The Scarlet Letter: Part 1: 1-6

Hawthorne’s style seems to change in the transition from the customhouse to the main part of the novel; it feels faster and not as dry. I actually preferred this; the customhouse felt more tedious to read in comparison. I found the first chapter to be beautifully written and visual with emphasis on the symbolism throughout, especially in regard to the rosebush. While reading the first chapter, the words flowed into my mind with the visual context of a film. In particular, it reminded me of the movie artistry in Schindler’s List. While an unusual comparison, I admit, in my mind I pictured the prison and all surrounding it draped in black and white, then the rose bush coming into frame with vibrant color of red popping out-just as in Schindler’s List with the little girl’s red coat. The same visual came to mind with Hester-only the “A” on her chest reflecting of any color. Side Note: I’ve never seen any of the film interpretations, but I think read/heard about this being in one of the older films. Anyways, the second chapter seemed to carry on some of the cinematic imagery as the first, especially when she’s visualizing her past, like the descriptive attributes of her parents and even the visualization of herself and her feminine attributes that she took pride in her past-which becomes an important detail in Hester’s character later on. I found that Hester’s character becomes more admirable in the following chapters, for instance, when she refuses to rat out the name of her baby’s father. She takes on the burden of her punishment on her own, which I’m not sure many people would do in either those colonial times or even today. On the opposite, Dimmesdale and Chillingworth are both are unlikable characters. Although, Dimmesdale does redeem himself later on and proves to be of stronger character, he initially seems weak and wobbly as a wet noodle. While I could understand Chillingworth’s feelings toward Hester and the mysterious identity of her lover, Chillingworth quickly sets the tone for the antagonist. When Pearl is introduced, I found her to be delightful and as colorful as the letter upon her mother’s chest. Hawthorne nailed her character as the otherworldly or “fairy-like” child. I felt that Pearl was the most interesting in the fact that she seems to see into people’s hearts with an uncanny intuitiveness for a curious child of her age. 

The Scarlet Letter: The Custom-House

While reading the custom-house, I initially believed it was from Hawthorne’s perspective before realizing that this section was a part of the whole narrative as well. I later found that the fictional, custom-house author reflected Hester’s character in a way that might have been intentional by Hawthorne to foreshadow what was to come in The Scarlet Letter; the narrator in the custom-house seems to share some of the same aspects of alienation and solitude that Hester experiences throughout her own story. Narrator points out that they share a similarity: his time spent in the custom-house will be left with little evidence and be forgotten eventually, just as Hester’s story has faded overtime- This fact seems to confirm to me that the similarities were intentional by Hawthorne. Perhaps, this is also why the narrator felt the need to write a novel about Hester, so that both he and she would be remembered in some way or another; I have to add that I found it interesting that one of the last things narrator mentions is that he finds his own memories of the custom-house becoming hazy and dusty as well.

Henry David Thoreau

I liked how Emerson’s ideologies showed through in Thoreau’s writing; his writing exuded a sort of spiritual/meditative reflection on how better live out one’s life. One of my favorite quotes from the reading ended up being "nature is the opposite of the soul".  It was intriguing how he could find pleasure in the act of simple, life-preserving tasks, such as, chopping wood for material to build his house with or taking a plain meal for lunch among the wood chips. I think it’s even more intriguing that Thoreau felt calm and got a sense of tranquility from building his house, especially after reading his exploration on the purpose of a house; his inquires on this is what struck me the most, while reading. He delves into why are we so focused on furnishing and cleaning our homes, and in the process making them bigger and better, instead of going outside and living; Thoreau makes a humorous comment about how there is no dust on grass that seemed to sum up this notion of living and taking in the world we live in to the fullest, instead of focusing on gathering more and more material possessions to collect dust. I also liked his idea on how books are noble and how they are "best of things, well used; abused, among the worst." He adds that they always look backward and not forward, and that genius always looks forward.  

Emerson: Nature

While, Emerson’s Nature was richly interesting in the manner of thinking deeper on philosophical level, I found many parts of it daunting and difficult to follow at times. I would find myself re-reading passages and still wondering what it was that I just read. It was only through our class discussions that I was able to gain a firm grasp on some of the ideas Emerson was exploring. The main idea or aspect to his writing in Nature that seemed to gather and repeat itself was the notion of living and interacting with life rather than just following or going through the motions. Emerson wanted to encourage the idea of taking an active part in life, all of which he categorized as a part of nature. I liked he take on the difference between the idea of farming and man farming, and how we are not simply what we do, if we believe that it makes us less than what we are. I found that interesting because it seems to reflect off onto the notion people have today of putting a label on everything and everyone. Whether its through games, text messaging, Facebook, or Twitter, there seems to be push to compartmentalizing the whole lives and personalities of people into a single post or twit. I think Emerson was getting at the idea that we can’t shove our beings, our nature’s into one word or phrase; it devalues ourselves and doesn’t begin to due justice to the meaning of our lives. I think this spoke to me because my social, educational, or occupational statuses are not what solely define me as a person. I don’t think labels like that can sum an entire person’s life, nor should they. Emerson’s view on this made me really think about what kind of world our generation lives in today. 

Rip Van Winkle

I have to say that I really enjoyed reading Irving’s Rip Van Winkle. Many of the details in the story share similar characteristics to that of old folktales and the fairytales of the brothers Grimm. The colonial village seems to be pretty isolated with rocky terrain and a thick forest, that adds to the “magical-like” atmosphere of the story. Even Van Winkle seems to exude the personality of a typical fairytale character. While he is friendly helpful to the women in the village, doing many of their chores, his own wife cannot for the life of her get her husband to do anything of use at their own homestead. Besides helping people, the only Van Winkle seems to want to do is slack off with his faithful dog by his side-You just now something is going to happen to him. Of Course, it’s when Van Winkle meets the strange men in the forest that story reaches the height of its fairytale-like quality. While I enjoyed the first half of the story best, it isn’t until Van Winkle wakes up that I believe the story holds any real significance. Many things have changed once Van Winkle wakes up, revealing much about the evolving nation and Van Winkle’s place in the world. When he approaches the old inn, Van Winkles notices the change of the sign-it hints at the he slept through the Revolutionary War, in which time King George was replaced by another George (Washington). The fact that this doesn’t seem to faze Van Winkle seems to be important, as his life wasn’t really affected by either ruler. In the end, the reader learns that his wife has passed away and his son has become a younger version of himself; Van Winkle seems troubled at first, not knowing who he is anymore as a person. I find it interesting though that once Van Winkle accepts his fate and the time he lost, he’s just as happy as before if not more; his daily carefree behavior hasn’t changed, but now it’s acceptable for him to be lazy because he’s an old man. He even seems relieved that he doesn’t have to deal with his nagging wife anymore. The misfortune of his long sleep turned out to be a blessing, bringing back that magic-like, fairytale quality in the last bit of the story.