworst,yet some traitwherebythe worst
may be inferred!"The moral contradictsthe narrator'sconsistent strategy,
for he, like Dimmesdale,has presentedhis subversive,unorthodoxideas covertly,in marginalisedandcontradictoryvoices. If the readerwere not straining to hear them, these voices might go entirely unnoticed. Just as
Dimmesdale'sparishionerscannothearthe "confession"in his sermons,it is
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
371
possible thatreadersmay not hearthe voicings of "oppression"in the narrative. The narratoris certainlynot freely showing his "worst,"but "shadowing it forth."In undermininghis own authoritativelystatedmoral,situatedin
the "denouement"of the plot's overt structure,the narratoris undermining
the entiresymmetryof his plot structure.By definition,a denouementshould
clear up the complications of the plot; but this denouementcreates more
loose ends than it tidies up. The novel does not click neatly shut, enclosing
the tapestry created by the interwoven voices of the narrative,but leaves
strands of plot messily lying about, insinuating their way into readers'
subjectivities.
The story is not "about"the linear progressof a man's moral dilemma.
The multipleendings and the cyclical turningof the plot subvertthe Aristotelian symmetry.The storydoes not end with Dimmesdale'sdeath, noreven
with the questions about the meaning of his death.The public narratoraddresses his narratee,explainingthathe has "a matterof business to communicate to the reader"(199). In a seemingly offhandand parentheticalway,
the narratorcontinuesthe story,providingseveralendings, and some beginnings. The narrativeopens with a referenceto the "footstepsof the sainted
Ann Hutchinson"and ends with Hesterpossibly following in them. The cyclical natureis also emphasisedin the presentationsof female charactersas
child, sexual woman and crone: as Hester becomes (or, perhaps,replaces
MistressHibbinsas) the crone,Pearlmaturesinto womanhood,becominglike the narrator-a "citizenof somewhereelse" (52). The lettersHesterreceives and the baby clothes she fashions indicatethatthe matriarchal/maternal cycle continues.
Pearl'sis the second ending,and, althoughthe historyof Pearl'slife after
leaving Salem is shroudedin mystery,the narratorimplies that it is a happy
one. The final ending, Hester's, comes full circle to the first mention of the
heroine of the story in "The Custom-House,"where she is an old woman,
rememberedby "agedpersons alive in the time of Mr. SurveyorPue" (43).
These aged persons rememberedan old woman of "statelyand solemn aspect" from theirchildhood,a woman who had the habitof wandering
aboutthe countryas a kindof voluntarynurse,doingwhatever
miscellaneous
goodshemight;takinguponherself,likewise,to
give advicein all matters,especiallythoseof theheart;by which
means,as a personof such propensitiesinevitablymust, she
gainedfrommanypeoplethereverencedueto anangel.(43)
372
J
N
T
Fromthis first outerglimpse of Hester,the narrator,by degrees, takes us
furtherinside the psychology of her character,revealing the complexities
and conflicted natureof humansubjectivity.By the end of the story, she is
againassociatedwith the "angel"-perhaps even the "domesticangel"in the
Puritanhouse, "toilsome,thoughtfuland self-devoted"-but by no means a
stereotypicalone. Throughthe narrator'scarefullyconstructedrenderingof
her character,we have a much more complex understandingof this "fallen
angel."Hester'sdecision to remainin Salem, whateverthe motive, resultsin
a subtle enlargingof her sphereof quietly rebelliousinfluence. Hester's decision to stay symbolicallypaves the way for some futurewoman to be the
"angeland apostleof the coming revelation"thatmightreveal a "new truth"
and"establishthe whole relationbetweenmanandwomanon a surerground
of mutualhappiness"(201).
These last sentiments are Hester's, narratedin free indirect discourse,
smoothly blendingthe narrator'sand Hester'svoices. Trueto form, the narrator follows the sympatheticallyrenderedpassage with an authorialdisclaimer:"So said HesterPrynne,and glanced her sad eyes downwardat the
scarletletter."One last time, the narratordistanceshimself from the radical
sentimentsof his heroine, never quite letting the readerfeel on solid interpretiveground.However,this "disclaimer"mightalso be readas a refutation
of Hester's self-deprecatingimage as too "stainedwith sin" to take on the
role of angel that she envisions for a more "lofty,pure"woman (201). "So
said Hester Prynne"-but anothervoice suggests perhapsshe already has
assumedthis role.
Ellen Moers characterizesthe equivocal techniqueas "Hawthorne'sdevious plot structure"(54). She assertsthatthis structuredoomsanydramatised
version to failure because the narrativeraises principalquestions that are
never answered: is Dimmesdale "a villain or a saint? Is Hester a spokeswoman for nineteenthcentury feminism or its refutation?"She concludes
frombeginningto end,
that"hadHawthornetold his storystraightforwardly,
he would not have been able to avoid supplyinganswersto these questions"
(54). But he did not choose to tell his story straightforwardly-for such a
telling would necessarilybe fraughtwith lies, or, at least, artificialconstructions of a version of truthbased on a single perspective.If there is any subject upon which the narratoris consistent, it is the difficulty of "reading";
and if the novel can be said to be "about"one thing in particular,it is about
subjectivityand the problemsof interpretation.All of the characterspresent
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
373
Hesterandherscarletletterarecontinuallyscruproblemsforinterpretation:
tinisedandinterpreted
her
community,butthe meaningneverbecomes
by
the narrator's
transparent;
manyperspectiveson Pearlserveto debateher
is called
(un)natural
identity;MistressHibbins'sveryexistenceinthenarrative
intoquestion,forcingthereaderto reconsider
of
thevalidity historicalrepreof Dimmesdale(andwhateverhe
sentation;andChillingworth's
"reading"
findson Dimmesdale'schest)providesa significantcontrastto the Puritan
community'sreadingof theirminister.Thereis no finalsolutionto any of
these"problems,"
makingthenovelsomethingof aninkblottest;interpretationsreflectmoremeaningfully
on thereaderthanon thetext.
In the firstparagraph
of "TheCustom-House,"
the narrator
attemptsto
definehis idealreader:"theauthoraddresses,not the manywho will fling
aside his volume, or never take it up, but the few who will understandhim,
betterthanmostof his schoolmatesandlifemates"(22).Hereis a formidable
task for the reader,but the narrator
makesit mucheasierby providinga
multitudeof voices, bothpublicandprivate,thataddressa multitudeof readers' sympathies.The play of "masculine"and "feminine"voices and techniques used throughoutthe narrativeis not merely a dialectic of gendered
binaries,but a continuumof subjectpositions, which interpellates,not a coherentunified subject,but a realisticallyconflicted subjectivity.
The many contesting voices of the narrativemerge and meanderto narratea euphoniouslyequivocal story-a truepolyphony-a multiplevoicing
of a varietyof narrativeideologies. A singular,authoritative,narrativevoice
cannotbe pinned down, enablingthe text to be read accordingto one's own
desires. Indeed the multitudeof voices creates a polyphony that allows the
feminine voices to emerge and,dependingon how one listens, perhapseven
over-powerthe masculine.However,if one is looking for a single authoritative voice, one might-like Mrs. Hawthorne-end up with a headache.For
above all, polyphony resists singularand fixed interpretation.Assigning a
singularmeaningto the novel may be as reckless as assigning a fixed signi-
fied to the symbolthatgives it its title,as therewill alwaysbe evidenceto
refuteit in the equivocal and conflicted narrative.If one voice dominates,it
will be the voice that the readermost wants to hear.Reading as a woman,
one may find the predominantvoices of the narrativein TheScarlet Letterto
be the "feminine"ones. Listeningto these voices may meantuningout other,
contradictoryones, but in doing so, one hears the feminine discourses and
techniques that underminethe patriarchalfoundationsof history-and of
374
J
N
T
society-and thatbegin to rescue the heroinesfromthe literarystereotypeof
the "villainess."
UniversityofRegina
Saskatoon,Saskatchewan
Notes
1.
Forfurtherdiscussionof Hawthorne'sequivocalnarrative,see MichaelDavittBell, Daniel
Cottom, Joanne Feit Diehl, David Ketterer,David Leverenz, Robert K. Martin,Ellen
Moers, Janis P. Stout, and David Van Leer, as well as Nina Baym's "ThwartedNature:
Nathaniel Hawthorne as Feminist," Micheal J. Colacurcio's "Footsteps of Ann
Hutchinson:The Contextof TheScarlet Letter,"JohnO. Rees, Jr.'s"Hawthorne'sConcept of Allegory: A Reconsideration,"and Elaine Tittle Hansen's "Ambiguityand the
Narratorin The Scarlet Letter" For a more complete list, see Daniel Cottom's notes at
the end of his article.
2.
JonathanCulleradmitsthathis definitionof "readingas a woman"is purelydifferential:
"to read as a woman is to avoid readingas a man, to identify the specific defences and
distortionsof male readingsand providecorrectives"(516). He states that readingas a
woman assertsthe "continuitybetween women's experienceof social and familial structures and their experience as readers"(511). Like many critics trying to describe or
define a feminine literaryaesthetic,Cullermanagesto makehimself understoodwithout
need of exacting terminology.The "definition,"while vague, is inclusive, and one of the
main tactics of readingas a woman is to be inclusive, to avoid the "limitationsof male
readings"(58).
3.
Michael Davitt Bell follows his article with extensive notes and bibliographicalreferences of othercritics who see Hawthorne'sdecision to write a Romanceas "revolutionary."
4.
See David Van Leer's discussion of the comparisonbetween descriptionsof Pearl and
Hawthorne's own children, in which he refers to Volume VIII, pages 398-436, of
Hawthorne'snotebooks for descriptionsof his children.
WorksCited
Abbott, Anne. "The Magic Power of Hawthorne'sStyle." Critical Essays on Hawthorne's
The Scarlet Letter.Ed. David B. Kesterson.Boston: G. K. Hall, 1988. 31-35.
Hawthorne's
Feminine
Voices
375
Baym, Nina. The Shape of Hawthorne'sCareer.Ithaca:CornellUniversity Press, 1976.
Bell, Michael Davitt. "Artsof Deception: Hawthorne,'Romance,'and The Scarlet Letter."
New Essays on The Scarlet Letter.Ed. Michael J. Colacurcio.Cambridge:Cambridge
University Press, 1985. 29-56.
Benstock, Shari."TheScarletLetter(a)doree,or the FemaleBody Embroidered."TheScarlet
Letter. Ed. Ross C. Murfin. Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin'sPress, 1991. 288303.
Brownson, Orestes."An Unfit Subjectfor Literature."In CriticalEssays, ed. Kesterson.3639.
Cixous, H616ne."TheLaughof the Medusa."In Feminisms:AnAnthologyof LiteraryTheory
and Criticism.Ed. Robyn R. Warholand Diane Price Herndl.New Brunswick:Rutgers
University Press, 1991. 335-49.
Cottom, Daniel. "Hawthorneversus Hester:The Ghostly Dialectic of Romance in The Scarlet Letter."TexasStudies in Literatureand Language24 (1982): 47-67.
Cuddy, Lois A. "Mother-DaughterIdentificationin The Scarlet Letter."Mosaic: A Journal
for the InterdisciplinaryStudyof Literature19:2 (1986): 101-15.
Culler,Jonathan."Readingas A Woman."In Feminisms,ed. Warholand Herndl.509-22.
Davis, SarahI. "AnotherView of Hesterand the Antinomians."Studies in AmericanFiction
12:1 (1984): 189-98.
Dubrow,Heather.Genre.London:Methuen, 1982.
Duyckinck, EvertA. "A Psychological Romance."In CriticalEssays, ed. Kesterson.23-25.
Elbert,Monika. "Hester'sMaternity:Stigma or Weapon?"ESQ 36 (1990): 175-207.
Hawthorne,Nathaniel.TheScarlet Letter.Ed. Ross C. Murfin.Boston: BedfordBooks of St.
Martin'sPress, 1991.
Irigaray,Luce. "Another'Cause'--Castration."In Feminisms,ed. Warholand Herndl.40412.
James, Henry."TheScarlet Letter."In CriticalEssays, ed. Kesterson.49-53.
Ketterer,David. " 'Circle of Acquaintance':Mistress Hibbins and the Hermetic Design of
The Scarlet Letter."English Studies in Canada 9:1 (1983): 294-311.
376
J
N
T
Kristeva,Julia. "Women'sTime."In Feminisms,ed. Warholand Herndl.443-61.
Lanser,Susan S. "TowardsA FeministNarratology."In Feminisms,ed. Warholand Herndl.
610-29.
Leverenz, David. "Mrs. Hawthorne'sHeadache:Reading The Scarlet Letter."Nineteenth
CenturyFiction 37:1 (1982): 552-75.
Martin,Robert K. "HesterPrynne, C'est Moi: Nathaniel Hawthorneand the Anxieties of
Gender."EngenderingMen: The Question of Male Feminist Criticism.Ed. Joseph A.
Boone and Michael Cadden.New York:Routledge, 1990. 122-39.
Ripley, George. "The Gothic, the Supernatural,the Imagination."In Critical Essays, ed.
Kesterson.25-27.
Stout, Janis P. "The Fallen Womanand the ConflictedAuthor:Hawthorneand Hardy."The
American TranscendentalQuarterly1:1(1987):233-46.
Van Leer, David. "Hester'sLabyrinth:TranscendentalRhetoricin PuritanBoston." In New
Essays, ed. Colacurcio.57-100.

Hawthorne`s Feminine Voices: Reading

Transcription

Similar documents

Sample Summary: In chapters 1-8 of Hawthorne`s The Scarlet Letter

Hawthorne`s Hester - Northern Highlands

Causal Effects in Nonexperimental Studies: Reevaluating the

Nested Analysis as a Mixed-Method Strategy for Comparative

The time of reckoning has arrived, as the Kingdom

Community Care Workstream - NIHR CLAHRC Greater Manchester

Informational Brochure

The Faces of the Tri-Hexaflexagon

Punk "Noir": Anarchy in Two Idioms

Sadowski

Evil and Omnipotence

Moritz * English 202 Name:______________________________ Scarlet Letter from Spark Notes