Hester and The Father - Stacey

It is unlikely that if someone were expecting a child, and looking for parenting books, that anyone would recommend Cormac McCarthy's The Road, and possibly even less likely that anyone would recommend Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter. Despite that, it is undeniable that both tell the stories of parents, even if one takes place in pre-colonial America and the other in post-apocalyptic America, making them unlikely references for current-day parents.

Of each respective volume, there is the focus on aforementioned parents: in The Scarlet Letter, we have Hester Prynne, and in The Road there is the father. These two characters are alike in numerous instantly observable ways, both are single parents, both with one child of the same sex, both are only them and their progeny against the world. Both Hester and the father seek to vigilantly protect their children, in the present and the future.

In protecting her precious daughter, Hester has to refrain from confiding in Pearl, her only companion. She hides the reason of their estrangement from their strictly Puritan society from Pearl directly, knowing that if she were to confide in Pearl about the sin which she had committed, that Pearl would only shrug off the harsh comments and whispers of adultery surrounding her mother. "What does the letter mean, mother?" Pearl asks Hester. "and why dost thou wear it? and why does the minister keep his hand over his heart?" (127) Hester deliberates before answering Pearl, conflicted, wanting to gain the sympathy of her only confidant but refusing to give herself that relief for the price it would inflict upon Pearl - losing proper knowledge of sin for the idolatry of her mother that all children have. So, she becomes coy and makes light of Pearl's inquiries. "Silly Pearl," said she, "what questions are these? There are any things in this world a child must not ask about. What know I of the minister's heart? And as for the scarlet letter, I wear it for the sake of its gold thread." (127)

Likewise, the father in The Road holds his boy's future in high regard. He is, however, protecting his child's life in a much more immediate and literal way than that of the protection provided from Hester to Pearl. While the only danger that persists to threaten Pearl's life is the danger of lynching in her future if she fails to adopt a sin-based moral stance and commits a sin-based crime in their Puritan state, the boy is in immediate mortal danger. Him and his father are travelling along a stretch of highway crawling with cannibals and marauders, trekking along through autumn as with winter encroaching slowly and painstakingly upon them. Even if the rest of humanity didn't pose a threat to the two, the cold was enough of a threat. "He [the father] woke to the sound of distant thunder and sat up." (15) Even in the midst of night, the father worries only for his son's continued life, which he is preternaturally attuned to. "He pulled the tarp about them and he lay awake a long time listening. If they got wet there'd be no fires to dry by. If they got wet they would probably die." (15) The next day, the first snowfall ensues, adding to the father's solemn sense of foreboding. And so, perhaps even more quickly than before, "they pushed on together with the tarp pulled over them. The wet gray flakes twisting and falling over nothing." (16)

Though the two parents unanimously seek only to protect their offspring, they carry distinctly different attitudes towards their children, of an almost divine type. Hester sees Pearl as an inherently evil and impish force, given to her by God to punish her for her sin, and sees it as her divine duty to teach Pearl the Godly way, which, with Pearl's heathenish demeanor is a lifelong challenge and a sort of purgatory-like test for Hester.

The father, however, sees his son as the "fire". The boy is the next Christ to his father, the only good thing left of humanity and the only thing left to assure God's existence. As his wife had known before she took her own life, the boy was the only thing left in the world worth living for. The boy is the incarnation of the divine to his father, whereas to Hester, Pearl is quite the opposite - an incarnation of Satan and evil and sin.

Hassan and the boy by Nordmann

Relationships with those that are close to us can be what define us as individuals. The people we choose to surround ourselves with can have a major influence on our lifestyle and choices in life. Both Hassan from Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner and the boy from Cormac McCarthy’s The Road have similar influences on those closest to them. 

Both of the boys are portrayed as young, innocent, and full of goodness. The way that they care for others show their good intentions as well as how much their relationships are interdependent. Hassan brings integrity, kindness, and virtue into Amir’s life and unconditionally gives and gives, no matter how Amir treats him. However Hassan relies on Amir just as much, as his best friend, without Amir, Hassan has no other friends his own age. Similarly, the boy and the man have a mutually dependent relationship with one another. The boy provides light in an otherwise bleak world for his father and reminds him that they are the “good guys” while the father shows his son how to survive and continue on even when all hope seems lost. 

Between the two boys I felt that Hassan was not as believable as a character. While it is nice to think that there are young boys who will continuously serve without one complaint, and never whine, it is strange to see a young boy who throughout the whole story had almost no faults. It almost felt that Hosseini was using Hassan to represent the goodness and humanity in Amir’s life, which sacrificed Hassan feeling like a real child. This also could be attributed to an unreliable narrator. We know how much that Amir respected Hassan in his older life, so when he is telling the story it is also possible that he is painting Hassan in an idealized version, forgetting his faults; “Baba’s other half. The unentitled, unprivileged half. The half who had inherited what had been pure and noble in Baba.” (Hosseini 359). 

In The Road, it is very believable that the boy would act in the manner he did. During their journey he complained about being tired and cold, which would be the reaction of most everyone, but still was able to remind his father to show compassion. By doing this the author was able to simultaneously craft a character that was believable and one that represented the goodness of humanity. One event that truly showcases this is when the boy thinks that he saw another little boy on the road. He insists that they go back and rescue the boy saying that he “wants to see him” and wondering what will happen to him if there is no one to take care of him, showing his deep compassion for others. In contrast to this, immediately after when his father asks him if he wants to die, he responds by saying “I dont care” (McCarthy 85). This forms a complex character, one that is looking out for humanity and wishes for the safety and goodness of others, but at the same time is losing his own will to live. McCarthy is able to craft more believable and real characters by utilizing flaws and imperfections in his novel in a way that causes the readers to sympathize with the characters instead of resent them. 

Another similarity between the boy and Hassan is their motivation behind what they do. For both, the reason why they continue on is because of someone close to them. They are aware that the person closest to them relies on them to survive and this causes them to disregard their own feelings at times and put the other person ahead of themselves. Hassan knows that Amir does not treat him with the same respect he gives Amir, but regardless, he continues to serve him with a smile on his face because he knows that’s what Amir needs from him. He also believes somewhere deep down that Amir appreciates his friendship and so he continues to make sacrifices for him. Similarly, the boy knows how much his father relies on him and how he has almost become his purpose in life. No matter how bad things get the boy is always there to remind his father to show sympathy to those they encounter. The boy is concerned that they remain the “good guys” in the story which, even though is hard for the man to agree with at times, helps to restore his faith in humanity. 

Both Hassan and the boy are used by authors to represent humanity’s goodness and sympathy in their novels. While McCarthy crafts a more believable character, both authors show the importance of relationships and how interdependent they can become. 

Shug Avery and Hannah Peace- Boynton

When comparing Sula, by Toni Morrison, and The Color Purple, by Alice Walker, it's very easy to find similarities between the two. The female authors establish a story focused around a black woman looking for herself through the course of many years. Discussing issues applying to a woman’s place and the struggles of a black person, both Morrison and Walker create an interesting narrative to address these concerns and many others. However, while the themes are similar, the plotlines and characters are vastly different, and, at first, it seems difficult to find any complex parallels between two characters. But with a closer look, many of the characters present similar traits that play a role in the main characters development and life. For example, take Shug Avery from The Color Purple, a well known singer, and Hannah Peace from Sula, the mother of Sula.

Both women were constantly searching for the affection of others, and weren't able to be loyal to a single partner. While Shug maintained relationships over the years, she loved to show herself off and didn't stick to a single person. Hannah, on the other hand, was loyal to her husband until death. Afterwards, she slept with many men, many of whom were married. Both women were not satisfied with the love of one man- they were constantly searching for better and focused on their own needs.

While their behavior was similar, the way they were perceived wasn't exactly the same. Hannah's tended to go for one night stands, and while she was nice and sweet, she was only looking to have sex and not to form any long lasting relationship. For this reason, she didn't mind hooking up with married men and often tended not to keep female friends. Had they not been hurt by her already, they saw her as different and thus, as an outsider. The men, on the other hand, saw her as “unquestionably a kind and generous woman” (Morrison 47) and were willing to defend her against the women’s rumors. However, Shug was idolized by all of her lovers, and although she continually hurt them, they still loved her and strived for her love through the years. Even as Shug was leaving Celie for a younger man, Celie admitted to still loving her, and even began to wonder what she did wrong, despite Shug admitting that it was her fault for being so needy. Her first known long term lover, Albert, still idolized her as she left him for the second time for Celie, saying “Shug got talent… She can sing, she got spunk… She can talk to anybody. Shug got looks… She can stand up and be noticed” (Walker 212). Meanwhile, those not sleeping with Shug did not look down to her. They still considered her a good friend and famous woman. Her reputation was not tarnished despite her taboo behavior.

Both women has very open minded ideas about sex- it was for pleasure, and they didn't buy into the “sex is a spiritual thing done between two married and in love individuals” idea. Their casual attitude about sex affected the main characters in each novel in subtle but powerful ways. In Sula, the impression on Sula of her mother's love life was stated outright- “Seeing her step so easily into the pantry and emerge looking precisely as she did when she entered, only happier, taught Sula that sex was pleasant and frequent, but otherwise unremarkable” (Morrison 46). Through life, this idea of sex carries with her and as an adult, she is as relaxed with sex as her mother, leading to her ruined reputation and downfall. In The Color Purple, Shug teaches Celie the idea that sex can be pleasurable, instead of just a tedious task that must be done with her husband. In doing so, she finds more pleasure and happiness in life, as this little thing opens up the door to many possibilities involving her treatment and such. While this doesn't immediately solve all her problems, it allows her to be more intimate and free in her life.

In the end, while Shug and Hannah are not exactly alike, they do share controversial characteristics that play a role in the main character's life. Although they both hold similar views on sex and love, they execute these ideas different and are viewed differently by their peers and lovers. While Hannah is seen differently between people, Shug is almost idolized among everyone. While Shug was willing to stay with lovers for an extended period of time, Hannah usually didn't keep a relationship with anyone. But both girls played an important part in the plotline, to the main character, and the themes in each novel.

Celie and Madame Defarge - Fenneuff

                In two different stories written by two different authors, set in two different time periods and written during different times, important characters in the two stories are bound to be vastly different. Surprisingly, however, sometimes these characters can have as much in common as they do not. Celie from The Color Purple and Madame Defarge from A Tale of Two Cities are examples of this phenomenon. Both Celie and Madame Defarge are quiet, and can actually get quite violent (which is surprising in Celie’s case, but not so much in Madame Defarge’s). Despite their similar personalities, however, the women’s ideals are simply different.

                Celie is quiet. She has never been one to speak up or question when she feels uneasy or when something feels wrong. She never tries much to change what happens in her life, and mostly accepts that her life is what it is. She is not an overly-ambitious person, and she will sit back and let things happen only when she is the one being harmed. However, when it comes to the people she loves, she is willing to stand up to whoever is harming the people that matter to her. She is much more passive when it comes to her own health and safety. Madame Defarge is quiet in a different way. She is cunning, watchful, and clever. She is quiet because she doesn’t need to speak: she is aware of what is going on and uses her silence to her advantage. She is always plotting. Madame Defarge has a plan and she must be quiet and watchful in order to execute it and let everything fall into place the way she wants it to. The two are both quiet for their own benefit, but Madame Defarge’s reason for doing so is much darker than Celie’s.

                In both A Tale of Two Cities and The Color Purple there is a social class established, and Madame Defarge and Celie have differing opinions on said social class. In A Tale of Two Cities, it is clear that the aristocrats hold all the power. All of the cards are in their hands and Madame Defarge resents them for it. It doesn’t help, of course, that the deterioration of her family happened due to the actions of the high and mighty aristocrats. Madame Defarge is a ruthless woman and will stop at nothing to overthrow the aristocrats and avenge her family. Celie, on the other hand, is much less vicious. In The Color Purple, the established hierarchy places white people at the top of the social ladder and black people at the bottom. It’s been like this for as long as Celie can remember, and she has no strong desire to change it. Celie doesn’t have any extreme feelings about the racial bias where she lives: she’s accepted it, and her placid personality doesn’t allow her to have any extreme desire to rearrange the social hierarchy.

                With their two very distinct personalities, Celie and Madame Defarge respond very differently to the actions of other people, more specifically, how the treat a person they believe has done them wrong. Both women are initially very violent toward the person who has wronged them: when Celie discovers that Mr. ____ had been hiding her sister’s letters from her, she was filled with immense rage and wished to hurt him, asking herself multiple times “how I’m gon keep from killing him” (150). Likewise, Madame Defarge wishes to kill the son of the man who raped her sister and destroyed her family, despite the fact that the son is innocent of any harm done to her family. The son, Charles, has even gone so far as to change his last name from that of his father’s and rejects his father’s treatment of the poor, but that doesn’t matter to Madame Defarge. In her eyes, he is guilty, and she wants more than anything to see him dead, stating, “the Evrémonde people are to be exterminated, and the wife and child must follow the husband and father”(279). This shows that she truly shows no mercy: she does not care that not everyone in the Evrémonde directly harmed her family; she wants them all dead anyway. Celie, on the other hand, is much more forgiving. After she moves out of Mr. ____’s house, the two don’t see each other for a while, until they begin to talk to one another more often and even become friends. Celie is able to forgive Mr. ____ for the way he treated her all of the years that they were married, and the two reconcile and form a friendship.

                Throughout many different pieces of literature, characters can share traits as well as be polar opposites in some aspects. Celie and Madame Defarge are perfect examples of this. Though they are both quite reserved, they can both be violent and angry if triggered. However, despite their similarities in their personalities, the two have a very different perspective on social hierarchy and forgiveness. 

Celie and Offred - Jessica Ruby

The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood and The Color Purple by Alice Walker, although in completely a different time and setting, show strong similarities in character motivation and meaning. With the common theme of oppressed women in hard times fighting for liberation and equality with their male counterparts, these characters take on a strong resemblance to each other. Both Celie and Offred show signs of hesitant rebellion, believability, and strength.

In every corrupt system there are fighters and there are followers. Followers go with the flow and make no effort to shift the status quo no matter their beliefs in its morality. The fighters on the other hand will do whatever it takes to stand up for what they believe in and won’t stop until a change is made. Both Celie and Offred display qualities of both of these parties and it seems that they almost can’t decide which they should be a part of. They are both influenced by a third party character that comes into their lives. For Celie, Shug Avery and Sofia enter the picture and put new ideas in Celie’s head that lead her to rethink her meager way of life. For Offred, first the doctor puts a deceitful idea in her head, she begins to have what seems to be an affair with the commander, and falls into Serena’s own deceitful plan with Nick. After Offred begins having regular talks and non ceremonial sex with the commander she confides in him how truly unhappy she is with her life, his only response is “you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs” ( page 120).

In addition, this uncertainty as to what role they wish to play in society and in their lives makes their overall existence more believable and relatable. Both Celie and Offred are faced with several instances that give them the opportunity to rebel or to follow the strict instructions of their oppressive lifestyles. This mental struggle in itself clearly demonstrates their humanity and innocence making them more appealing and thought provoking protagonists. For myself, the fact that they don’t always have it figured out what they want and what the right thing to do is makes them more appealing, because the alternative is unrelatable.  

Finally, the strongest resemblance between Celie and Offred is their almost unwavering strength. Despite the unfortunate lifestyles and time periods they are confronted with, they are able to make the most of what they are given. The genuine happiness that a simple picture of Celie’s sister or Offred’s daughter brings them is a perfect example of truly appreciating the little things in life and that you can push through the worst even when you have the least.

In conclusion, despite the polar opposite times and situations displayed in the lives of the protagonists in The Color Purple and The Handmaid’s Tale, they show similarities in several different aspects of their character. The strength, motivation, and relatability of both Celie and Offred can be attributed to their struggle for equality, their being used and undermined by men, and wish for something more to their lives.

Amir and Offred by LeTourneau

Everyone is a little different given their environment, social situations, and overall personality.  Amir and Offred begin their separate stories as timid and happily conform to the invisible rules laid out for them.  Amir pushes Hassan away because of their ethnic backgrounds and Offred accepts that her main job is to bear children.  Over time both these characters grow and take charge of their lives and eventually jump blindly into a situation that could end up awful.  For Amir it’s saving Sohrab in Afghanistan, for Offred it’s allowing Mayday to save her.  These events require a lot of change in both characters.

Amir starts off as just a regular boy, best friends with Hassan, a Hazara and also his servant.  Although great friends, society influences the way that Amir treats Hassan in certain situations and his decision making.  Unlike many other characters in the book, he is unable to stick up for himself as he is too afraid of what others will think of him.  This is something everyone struggles with, especially at a young/adolescent age.  Offred has a free life before her capture in which after she settles into a restrictive routine.  Offred accepts this but she becomes almost emotionless to her daily routine, unlike Amir who has many emotions constantly running through his mind.  These beginning situations show these characters as timid.

Even though the characters don’t stick up for themselves quite yet, their minds often deeply think about their current situations and what could be different.  Offred often thinks back to her old life.  She thinks about the way she used to dress and her husband and the freedom she used to have.  She also thinks about her life as it begins to transition to her current life.  All the times she used to sneak around with others to smoke, and the discussions of people who were trying to escape.  These flashbacks come everyday and she often compares them to her current situation, and as it begins to change her old self begins to creep in.  Such as when the Commander offers to get her whatever she wants such as lotion and soap.  Offred used to not crave these things but as she grows she begins to crave them more.  She also revels in her old life when she begins to have an affair with Nick.  Something that the Commander's wife initially started in order to help Offred get pregnant turned into a full affair under everyone’s noses.  She likely gets caught up in the affair as it closely resembles her affair with Luke, just like the lotion and soaps she craves her old life in a more physical and emotional way.  At the end of her story Nick comes to take her away as a member of Mayday.  Offred doesn’t know how this will end, she could end up free or dead, she takes the chance as she craves freedom.

Amir often wonders why it’s so odd for him to play with Hassan.  He loves Hassan and he doesn’t understand why he himself doesn’t invite him to play with other boys when his father had a party.  Amir never spoke out against this until his adult life and he has to fly back to Afghanistan to save Hassan’s son, Sohrab.  Amir struggles with this decision to fly back because of fear.  He feels so much guilt about how things turned out with Hassan, but he fears what will happen to him in Afghanistan since he knows he was never able to stick up for himself.  But his decision to fly back reflects how much he’s grown and how much he wants to make things right.  Another situation that shows how much Amir wishes to make things right is when he fights with Assef.  This sort of situation is something Amir was extremely afraid of in his childhood and something he even moments before the fight was afraid of.  

Another thing both the characters had that influenced their decisions was their past.  Amir had a difficult past that he struggled with and forced him to strive to change himself.  Offred had a completely different life in her past, this made her crave her old life.  The past often influences everyone as people want to improve themselves.  In Offred’s case she started out great she dipped down in worse situation and her past made her reach for her old life.  Amir had a difficult past and that past influenced him to save a young boy who would’ve ended up with a worse one.

In conclusion these characters struggled with sticking up for themselves but both knew that there was something better for them.  Both of them looked for things to change themselves even though their environments were much different.  Offred’s being under a dictatorial government in The Handmaid’s Tale, and Amir living in Afghanistan and America in The Kite Runner.

Hassan and Pearl - Fogel

        No two people are exactly alike; everyone is unique in their own way. But both physical traits and personality traits between two people can be quite similar. Having personality traits that compare to your own allow you to understand that person on a higher level than those whose traits do not match with yours. When I read The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini and The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne, the characters Hassan and Pearl really spoke to me and I connected with them with our parallel personality traits throughout the books. This allowed me to identify and sympathize with the characters during events both Hassan and Pearl go through in the books in a more in depth way.

            When Pearl’s personality is first described as a young girl, immediately I was drawn to her character because it closely resembled me as a little girl and even parts of my personality from present day. Her personality is described as imaginative, inquisitive, determined and full of life. She is a baffling mixture of strong moods, given to uncontrolled laughter at one moment and sullen silence the next. Hawthorne’s description of Pearl in The Scarlet Letter is exactly how I was when I was young and how I still am today. When I was a kid, my imagination was always running wild no matter what I was doing, and there was never a dull moment in my house. Pearl’s character allowed me to go back into my childhood while reading the book, which, in a way, made me see myself as Pearl and understand her character better than others might.

            Loyal, forgiving, and good-natured is how I would describe Hassan’s character in The Kite Runner. And although I have my days where I am peevish and irascible, these words describe me as well for the majority of the time. I have always considered myself as a selfless person; I will give anything it takes for the needs or wants of my friends or family. Hassan is the same way to an even greater extent. No matter what the situation is, Hassan will always stay by Amir’s side and do whatever it takes to maintain Amir’s happiness and satisfaction. I try to do the same thing to the best of my ability. Making other people happy is what makes me happy. Although I may not be quite as loyal as Hassan, considering the fact that he was raped and never told anyone in order to get the kite to Amir, when reading The Kite Runner and discovering Hassan’s character I found many of my characteristics shared with his. Not only did I find many of my childhood traits within Pearl’s character, but I found many parallels between myself and Hassan with how I am and act today. Because of this, I am able to see Hassan’s world through his eyes in a way not many readers are able to do.

            Although there are multiple similarities between me and both Pearl and Hassan that allow me to really understand the characters’ personalities better, there are also some parts of their personalities that don’t match with mine. One trait that I immediately noticed with Hassan is that he is extremely shy.  I, on the other hand, am on the other end of the spectrum. To be like Hassan and never speak up for myself or voice my own opinion would be nearly impossible for me. In some circumstances where Hassan’s shyness truly shows, I tend to disagree with how he handles the situations because of him being shy. If I was a more timid and introverted person, I would be able to see this trait in a completely different way. But because I am not that way, I am not able to connect with Hassan’s character in that aspect. One of Pearl’s traits that differ from mine is that she is very fixated on society’s view on her and her mother. I am not like this. I live my life and choose how to go on with my life based on what I want; I do not base my life decisions on what other people will think of me. Yes, there are times where I do conform to society. But for the most part, I do what makes me happy. Pearl is very different from me on this point of view, for she is very conscious of what others think of her and her mother. These differences Hassan and Pearl have between me and them makes it harder for me to comprehend their thoughts and behaviors. At the same time, it lets me learn and appreciate different personality traits.

            In conclusion, sharing similarities with both Pearl from The Scarlet Letter and Hassan from The Kite Runner was quite a benefit for me to have. It made me understand and sympathize with them more, therefore allowing me to get more out the book than most. Finding the similarities also made both books even more enjoyable to read. 

Celie, Hester, Offred- Fisher

When reading any great fictional novel, the question of what motivates the main characters to act in the way they do is often at the forefront of many readers’ minds. When an author creates a truly interesting, detailed character, often their motives are hard to discern, yet still central to understanding the novel as a whole. In the books The Color Purple, The Scarlet Letter, and The Handmaid's Tale, the role of women in society is a main theme. The main characters in these books are Celie, Hester Prynne, and Offred, respectively. These women are motivated by unique factors, and thus have vastly different ways of dealing with their societal disadvantages and  the discrimination they face because of their gender. Celie’s actions are motivated by jealousy, while Madame Hester is motivated by her fierce sense of pride, and Offred by devastating fear.

 First, in Alice Walker’s The Color Purple Celie is frequently jealous of the success achieved by the strong female figures in her life. She is jealous of Shug Avery for her relationship with Mr. ____, jealous of her sister Nettie for her freedom and independence, and jealous of Sofia for her ability to stand up to her husband Harpo. This jealousy motivates many of Celie’s actions, such as telling Harpo to beat Sofia, and crying herself to sleep when she knows Shug Avery and Mr.___ are sleeping together each night. Celie admits as much, when she explains her actions to Sofia by saying “I say it cause I’m a fool, I say. I say it cause I’m jealous of you, I say it cause you do what I can’t” (Walker 40). In addition, she concedes her jealousy of Shug Avery by saying “She take my at my word. I take me at my word too. But when I hear them together all I can do is pull the quilt over my head... and cry” (Walker 80). Therefore, these quotes clearly show that Celie’s actions throughout the novel are motivated by jealousy of her female comrades.

On the other hand, in Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter Hester Prynne often displays her fierce personal pride, despite facing extreme adversity from society and intense disrespect from her peers. This pride motivates many of her actions throughout the book, mainly her refusal to hide the letter A which marks her as an adulterer, and thus her choice to wear it without shame. This is exemplified when Madame Hester is first put on display in the Market-Place, and the manner in which she leaves the prison and steps out into the open. In this case, Hawthorne describes the situation by saying “On the threshold of the prison door, she repelled him, by an action marked with natural dignity and force of character, and stepped into the open air, as if by her own free will” (Hawthorne 61). This quote displays the tremendous amount of self-confidence which Madame Hester posses, and proves that it motivates her actions and behavior throughout the book. While Madame Hester's confidence would steadily decrease throughout the book, and she began to hid the letter A, her pride still remained intact. This is seen in her choice to give back to the community and put others, particularly her daughter, before herself. This intense selflessness is also a product of her pride.

In addition, the behavioral differences between Celie and Hester Prynne can be easily explained by juxtaposing their two unique motives. Celie’s jealousy and subsequent jealous actions equated to her having a passive attitude towards her diminished role in society and in the family. However, Celie did occasionally take action, and when she did it was using others, such as when she used Harpo to beat Sofia and Shug Avery to make Mr.____ stop beating her. In contrast, Madame Hester’s pride equates to her taking it upon herself to elevate her status, and she doesn’t rely on others to take action on her behalf. This is exemplified by Arthur Dimmesdale's refusal to publicly admit he is her lover, and Hester is still able to stay strong and prideful and live her life as normal without his help.       

Lastly, an ever present sense of fear is the largest motivating factor for Offred’s behavior in Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale. Despite being deeply opposed to her current situation internally, after Offred’s escape attempt was thwarted virtually any other form of outward resistance she may have dreamed of was crushed by her fear. For example, despite being friends with Ofglen, a member of the resistance, Offred refused to join herself because of the fear of being caught. As a result of this fear, Offred’s behavior was even more passive than Celie’s, and Offred displayed an even weaker desire for action. Thus, her actions are the exact opposite of Hester’s who seemed to have almost no fear and was not afraid to stand up for herself. This burning desire to remain unnoticed and not cause problems is seen when Offred says “We lived, as usual, by ignoring. Ignoring isn’t the same as ignorance, you have to work at it” (Atwood 74). In this quote, it is clear Offred has no intentions of speaking out and standing up for her rights, but rather makes a conscious effort to ignore the injustices of society which surround her because of her fear.

 In conclusion, despite being placed in similarly disadvantaged roles in society, the protagonists of The Color Purple, The Scarlet Letter, and The Handmaid’s Tale were motivated by very different factors, and thus behaved in very different ways. Celie was motivated by jealousy, and thus took limited action through the manipulation of others. Hester Prynne was motivated by fear, and thus was strong, forceful and independent. Offred was motivated by fear, and thus was incredibly passive and took very little action at all. Luckily, regardless of their differences, the brilliant writing of all three authors made each character equally interesting and realistic.          

Dimmesdale and Mersault by Robinson

Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter features Arthur Dimmesdale, a young and widely respected minister. Albert Camus's The Stranger features Mersault, a young man with a content life. These two characters can seem nearly foils of each other in some aspects, while in others they are one and the same. Existing nearly 300 years apart in fiction and 90 years apart in reality, both of these characters fulfill the same role of a man who has come into conflict with (and is tormented by) society. Through religion, philosophy, love, and personality, Dimmesdale and Mersault are truly two characters worth comparing.

Firstly, there are some obvious analogies that exist in the external between the two characters. They are young, male, and have respectable jobs, with Dimmesdale a minister and Mersault an office worker. They are both separated from the mainland of their country, with Dimmesdale living in an American colony and Mersault living in French Algeria. They also both live somewhat estranged and personal lives while away from their jobs. And yet, there are also some external differences worth pointing out; Dimmesdale is revered publicly while Mersault is ignored. Dimmesdale has moved overseas while Mersault lives where he always has. Dimmesdale's crime against society is secret while Mersault's is public. However, with both The Scarlet Letter and The Stranger being novels with a considerable philosophical element (more so The Stranger), similarities and differences in the external are sure to be nothing compared to those in the internal thoughts of both characters.

Arthur Dimmesdale and Mersault are both very introspective characters and are both prone to simply think in peace. But what are the two characters thinking about? For Dimmesdale, it is likely coming to terms with the sin that he committed years ago. Being a very religious character, it is difficult for him to live with himself knowing that, as a supposed shining symbol of piety, he is living his life a lie. Despite his constant appearance of being in grief, this only leads others to think that he is bearing the sins of society, which in turn makes them revere him even more. From such a cycle, Dimmesdale is in constant internal conflict. In this aspect, Mersault is almost the opposite. Mersault is an atheist, or at least an apatheist. When the chaplain meets him in jail, he thinks "...I had only a little time left and I didn't want to waste it on God" (Camus 120). Religion is unimportant to him because he seeks no greater meanings in life. Given this, Mersault worries about no sins he may have committed and is more likely to blame the world around him than himself for his troubles. Although, as mentioned before, Mersault's crimes are not secret like Dimmesdale's, Mersault has no remorse for his actions and does not understand how they have cost him greatly. Despite these conflicts being almost complete opposites in means and directions, they both root from the doing of a crime against society that is impossible to forgive. And these crimes are the only things preventing these characters from living lives that would otherwise be perfectly content. Contributing to this contentness is the element of love.

Love is important to both Dimmesdale and Mersault, and thus worth comparing in both, although the details of love are very different in both. Dimmesdale wants true love, and wants it with Hester Prynne, a young woman with the same feelings. However, this true love leads to adultery, as Hester was married, and even produces an illegitimate child, Pearl. This is the primary source for all conflict in The Scarlet Letter. To Mersault, on the other hand, love is just another way to the enjoy life, and nothing more. He finds another connoisseur of this form of love in the character Marie, to whom he builds an intimate physical relationship with. While their actions of love are not the source of conflict as in The Scarlet Letter, their love is separated from Mersault's imprisonment, which in turn furthers his suffering in confinement. Dimmesdale has a lapse in his suffering when he meets Hester alone in the forest, while Mersault is temporarily relieved when Marie visits him in jail. But while Dimmesdale's meeting is an exchange of many personal words, Mersault's meeting consists mainly of facial expressions, as they meet in a loud jail visitation room. This reflects the differences in love of both characters. To the bitter ends of both Dimmesdale and Mersault, the love of another was the only respite in the sea of society's torment.

Arthur Dimmesdale and Mersault, through the lenses of their selves, their philosophies, and their interactions with love, are two characters that can be both parallels and skews. They come into their novels, The Scarlet Letter and The Stranger respectfully, as young men that have been sundered from society through crimes that are too late to repair. And although Camus may have come over a century after Hawthorne, both of their characters fulfill one and the same role, albeit in many different ways.

Archetypes in The Road by Nick Brandt

   Whether subliminal or consciously we all tend to group and label one another. It's seemingly in man’s nature to develop certain connections between a person and a generalization of character. You might call a Cro Magnon Man looking football player a “jock,” (probably not, as “cliques” are going the way of dinosaurs) or you might call your friend who likes her Algebra class a “nerd.”  Yet, most do not realize the extensive depth in relation to these associations we make.
   Carl Jung, a who made strides in psychology circa the early 1900s furthered understanding of archetypes, which simplified are these aforementioned associations that we make. These archetypes in Jungian Philosophy are the complex components of our universal unconsciousness. They are the template that molds our existence. All of these archetypal figures, motifs, and events such  as the Trickster, the Creation, and Death are archetypes, observable only through indirect means; art, personal behaviors, to even dreams. We find that they are a template for existence, though they are uniquely adapted in many different ways when actualized. So to clear up the misconception spawned by those darn New Age hipsters, archetypal motifs and images such as the Waif or the Hero do exist, but an archetype is a nebulous and much more vague concept akin to metaphysics.
   With the groundwork for understanding archetypes lain, we can now dissect a couple of unorthodox archetypes, the Apocalypse motif and the death event. These are both in the framework of a book I recently read, but already hold dear to my heart. This book is titled simply, yet boldly The Road by Cormac McCarthy. In the book The Man accompanied by The Boy traverse a frigid land home to ashen fields and soot laden waters to reach something intangible yet so crucial... Warmth. The South.
   The apocalypse has razed, scorched and buried almost all that is good, save for the few ranks of “the good guys.” Why would any person wish to peruse the pages of such a sullen work? Why would any person attempt to place thought into the 5,000 Shades of Grey and Nothing Else that McCarthy presents? Incredible perspective is offered by the mere concept of the apocalypse, especially as it is pictured in his works. Raving bands of cannibalistic marauders, bleak everything, finding a forest fire entrancing due to it featuring colors other than the grey that becomes increasingly onerous to endure daily. This compounded by the simplicity in the heartwarming moments the duo shares throughout the book really can give a substantial deal of perspective as to what hardship really is. And at the heart of the matter, that is why McCarthy even chose to write this book in the first place. A Coca-Cola or a shopping cart shared with a boy full of innocence can provide a man the strength to endure the end of the world. While others might complain about (insert absurdity here).
   Just to clarify, the Man did outlast many in the apocalypse, but a case of assuredly Tuberculosis compounded with an arrow in the leg is a potent combo that could spell out death for just about any hero, including the protagonist of this novel. The tender love between child and father can outlast much yet not that. In any order, it should be established that the death of the father also is setup to provide even more perspective, testing the reader’s empathetic devices. The prospect of death does not frighten the man, only the thought of his son not “carrying the fire” scares him, or rather enrages him. He wants his posterity to go on and survive and instill courage and justice and humanity into this forsaken earth. We all want to know what is on the other side. Because we have so much given to us, we have the audacity and time to ponder these greater concepts. The Man was toiling day by day and had no time for this fear.
   These archetypes are invaluable in providing insight into realities we might not call our own. They allow us to juxtapose these foreign constructs and juxtapose them with ours. Functioning in a more universally cognizant manner is easier achieved through the use of archetypes in great literary works such as The Road.

Sula and Meursault, Seeger

The novel Sula and the novel The Stranger share few apparent commonalities. Sula was written by a female, Toni Morrison, The Stranger by a male, Albert Camus. Sula was published in America, while The Stranger was published in France. The protagonists in the two books, Sula Peace and Meursault, respectively, have little in common as well. The novels are both driven by the emotions of the protagonists. However, The Stranger is remarkable by Meursault’s lack of emotions while Sula is characterized by Sula Peace’s erratic and emotional responses. One commonality that the two novels share is the characterization of both protagonists as being strongly independent and individualistic, traits which often separate them from the rest of society.

The character of Meursault in The Stranger, written by Albert Camus, is unique in that throughout the novel he is unfeeling and often indifferent to what is happening around him. Whereas many authors often utilize the emotion of their characters liberally in their writing in order to better develop the character, Camus almost does the opposite. The character of Meursault is blunt in his delivery of dialogue, and his thoughts are notable for his lack of emotion rather than his display of them. Meursault often fails to conform to societal expectations of honesty and empathy. He doesn’t see the value in withholding the truth, even if it is intensely hurtful, as seen in the following interaction with his girlfriend, Marie:“A minute later she asked me if I loved her. I told her it didn’t mean anything but that I didn’t think so”(Camus 35). A similar situation arises following the death of Meursault’s mother.He is very analytical in his descriptions surrounding her death and his trip to the funeral, saying that he “caught the two o’clock bus. It was very hot. I ate at the restaurant, at Celeste’s, as usual. Everybody felt very sorry for me”(Camus 3). Meursault comments on how other people felt, but has no emotional response to the death of his mother personally. This unfeeling response towards the death of his mother, which occurs in the first chapter of the book, establishes a trend of indifference that continues throughout the rest of the novel. Meursault’s divergence from societal expectations of emotions-having the capability of love and sadness and remorse-further ostracize him from society. The actions and lack of feeling of Meursault in the novel were unrelatable to me. As a more sensitive and emotional person, I often times didn’t understand his cold approach to many delicate situations. However, Camus is consistent throughout the novel in the characterization of Meursault's behavior, and thus creates a believable character, despite his absurd and uncommon actions.

The character of Sula Peace from the book Sula, written by Toni Morrison, is a complex and confusing character. She is often portrayed as wild and emotional and erratic. However, at times she is in control of her emotions, and often desires calm and peacefulness. Like Meursault, she often engages in activities that society deems immoral, and has a difficult time realizing the wrongs that she has committed. The relationships that she engages in are perceived to her as being light and meaningless, purely physical. Because of this, she doesn’t always realize the severity of the repercussions of her actions. This is evident in the ending of her friendship to Nellie, occurring due to Sula’s affair with Nellie’s husband.  Despite the hatred that many of the townspeople feel towards her as a result of her sexual relationships, she continues with her actions. This illuminates a similarity between Sula and Meursault; they both refuse to conform to society despite pressure from the community to change. Meursault is pressured to feel empathy for others and regret, while Sula is pressured to feel shame for her behaviors.

Both Sula and Meursault are solitary characters. They isolate themselves from the rest of society, and have views that differ from the rest of the general public. Sula has little worry of what others think of her. Instead of focusing on the domestic life that the rest of her community seems to conform to, Sula takes a more modern and unconventional approach. In response to being questioned as to why she had no desire to start a family, Sula responded that “I don’t want to make somebody else. I want to make myself”(Morrison 92). Meursault is also an individual character. He doesn’t accept God, which is abnormal in the culture that he lives in. He is brutally honest with those around him, resulting in him eventually becoming ostracized by society.

In conclusion, there are few shared traits between Meursault and Sula besides their honesty, solidarity, and rejection from society. Sula Peace lets her emotions drive her actions, while Meursault is often devoid of emotions. The almost opposite emotional response of Sula and Meursault result in two characters that share few commonalities.

Week 7 Explanation

This week’s blog topic asks you to compare and contrast two characters from different books in your summer reading. You can discuss the way authors characterize them, the character’s motivation, the believability of the characters, and/or how well or poorly they relate to you. DON’T use “I think” or “I believe” or “I” anything for most of the topics unless you are relating the characters to yourself.

One of the two characters you compare should be from a book new to your blog posting. Please use quotes (citing them properly).

When you write for this assignment (and most of the others) keep the following general guidelines and possibilities in mind: 1). DO NOT SUMMARIZE. I don’t care if I haven’t read your book; I’m not asking for the plot. 2). Pay attention to your content, ideas, and organization as you structure your post. 3). Certainly mention the book title (use italics to set it off) and author. The title of the post should contain the title of the book and your last name, like in the example that follows these directions 4). Deal with other issues that are interesting, novel, and intellectual yet still relate to the general topic of the post.

Try to have a good time. Remember internet safety protocols: don’t use your entire name or give away identifying information. You should probably change your display name if you’re using your real name. Be tactful and don’t disparage anyone. You are graded on the quality of thought and expression in your post, its length (between 700 - 1000 words), and on using quoted material properly (if you use any). I suggest writing the post in a word processing program and then pasting it into the post window. Contact me if you have any questions and I’ll answer ASAP. The following example is not a strict template of what you should do but only a possibility, and a poor one at that. Off we go then…

Nora and Guy by de la Cruz

If Harry Potter were real, what celebrity would be his ideal romantic partner? That seems like a strange question, but every avid reader of the Harry Potter series is able to come up with likely answers. After so many volumes, Harry has coalesced into a living, breathing idea in the minds of countless fans because his feelings, desires, interactions, and decisions are realistic and justifiable even though he lives in a fantasy world. Authors like J.K. Rowling succeed when they create characters so real that readers shape a solid impression regarding who the character is and how the character should behave. Ray Bradbury succeeded with Guy Montag from Fahrenheit 451, but Henrik Ibsen failed with Nora Helmer from A Doll’s House.

Both Guy and Nora are trapped in societies and situations they initially support: Guy is the burning fireman, Nora is the domesticated wife. Eventually, both characters tear themselves away from their oppressive circumstances. However, only Guy’s decisions ring true and inevitable; readers easily see the course of Montag’s actions as logical. Nora’s metamorphosis, however, feels sudden and improbable. Bradbury succeeds in making Guy believable because of his forceful and frequent use of foreshadowing.

From the very beginning of Fahrenheit 451, Guy questions the system under which he lives. He is clearly in a state of unrest when he responds this way after being asked if he is happy: “Of course I’m happy. What does she think? I’m not? he asked the quiet rooms. He stood looking up at the ventilator grille in the hall and suddenly remembered that something lay hidden behind the grille, something that seemed to peer down at him now” (Bradbury 10). What lays hidden behind the grille is a forbidden book that further foreshadows his sense of rebellion. Hence, the reader awaits Montag’s insurgence against the oppressive society in which he is a key player. His development into a revolutionary is the focus of the entire novel.

Because Montag’s emotional state is clear and his actions point toward the questions frothing in his mind, each subsequent decision he makes is believable. Stealing more books, finding Faber, killing Beatty, 

abandoning Mildred, and escaping into the outskirts of society are all products of Montag’s disquiet and growing need to know the truth, to access the answerless knowledge found in books.

Nora’s condition in Ibsen’s A Doll’s House is similarly unhappy. It is obvious from the play’s title that Nora’s home life is not her own but a thing others toy with and control. Her husband -- and her father before him -- is the center of Nora’s life. Husband, children, and a pampered existence are all supposed to bring her happiness, but they do not; they comprise the structure of an repressive system. Moreover, Torvald, her husband, is ungrateful when Nora saves his health and his wealth. These seem like strong reasons for Nora to abandon the “doll’s house” in the end to find personal happiness. However, the decision she makes to leave is incongruent with the desires and characterization presented earlier in the drama.

Throughout the majority of the play, Nora cares for nothing more than Torvald. She goes to extraordinary measures to keep a secret from him: that she saved his life by taking out a personal loan to help his health. She keeps the secret in part because of “how painful and humiliating it would be fore Torvald…to know that he owed me anything!” (Ibsen 12). Furthermore, the possible revelation of this secret is the focus of the play’s most prominent conflict. Nora contemplates asking a close family friend for money and more; she considers suicide. Yet in the end, the revelation of the secret is anti-climactic because it is Nora who urges Torvald to read the letter which uncovers it.

That instance, however, leads the to the true climax where Nora acts uncharacteristically. One moment, Nora tells Torvald “I have loved you above everything else in the world” (Ibsen 62) and the next she leaves him. In that swift moment, she heads out the door and abandons the doll’s house she has loved for nearly a decade. This is uncharacteristic of a person who has worked so hard to keep the marriage together, to make Torvald happy. True, he was ungrateful, scared, spiteful, but that was simply his first reaction. He may have come around as he begins to do near the end of the play where Nora doggedly proceeds with her abandonment. In addition to her decision being uncharacteristic, the character and tone of her dialogue also changes. Until this moment in the play, Nora appears superficial and not too bright where as she gains an abrupt depth of character at the end that was not believable.

Both Bradbury and Ibsen create interesting settings for their works, but only Bradbury succeeds in bringing the more competent and logical character to life.

Archetypes in Hamlet - Martin

Archetypes are a part of everyday life. They are instilled in us from the day we are born. We believe that because someone or something has certain characteristics that they fit a certain “type”. This can also apply to literature. Many basic archetypes are implanted throughout literature. Many archetypes can be seen throughout William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, including the hero, the fall, the wise, the innocent, and the villain.

The main character in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is Hamlet himself, as the title suggests. As the main character, Hamlet has various roles to fill, including portraying certain archetypes. One of the most prominent archetypes seen in literature is the hero. A hero is defined as someone, typically a male, who is admired for outstanding achievements and noble qualities. Hamlet is considered the hero for a portion of the story. He wishes to avenge his father’s death, which is seen as a noble and courageous act. Hamlet also experiences the fall. The fall is a descent from a higher state of being to a lower state. After being seen as the hero, his descent into madness after Ophelia’s death sends him plummeting downwards.

Shakespeare uses characters other than Hamlet to display important archetypes. Horatio exhibits the qualities of the wise. He listens to the hero and proceeds to give him advice and information. The wise also tends to know when danger is imminent and warns of it. Horatio additionally is the voice of reason. The character of Ophelia is used to show the archetype of the innocent or the damsel in distress. She is sheltered by her father, therefore being shielded from the harsh realities of the world. She is naive and pure. When the realities of the world catch up with her, she kills herself instead of being saved by the hero.

The villain is arguably one of the most important archetypes in history. Their goal is usually to destroy the hero or to gain power. The villain lacks compassion. In Hamlet, Claudius is the villain. He murders his brother, who is also Hamlet’s father, in order to gain power. He also attempts to murder Hamlet in order to prevent people from finding out the truth. The villain is willing to betray anyone in order to accomplish their goal. Claudius marries his dead brother wife in order to ensure his position in power. As there is a villain and a hero in Hamlet, this fills the archetype of nemesis’ and the struggle between good and evil. Claudius is Hamlet’s nemesis as Hamlet is the hero and Claudius is the villain. Their feud creates the fight between good and evil, although in the common use of the archetype good comes out on top. In Hamlet good nor evil really wins as Hamlet and Claudius both die in the end.

Archetypes are a prominent part of life and literature. There are endless amounts of them, and William Shakespeare exhibits quite a few in his play Hamlet. Whether it be the fall from grace or the battle between good and evil, archetypes can be found everywhere.

Walker - Jessica Ruby

Alice Walker’s The Color Purple is a perfect archetype of not only the treatment and life of African American women in this time period, but it also appeals to the everyday human in its unique narrative style. By having Celie tell her own story, a better representation and understanding of her everyday life is created. The obstacles that she faces and overcomes are relatable and are very characteristic for someone in her relative situation.

First, Celie is born and raised in a rural area and works on her Father’s farm. She is overworked and unpaid, and lives in a hostile environment. This is a common theme in books with a similar plot and setting. It does, however, stand out from others like it because of its unique format. Celie writing letters to God, while faith is also a characteristic part of such a setting, exemplifies the personal aspect of this story and sets the scene for the classic protagonist and innocent persona Celie is expected to have in her situation.

For example, one common event that links such characters is a great loss at a young age. For Celie, it is her mother that becomes ill and passes away which has a great impact on the rest of the story. Because her father is abusive, there is no one to teach her of the world and she must learn on her own. She is commonly naive and inexperienced, learning things the hard way. This sense of innocence is a recurrent theme in such protagonist characters like Celie.

As her story continues, she is met with more and more obstacles in which she must overcome. This includes the death of her father, finding out about her real father, the loss of Nettie, and struggling to find value in something in her life. While there are some things she may never overcome completely, it identifies coping methods as a release. Nonviolent and easy ways for her to relieve her stress and fight for what she believes in are common characteristics of novel heroes.

In addition, one of the most obvious archetypes is found in her faith. In a time period where there is more hope than action in terms of rights for African Americans and women, faith is a common central theme. Celie relies on God and expects him to hear the prayers that she rights ever since her Father sexually abused her and told her she could not speak of it to anyone but God. As all good heroes, she remains hopeful and her faith stays strong. As a reader, being able to read and understand how she sees the world and copes with her unfortunate situation offers a greater explanation of how things were at this time.

In conclusion, while The Color Purple by Alice Walker stands out in its genre it is also the perfect archetype of its genre as a whole. In a way it explains its genre in greater detail from the eyes of the main character allowing readers to more easily identify with her story and, in fact, see the commonalities and archetypes displayed in other novels like it.