Article Summary: The Biblical Context of “Ethan Brand”
This article by Stock (1965) discusses the short story “Ethan Brand: A Chapter from an Abortive Romance” by Hawthorne (1850, 1852), specifically considering the Biblical context. He states that the story’s primary source is the Bible, and that whilst the most obvious biblical allusion is “to the concept of the Unpardonable Sin”, closer perusal of the tale shows that there are other, more complex allusions, the main one associated with the narrative of Cain and his character as encapsulated in legend (p.115).
Stock also notes that Hawthorne’s choice of the name Ethan positions the character in a moral context, comparing his character with the Ethan mentioned in the Bible (Ethan the Ezrahite) who possessed a “largeness of heart” – the characteristic that Ethan Brand loses in Hawthorne’s story (p.116).
Stock further notes that Ethan the Ezrahite is attributed as the author of Psalm 89 (p.116). Whereas the biblical Ethan is “open to God”, Ethan Brand is incapable of having any form of immediate relationship with Him. Stock suggests that Ethan Brand’s motives for embarking on his search for the Unpardonable Sin were humanistically good, as were those of Ethan the Ezrahite (p.118).
However, whilst the biblical Ethan was convinced he was not one of God’s enemies, Ethan Brand – by his lifestyle and his denial “that God's spirit is at work in the world, in the hearts of men” – clearly stands as one of God’s enemies (p.118-119).
Stock describes other biblical details present in Hawthorne’s tale as even more significant than the choice of Ethan as the name of the main character (p.120). He notes that in Hawthorne’s story the Unpardonable Sin is committed against “both man and God” and against the concept of brotherhood, whereas in the New Testament, it is against only the Holy Ghost (p.120).
Stock alludes to marginal notes in early editions of the King James Version of the Bible referring to Cain’s murder of his brother Abel as “the first Unpardonable Sin” (p.121).
He mentions that much of the Ethan Brand characterization and events in the story appear to have strong links with Genesis 4. He refers to Cain being given Abel’s dog as a travelling companion, and to the dog chasing its own tail in the Ethan Brand account.
There is also the Ethan Brand character of the Wandering Jew, who is seen as having links to the Cain character in the Bible, and the mention of Ethan Brand conversing with Satan, drawing a parallel with the legend that Cain had a conversation with the Devil before murdering his brother Abel (p.123-124).
Stock refers to Byron’s work “Cain: A Mystery” – published some 30 years prior to Hawthorne’s story – which he considers connected with not just the appearance of Satan to Ethan Brand, but also to other elements of the story (p.125).
Another biblical parallel cited by Stock is when Ethan Brand faces a group of drunkards. Stock perceives this as in part based on Proverbs 26. From those biblical links Hawthorne was able to show favorable feelings towards Brand whilst judging him (p.130).
Considering the overall character of Ethan Brand, Stock sees him as part Hawthorne and part Cain. He views Hawthorne’s use of the biblical (Cain) parallels as giving him the opportunity and capability to better write romantic fiction, and to “enrich otherwise insignificant details with the fascination and power of myth and legend” (p.134).
It was interesting to note the number of parallels drawn by Stock between the story of “Ethan Brand” and passages of the Bible. To this reader it highlighted an obvious fact: that Hawthorne himself must have been a very religious man, in order to have such an intimate knowledge of the Bible, that he was able to create a story of his own which relied upon events and characters that he could use in his own work – or at least that he could use to form the basis of people and incidents forming elements of his written texts.This researcher can only bow to Stock’s superior knowledge in such matters, but having read his article, there seems little reason to doubt the validity of most of the similarities and parallels drawn.
The specific parallel drawn between Ethan the Ezrahite and Ethan Brand seems valid as does Hawthorne’s choice of the name itself. There are differences between the two though, as Stock points out – presumably a deliberate choice by Hawthorne. Ethan Brand, unlike his biblical counterpart, seeks no divine mercy for himself.
Whilst most of the links and parallels with biblical events and characters (particularly the character of Cain from Genesis 4) seem apt, some of the allusions to biblical parallels are less robust. Taking into account the massive scale of the Bible as a work of reference, it will always be possible to find a link or a parallel somewhere within its many pages, however tenuous. Even in the case of what Stock sees as a centrally important comparison between Ethan Brand and Ethan the Ezrahite, he is obliged to point out fundamental differences between the two as well as their similarities, perhaps making the parallel less solid in consequence.
Overall, Stock’s assessment of Hawthorne’s tale and his conclusion that Hawthorne intentionally and knowingly based Ethan and his story on biblical parallels cannot be seriously challenged.
Works Cited:
Hawthorne, Nathaniel. (1850, 1852). “Ethan Brand: A Chapter from an Abortive Romance.” (From The Snow-Image and Other Twice-told Tales). Available at: http://www.eldritchpress.org/nh/eb.html
Stock, Ely. (1965). The Biblical Context of “Ethan Brand.” American Literature, Vol. 37, No. 2 (May, 1965), pp. 115-134. Duke University Press. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2922988
