And so we come to the end of another novel! Join David, Heidi, and Karen as they dig into the ending of Hawthorne’s novel, with special attention paid to Pearl’s role. Plus: how does the genre play into the end of the book, what do we do with Dimmsdale’s demise, and how does Hawthorne want us to respond to their plot to escape? Happy listening!
I don’t think the characters change at all. It’s even hard to imagine that seven years pass by. So when Pearl is transformed by her Father’s recognition, it’s very sudden and anticlimactic (maybe?).
... Hester is literally still wearing the scarlet letter, doing what she was doing in the same place. It’s the same objective correlative which Dimmesdale speaks of when he’s telling Hester of their never having really been able to be together on this side of heaven. The already-but-not-yet. Which funnily enough reminds me of Puritanism, in a good way.
Is this where we post questions for the Q&A episode? If so, I'm curious about what Karen believes are the morals of the book. She noted one, that hidden guilt kills, but alluded to there being more.
David’s comment about Dostoevsky incorporating ideas and story reminded me of Solzhenitsyn’s Cancer Ward—also excellently done. Could this be a strength of those Russians?
When I was reading these chapters and the “Election sermon” I mainly thought of the Calvinist theology of “being elect” as in being saved. That he would prepare to give a sermon on election, march/parade with all the “saints” of the town and then die.
I don’t think the characters change at all. It’s even hard to imagine that seven years pass by. So when Pearl is transformed by her Father’s recognition, it’s very sudden and anticlimactic (maybe?).
... Hester is literally still wearing the scarlet letter, doing what she was doing in the same place. It’s the same objective correlative which Dimmesdale speaks of when he’s telling Hester of their never having really been able to be together on this side of heaven. The already-but-not-yet. Which funnily enough reminds me of Puritanism, in a good way.
I'm curious to hear more from Heidi talking about Hester's character. I missed the compelling nature of Hester's character.
I also want to see David's list of books which are good in both ideas and plot.
Is this where we post questions for the Q&A episode? If so, I'm curious about what Karen believes are the morals of the book. She noted one, that hidden guilt kills, but alluded to there being more.
David’s comment about Dostoevsky incorporating ideas and story reminded me of Solzhenitsyn’s Cancer Ward—also excellently done. Could this be a strength of those Russians?
When I was reading these chapters and the “Election sermon” I mainly thought of the Calvinist theology of “being elect” as in being saved. That he would prepare to give a sermon on election, march/parade with all the “saints” of the town and then die.