|
|
Post by emsuria35 on Nov 13, 2011 18:32:16 GMT -5
The child of Hester Prynne has yet to be named in the story. She is referred to as the child or the baby, but her actually name is not known. What is the significance of this? How does it relate to Hester and the scarlet letter?
|
|
|
|
Post by aihughe38 on Nov 13, 2011 21:37:53 GMT -5
One possible reason would be because Hawthorne's intent in the first several chapters is to affect how the baby is viewed by the reader. Using the baby's name would humanize the baby, whereas refferring her only as "the child" dehumanizes the baby, and Hawthorne uses that effect to make the baby a physical representation of Hester's sin instead of just being a baby girl.
|
|
|
|
Post by bezhang38 on Nov 13, 2011 22:08:29 GMT -5
Referring to the baby by her name would evoke sympathy from the reader because it gives her a unique identity, not just being a baby. Therefore, the reader would have a harder time connecting the baby to a visual symbol of shame and sin, which is Hawthorne's goal. However, I don't think referring to the baby as "the baby" dehumanizes her because obviously a baby is still a human, but Hawthorne makes it relatively easy to compare the baby to shame and sin. This relates to Hester and the scarlet letter because all three examples symbolize adultery.
|
|
|
|
Post by dacui38 on Nov 13, 2011 23:09:18 GMT -5
I agree with Becky
...
...
that is all.
|
|
