This sometimes complicated section of the novel sets up how the story within the novel came to be. More importantly, the introduction introduces the narrator. Some scholars believe that this narrator is not reliable because he is bias and intentionally portrays certain characters in a negative light (mostly because of his Puritan background), while others argue that the narrator uses specific rhetoric and structure to describe each character in enough detail to where the reader can decide for himself/herself if characters are good or evil.
Why is the narrator reliable or not reliable? Support your response with details from the novel.
Your responses should be approximately 50-words in length. Be sure to use textual evidence when appropriate. Going over the suggested word count or under that word count is acceptable as long as your response is detailed and direct. Be sure to read the “Scoring Rubric” before posting your response. Also, review your responses for correctness before posting.
Respond often and in a timely manner. It is okay to post a response and then check back days later to see if anyone has responded to you or asked you a question. You will be able to (and expected to) respond to this post throughout the course of the summer.
Simply click on "Comments" below to post your comment. Be sure to type your full name by clicking on the "Name/URL" option or login to your Google account and post your comment.
Simply click on "Comments" below to post your comment. Be sure to type your full name by clicking on the "Name/URL" option or login to your Google account and post your comment.
The narrator is not reliable because his imagination is tainted and only shows the negative side of the characters. "My imagination was a tarnished mirror. It would not reflect, or only with miserable dimness, the figures with which I did my best to people it." (pg. 25) This, therefore, will hinder the character development and our ability to understand these characters. A character is composed of positive and negative qualities. If only one side is shown, it weakens the other side. Due to his "tarnished" imagination, the characters he is attempting to create will be mostly negative. This will only show one part of the character and not allow total connection with that character. It helps take the meaning from the characters and inhibits our full understanding of the novel. "They would have neither the glow of passion nor the tenderness of sentiment, but retained all the rigidity of dead corpses," (pg. 26) This weakens the flexibility of these characters and restricts the reader's connections to these characters, for all the reader will most likely see is the negative aspects, which no one likes to reflect upon themselves in a negative manner, thus inhibiting the reader to fully understand the novel. This narrator would cause all of these problems, thus making him unreliable to convey the full aspects of the novel. (P.S: Sorry if I went overboard.:3)
ReplyDeleteThe narrator is reliable because he describes the characters and puts it into the readers' hands to determine whether they are good/evil. Just as in life when someone is being described to a person, it is up to them to determine what they think about the person being described. The narrator says, "My comparatively few opportunities enabled me to sketch only in the merest outline." (pg. 24-25) This displays that the narrator had few opportunities to construct the descriptions of the characters with enough structure and detail to provide for the readers. Therefore, the descriptions represent an outline of the characters, allowing the readers to fill in the "body" with their perception of them. Also stating, "Here, in a word, -and it is a rare instance in my life, -I had met a person thoroughly adapted to the situation which he held." (pg. 31) The narrator supports his descriptions on the situations that the characters are placed in. This allows the readers to have an understanding of how the characters' actions had an impact on the situation they were in; implying that the narrator is reliable because he uses structure and specific evidence to give his readers the ability to determine if the character is good/evil.
ReplyDeleteThe narrator is reliable because-- while he often describes the negative aspects of other characters' traits-- he also shows the positive ones that shine through, allowing for a balanced perspective all in all. This gives the reader the opportunity to come to his/her own conclusion about each character, while still highlighting the narrator' sown thoughts about them. For example, the narrator's negative view of the Custom-House Inspector is seen on p. 19, where he states, "My conclusion was that he had no soul, no heart, no mind; nothing, as I have already said, but instincts." However, later in his depiction of the Inspector he realizes a most valuable trait-- "This individual was fittest to be a Custom-House officer. Most persons... suffer moral detriment from this peculiar mode of life [but not he]."(p.21). Such descriptions of characters while still giving a second opinion allow readers to obtain a better understanding of each character and the value they give to the Custom-House as a whole, while still learning about the Puritan views of such traits, which the narrator does point out as being hypocritical at times, considering his own family history of negative traits, which he apologizes for, saying the he shall "take shame upon [himself] for their sakes"(p.12).
ReplyDeleteShania Young, what you say is true in the aspect of life, however, in this novel, this is not the case. Our views of the characters is based on the details that the narrator gives us within the passage. If left to our own device, as you say the narrator is doing with the "body" , we could mislead ourselves in the wrong interpretation of the novel, thus ruining the reason why the narrator gives the story. "My comparatively few opportunities enabled me to sketch only in the merest outline." (pg. 24-25) This shows that he will barely give us much detail so we may be able to fulfill the context of the "body," thus making the narrator unreliable.
ReplyDeletePaige Wells, I agree with what you have to say. Oftentimes, he does show some positive views on the characters in the story along with negative aspects of them. However, these positive views tend to be more of comparisons to pervious people in that area or field. "This individual was fittest to be a Custom-House officer. Most persons... suffer moral detriment from this peculiar mode of life [but not he]."(p.21). This "positive" aspect is more of a comparison on the individual to past residents of the position, thus making it less positive. The positive thing about this is he hasn't had moral detriment, which is an event, thus not really reflecting on the character as much for it could still happen. The views tend to more negative when dealing more with the nature of the characters, thus making the narrator unreliable. "My conclusion was that he had no soul, no heart, no mind; nothing, as I have already said, but instincts." (p. 19) This quote is negatively reflecting on the character's nature, while as the other positively reflects on events, thus making the characters still negative and narrator unreliable.
I agree with Shania Young on that the narrator is reliable because in the book it says, "My comparatively few opportunities enabled me to sketch only in the merest outline." (pg. 24-25) Which means the narrator is giving the readers enough information and details about the characters whether they are good/evil but the narrator leaves out information because he wants the readers to form their own opinion about the characters and have them determine if they are good or evil. The reason why the narrator is reliable is because he uses specific detail evidence to allow the reader is determine if a character is good/evil. The narrator does this by using a certain situation and how the character's action impacted the situation. That can be seen on pg. 38 with General Miller and how he was apprehensive about change. As a reader you can take that as either a good thing or a bad thing because depending upon the situation and circumstances, the change could be beneficial or not beneficial at all.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Author is indeed reliable. The fact that, on this blog there are differing opinions shows that Hawthorne's writing is up to debate. It is the flexibility in views that shows Hawthorne's reliability. IF he was so rigid all would have the same general views of the writing. It is this that is left up to the reader for interpretation that solidifies the reliability of Hawthorne. To explore this deeper I propose that one's mentality gives a great deal of how they perceive the writing. As Brianna said of General Miller, and his apprehension of change, it is up to reader interpretation. For example, one of a negative mindset may see General Miller to be someone scared, unnerved or worried by the ides of change, while an optimist would be likely to view General Miller as ready and excited/(anxiously awaiting),change. Even on this blog, Dylan (as a self-proclaimed pessimist) is viewing this writing as negative leading him to the conclusion of a biased author. All the meanwhile people of a more positive outlook view the writing in a more positive light and find the author reliable.
ReplyDeleteIn Summary: The differing of opinions with readers show how The Scarlet Letter can be left up to a form of interpretation, one that would not be present if Hawthorne was an unreliable author.
I agree that the narrator is reliable because he allows the reader to form their own opinion of characters based on the details given and how the narrator describes them. He gives enough details about the characters to allow the reader themselves to form an opinion of whether they are good/evil around the details already given. Like said by others the narrator presents characters in certain situations and shows how the character would deal in the situation they're in. The reader can then decide whether how the character reacts presents them in a positive or negative light and whether they are seen as good or evil. This can help the reader better relate to characters in the novel.
ReplyDeleteAs with all first person narrations, the narrator is not reliable. Many aspects presented in this first section of the novel have influenced my opinion in this way. The first of these factors would be the fact that the narrator is biased. This is simply because as human beings, we unintentionally influence others with our description of areas, events, and people with the feelings that we associate with those things. For example, Hawthorne’s descriptions of the Custom-House’s inhabitants were given to us in the way that he saw them at that current moment. Secondly, Hawthorne is first and foremost, a storyteller. His life’s work is to depict scenes, create characters, and alter the truth as he sees fit in order to make the novel more interesting for the reader, autobiographical works or not. Therefore, on this information alone, nothing that has been or will be read can be considered complete and unbiased truth.
ReplyDeleteBrianna, I have to say that I dissagree. This is because there appears to be one small flaw with your first quote and the reasoning you place behind it. The fact that Hawthorne states that he can only provide the " merest outlines" shows that his discription that follows will be flawed. This is because he is not an omniscient narrator, he does not know enough to provide an adequate description of these people, allowing the reader to form their oppinons of "good/evil" soley on the scrapes of information plucked from Hawthorne's own mind alone.
ReplyDeleteLevi, I must disagree with you as well. This is quite simply because an unbiased author will provide factual evidence as to why he or she claims what they claim is true, causing this "ridgid" belief that you claim only biased authors will provide. With a first person narration, there are ALWAYS facts that will be missing, which makes for an unreliable source. Going off of the example both you and Brianna provided with the General, we do not know what he is thinking ( whether he is anxious for change or compltely against it) BECAUSE the narrator only knows what he has seen and heard from these people, causing a natural bias. Hawthorne portrays these people in the light that he does because this is how he sees it, because he does not know all of the facts. As we all know, a lack of facts creates personal interpretation, otherwise known as personal bias. Bias, however, is not always a negative oppinon or outlook.
I agree with Sydney. The biggest problem we have is that he is presenting with only his little amount of info. He never experienced Hester or seen her story first-hand. The only data he has is Pue's info on here. Hester Prynne was talked to once. However, there is still limited data on her. "There were several foolscrap sheets containing many particulars respecting the life and conversation of one Hester Prynne," (p. 24) This may have the important events and aspects of her in it, but, most likely, It doesn't have all of the info of her life. Thus, he most likely had make some things up. This make him unreliable because he is unable to provide a very accurate portrayal of Hester Prynne and her life, therefore, making him unreliable.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the narrator is reliable. He gives the good and the bad and leaves it up to the reader to decide which is a true representation of the character. If he wasn't reliable i feel as if he would only tell the bad or only tell the good about each character. The narrator states on pages 25 and 26 "The characters of this narrative would not be warmed or rendered... but retain all the rigidity of dead corpses." I believe the narrator is saying he doesn't know the people so he isn't biased about the characters he wrote about and allowed us to decide if they are evil or good.
ReplyDeleteThe narrator is not reliable. Although he does depict characters in a positive light at times, the majority of his character portrayals are negative. "Often times they were asleep, but occasionally might be heard talking together, in voices between speech and a snore, with that lack of energy that distinguishes the occupants of almshouses, and all other human beings who depend for subsistence on charity, on monopolized labor, or anything else, but their own independent exertions"(Pg 6-7). In this passage, the narrator negatively describes custom house officers saying they are lazy and depend on anything except for their own personal work to make a living. When only giving negative descriptions of characters, it takes away from the reliability of the narrator and keeps the reader from being able to decide for themselves whether characters are good or evil. If the author makes a bigger effort in pointing out negative aspects of a character, the reader is less likely to be able to see the positive aspects of a character.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the character is reliable because, yes, it shows mostly of Hester Prynne, but it also touches on others points in the book. For example, later in the text(chapter 9), it tells the relationship of Dimsdale and the physician. So clearly it is going through the minds and lives of more than just one character. I also have not t decided whether I feel that it is a character narrator that is looking back to the past telling this story, or if it is an outside, unknown narrator. Once I am father in the book I hope to figure out.
ReplyDeleteIt's very difficult to describe a scene accurately using nothing more than words. Each person that attempts to depict the described image in their own mind will have a different result than the person next to them. Managing to fully describe every detail in a scene is extremely strenuous, as there are so many intricate aspects to any scene, especially one of a town full of people. Because of this, I do not hold the narrator responsible for the complications that resulted from describing the setting of "The Scarlett Letter." Whether there is bias present or not, describing a scene completely and accurately is a very difficult task and any narrator would have his/her complications in doing so.
ReplyDeleteThe narrator found the diary of a previous custom house worker. The diary contained the observations and accounts that the custom house worker wrote about Hester Prynne. The narrator is telling the story deriving out of what he concluded from the diary. The narrator is as reliable as he can be with the given information, being that the information came from a primary source. "This I now opened, and had the satisfaction to find, recorded by the old Surveyor's pen, a reasonably complete explanation of the whole affair." (Pg. 39)
ReplyDeleteI believe that the narrator is indeed reliable. throughout the book, the author shows how the characters actions are both good and evil. at no point in the book does the author seem bias in any way. On page 24 and 25 Hawthorne states, "There is one likeness, without which my gallery of Custom House portraits would be strangely incomplete; but which my comparatively few opportunities for opportunities enable me to sketch only in the merest outline." I believe that he is saying that he is going to give enough information about the characters for the reader to make an outline of them (which he does). He wants the reader to form their own opinion about them and decided wether they are good or evil.
ReplyDeleteMadisyn, I agree with you and True and what you say. However, a book, through the words, is supposed to influence the reader on how the character is good or evil. If the book leave only an outline, that may lead the reader to believe the wrong ideas, which would mess up the progression of the story and allow the reader to misinterpret the meaning of the book. "There is one likeness, without which my gallery of Custom House portraits would be strangely incomplete; but which my comparatively few opportunities for opportunities enable me to sketch only in the merest outline." (p. 24/25) If this were to happen, we could lose the book's meaning, thus making the narrator unreliable.
ReplyDeletepersonally, I believe the narrator is reliable. He uses his own thoughts and opinions in the fiction novel, but finds a way to separate himself from the book. He shows depth to many of the charterer making them both good and evil. One example is Hester. In chapter one of the novel he embodies how seriously the sin was taken and shows her guilt and shame through her actions, however he also shows how she loves her daughter and tries to give her the best life possible under their circumstances.
ReplyDeleteI believe the narrator is not reliable, as he has preconceived ideas of certain characters and how they should act based on his personal experience and feelings. "My imagination was a tarnished mirror. It would not reflect, or only with miserable dimness, the figures with which I did my best to people it." (pg. 25) This set of bias opinions paints a certain picture of characters without allowing readers to form their own opinion of the character. His negative ideas of the people the characters are based on translates to the reader also having a negative idea of them. The narrator is unreliable.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the narrator is reliable. My evidence is simply the whole first 55 pages. He gives background information of himself, the story and even a Puritan timeline. Hawthrone is honest in everything he says. Giving his readers a open mind, past his thoughts and opinions.
ReplyDeleteThe narrator is reliable because there is two sides of everything being told. The good and evil of each person is being set out and its up to the reader to make notions and pass almost a judgment of the person. There may be a bit of misinformation between the diary, and how the diary sets up each person to be (like if Jonathan Pue had a few opinions on those being written about) but I don't think the narrator intends for there to be a bias. "My comparatively few opportunities enabled me to sketch only in the merest outline." (pg.24-25) The outline is the narrator being able to give only the basis and not an opinion on what each person is like.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Luke Adkins. The author doesn't give the reader a chance to actually decide how they feel about the characters. He often gives negative ideas about them because that is the way he feels.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sydney Ely as well. The fact that the author is a story teller should point out that not everything he is going to say was really true at that time. It is impossible to know whether what he says is fact or bias because nobody today can see what the author had seen.
ReplyDeleteThe narrator is not reliable. The reason is because once someone(or something) is portrayed as bad in an individuals mind, He/She becomes blind to the truth about the character. For example, like Dylan said, the narrator states "My imagination was a tarnished mirror. It would not reflect, or only with miserable dimness, the figures with which I did my best to people it." (pg. 25). Hawthorne admits that the representation of some characters won't be as truthful as others. The fact this happened ages ago is proof enough to show how the reading will be bias. Hawthorne's mind will be too clouded by the idea of someone being good or bad that he will not remember to include the good things that the "bad" has committed and the bad things that the "good" has committed. To fully understand a person's true character we'd have to be there to witness it for our self. The reason being is because there was too many chances for the narrator to have included bias text in the reading.
ReplyDeleteThe narrorator, in my opinion, comes off as fairly reliable. Though he does have a tendancy to give certain characters more details regarding their negative side, and vice versa for others, this is never to a drastic degree in either direction for any given character. In the book he states, "My fellow officers,and the merchants and sea captains with whom my official duties brought me into a manner of connection,veiwed me in no other light, and probably knew me in no other character"(pg 32), He is stating that neither he nor his co workers knew much of eachother, other than that of what they learned working together. So the narrorator simply gives what information he knows, and it is up to the reader to decide if the person is good or bad.
ReplyDeleteBut with lack of detail and understanding, how can we classify anybody he describes as good or bad? He may only have the understanding of what he saw in someone but that doesn't describe someones moral standing. You'd have to know more about an individual to truly know what side he/she falls under.
DeleteI believe the narrorator is not reliable, because his writing contains a lot of bias. When the narrorator introduces a character, like Reverand Dimmsdale, in a negative light the reader continues to see that character as he's portrayed. As many other people have stated before “my imagination was a tarnished mirror. It would not reflect, or only with miserable dimness, the figures with which I did my best to people it.” Pg 25. This implies the obvious fact of the characters being revealed as he saw them, without letting the readers make their own assumptions. All in all, the narrorater seemed like a real downer, definitely made an impact on my reading.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the narrator is reliable. The characters he describes all seem to follow the details he gives, with their actions and things they say. He offers a description of the characters but leaves it up to you to decide if they're good or evil. I think the whole question on if he is reliable or not is based on how people interpret the writing and not on his actual trustworthiness. The book says: "One token of her shame would but poorly serve to hide another." I don't feel like he's trying to hide anything or have any bias towards how the characters are viewed, but just letting the reader decide and have their own thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree that the narrator is reliable. Throughout the book, the narrator says the good and bad things and doesn't choose a side. The narrator tells the story from more than one perspective, which makes me feel like the narrator is definitely reliable.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the narrator is a reliable source because although he sees more of the negative aspects about others he doesn't choose between good and evil. He speaks of his highly religious ancestors and claims they had to ask for forgiveness due to their persecution to others. " I know not whether these ancestors of mine bethought themselves to repent, and ask pardon of heaven for their cruelties." He doesn't claim that they where above others or had more pure souls due to the fact that they followed gods law but rather that they were just as guilty as sinners due to their mistreatment that was cast apon others
ReplyDeleteAnd that quote was found on pg 13
ReplyDeleteI believe that the narrator can't be reliable. The entire introduction is his opinions of everything that he sees. There are some accounts of the narrator talking to most of the people that he has described, but other things, such as the description of the eagle and the banner upon the custom house steps on page 7, are purely his opinion of what he sees and their meaning.
ReplyDelete