Puritan Society in Winthrops

In his work “Remembering John Winthrop- Hawthorne’s Suggestion” Matthew Holland calls John Winthrop powerful but unclear, well-liked and despised, completely unwanted by some while other energetically fight traditionalists to make him an image of ideal. The author finds very strange the fact that being a critic of Puritanism, Nathaniel Hawthorn turns our attentions to Winthrop’s ideas of charity (Holland 1). According to Holland, The Scarlet Letter testifies that Hawthorne was not at the Puritans’ side and did not consider their values to be right.

Since Winthrop is primarily connected with the origin and propagation of Puritan ideas, it is not possible that Hawthorne could not consider him to be deserved an honor. Notwithstanding that Winthrop’s own use of ideology of Christian love can influence Hawthorne’s attitude positively, this can’t overshadow the excessively cruel social arrangement Winthrop created (Holland 12). Holland states that Hawthorne simply considered Winthrop to be a normally righteous exclusion to a Puritanism that generates just wickedness and tyranny.

However, Hawthorne noted that Winthrop was an outstanding person way, a leader of his age, elected by his contemporaries and reelected for several times. Trepanier, Lee. “The need for Renewal: Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Conservatism. ” Modern Age, Fall 2003, Vol. 45. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOhost. 1 March 2007. In “The need for Renewal: Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Conservatism” Lee Trepanier describes Hawthorne’s attempts to renovate the Puritan heritage by means of art (Trepanier 200) .

The author tries to explain to us the final breakdown of Hawthorne’s artistic and sacred views and tries to find out how actual breakdown influenced our evaluation of Puritan heritage. According to Lee Trepanier, The Scarlet Letter is usually understood as a story of morality, where the traditions of Puritanism and defenselessness of people are perfectly represented. However, the author explains the way how to fight with defenselessness stating “life is strictly a function of ‘mechanism; and that having knowledge of the mechanism is to have power over life itself” (317).

Michaelsen, Scott. “John Winthrop’s ‘Modell’ Covenant and the Company Way. ” Early American Literature, 1992: 85-100 Scott Michaelsen reminds the reader that straight after their coming to the New England to create a new civilization founded on the Calvinism, Puritans were perceived as cultured, hard-working and established. Today their influence is the New England are to coming to naught, it is heritage still is felt in the society (Michaelsen 10). The author told us that American leaders of the past century cite John Winthrop.

However, they sometimes overlook his anti- sovereign political theory. Michaelsen explains, that Winthrop’s creations – and A Model of Christian Charity is one of them – were not well-liked by his contemporaries, due to the reason that the he did not create any new values of Puritanism and simply talked about the ideas developed by someone else earlier (Michaelsen 60). Winthrop stated that real pure feeling was present only before the sin of Adam and Eve, while the modern imperfect society needs charity preservation.

According to him, such qualities as forgiveness and fairness play more important role than love in our society today. However, the author argues that people must know their obligations and be merciless to one another (Michaelsen 91). People are commonly upset because of the severity of Winthrop’s viewpoint. This state is generated by reading some literature of Winthrop’s supposition connected with the power of patriarchy and the live of women in the Puritan society.

It is essential to note how our modern ideas about what is right and wrong can occasionally differ from those in the society Winthrop lived in. Schweitzer, Ivy. John Winthrop’s Model of American Affiliation. Early American Literature, 2005: 441-69 In his article the Schweitzer provides the John Winthrop’s work and values evaluation. According to the author of the article Ivy Schweitzer lately, researchers started to investigate the Age of Reason’s veneration of and devotion to composed motivation, and to discuss the ‘‘emotional history of the United States’’ (441).

Schweister states that In his study of early American influence, the author Peter Coviello says that the population appears under the influence the oratory of its main leaders through the tactical expression of powerful feelings of failure and parting that make a very contrasting and extensively alienated colonial population to unite (Schweitzer 442). According to Schweister, this not just paves the way and creates the political establishment of the new nationality however it develops the ability for emotional reaction as a precondition for “virtuous republican citizenship” (441).