Chillingworth and Claggart the Symbols of Evil

¶ … Chillingworth from the Scarlet Letter with Claggart from Billy Budd

Herman Mellville admired Nathaniel Hawthorne and presented him as the lucky strike of faith for the American literary world. According to Melville, the genius of Shakespeare had found a worthy follower in Hawthorne. The "villains" in Melville's "Billy Bud" and Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter" are characters that challenge the reader into questioning the deeply ingrained and often pain relieving belief that originally there is something good in every human being. They both embody pure evil in human form, with or without an obvious motivation.

In his "Introduction" to the book "Billy Bud," Cyrus R. K. Patell is placing an emphasis on the importance of the influence Nathaniel Hawthorne's writings had on Herman Melville's literary style and more importantly, on his entire artistic vision. Not surprisingly, the two authors created characters that will forever stand as works of art produced in the literary world. Showing a deep understanding of the human nature and proving a great ability to translate their visions on paper, Melville and Hawthorne's characters, both in the realm of good and evil, withstood the proof of time with ease and even grace.

Both Chillingworth and Claggart endeavor to get a fellow man's soul. The narration surprises them at a stage in life when they act driven only by revenge. Revenge is their obsession and the fire that keeps them going. The difference is that, while in Chillingworth's case, there is also some sort of explanation for his hate, in Claggart's case things are obscure. His determination to inflict pain upon another mate is supported by a pure juxtaposition between him and Billy Bud, the object of his hateful passion. Again, both characters show signs of being related in the fact that, regardless of the existence or absence of a reason for their evil actions, they are presented as being born with an all-encompassing evil side.

The puritan town that Chillingworth chose as his new residence could have little in common with a battle ship, the place where Claggart hatches his devilish plans. Yet, both places are governed according to implacable rules that will inevitably end in the punishment of innocent souls, such as Hester or Billy Bud. Leading a new life, under a new name, in a world new to the puritan colonizers, but old to the natives, Chillingworth is briefly and wholly characterized as a man who "possessed more than a common measure" of "learning and intelligence" (Hawthorne, 140). Reason and blind faith, two opposites, go here hand-in-hand with those who are willing to inflict pain upon their fellow humans.

On one hand, Chillingworth is the one who was born with a great potential for being evil and has refined his potential along the years using his intellect and the power of education, Hester's mistake acting as the spark. On the other, in Claggart's case, the evil appears to have had no need for the reinforcement of intelligence, science or any motivation for revenge. The narrator leaves no doubt about him, presenting him as "a depravity according to nature." Like the very devil, Claggart cannot help himself when it comes to leading to Billy's end. Billy's innocence is acting like a magnet and Claggart has no choice but to follow the smell of blood and hunt down the one that is guilty of being at the opposite end of the human existence.

"Billy, the innocent, is tempted by the satanic Claggart and breaks the law"(Patell, 2014). He will also commit the sin, but not at the beginning, like Hester, but towards the end. He will also be punished according to the human law, his condemnation and execution reminding of the sacrificing of the innocent lamb. Evil souls like Chillingworth and Claggart can easily find in human laws veritable pillars to support their evil work and ease their actions into completion.

Both Chillingworth and Claggart are guilty of envy. Usually, envy implies that those who suffer from it aspire to being something they cannot be or acquiring something they are unable to acquire by their own forces. Mellville and Hawthorne leave no doubt about their evil characters' nature: they do not aspire to be good or innocent, they just want to destroy anything of that sort, even if it meant their own end. Chilingworth and Claggart have had one feature in common with their victims though, making the differences even more striking. Both Clillingworth and Dimmesdale, the minister, are scholars. Both Claggart and Billy are sailors. Both evil doers could not survive without their victims. They are in a strange symbiosis with them. The narrator in The Scarlet Letter even indicates Chillingworth's surname "Leech." Like a leech, he needs to inflict pain to find nourishment.

Human and divine laws are meant to be observed in order for them to have meaning. Yet, although they are there to serve the good, they are in both discussed novels serving the evil. Melville and Hawthorne repeatedly let the reader know that theirs are not meant to be simple stories about villains and their innocent victims (Schiffman, 1950). In both cases, their stories trigger considerations about human nature, the meaning of truth, right versus wrong, the meaning of the law, and ultimately, the fate of humanity. Their evil characters could not exist without their props. In Cloggart's case, the righteous, instructed captain Vere serves as the best tool in achieving his evil goal. Vere is brave, righteous and an intellectual, but he is also in the army's service. Wars and armies, no matter on what side posterity places them, are in their essence, evil. Human justice is blind, army's justice is even more implacable. There cannot be any exception to the rule. The once innocent turned murderer has no escape. As innocent as Dimmesdale might be, he is also a character that symbolizes a corrupted world. Chillingworth was merely the best product of what human nature could give in terms of evil.

Something else of importance that both Cillingworth and Claggart have in common is that they did not commit murder themselves. They are the moral authors, which in modern law is worse, but their victims did not die of their murderous hands. They led their victims to death by making them either commit a deadly sin or preventing them from getting liberated by confessing. In both cases, the word, divine tool that led to the divine creation of the world as well as the worldly tool that, according to humans, defines humanity, essentially making it different from the rest of the living world, is failing the victims. They both cannot utter the words that would set them free. The irony in both cases is that Christian belief relies on the fact that confession shall set one free.