The Scarlet Letter Rhetorical Analysis

599 Words3 Pages
Elizabeth Looby Dr. Karen Walker Advanced Placement language and Composition 30 October 2014 The Scarlet Letter Essay Every person is colorful; no one is absolutely good or bad. The sum of our actions might be the measure of our morality but in reality, each event does not have a specific value and so the sum is questionable. The value of a person’s soul, at the same time, cannot be determined as good or bad because we are made up equally of both. In The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Hawthorne portrays moral ambiguity through the characters, Roger Chillingworth and Arthur Dimmesdale, and stylistic devices. Hawthorne presents Arthur Dimmesdale as a weak and sinful man but a passionate reverend. His very description already contradicts itself; as how can one be a sinful…show more content…
These two situations work against each other and, unfortunately for Dimmesdale, ultimately lead to life-threatening trauma on his psyche that physically manifests itself in the form of a burning scarlet A on his chest (Hawthorne ?). All of Dimmesdale’s decisions with a few exceptions seem to be in direct contrast to his position as a moral guide to the puritan community of Boston. For example, although Dimmesdale preaches about accountability and begs Hester Prynne to “speak out the name of thy fellow-sinner and fellow-sufferer” he does not reveal himself as the “fellow-sinner” (70). Dimmesdale lets his weak nature render him silent for his crimes but hypocritically asks Hester to reveal the sinner. Throughout the novel, Dimmesdale is given many opportunities to reveal his paternal connection to Pearl and each time he denies it even to the child’s own face like the night on the scaffold when Pearl asks “Wilt thou stand here with mother

    More about The Scarlet Letter Rhetorical Analysis

      Open Document