Ominous: hello
Greg Hyzak: hi
Daniel Anderson: What if i say that the amount of control that the church elders tried to exert in , say, Ann huthinson's time might have been a good thing. it seems like persecution now to us, but then it was a necessary part of the communities activities.
Samantha Smith: My impression was more along the lines that YGB was battling with his past more than the past of his community.
Gilbert S.: Ok, i think the story states that if you are going to be that pious, your life ends up screwed either way.
Daniel Anderson: Samantha, so it seems like amore psychological thing. How much of that assesment might be controled by our own modern fascintion with psychology?
Mark Fisher: In what was it a *necessary* part of the community activities dan?
Joe Pedroza: Once again I think that Hawthorne messes with your mind and introduces this style of writing in his stories.
Domingo A. Rochin: I believe that the author had more insight into the past because his ancestors had been active participants of it
Mark Fisher: Joe, doesn't Stephen King do that also, copuld you not say that is a goal in successful fiction?
Daniel Anderson: Mark, I don't know, it could be that in an emerging community, with more dangers around and less chance of survival that more control was needed. if every individual does his/ her own thibng, we've got a problem and that may have been amplified by the circumstances of the time.
Gilbert S.: ofcourse haw. is a psychological writer, his storiesbattle it out in the subtext, not out in the open. king...i'm not too sure
Samantha Smith: I thought it was ironic that in Anne Hutchison's case, she was being ostracized for something that is now commonplace. Back then, it was heresy to say that God was speaking through you, but in every christian church I have attended that was almost like the most sacred of goals--like speaking in tongues or something.
Domingo A. Rochin: Some times our parents and grandparents will tell us things about their past that they won't tell any body else. It is possible that they, at one time , felt gilt for all the people they wrogly prosecuted
Mark Fisher: Domingo, the Mayflower Madam's ancestors came over and jumped on PLymouth Rock... What relevance does that have to his credibility or lack thereof?
Samantha Smith: I admit that I see things from a more psychological point of view
Gilbert S.: the past is like a dirty mirror. you don'talways want to wipe it clean and see you rtrue self...sometimes you need to..sometimes you would rather not.
Daniel Anderson: Good point, Samantha. it seems as if our won time makes us see the past in diffeerent ways. If someone from 1700 came here today and found the Bible online, what would he think of us? So the question is,how do we assess the actions of the past was it right for the puritans to ostracize Ann huthinson?
Tim Decker: I think from a religous stand-point you are correct it is a highly admired goal to gain no mediated communiction with God, but Churches of that time period were also political structures. Thus, they inherently did not want you to remove the "mediator"/"ruler" from your actions both politically and religously.
Ominous: A person from the 1700's would comdemn the public interpretation but not the display of the Bible.
Melinda Baggett: YGB shows how temptation led Goodman Brown to the meeting in the forest and resisted it by not joining the crowd. Consequently, he lost faith in the Puritan belief system. Possibly his gloom after the meeting represents that he was actually living in a "hell" community with all of these evil people around him, and when he died he actually went to heaven. I think him losing his wife to the evil community shows that he lost "faith" in the Puritan community, which caused his gloom, his disenchancement.
Mark Fisher: How do we know he lost his wife and she did not lose him?
Domingo A. Rochin: Mark, I don't understand your comment
Daniel Anderson: Good point Tim, about churches as political structures. There was a different make-up of authority in the community. Just as we have a huge justice system in place to exert authority over our citizens, the past used the church. Thisd makes it important for us to keep cultural difference in mind when we consider the past. Doers anyone see any dangers of using the cultural difference argument though?
Greg Hyzak: We would have to experience the time period of Ann Hutchinson to assess if the actions of the puritans were right. Sure today we persecute this kind of action, but both beliefs and lifestyles were totally different then.
Joe Pedroza: i think that the community at the time felt they had to opress the kind of action they took in order to keep authorithy over the community as a whole, if they hadn't then everybody would started there own sermons and later led to different religions.
Gilbert S.: Greg, we can still see that some logical fallacies existed in their time, and sometinhgs just are no good to humans at anytime
Consuelo Richardson: For anne it was a little easier to deal with the miscarriage than even her ancestors. Further back in time women were considered unpure while pregnant. There was a certian amount of time that had to pass after the preganancy for them to be allowed back into the church. In scotland women even had to experience extreme pain or it was considered a birth aided by the devil. Progression of society is a blessed think.
Domingo A. Rochin: good point Milinda
Tim Decker: I don't believe that as many people center what could be considered there major life conflict around religion as much as they did then. (That doesn't really answer your question Dan, its just a thought)
Mark Fisher: Domingo, the point I was attempting to make was the *fact* his ancestors were active participants in "history" should have no bearing on hawthorne's credibility of as an author. If those credentials were necessary to be taken seriously in the writing community, the whole concept of America as a melting pot would pretty much preclude all of our generation from writing about history.
Daniel Anderson: Greg, the tolerance you suggest seems to be necessary in interpreting another culture, but what are it's dangers. What if we say the culture of slavery, for example, deserves the same kind of tolerance. What about persecution in our own time. The problem in a nutshell is that we have to grant some tolerance for historical difference, yet we still ahev to make our own value judgements about what's right and wrong and we don't want either to smash the other.
Samantha Smith: We can see in present day that each person doing his own thing leads to problems. I see your point, Daniel, the control of the church was very important to the infrastructure of the society. I see this also in present society--the church provides a cohesive and strong support for its members which enables them to better deal with problems as they arise.
Morris Pittle: I think it has to be taken into account in any piece of writing. Culture defines who we are, therefore it becomes an important factor in intrepreting a story. If this were not the case, would Shakespere make any sense.
Ducky: The Puritans valued their Church over anything else. The Church was even held higher than the king. These people relied on the Church because the reasons why they came to the New World was because they thought that the English people were too corrupt for their liking.
Rogue: Kind of like in Texas football is higher than God?
Ducky: Correct!
Gilbert S.: ducky, silly then that they went back to or even made extreme the church deal?
Unk: I am sorry does football have a place in this discussion?
Daniel Anderson: Morris, the question of Shakespeare raise interesting possibilities. If it srill makes sense today, that would suggest that our culture and his are not that different. But are they really that similar. or is it possible for us to put our own cultural baggage aside to asses any other culture. Maybe what we see as making sense in sakespeare meant something totally different to the Bard's audience.
Consuelo Richardson: It could be siad that the cowboys did make it because they thought htey were highter than god and he had to put them in their place
Rogue: gilbert, What!!!!! Please, pray do explain your facinating concept further....
Domingo A. Rochin: Mark, If your grandfather had been in WW II, and he told you a story about it, woud'nt you think that his story is more credible than one made up by somebody who wasn't even there
Daniel Anderson: Unk, suppose a person from the future wanted to write a Young Goodman Brown of today about the way our hypocritical community would rail against violence in pur streets and the youth carrying guns, etc, then show gladatorial contests everyday to an audience of millions for money. Any hypocrisy there that we might not be noticing?
Gilbert S.: rougue, i shall. the english came over here to escape persecution...the purians were not happy campers in that miserable foggy isle....they then decided to make a religious-political cummunity and exclude and burn people to death because they were not in the right ideoloy..more of that hawthorneian hypocrisy eh?
Domingo A. Rochin: What I am trying to say is that, in lack of sufficient history records, the "word of mouth" is what we have to go with
Rogue: Domingo, I might question the true exacting nature of a story told by my grandfather. that would more fall into the category of a legend. My point is accurate facts about history do not have to come from genetic participants. If John Jakes is not related to anyone who died in the Civil War, does that mean his novels are complete bunk?
burton: Do you think possibly that the forest in YGB could be being likened to the bright light that you see just before dying?
Ominous: no
Unk: I understand that point Dan and agree wholeheartedly.
Gilbert S.: burton, i don't know yet
Daniel Anderson: domingo, you raise an interesting point aabout the authority of the stories we hear. it would be wrong to say that fact and fiction are the same but histroy contains within it the story. i a japanese soldier told the same story it would likely be a different one,. interpretaion of events takes place in both history and story.
Rogue: let's go for a capuccino, Gilbert...
Gilbert S.: sure let me get my berret
Ominous: I think it is interesting that the forest was portrayed as evil, the farther he went into it the more evil it seemed.
Daniel Anderson: Burton, what do you mean by the analogy with the forest and the bright light?
Domingo A. Rochin: Rogue, NO! I am not trying to discredite anybodies story, but that in the context of time, it is likely that howthorn had better access to the true accounts of history than anybody else
Consuelo Richardson: Even today we see witches and worlocks hiding in the forest
Ducky: The Puritans did not come over to escape persecution. They came over to form, in their minds, the most pious state as an example for all the world to model itself after. They did not think that any religion yet established was as pious as it should be.
Gilbert S.: ominous, burton, consuelo what do you mean by the forest being such a centrl symbol of the story..how about saatan?
Daniel Anderson: If the forest is eveil and also represents the unconscious, then looking into the unconscious is dangerous. i think it might be. YGB went into the forest but didn't take anything back from it, Didn't acknowledge it's power. if he had, perhaps he would have been better adjusted.
Domingo A. Rochin: burton, I have not been there
Consuelo Richardson: Satan can live in the forest too Gilbert
Rogue: Gilbert, Whatever. This tangent of the discussion has reached its capacity to be micro-examined.
Unk: Is this story more of the classical conflicts man vs. himself or man vs. evil?
Ominous: I think any story nomatter who tells it, unless unconcerned with it, will tell it with a bais and leave out any part not flattering to it and add things to it to make it good.
Consuelo Richardson: both i think depending on point of view
dink: aren't they one and the same, Unk.
burton: Daniel, maybe the YGB was being pushed towards "the end" by some sort of religious force, perhaps Satan or God, as most seem to believe to be true of the religious practices of present day.
Rogue: Unk, should we consider whether YGB was happy in his marriage???
Melinda Baggett: I feel that Hawthorne brought out a characteritic trait in the god worshipping people today, like the born-again christains. he shows that although outwardly they are pure and perfect, in reality there is a deep dark past where evil has overcome them, or where they have participated in evil deeds, as when the devil spoke of YGB's father whom YGB thought as all good when in actuality he was not.
Greg Hyzak: It seems to be a story of man vs. himself, because he has several children and grandchildren and is only not at peace with himself.
Daniel Anderson: We might interpret Satan as a figure that is met in the forest, or in that black place where voodoo happens. Gilbert makes a good point about Satan, however, What if Saan is controlling the entire action. perhaps all the churhc voices, the forest , itself etc, are all manifestations of the will of Satan meant to tempt YGB. The fact that he resist shows him in a positive light then. What about his subsequent misery then?
Gilbert S.: ok...i did digress..football too... how about the ol' line good vs evil..ygb vs the town and all the bad guys...or is it good vs ygb as the town was right and the person was wrong..look at the cultural angle, the puritans were correct as a pious community.
Melinda Baggett: Well, he did take the memories from the experiences of the forest with him.
Rogue: Greg, couldn't that also be more of a collective "man against society"?
burton: Perhaps this misery is showing the power of the wrath of God.
Domingo A. Rochin: Any time you have a group of people who believe that they can form a "pure" society, it is an indication that the whole society is sick, not just them , but the whole community of people of that state
Unk: Ominous, Hmm! Very interesting. Some of the most captiviating stories I have ever read included the unflattering parts. These always seem to show a certain amount of vulnerablity by either the author or narrator which makes the story better easier to identify with.
Gilbert S.: true true
Melinda Baggett: I think this story is man v himself in whether he will adjust his morals and join the clan or keep to his original morals.
Rogue: Unk, are we still discussing Hawthorne or have you delved into your Barbara Cartland series?
Ominous: What if the Satan was controlling the entire "dream" and created everything as a vision, the end result was, YGB was distrustful of everyone including his wife and liked noone. That doesn't seem very chruchlike?
Daniel Anderson: Unk and ominous, are you saying that there are certain universals that wil appeal to us in a story even if we don't mesh with the actual history , etc. does this take away from the role that literature may have in telling us something about different cultures, etc.
Domingo A. Rochin: Ominous, That is exactly my point. For a long time there had been a bais on the accounts of the time. Howthorn now is giving the people of his time a different and revealing insight of what he knows
Consuelo Richardson: Ominous, maybe his wife slipped him a mickey
Unk: Question, In any situation that can be defined as man vs. society can not society be deemed the one of the larger entities "Good" or "Evil"?
Sambina: The unconscious. I think it is normal for a person to question their beliefs, or the beliefs of the many. I think that since the Puritanical way was to oppress any impure thoughts, it was almost impossible to NOT think impure thoughts. But then they felt guilty and more sinful than ever. With that environment, one had to suppress things so deeply that a drift into the unconscious (i.e., a dream) was the only release for stress.
Daniel Anderson: Ominous, unless, satans controll never stopped, and the rest of YGB'slife then had to be a dream about resisting Satan. Of course we may be forgiven for our sins, so it would be possible to give in to Satan, later knowing that we will be forgiven by Christ. That might have bothered the church elders a bit too.
Rogue: Unk, How about Austin?
Gilbert S.: ominous. the way it turns out, ygb either way was a gonner..go with the dream and doubt...or live the truth and doubt and more fear..it could just as easily be him and not satan..
Ominous: I am saying that you can take the same story and have a writer from many cultures and they will be the same story but will have a different meaning, to get the writers point across.
Domingo A. Rochin: JGB was not happy with his marriege. He was so scared that he ran into the woods, made up a story just to get away. He literately went insane
Rogue: Went insane or was driven insane?
Unk: I do believe that there are certain universals, because all storys come down to a storyteller, which most of the time is a fellow human, and thus you will always have certain amount of contact and understanding.
Domingo A. Rochin: Gilbert, you been talking to Jehova's Witnessess
Rogue: What sort of *contact* are discussing... I did not think Hawthorne delved into any of the sexual dysfunctions of the time...?
Gilbert S.: what does that mean?
Daniel Anderson: Unk, good question. it is easy almost necessary to make these oppostions. And they continue today.Some might sayt the Contract with America is the same kind of situation, except now government is the big evil and the individual must get free in order to find the good. less centralized control. freedom to be Anne huthicnson, or YGB, etc. nah?
