So …. Priscilla won. But did she really win? What kind of a prize is Hollingsworth? He has given up his philanthropy up a little for now in the guilt of Zenobia's death, but will he not abandon Priscilla in a little while to take up his philanthropy again? Even if he doesn't what kind of life can she have now, caring for Hollingsworth? And in winning Hollingsworth she has lost the half-sister that she always wanted and initially loved.
And of Zenobia? Is losing Hollingsworth really worth the drowning that she gives herself? It is a terrible thing to think. And yet, Silas Foster is a little ridiculous in his search for her body. What are we to think of this decision? Is it as ridiculous and stupid a notion as he makes it seem? I feel that her decision was as silly as Foster believes. I mean, she has known Hollingsworth for a few months, right? And she was so much admired, Coverdale himself talked of her as if talking of a goddess.
And yet I think that her death preserves her character. She “had no more to hope for” as Coverdale says, and I don't think that her beauty would not have waned as Westervelt claims, and perhaps the drama of her suicide is more appropriate to her character than the slow wasting away that might have been her fate.
The question still remains though, is the novel in the least bit feminist? Surely Zenobia is a strong female character, but in the end the only avenue of change afforded to her is her own death. Priscilla, on the other hand, is the weakest sort of girls, but yet she gains Hollingsworth and becomes his only supporter. Not only did she win Hollingsworth, but, we find, Miles Coverdale too. Is Hawthorne trying to tell us that the real power in women is their being the sort of frail creatures in need of support that men would have them be? Or is he just expressing the idea that strong women like Zenobia, no matter how full or womanliness they are, will never win the love of a man due to the very masculinity of their strength?
No comments:
Post a Comment