The Birthmark
In examining the struggle of science vs. nature, we must first analyze each story by itself, and recognize its relationship. First, in looking at “The Birthmark”, we can see that science and nature/love are intertwined through the correctional habits that Aylmer possesses, the way that the birthmark could actually be seen through as more personal light, where Hawthorne is commenting on the way that society wants to advance, as well as the way that society as well as he perceives the process of menstruation and childbirth for women.
The first aspect in the correlation between science and nature is within the realm of the woman, specifically the woman’s natural occurrences. These are the processes of menstruation and childbirth (Zenger 368). …show more content…
Now that Aylmer wants to take this away, it will end her sexual nature, possibly her life, and leave Aylmer “the only member with creative powers” (Eckstein 515). At the end of the story, Georgina takes a vial, that kills her. A common fear at this time was of childbirth, as death for mothers, because of this, was very common. With the knowledge that childbirth could be deadly, Aylmer wanted to limit this chance, by taking away the birthmark along with her sexuality. "Science is not unequivocally evil; it is, however, dangerous in isolation from human society's other influences, including sexuality, work of all kinds, and familial relations. It is dangerous in the speed with which it progresses, an incredible pace far outrunning the cumbersome gait of social and moral change." (Eckstein 517). This is the main point of the science versus nature debate. Is it possible to “perfect” nature? Can we expand our scientific findings to all fields to make living better? In the case of the Birthmark, the answer is no. On page 7, it says, “"Aylmer appeared to believe that, by the plainest scientific logic, it was altogether within the limits of possibility to discover this long-sought …show more content…
Obviously, this manipulating of science is within the garden of Rappaccini, but there is a concrete difference between the science of Aylmer from “THe Birthmark” and the science of Rappaccini from “Rappaccini’s Daughter”. Aylmer uses science in an attempt to perfect his wife, while Rappaccini uses his science in a way that seems like he has gone insane, using his daughter as his test subject. So while Aylmer and Rappaccini are alike in the way that “he cares indefinitely more for science than for mankind. His patients ae interesting to him only as subjects… he would sacrifice human life.” (Male 105). Rapaccini falls under the category of intellectual pride, it is his only goal to provide a end to the lonliness of Beatrice. In the short story, Baglioni is the opposite of Rappaccini, as he is a scientist who respects science. Baglioni is much more outgoing, and can also be seen as the “normal conscience”, because he did not fall for the beauty of Beatrice, as he provides an “antidote against her poisonious nature.” (Male
The first aspect in the correlation between science and nature is within the realm of the woman, specifically the woman’s natural occurrences. These are the processes of menstruation and childbirth (Zenger 368). …show more content…
Now that Aylmer wants to take this away, it will end her sexual nature, possibly her life, and leave Aylmer “the only member with creative powers” (Eckstein 515). At the end of the story, Georgina takes a vial, that kills her. A common fear at this time was of childbirth, as death for mothers, because of this, was very common. With the knowledge that childbirth could be deadly, Aylmer wanted to limit this chance, by taking away the birthmark along with her sexuality. "Science is not unequivocally evil; it is, however, dangerous in isolation from human society's other influences, including sexuality, work of all kinds, and familial relations. It is dangerous in the speed with which it progresses, an incredible pace far outrunning the cumbersome gait of social and moral change." (Eckstein 517). This is the main point of the science versus nature debate. Is it possible to “perfect” nature? Can we expand our scientific findings to all fields to make living better? In the case of the Birthmark, the answer is no. On page 7, it says, “"Aylmer appeared to believe that, by the plainest scientific logic, it was altogether within the limits of possibility to discover this long-sought …show more content…
Obviously, this manipulating of science is within the garden of Rappaccini, but there is a concrete difference between the science of Aylmer from “THe Birthmark” and the science of Rappaccini from “Rappaccini’s Daughter”. Aylmer uses science in an attempt to perfect his wife, while Rappaccini uses his science in a way that seems like he has gone insane, using his daughter as his test subject. So while Aylmer and Rappaccini are alike in the way that “he cares indefinitely more for science than for mankind. His patients ae interesting to him only as subjects… he would sacrifice human life.” (Male 105). Rapaccini falls under the category of intellectual pride, it is his only goal to provide a end to the lonliness of Beatrice. In the short story, Baglioni is the opposite of Rappaccini, as he is a scientist who respects science. Baglioni is much more outgoing, and can also be seen as the “normal conscience”, because he did not fall for the beauty of Beatrice, as he provides an “antidote against her poisonious nature.” (Male