Anybody else did not like "The Scarlet Letter" by Hawthorne? What makes the book great?

I was told it's one of the greatest books of all time, and one about guilt and shame (an issue I was struggling with, hence the recommendation), but I did not find it satisfying on either count.

I wanted to know so much more about Hester's daily and inner experiences of shame and guilt but we were barely given anything on that. Instead, only later on, we got a decent glimpse of Dimmesdale's internal struggle but that one did not go beyond a couple of chapters either. Neither was the book a sociological study of shame and guilt, if not psychological. At the end I can only see it as more of work of an author in love with heavy-handed symbolism, be it in the letter A or Pearl or Chillingworth who for some reason we are told to see as purely evil, than any real study of those emotions.

Assuming somebody here generally agrees with those points, then I have two issues to work through: One, it may simply be that I had the wrong expectations and was misled about what the book was about, and so I should see it for what it is. So the second issue is, What IS the book about, what theme is it trying to develop?

As I mentioned, I don't see it being the kind of book I expected to and wanted to read, which was either psychological or sociological study, focused on Hester's shame/guilt. Nor could I see it as exceptional work of romance or even one exploring religion. I figured one option is to see its greatness in (historically) breaking new grounds. Another consideration is that I don't recall reading book that relied heavily on symbols and so maybe this is an exceptional book produced by someone who was a symbolist, and so the work should be judged from that perspective.

I don't mind disliking a great book, nor liking a mindless inferior one. So this is not a question of taste, but objectively understanding the significance of this book as what quite a few critics have referred to as THE (or one of the) greatest American novel. Just as I have gone to movies that I hated and yet appreciated their production value or great cinematography, I like to be able to appreciate what makes this book special even if it's not the kind of book I usually enjoy reading.

Thank you.

Hi, did you add a tag or did you mean I should post my view in that thread?

MarthaJeanne added a link to the book so that someone can click and go directly to it. It is helpful. You do that by enclosing the name of the book in square brackets.

I also made an about, which you do at the top right. That lets people looking at the book page know that there is a discussion about the book.

Should say that I read it years ago & whilst I might one day re-read some of Hawthorne's stories I've no mad urge to re-read Scarlet Letter about which I'd no strong feelings anyway.

I very much doubt that outside the US anyone would call it great one of the greatest books of all time, or for that matter 'great'--no more than they would Huckleberry Finn, The Great Gatsby, The Sun Also Rises or any of those books on high-school reading lists--even if they've heard of it never mind read it.

Who knows why this book, perhaps most (often only locally renowned) 'well-regarded' books became famous? Panels of teachers deciding what to put on a list of assigned readings? a great number of doctoral dissertations determining & afterward being devoted to one of the 'classics'? literary critics writing persuasively and sweepingly about books they particularly fancied? literary fashion?--From what I remember of it, I suppose that 'ooh ah she slept with a man she wasn't married to!' or 'ooh ah the Puritans weren't all about sharing their bounty with the Injuns cos they had a nasty streak!' or 'ooh--look, here's an old-fashioned writer who criticised the pilgrims!', or the implication that unconventionality isn't wholly wicked might be part of the appeal over there.

oh thank you.

thank you very much

If you want people to know who you are replying to, you can use a > and the message number.

>7 Partlee:

I read this in school. While I already loved reading, I disliked most of the books I had to read for school. They seem to fall into two categories: The ones I violently hated and the ones I have totally forgotten. This is one of the second sort. To Kill a Mockingbird and Lord of the Flies were among the first group.

Hopefully, you're beginning to get sick of the political propaganda that has infested public education ever since the romantic and euphoric enlightenment, and its pretentious, over-blown love affair with unrestrained "human rights."
I'll admit the books you mention were linguistically well-written, but the primary enthusiasm among educators and politicians was the inherent attack on institutions, cultures, and traditions which would restrain or subdue any sort of freedom of action or speech.
The closer you look, the more appalled you'll be with the propaganda our public schools have been dispensing.

>11 eschator83: If you mean me, I've been out of school for a long time. My recollection is that my main objection to Lord of the Flies was the language. I have had no experience with American public schools for decades.

(>12 MarthaJeanne: Of course he meant you. You had the great good fortune to live in a country that has a tradition of restraining human rights--a tradition that continues till nay flourishes in the present day, I might add--yet left it to live in a country with a very old tradition of sometimes inexcusably iconoclastic & sometimes immoral music, literature, and art whose leaders are too fearful to speak of restricting those rights. Well, since 1945 they have been.)

>1 Partlee: I'd meant to say but didn't that it was refreshing to come across your OP; I'm so taken with the way you talk about the book--very thoughtful, very earnest. You might consider entering some of your books on the site so that you could write us a few reviews . . . ?

My Dad's job meant we moved a lot so I wound up attending 3 high schools in 4 years and, as luck would have it, the book to be reviewed for 3 years running was The Scarlet Letter. I hated it. I thought Prynne and Dimmesdale weren't worth the print it took to describe them. The only character I had any sympathy for was Chillingworth and he was the one I always chose when it came time (as it did every time) to write an essay in defense of one of the characters in the book. The essays earned me 3 C's and a note to my parents condeming my choice of essay subject.

I was required to read The Scarlet Letter in 9th grade. I loved to read but that book—ugh. Two years later, I had to read it again. A second reading did not change my opinion although I felt that I understood it a little better. Decades later I might appreciate it but life is too short and there are still so many books that I really want to read, so I'm not going to give it a third chance. I was supposed to read The Mill on the Floss too but it always put me to sleep instantly. I never did get through that one.

>9 MarthaJeanne:

Thank you. But this is so confusing, it would have been much more convenient if you could either quote the post or something like that.

>6 bluepiano: yes you make very good points, so many factors are involved. I guess a part of me fears that since we have limited time on Earth, I better do some reading and hear what some great minds had to say, and where else to start from but some list of "greatest" or "best". But of course, as you imply, I should not take such lists too seriously.

edit: Oh I just came across your other comment, surprised me, I'm flattered, that's very kind of you to say my OP was very thoughtful and earnest. And yes I do hope to participate more and write a few reviews. For me usually the best time to write a review is right after I finish a book because I'm emotionally involved and can hopefully say something meaningful then.

>14 alco261: sorry don't mean to sound insensitive but that last sentence made me chuckle. But that's such an original idea, to write in defense of Chillingworth. The author or the author's voice in the story, certainly does not want us to sympathize with him as much as with others, and he is often associated with evil, which is something I did not understand. If the book had done more "showing" than simply "telling", about why he did not deserve any of the reader's sympathy, we would not be in this situation. Regardless, it's hard not to have any sympathy for the major characters even though they're all flawed and did something wrong.

>1 Partlee: You know, it's been over 20 years since I read this book, but I distinctly remember it being a commentary on being oneself and not worrying about what society thinks. The shame and guilt was from external sources. But again, that's my fuzzy brain trying to remember something from a time I purposefully have suppressed.

I believe the educators I had at the time did focus on the symbols and how that worked for the story more than the actual plot or characters.

Then again, this is listed as an American Classic, probably because of the heavy handed literary symbolism showpiece more than the underlying story was compelling.

But the word crafting is superb.

You have all encouraged me to read it again! I don't remember particularly disliking it but it was so long ago…

>18 Partlee: No insensitivity detected. :-) I do recall getting the impression that the author pitched his case for Chillingworth in terms that were supposed to make him the villain but I always thought he got a bum rap. In line with a comment made by >19 gilroy: one thing that did happen was that I never had to read Moby Dick in high school. I had the good fortune to read it while in the Navy. I really enjoyed the book and I had no trouble identifying with the narrator as well as all of the characters he described. All Melville would have needed to do was change the focus from hunting whales to hunting submarines and update the character's wardrobes and, with the exception of the destruction of Ahab's ship, his book would have described my experiences aboard my destroyer.

>22 alco261:, that's suggests an interesting metaphor. Huh. Loved Moby Dick myself when I read it in school, but that was voluntary. I had nothing like that to relate it to but read it as pure adventure.

The Scarlet Letter is on my TBR pile at home, funny I've never gotten to it yet given it's so short and probably a quick one. Next year, maybe I'll be able to come back and review some of these impressions to compare with my own.

Boy, I hated The Scarlet Letter, which I read a full half-century ago. Is it still on lists of recommended books?

To me, it's a holdover from Puritan-based values. There are so many other good books to read...