Let me just put it out there that reading the end of The Scarlet Letter was infuriating. If
there is any literary term for the antonym of Verisimilitude, please let me
know, for as of right now, I’m just going to make up my own word for
it—TheEndofTheScarletLetter. I could rant for pages, but I’ll just touch up on
the basics.
The tragic hero, Dimmesdale, was thoroughly disappointing.
Even when he was ignorant and overly pious in the beginning of the novel, at
least he had his own backbone. In the scene at the woods, he dared to say “I
pray you, if thou hast any means of pacifying the
child, do it forthwith! … Pacify her, if thou lovest me!” Words cannot
describe how disturbed I was by this dialogue. By taking in Dimmesdale, Hester
is basically taking in another child. Does he really think that she’s choosing to
have Pearl be this wild rampant of a child (can you tell I dislike Pearl also)?
In the end, when Dimmesdale repents his sin to the
community, he decides to just drop dead and leave his family behind. Sure, I
understand that his death did have symbolism and that it created dramatic
effect and character development, but just because it is the seventeenth
century does not allow one to defy the laws of universe and drop dead whenever
he pleases! If anything, I thought that revealing his sin would make him
stronger in the way that it did for Hester. Dimmesdale is supposedly the tragic
hero, but to me, he is the most tragic tragic hero I have ever read about.
I feel as if I’m always super angry after reading an
archaic classic; what they used to find beautiful and romantic (i.e. Romeo and
Juliet), I just find humorous. It’s a good thing that Hester is a strong,
independent woman who don’t need no man.
 |
| A symbolism of Pearl in the modern day society |
