The Scarlet Letter

Reviews (See all 6,110) Write a reviewfor this

It's a hit!

Hawthorne does an excellent job. He manages to write a novel that not only sucks you in, very quickly I might add, but also portrays a very clear p... (show more)

Hawthorne does an excellent job. He manages to write a novel that not only sucks you in, very quickly I might add, but also portrays a very clear picture of the Puritans life. From the very beginning I could identify with Hester Prynne and feel her pain. I longed for her to receive justice and I felt as if Hawthorne knew that and was dangling it like a carrot in front of me, forcing me to turn the page.

While the ending was sad, as most people will tell you, I was satisfied with it. I felt that God had achieved his own level of justice, despite what the Puritans thought was best. We were also shown very clearly that nobody is perfect. Even in that era with such strict rules, the person esteemed the most fell very far! All in all, "The Scarlet Letter" is a fantastic book. I recommend it to all! (show less)

 

 

by Elizabeth Lindstrom

No, it's a flop!

Beautiful imagery and symbolism but they're swallowed up whole by Hawthorne's maddeningly annoying prose. It could have been a great novella, but i... (show more)

Beautiful imagery and symbolism but they're swallowed up whole by Hawthorne's maddeningly annoying prose. It could have been a great novella, but instead it's a mediocre novel. (show less)

 

 

by Facebook User

More Reviews

• 
  

  I really really don't like Hawthorne. Read any story of his and it will be about morality and a woman will usually be at the heart of the problem and will gratefully accept her fate because she deserves it.

  Hawthorne is definitely a writer of his time. Today, I think he would be advised to stick to short story writing, because when he goes long he becomes tedious. He also has a weird issue with random prologues ("Rappaccini's Daughter" and of course, "The Scarlet Letter&q... (show more)

  I really really don't like Hawthorne. Read any story of his and it will be about morality and a woman will usually be at the heart of the problem and will gratefully accept her fate because she deserves it.

  Hawthorne is definitely a writer of his time. Today, I think he would be advised to stick to short story writing, because when he goes long he becomes tedious. He also has a weird issue with random prologues ("Rappaccini's Daughter" and of course, "The Scarlet Letter"). Also, women. I think "The Scarlet Letter" is a bit like "Citizen Kane" in that it was groundbreaking, but now that the techniques are commonly used, it just seems an unedited, long-winded, hackneyed sermon (although I actually like "Kane"). It is incredibly unsubtle and the characters aren't really characters except for their place in the context of the story.

  I mean, honestly? Dimmesdale has an A on his chest AND nobody knew why he was sick AND nobody noticed him on the scaffold with Hester and Pearl even though practically everyone was passing by? Of course, because his character must be punishing himself and others cottoning on would ruin it. Pearl is an obnoxious sprite (because she is from a fallen woman)? Of course, because she heightens everyone guilt and her acting normal would ruin it. Hester wears the A forever because it is part of her? Of course, because her character takes her deserved punishment and remains in Salem, because otherwise it would ruin it. His characters aren't real, they are just conduits for the points he wishes to make.

  Also I find it funny that he rails against Puritan society, when actually aside from the witch trials, they were a remarkably enlightened group. Plus, he always adds a bit about witchcraft or devil-worship as a reality in his stories, which kind of negates his being a blowhard about it. In general, if you employ close-reading of any of Hawthorne's stories he contradicts himself all over the place.

  Most classics still have a place in being read and understood today, but I think "The Scarlet Letter" is one of the few that does not withstand history. If Hawthorne were writing this review, it would be 20 times longer and every other word could be excised. (show less)

   

   

  by Facebook User on May 15, 2009 at 04:30AM

  Already read

  Is this review helpful? yes no
   
• 
  

  The story line and concept for the Sacrlet Letter is decent, the fault just lies in the way that Hawthorne tells it. One of the cardinal rules for young authors is to stick to "show, don't tell," which is exactly where Hawthorne fails. Nothing much happens in the book, and most of the time when it does we are only told about it. We don't get to see it first hand.

  There is tons of useless description of things that aren't even important, and tangents that don't matter to the ... (show more)

  The story line and concept for the Sacrlet Letter is decent, the fault just lies in the way that Hawthorne tells it. One of the cardinal rules for young authors is to stick to "show, don't tell," which is exactly where Hawthorne fails. Nothing much happens in the book, and most of the time when it does we are only told about it. We don't get to see it first hand.

  There is tons of useless description of things that aren't even important, and tangents that don't matter to the story. Especially the introduction, which really has nothing to do with anything. It's clear that this was an attempt to make the story novel-length so it could be published. How about you actually try to enhance the story itself rather than tacking on useless and boring reading? The Scarlet Letter seems to have a lot of potential, but it fails on delivery. In ways like that it reminds of Heart of Darkness. A story that could have been told in fewer pages is dragged out and bogged down by useless description and tangents. (show less)

   

   

  by Becky Kolacki on Aug 25, 2009 at 06:49PM

  Already read

  Is this review helpful? yes no
   
• See all reviews
  Write a review