Annotated Bibliography
Coxe, Arthur Cleveland, “The Writings of Hawthorne,” Church Review and Ecclesiastical Register 3, No.3, 1851. 506-507. Rpt. in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1996. 24-26. Print
In this criticism, the author, Arthur Cleveland Coxe, vehemently condemns ideas presented in The Scarlet Letter, especially when it comes to sin. Though stated as delicately and eloquently written, Coxe severely rebuffs the mere idea that this work should be considered a romance and goes on to say it promotes adultery and is only popular due to society’s sensual and materialistic lust. Throughout his criticism, Coxe begins to show disappointment in society and wonders what the world has come to. He points out that this novel’s major fault is its pitiful opinion that allows the reader to sympathize with characters who committed the abhorrent sin of adultery, rather than antagonize (he continues by uttering how sickening the basis of the story is). He also provides the rude comment that anyone unwilling to go to Church or accept the Ten Commandments would be delighted to read this book. It should be made aware that Arthur Cleveland Coxe was a theologian and had drastic beliefs about what truly is moral. This source provides useful insight into how a devout Christian (or Puritan personage) may view this story of sin. This source is also unique compared to other sources of this annotated bibliography due to its lividness of The Scarlet Letter and utter hatred of how society accepts the novel. Despite this animosity, the source is still reliable (especially because, among other things, Arthur Cleveland Coxe was known for being a critic) and allows for the reader to view the book from a morally strict point of view. The goal of this source (at least for my annotated bibliography) was to show that even though The Scarlet Letter received much praise for being one of (if not) the first great American novel, its controversial topic of discussion led many people to be perturbed and certainly caused varying opinions.
James, Henry. Hawthorne. London: Macmillan, 1879. 109-14. Rpt. in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1996. 27-30. Print
In this excerpt from his gargantuan analysis of Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry James has an extreme contrast in opinion than Arthur Cleveland Coxe. Henry James praises this book as the first American novel to surmount to European novels’ standards. He claims its simplicity (compared to Hawthorne’s other works) and realistic Puritan beliefs made it a masterpiece to be beheld for generations to come. He believes that Hawthorne had pure mastery of the subject and story due to it presiding inside of him for a long time. Henry James also recollects that Hawthorne grew very popular when the book was released to the public (he was seven at the time). The book had an ominous aura surrounding it (stating that people would shudder when an allusion was made to it). Furthermore, James praises the story’s uniqueness and the relationship between Roger Chillingworth, Arthur Dimmesdale, and Hester Prynne. Another conflicting opinion of Arthur Coxe is that Henry James believes this novel is the worthiest of being deemed a romantic due to its mystical and extraordinary elements. Henry James was a very significant and praiseworthy author at his time and did pose many reasonable opinions about The Scarlet Letter. This source is considered reputable due to Henry James’ status and wealth of knowledge that pertains to good writing. As stated in the excerpt itself, this is the most praise he has given to any of Hawthorne’s works/writings. This source (like two others from this bibliography) has an overall amiable tone towards The Scarlet Letter and panegyrizes its eloquence and Hawthorne’s superb control of the story. I believe this source is useful because it is a more refined opinion due to Henry James’s prestigious writing skills and helps to show why it is considered such a great novel.
James, Pearl. “Criticism.” Novels for Students. Ed. Diane Telgen. Vol. 1. Detroit: Gale, 1997. 319-322. Print.
This analysis of The Scarlet Letter is straightforward and details the implications of hypocrisy and ambiguity in the aforementioned novel. Pearl James has a more impartial approach to critiquing this novel and mentions many symbolic attributes (Pearl). He describes how the novel is actually a “moral parable” and talks about how Nathaniel Hawthorne’s desire to give it an “authentic” feel by not just documenting events is a reason as to why The Scarlet Letter is so astounding. In accordance with the mentioning of hypocrisy at the beginning of the paragraph, James lists many hypocritical situations in the novel, such as the women outside of Hester’s prison door gossiping about her atrocious act of adultery (yet sinning by doing so) or the idea of the Puritan settlers that one will not sin by denying the existence of sin itself. Ambiguity and autonomy are also involved in this criticism; James points out the “A” on Hester’s bosom represents different words based on what is occurring in the story (adultery, able, angel, etc.) and how it is truly up to the reader to decide what it means to himself/herself. Therefore, the takeaway of this criticism is that Nathaniel Hawthorne masterfully seeded many symbols within this seemingly simple story. Yet, this source is another reliable and reputable critiquing of The Scarlet Letter (which one could deduce based on Pearl James’ position or the ideas posed in the criticism). Compared with the other sources, this one, rather than expressing strong opinions, sticks with the status quo opinion of this novel and points out intricacies that justify its greatness. Of all four sources, the analysis by Pearl James (in my own opinion) should be considered the most objective. I consider this source beneficial in my annotated bibliography due to its extensive analytical insight and lack of bias, which allows for a deepening of knowledge about The Scarlet Letter for the reader.
Works Cited
Coxe, Arthur Cleveland, “The Writings of Hawthorne,” Church Review and Ecclesiastical Register 3, No.3, 1851. 506-507. Rpt. in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1996. 24-26. Print
James, Pearl. “Criticism.” Novels for Students. Ed. Diane Telgen. Vol. 1. Detroit: Gale, 1997. 319-322. Print.
James, Henry. Hawthorne. London: Macmillan, 1879. 109-14. Rpt. in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1996. 27-30. Print