Skip to main content

Sin and Redemption



Religion can make one a devil.  Nathaniel Hawthorne’s novel, The Scarlet Letter (1850), shows how.

Roger Chillingworth, a sombre scholar, marries a pretty woman, Hester, much younger in age.  During his long absence she develops an affair with Arthur Dimmesdale, a pastor.  When a child is born to Hester in the protracted absence of her husband, she is labelled an adulteress and punished.

All this happens in the 17th century Boston, then a Puritan colony.  The Puritans were a kind of religious fundamentalists.  They followed the letter of the law.  Love, mercy and other such tender feelings had no place in the Puritan worldview.  People should abide by the law at any cost.

Hester is punished to wear “the scarlet letter” on her bosom throughout her life.  The letter A, for Adulteress, is emblazoned on her chest, and she has to spend some time on the pillory everyday displaying herself for the edification of the public.  

Dimmesdale is struck with guilt feeling and remorse.  But he is a Puritan at heart, and a pastor to boot, and hence cannot transcend the straitjacket of the law.  He lacks the courage to own up his guilt in public and accept his human failing as well as his love for Hester. 

Chillingworth, Hester’s husband, who has returned wants to avenge the ignominy brought on him by his wife and her lover.  But he won’t kill them directly.  He knows that the scarlet letter is enough of a punishment for Hester.  His intention is to seek out the man who brought the ignominy on him and punish him with the typical Puritan cruelty.  It takes him a while to know that Dimmesdale is his enemy.  And Dimmesdale is already wasting away because of his sterile guilt and remorse.  The guilt and remorse have produced a stigma on Dimmesdale’s chest in the form of a scarlet letter.  If Hester is wearing an artificial scarlet letter on her dress, Dimmesdale is wearing a painful physical stigma on his chest. 

Dimmesdale goes through excruciating psychological and physical pain before he is able to make his confession in public.  The confession kills him. 

Hester goes on to become a character loved by the people as she turns to social service.  The scarlet letter ‘A’ slowly loses its stigma.

Chillingworth dies within a year of Dimmesdale’s death.  He does not have a purpose to live for anymore.  His only purpose had become taking revenge on the man who had assaulted his wife’s marital fidelity.  And he was firmly convinced that he was fulfilling a religious duty by pursuing his vindictive aspiration.  He does not understand the implication of his wife’s observation, “... the hatred ... has transformed a wise and just man to a fiend!” 

Stringent adherence to the law can transform a wise and just man into a devil.  That’s one of the themes of the novel.  Neither Chillingworth nor Dimmesdale –  both of whom are very religious – understands the lessons of compassion and forgiveness that Jesus, their God, had taught.  In fact, no religious fundamentalist understands the spirit of his/her religion.  Fundamentalism is more about following rules and regulations than understanding the values of the religion and internalising them.

The narrator of the novel tries to present a moral in the last pages.  “Be true!  Be true!  Be true!” says he.  “Show freely to the world, if not your worst, yet some trait whereby the worst may be inferred!”  Live with transparency.  Be true to yourself.  Dimmesdale achieved that toward the end.  But it was too late.  His religion had already become a terrible burden for him by the time he understood its spirit rather than its legal scaffoldings. 

Did Hester learn the lesson?  Given the society in which she lived and the upbringing she had, she could only think of herself as sinful and hence in need of redemption through penitence.  She continued to live as a penitent.

How would she live were she living in today’s society?  She would have accepted her error, learnt the lesson, and then gone on to live a life of dignity.  Falling is not the tragedy, refusing to get up and walk on is.

Error is natural to mankind.  Each error should teach us the lessons they contain and help us to cultivate sympathy and understanding of others, help us in our personal growth.  Religions often fail to teach this with their unhealthy focus on man’s sinfulness and suggesting rituals as the remedy.  Understanding is the secret of spiritual health, not rituals or prayers.


Top post on IndiBlogger.in, the community of Indian Bloggers

Comments

  1. I've always wanted to read The Scarlet Letter, but never got a chance. I should pick up a copy soon..
    As for the discussion on religion, you're right that too much adherence to laws can turn a man into a devil. But originally, no religion or scripture was a "rule book", as I am sure you are already aware. All of them taught forgiveness and mercy, but the people who took it upon themselves to propagate their respective religion bent and twisted the rules and the rest is history!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Sreesha, the problem is not with the scriptures but with those who interpret them and codify them into rules. I am not a religious believer and don't set store by the scriptures of any religion. There's much in them that is self-contradictory and even puerile. But there's more than that too: there's mysticism, for instance. I interpret the scriptures in my own way, just as I do with literature.

      Delete
  2. I have read the book and loved it...Loved your post too...

    ReplyDelete
  3. [ Smiles ] Hmm. Maybe, it is time that I read "The Scarlet Letter."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wonderful read. The story and the lessons are truly rich and you have presented it very well !

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, I truly believe in making mistakes and learning from them. I think it's the best way to lead an enriching life...at least you won't be bored :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's nice, Pankti. You remind me of Oscar Wilde who said that feeling good and behaving well don't go together.

      Delete
  6. Hawthorne shocked me with these words: "But this had been a sin of passion, not of principle, nor even purpose"
    I could never understand, young and full of lofty principles that I was how a sin of passion cannot infringe on the principles of a person. How can passion be a separate entity? Doesn’t passion arise from the person that you are… that same passion that wrought your principles?
    It took a lot of growing up to understand Hester and the Minister. How “She could no longer borrow from the future to ease her present grief.”
    The Scarlet Letter is a beautiful book. Thank you for bringing back powerful memories and discussions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I read this novel some 20 years ago I didn't appreciate it as much as I did this time. You're right: it takes some growing up to understand "Scarlet Letter" and the author's philosophy.

      Delete
  7. The very first English novel I read!. In my college( coming from vernacular schooling, it was a lucky introduction to English fiction, which grew over the years). I was very impressed, and the novel never left my memory.

    Reading your review made me like the novel more. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm delighted to have brought you that feeling, Pattu.

      Delete
  8. The 'Scarlet Letter' sounds interesting...Would go and hunt for it tomorrow at the office library..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of the 19th century classics, it can ennoble you. Best wishes.

      Delete
  9. I will have to catch this book!
    I've nominated you for the Versatile Blogger Award here - http://stiryoursouls.blogspot.in/2013/12/lights-camera-versatile-blogger-award.html
    Do have a look! :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. After reading this post I will surely like to read this book.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ayodhya: Kingdom of Sorrows

T he Sarayu carried more tears than water. Ayodhya was a sad kingdom. Dasaratha was a good king. He upheld dharma – justice and morality – as best as he could. The citizens were apparently happy. Then, one day, it all changed. One person is enough to change the destiny of a whole kingdom. Who was that one person? Some say it was Kaikeyi, one of the three official wives of Dasaratha. Some others say it was Manthara, Kaikeyi’s chief maid. Manthara was a hunchback. She was the caretaker of Kaikeyi right from the latter’s childhood; foster mother, so to say, because Kaikeyi had no mother. The absence of maternal influence can distort a girl child’s personality. With a foster mother like Manthara, the distortion can be really bad. Manthara was cunning, selfish, and morally ambiguous. A severe physical deformity can make one worse than all that. Manthara was as devious and manipulative as a woman could be in a men’s world. Add to that all the jealousy and ambition that insecure peo...

Bharata: The Ascetic King

Bharata is disillusioned yet again. His brother, Rama the ideal man, Maryada Purushottam , is making yet another grotesque demand. Sita Devi has to prove her purity now, years after the Agni Pariksha she arranged for herself long ago in Lanka itself. Now, when she has been living for years far away from Rama with her two sons Luva and Kusha in the paternal care of no less a saint than Valmiki himself! What has happened to Rama? Bharata sits on the bank of the Sarayu with tears welling up in his eyes. Give me an answer, Sarayu, he said. Sarayu accepted Bharata’s tears too. She was used to absorbing tears. How many times has Rama come and sat upon this very same bank and wept too? Life is sorrow, Sarayu muttered to Bharata. Even if you are royal descendants of divinity itself. Rama had brought the children Luva and Kusha to Ayodhya on the day of the Ashvamedha Yagna which he was conducting in order to reaffirm his sovereignty and legitimacy over his kingdom. He didn’t know they w...

Liberated

Fiction - parable Vijay was familiar enough with soil and the stones it turns up to realise that he had struck something rare.   It was a tiny stone, a pitch black speck not larger than the tip of his little finger. It turned up from the intestine of the earth while Vijay was digging a pit for the biogas plant. Anand, the scientist from the village, got the stone analysed in his lab and assured, “It is a rare object.   A compound of carbonic acid and magnesium.” Anand and his fellow scientists believed that it must be a fragment of a meteoroid that hit the earth millions of years ago.   “Very rare indeed,” concluded the scientist. Now, it’s plain commonsense that something that’s very rare indeed must be very valuable too. All the more so if it came from the heavens. So Vijay got the village goldsmith to set it on a gold ring.   Vijay wore the ring proudly on his ring finger. Nobody, in the village, however bothered to pay any homage to Vijay’s...

Empuraan – Review

Revenge is an ancient theme in human narratives. Give a moral rationale for the revenge and make the antagonist look monstrously evil, then you have the material for a good work of art. Add to that some spices from contemporary politics and the recipe is quite right for a hit movie. This is what you get in the Malayalam movie, Empuraan , which is running full houses now despite the trenchant opposition to it from the emergent Hindutva forces in the state. First of all, I fail to understand why so much brouhaha was hollered by the Hindutvans [let me coin that word for sheer convenience] who managed to get some 3 minutes censored from the 3-hour movie. The movie doesn’t make any explicit mention of any of the existing Hindutva political parties or other organisations. On the other hand, Allahu Akbar is shouted menacingly by Islamic terrorists, albeit towards the end. True, the movie begins with an implicit reference to what happened in Gujarat in 2002 after the Godhra train burnin...

Empuraan and Ramayana

Maggie and I will be watching the Malayalam movie Empuraan tomorrow. The tickets are booked. The movie has created a lot of controversy in Kerala and the director has decided to impose no less than 17 censors on it himself. I want to watch it before the jingoistic scissors find its way to the movie. It is surprising that the people of Kerala took such exception to this movie when the same people had no problem with the utterly malicious and mendacious movie The Kerala Story (2023). [My post on that movie, which I didn’t watch, is here .] Empuraan is based partly on the Gujarat riots of 2002. The riots were real and the BJP’s role in it (Mr Modi’s, in fact) is well-known. So, Empuraan isn’t giving the audience any falsehood as The Kerala Story did. Moreover, The Kerala Story maligned the people of Kerala while Empuraan is about something that happened in the faraway Gujarat quite long ago. Why are the people of Kerala then upset with Empuraan ? Because it tells the truth, M...