Nathaniel Hawthorne was the great-great-grandson of John Hathorne, who was a judge during the Salem Witch Trials. Hawthorne changed his name in his early twenties, and though he never explained the change, some believe a major reason was to distance himself from his family history. Unlike some others involved in the Witch Trials, John Hathorne never acknowledged their injustice. Note that “Young Goodman Brown” takes place in Salem, presumably at a time just before the trials. (The story tells us Young Goodman Brown’s father fought in King Philip’s War, which was fought 1675-1678; the trials began in 1692.) How does this story depict the Salem community, or rather tell us about Hawthorne’s attitude toward it? What role does ambiguity — what can we be sure actually happens? — play in the story, and how does that affect our judgment?
“The Minister’s Black Veil” is not a story that employs symbolism in the usual literary sense; it is a story about Reverend Hooper’s conscious use of a symbol. Hooper effectively authors his own story and makes his own symbol central to it, just as Hawthorne or another author might in a literary work. If we think about the story in that light, however, Hooper is a problematic figure. After all, his audience cannot agree on what the veil means; even on his deathbed, Hooper has to announce its meaning. An author who has to make a symbol’s meaning explicit might well be considered a failure. How should we feel about the earnest reverend at the end? Is he someone we should admire or pity?
While we may consider both “Young Goodman Brown” and “The Minister’s Black Veil” parables (stories intended to convey a spiritual or moral lesson), one could make an equally valid argument for Hawthorne as a psychological writer, meaning one who focuses on his characters’ mental processes or even disorders. Consider any of these stories from that perspective.
Both “The Birthmark” and “Rappaccini’s Daughter” tell the tales of misguided men of science. In both cases, the science is arguably indistinguishable from magic, which perhaps explains while Hawthorne — unlike his contemporary Edward A. Poe — is generally not considerd an early writer of science-fiction. For Hawthorne, the means by which Aylmer attempts to remove Georgiana’s birthmark are less important than the desire to attempt it and the confidence he can succeed. (That said, the presence of Aminadab would itself be worthy of a post). Similarly, Rappaccini’s motivations and attitudes toward Beatrice, though quite different from Aylmer’s, matter more than his process. What is Hawthorne saying about the pursuit of knowledge through one or both of these characters, or in “Rappaccini’s Daughter” through the characters of Guasconti and Baglioni?
In both “The Birthmark” and “Rappaccini’s Daughter,” women are the victims of egotistical men. Yet Georgiana and Beatrice are more than merely victims; they are each in their own ways stronger and more admirable than their male counterparts. As we look ahead to The Scarlet Letter and Hester Prynne, examine Hawthorne’s depiction of women in these stories and draw what larger conclusions you can. (One could also examine Elizabeth from “The Minister’s Black Veil” and Faith from “Young Goodman Brown,” though neither is as well developed a character as Georgiana and Beatrice.)