And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic mills?
…………………………………
I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England 's green and pleasant land. (Blake preface.33-44)
During the industrial revolution, the world was going through rapid changes. Some, like William Blake did not just blindly accept the new changes and technologies. Instead, Blake holds this advancement to a higher standard. Namely, he juxtaposes the “Satanic mills” to the resplendent purity of Jerusalem and finds those mills lacking (Preface. 33-44). Blake desires England, his home, to be rid of the unrestrained “Satanic mills” and become more like holy Jerusalem (Preface.36).
Indeed, it is this very denunciation of unbridled and ultimately destructive scientific advance that the American author Nathaniel Hawthorne argues against. He refuses to naïvely accept the enlightenment’s shift to a purely “scientific” worldview. As an article in the journal The New Atlantic puts it: “… Hawthorne brought… moral imagination to bear on the modern scientific enterprise – its ends, its means, its animating impulses. With the Industrial Revolution well underway, science and technology seemed to have near-limitless potential. While some of his contemporaries worried about soulless mechanization, Hawthorne detected that science had not entirely escaped the clouds of sorcery that had clung to it in dreamier and less efficient ages” (“Spirit of Science” 4). He sees that, like the Israelites, the modern man still turns to the shiniest golden calf and grovels at its metallic hooves. The new idol is simply more respectable, very sanitary, and promises a pleasurable existence (for some). Additionally, Hawthorne recognizes that a moral compass is needed if any good is to come from the rampant advancement in science. Clearly, he was willing to (as a wise man once said) “Burn the lab coats!” and “Shatter the beakers!” if the greed of voyeuristic science is not checked (Tye). In his works The Birthmark and Rappaccini’s Daughter, Hawthore makes clear that scientific progress without a clear moral guide is horrific. In The Birthmark, Hawthorne portrays the main character, Aylmer in a rather unfavorable light. He is so enthralled in his scientific advancement that his love for his beautiful wife, Georgiana, “… could only be by intertwining itself with his love of science” (465). It is this perverse love that drives Aylmer’s treatment of his wife. One day, he becomes fixated and perturbed by Georgiana’s dainty pink birthmark on her face (467). While most everyone around her loves the birthmark, Aylmer hates it and wants to “cut or wrench it away” (466-467). Yet, before the scientist begins to experiment, Hawthorne issues a warning. He says that the mark is “… the fatal flaw of humanity which Nature, in one shape or another, stamps ineffaceably on all her productions, either to imply that they are temporary and finite, or that their perfection must be wrought by toil and pain” (467). Despite the fact that it is absurd to expect the ability to use science to remove such a profound mark as the fallen nature of all humans, …show more content…
It is distinctly in the shape of a hand (466). In her work “The Invisible Hand Made Visible,” Cindy Weinstein explains that this is important because it seems to reflect the “invisible hand” economic idea about which enlightenment economist Adam Smith writes (726-727). The “invisible hand” is representative of a group of enlightenment thinker’s who think less governmental control is best. They think that greed in this open economy is perfectly acceptable or even to be encouraged (727). Ergo, when Aylmer reaches out and takes the invisible hand out of his greed, Hawthorne seems to be saying that greed does not make a society more free, but rather it destroys all freedom (727). This is because once the mark of the hand on Georgiana’s cheek is removed, she dies almost immediately (Hawthorne 475). In fact, during the beginning of the industrial revolution, Hawthorne likely sees the greed of those desperately seeking technological advance. Also, he sees when that greed is used, the weakest are destroyed, not by the “invisible hand,” but by the hand of the immoral scientist or
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic mills?
…………………………………
I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England 's green and pleasant land. (Blake preface.33-44)
During the industrial revolution, the world was going through rapid changes. Some, like William Blake did not just blindly accept the new changes and technologies. Instead, Blake holds this advancement to a higher standard. Namely, he juxtaposes the “Satanic mills” to the resplendent purity of Jerusalem and finds those mills lacking (Preface. 33-44). Blake desires England, his home, to be rid of the unrestrained “Satanic mills” and become more like holy Jerusalem (Preface.36).
Indeed, it is this very denunciation of unbridled and ultimately destructive scientific advance that the American author Nathaniel Hawthorne argues against. He refuses to naïvely accept the enlightenment’s shift to a purely “scientific” worldview. As an article in the journal The New Atlantic puts it: “… Hawthorne brought… moral imagination to bear on the modern scientific enterprise – its ends, its means, its animating impulses. With the Industrial Revolution well underway, science and technology seemed to have near-limitless potential. While some of his contemporaries worried about soulless mechanization, Hawthorne detected that science had not entirely escaped the clouds of sorcery that had clung to it in dreamier and less efficient ages” (“Spirit of Science” 4). He sees that, like the Israelites, the modern man still turns to the shiniest golden calf and grovels at its metallic hooves. The new idol is simply more respectable, very sanitary, and promises a pleasurable existence (for some). Additionally, Hawthorne recognizes that a moral compass is needed if any good is to come from the rampant advancement in science. Clearly, he was willing to (as a wise man once said) “Burn the lab coats!” and “Shatter the beakers!” if the greed of voyeuristic science is not checked (Tye). In his works The Birthmark and Rappaccini’s Daughter, Hawthore makes clear that scientific progress without a clear moral guide is horrific. In The Birthmark, Hawthorne portrays the main character, Aylmer in a rather unfavorable light. He is so enthralled in his scientific advancement that his love for his beautiful wife, Georgiana, “… could only be by intertwining itself with his love of science” (465). It is this perverse love that drives Aylmer’s treatment of his wife. One day, he becomes fixated and perturbed by Georgiana’s dainty pink birthmark on her face (467). While most everyone around her loves the birthmark, Aylmer hates it and wants to “cut or wrench it away” (466-467). Yet, before the scientist begins to experiment, Hawthorne issues a warning. He says that the mark is “… the fatal flaw of humanity which Nature, in one shape or another, stamps ineffaceably on all her productions, either to imply that they are temporary and finite, or that their perfection must be wrought by toil and pain” (467). Despite the fact that it is absurd to expect the ability to use science to remove such a profound mark as the fallen nature of all humans, …show more content…
It is distinctly in the shape of a hand (466). In her work “The Invisible Hand Made Visible,” Cindy Weinstein explains that this is important because it seems to reflect the “invisible hand” economic idea about which enlightenment economist Adam Smith writes (726-727). The “invisible hand” is representative of a group of enlightenment thinker’s who think less governmental control is best. They think that greed in this open economy is perfectly acceptable or even to be encouraged (727). Ergo, when Aylmer reaches out and takes the invisible hand out of his greed, Hawthorne seems to be saying that greed does not make a society more free, but rather it destroys all freedom (727). This is because once the mark of the hand on Georgiana’s cheek is removed, she dies almost immediately (Hawthorne 475). In fact, during the beginning of the industrial revolution, Hawthorne likely sees the greed of those desperately seeking technological advance. Also, he sees when that greed is used, the weakest are destroyed, not by the “invisible hand,” but by the hand of the immoral scientist or