by Patalasi

Created on: December 21, 2006   Last Updated: May 08, 2007

Nathaniel Hawthorne's Aylmer joins a literary tradition of infamous brilliant characters that prove any attempt to tamper with nature (God's design) is inherently evil. When compared with the narrator of William Blake's "The Tiger," one can clearly see the restraint Aylmer lacks. Man can question creation (the tiger) not the creator (God).
In fact, a comparison of William Blake's poem "The Tiger" and Nathaniel Hawthorne's short story "The Birthmark" leads readers to question the most profound of truths: humans, although created in the image of a perfect God, are in fact, imperfect beings. Did God fashion his creations with deliberately placed imperfections and if he did not are we either Faustian or Promethean to improve upon his work? Maybe it is unfair to place those like Hawthorne's Aylmer on par with Prometheus. Especially, as Aylmer's actions resonate more with those of Lucifer in Milton's Paradise Lost or Christopher Marlowe's Dr. Faustus. Like Lucifer and Faustus, Aylmer treads where Blake's narrator will not, seeking to impose his idea of perfection on God's.

Where the narrator of Blake's poem seems hesitant to question the act of creation, Hawthorne's Aylmer evinces no such fear. Rather, he fearlessly sets out to perfect what he thinks the creator obviously overlooked a small birthmark in the shape of a hand upon his wife's cheek. Opposingly, Blake's questions, directed toward the tiger, arguably an apostrophe of the creator, along with imagery of the bright tiger surrounded by darkness, illustrate a preference to leave the very act of creation, shrouded in mystery. Aylmer, however, decides right off that the creative process was flawed. Moreover, he decides the flaw is not beyond fixing. As further illustration of his Lucifer-like arrogance, Aylmer blatantly disregards any sentiment on part of the creator, whose aesthetic sensibilities may find true beauty to lie in imperfect beings. Blake, on the other hand, wonders at the entire process of the tiger's formation, always in awe of the aesthetic sensibilities of the creator, wondering at the creator's media and medium.
Evidentially, there is a world of difference between Hawthorne's Aylmore and Blake's narrator. The latter sensibly refrains from questioning God's creative intent, while the former ostensibly crosses into a realm of blasphemous actions. He tampers with nature and in doing so, questions God's design. Removing Georgiana's birthmark is an act of hubris (the worst kind of pride), a sin equivalent to that of either Lucifer or Faustus. A reminder of both Lucifer's and Faustus' fall from heaven's esteem to a bitter realm in hell, foreshadows Aylmer's fate.
Like Marlowe's mythical Dr. Faustus, Aylmer "wonders at unlawful things" (pg). His intent to remove his wife's birthmark, while to him a necessary, scientific endeavor, echoes Faustus' damnable crime "to practice more than heavenly power permits." Aylmore's attempt to improve upon God's design is like watching Adam snatch his hand from contact with God's finger in Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel rendition of the Creation. Clearly, Aylmer falls short of Adam's heroism Adam who reaches to bridge the gap between God and men. No, Aylmer is truly Faustian, evil, never content to explore what is' he seeks too trump it.

Learn more about this author, Patalasi.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.