Revenge is part of human nature. It’s almost like a reflex – an automatic response to hurt and betrayal. Yet is revenge necessarily bad? What does it say about humanity?
In the novel The Scarlet Letter, revenge is seen as a selfish impulse that the characters used to obtain justice and redeem their self-worth. Unlike the stereotypical depiction of revenge that uses violence, silence is the motif that was prevalent in the novel. This, too, was used as the medium by which revenge was taken.
In the prison cell where Hester was held, Chillingworth and Hester were juxtaposed, and although Chillingworth showed a calm and seemingly kind and quiet demeanor while Hester was supposedly the befallen one, Chillngworth would be portrayed as the evil and conniving of the two. His seeming calm and kind words were but indeed vile. In Hester’s words, “Thy acts are like mercy [. . .] but thy words interpret thee as a terror.” In this scene, Chillingworth wanted to avenge himself and somehow redeem his dignity from the shame that Hester’s indiscretion brought upon him. This makes me ponder, is it part of human nature to recognize one’s own self worth only through the suffering of those who have made one suffer?
Revenge is also related to the human mind and to this end, Chillingworth would continue to mentally torture Dimmsdale even as he was supposedly being kind. Chillingworth would say, “A bodily disease, which we look upon as whole and entire within itself, may, after all, be but a symptom of some ailment in the spiritual part.” Such remarks would plague Dimmsdale’s conscience, depriving him of inner peace. Indeed, it eventually led to Dimmsdale’s death.
On the other hand, revenge, for the most part, was depicted as glorifying in the movie The Gladiator. Maximus vowed to kill Commodus and made sure that they would again come face to face. Maximus’ first triumph would be depicted in the reaction shot made of Commodus as the Spaniard, in slow-motion, removed his face mask and Commodus realized that the famous gladiator was, after all, his long-time rival. The subjective treatment of the scene also enabled the viewer to see the event unfold from the actors’ eyes. The symbolism of the thumbs up sign that Commodus made, along with the mass’ chants as the camera panned into the expanse of the Coliseum with the cheering crowd, also signified that Maximus won the favor of the masses after he spared his opponent’s life. Finally, during Maximus and Commodus’ duel, the juxtaposition of the protagonist and the antagonist gives justice to Maximus killing Commodus. Was the acceptance of Commodus’ death an implication of man’s belief that evil people deserve to suffer for their misdeeds?
A similar theme can be seen in Hester’s silence in The Scarlet Letter. Hester used her silence to maintain her dignity. It protected her from the shame and mockery that the mob wanted to impose on her. In her own way, her silence was able to torment the people who opposed her. As Hawthorne writes, “Madame Hester absolutely refuseth to speak, and the magistrates have laid their heads together in vain.” In the end, though, Hester became a stronger and more dignified woman. She even continued to wear the scarlet letter, which used to symbolize her shame and her sin. By then, however, the scarlet letter carried a different meaning with it.
This makes me wonder, Can revenge be conducted in a righteous way and yet still lead to the attainment of self redemption? Do the ends, after all, justify the means? For most, revenge is something that can bring hope or a new beginning. This is admittedly very arguable, but as this idea is very subjective then its understanding should be put in the proper context, which would understandably be different for each one of us.
