Holgrave the right inheritor : a study of The house of the seven gables
著者（英） Katsumi Koyasu
journal or
publication title
Core
number 26
page range 63‑78
year 1997‑03‑10
URL http://doi.org/10.14988/pa.2017.0000015026
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles 63
Holgrave t h e Right I n h e r i t o r : A S t u d y o f Th e House o f t h e Seven G αb l e s
Katsumi Koyasu
I
The ending of The House of the Seven Gαbles has evoked an enormous controversy among critics over its thematic structural consistency. On the whole， the difference in their interpretations of the ending is derived from the different assessment of Holgrave's demeanor in the romance's denouement. Those who regard the ending as ironical consider that Holgrave's conversion is too easily and abruptly contrived; and those who regard the ending as suitable consider that it is highly elaborated and well prepared.1
This paper wi11 attempt to deduce Hawthorne's legal ideology by investigating the motivations and measures of the misbehavior in the struggles for the property in the past and inferring what Hawthorne deems blameless and blameworthy from these conflicts; then， applying his ideology to Holgrave's deportment， it wi1l discuss the rightness of Holgrave' s receiving the Pyncheon legacy. Let us start with the investigation of the misbehavior of the past.
n
The romance displays two sets of struggles for property between the
64 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gables Maules and the Pyncheons of the past: between the first Matthew Maule and Colonel Pyncheon and between the second Matthew Maule and Gervayse Pyncheon. Both struggles are derived from the greediness of the Pyncheons: the former， the Colonel's claim for the Maule's property， and the latter， Gervayse's pursuit of a parchment which is essential to the claim for the Waldo County; and both cases end up with the death of a member ofthe Pyncheon family.
In the struggle for property between the first Matthew Maule and Colonel Pyncheon， with which the whole romance is led off， Colonel Pyncheon asserts his right fo1' the property， backed up by the authority of a grant of legislature. This struggle is not only the struggle between the classes， aristocrats and plebeians， as Richard H. Brodhead suggests，2 but also the one between the naturallaw and the written law， which wi1l be discussed later. Against the Colonel's relentless claim for the land， Maule stubbornly defends his right on the basis ofthe naturallaw， for he is the very person who has hewn [the property] out of the primitive forest， to be his garden‑ground and homestead.，，3 The Colonel's claim is obviously groundless， for his purpose to eject the Maules is only to "erect a family mansion . . . [which will] endure for many generations of his posterity" (9) as his monument by providing in his will that his portrait must be affixed on the wall of his study，4 but the legislature makes his claim plausible. He also takes an ill procedure to exclude the Maules from their property， by impeaching and executing old Matthew of a crime of witchcraft. This procedure is clearly irrational but given the communal sanction. Hence， his irrational persecution of Matthew Maule brings on himself and his posterity the curse of the Maules.
Even though Colonel Pyncheon succeeds in obtaining Maule's
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles 65 property， Maule' s retribution begins as the construction of the house commences. The flavor of the Maule's Well is lost soon after the commencement of building the house， and on the very day of the housewarming， the Colonel dies. Furthermore， building the house， Thomas Maule， the architect of the house and the son of old Matthew， hides the parchment which will fulfill the Pyncheons' claim for the Wa1do County behind the portrait of Colonel Pyncheon. This revengeful scheme brings about the succeeding tragedy.
In the second series ofthe struggle for the property， Gervayse attempts to find the document for possessing the Waldo County， which Thomas has hidden. With his fortune obtained at his wife's decease almost exhausted by this time， the claim for the Waldo County is now imperative for his plan to return to England and to bestow on his daughter， Alice， a rich dowry. The sinfulness of his purpose and measures can be observed in his negotiation with the second Matthew Maule.
Even though Gervayse acknowledges the Maules加 bethe arch‑enemy of his family， his avariciousness makes him dare himself to summon the second Matthew， a carpenter like his father Thomas， to the Pyncheon house and asks a favor of him to pursue the parchment. Matthew demands of Gervayse that he need Alice as the mediator for exercising his necromancy to find out the lost parchment. Gervayse considers this proposition ridiculous at first but his relentless greediness for the Waldo County makes him assent to Matthew's proposition. During the act of necromancy， his greediness reaches its utmost and impels him so much as to conceive the diaboIic idea that if the devil' s power were needed to the accomplishment of this great object， Maule might evoke him!" (204).
66 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gables Despite Matthew' s half‑successful attempt of summoning the ghost of Colonel Pyncheon， the place of the parchment remains secret， for the ghost of the Colonel has been impeded by the ghosts of old Matthew and Thomas Maule during the necromancy. Due to the retribution to his grandf:鼠athe町r乍 wrongdoingthe place of the parchment will remain secret until its validity expires as Matthew then announces to Gervayse:
It will never be allowed! . . . The custody of this secret， that would so enrich his heirs， makes part of your grandfather's retribution. He must choke with it， until it is no longer of any value. And keep you the House of the Seven Gables! It is too dear bought an inheritance， and too heavy， with the curse upon it， to be shifted yet awhile from the Colonelヲsposterity." (207)
This failure is caused by Gervayse's evil purpose and measures for obtaining the wealth， and also by his recapitulation of his grandfather' s sin. He reinforces his right to the Maule's property and turns down Matthew's rightful claim. Although Gervayse assents to Matthew's proposition that he will restore the House and its property to the Maules in return for his contribution to the search for the parchment， his decision to make this offer is derived from his avariciousness， not from his conscience;5 to the contrary， he denies the Maules' claim when the second Matthew insists on his right to the property by declaring himself as son ofhim who built the house‑‑grandson ofthe rightful proprietor of the soil" (194) as he introduces himself to Gervayse. Gervayse shows his confidence in the Pyncheons' right and his indifference to the possibility of reviewing this property issue:
1 know the dispute to which you allude . . . . 1 am well aware，
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gables 67 that my grandfather was compelled to resort to suit at law， in order to establish his claim to the foundation‑site of this edifice. We will not . . . renew the discussion. The matter was settled at the time， and by the competent authorities‑‑equitably， it is to be presumed‑‑and， at all events， irrevocably." (194)
Hence， Gervayse's attempt fails despite paying the high price， his own daughter， who has become the slave ofMatthew.
The same struggle for the property takes place within the Pyncheon family nearly a century and a half later: between Clifford and Judge Jaffrey Pyncheon. It is represented as the diminutive of the struggle between the Maules and the Pyncheons. Clifford is depicted as the incomplete， mock artist figure who has the sensitive taste for art but has become defective by unjust imprisonment， in contrast to the Maules who have retained their artistic traits despite their family history of being wrongly treated; while although the Judge conceals his nature by the smile of the sunniest complaisancy and benevolence" (57)， Holgrave's daguerreotype work exposes the sternness of his true nature and the similarity between the Judge and the Colonel， and Hawthorne also describes J affi仕reyas a derivative form of the Colonel i血n
To固day."
According to Holgrave' s story， this struggle originated in young Jaffrey's attempt to search his uncle's private drawers" (311). In younger days， he has been wild， dissipated， addicted to low pleasures， little short of ruffianly in his propensities， and recklessly expensive， • (311); this behavior disaffected uncle Jaffrey's favor and impelled young Jaffrey to commit this malicious attempt. Here young Jaffrey's greediness becomes the inducement of the whole course of tragedy as was
68 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gables in two precedent events. Young Jaffrey's robbery is found out by his uncle and consequently provokes uncle Jaffrey's hereditary apoplexy. Then With the cool hardihood" (312)， he annihilates a will in favor of Clifford， a recent one， and leaves the one in favor of himself， the older one. Thus Jaffrey wrongly obtains the bequest ofhis uncle and attributes the misdeed to his cousin Clifford， but his greediness for the material never ceases. With his relentless covetousness， he reiterates the second wrongdoing which his ancestor has committed. Mistaking the old parchment which should endorse the Pyncheons' claim for the Waldo County for his uncle's lost fortune， he resumes his persecution of Clifford. Through the whole story Jaffrey remains like Giant Despair" to Clifford and exists as the great cause of his threat by reiterating malicious exercise on him; nevertheless， immediately after he attempts to interview Clifford for his pursuit of the lost fortune， he dies， in the same chair Colonel Pyncheon， original figure of Jaffrey himself， has died. In Jaffrey's misbehavior， Hawthorne epitomizes both of the preceding conflicts by projecting the same motivation， process， and imagery， to reinforce the result which greediness causes.
What Hawthorne accusingly depicts in these struggles is， as he describes in the Preface，the folly of tumbling down an avalanche of ill‑ gotten gold， or real estate， on the heads of an unfortunate posterity， thereby to maim and crush them until the accumulated mass shall be scattered abroad in its original atoms" (2). He strongly denounces the wealth derived from ill purposes and measures. Under what circumstances he discerns the claims for wealth blameless and blameworthy can be distinctively observed in his description of ownership， which will be discussed in the next section.
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gables 69
I I I
The name of the street which the House of the Seven Gables is facing changes its name after the Maules have been replaced by the persecution by Colonel Pyncheon， from Maule's Lane加 pyncheonstreet.Associated with the name of the elm tree， Pyncheon elm， which is familiar to every town‑born child" (5)， this name of the street expresses the Pyncheons' status and rank， and as Brook Thomas discusses， years of their usage establish their immovable right.6 All the Pyncheon posterity regard their ownership as their hereditary rightヲasGervayse has done， except the elder Jaffrey Pyncheon， a person of strong morality， who has questioned the legitimacy of his ancestor's obtaining Maule's property， and even considered whether it were imperative upon him . . . to make restitution to Maule's posterity" (23). Furthermore， it is suggested that the House itselfwould possibly make even the Maules believe the Pyncheons' right to existence， although Hawthorne claims it as a counterfeit:
it [would not] have been singular， had they [the Maules] ceased to remember that the House of the Seven Gables was resting its heavy frame‑work on a foundation that was rightfully their own.
There is something so massive， stable， and almost irresistibly imposing， in the exterior presentment of established rank and great possessions， that their very existence seems to give them right to exist; at least， so excellent a counterfeit of right， that few poor humble men have moral force to question it， even in their secret minds. (25)
However， Hawthorne lets the name of Maule inscribed in the name of the well as the reminder of the original occupant of the property even
70 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House ofthe Seven Gαbles after the name of the street has been superseded. This implies that Hawthorne deems the priority ofthe Maules backed up by the "authority of natural law and tradition，，7 superior to the legitimized right of the Pyncheons and covertly rejects the ill‑gotten right of the Pyncheons.
Even though the law is considered as the supreme norm of the society， it has always been merely the reflection of the opinions of the influential class of the age， not necessarily of the public， through the history of human beings， as Thomas suggests， and the Colonel himself has doubtlessly been a prominent and powerful personage" (7) of his age.8 Whereas the Colonel's claim is based on the strength of a grant from the legislature" (7)， it decisively harms the Maule's right. On the other hand， old Matthew has cultivated the primitive land all by himself without infringing on anyone else's personal right， under the principle of "FiI前 in time is first in right."g Moreover， though Hawthorne pretends加 be neutral in the dispute between old Matthew and Colonel by saying It would be bold， therefore， and possibly unjust， to venture a decisive opinion as to its merits" (7 ，)it is obvious that he upholds the Maules， for he provides tradition" or village‑gossips，" which questions the measures of the Pyncheons， not history" or records，" which are written in favor of the authority as written laws." Hyatt H. Waggoner supports this assumption saying，Tradition， legend， and superstition . . . are the heart of the tale . . . [which are] very possibly grounded in the moral law."lO The fact that No written record of this dispute is known to be in existence" (7) evokes from the reader a suspicion as to whether the Colonel has taken a due procedure in this dispute. This suspicion is reinforced by the fact that Colonel finally obtained the Maules' property through the execution of his antagonist for the crime of witchcraft. The
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House ofthe Seven Gαbles 71 witchcraft trials in this age were of course legally legitimate， but Hawthorne questions the proceeding of the Maule case by describing that it is whispered" among the villagers， after the frenzy of witchcraft trial was over， that there was an invidious acrimony in the zeal with which he had sought the condemnation of Matthew Maule" (8). Therefore his preservation of the name of Maule's Well implies his supporting the Maules， 釘ldMaule's Well itself signifies the resistance of the Maules to the Pyncheons for the claim of the property by appealing to the natural law， as it lost the deliciousness" and grew hard and brackish" (10) when the foundation of the house is laid.
This relation between the act of naming and the ownership is recapitulated in the conflict between Clifford and J affrey Pyncheon， again as a diminutive. Although hampered by cousin Jaffrey's malicious measures， Clifford Pyncheon is the legitimate heir who was supposed to receive the bequest of uncle Jaffrey as his uncle's latest will indicates. Moreover， he has proclaimed his right to possess the Pyncheon legacy long before his cousin Jaffrey begins the pursuit of his uncle's bequest and wrongly takes control of it， by the symbolic act of carving his name on the post of the House:
As they passed into the street， Clifford directed Hepzibah's attention to something on one of the posts of the front door. It was merely the initials of his own name， which， with somewhat of his characteristic grace about the forms of the letters， he had cut there， when he was a boy. (252)
This act significantly suggests Clifford's claim to his priority for the house， which is the symbol of the legacy of the Pyncheons， in other words， for all the inheritance of the Pyncheons; and were it not for
72 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles Jaffrey's crime， the bequest wou1d fall in C1ifford's hand directly. Although on1y the House is 1eft for Clifford and Hepzibah， all the rest of the Pyncheon 1egacy is inherited by Jaffrey， including the curse of the past. As Hawthorne depicts Judge Jaffrey as a miniature or a parody of the Colonel， Jaffrey's process of committing the crime， shifting the blame for murder onto Clifford， depriving Clifford of his right， obtaining the bequest， becoming an eminent personage， and letting his misdeeds fade out of sight" as forgotten and forgiven frailties ofhis youth" (312) exhibit a perfect parallel to the process which the Colonel has taken: claiming Maule's property unrighteously， accusing old Matthew of the crime of witchcraft， depriving Maule's right， obtaining Maule's property， establishing the house， and having this wrongdoing out of sight by extinguishing the name of Maule from the street; therefore Hawthorne provides Jaffrey the same scene and cause of death as the Colonel's as the retribution for his misdeeds.
The only difference isthat the Colonel transgresses against the natural law depriving the proprietary of the Maules' by the strength of the written law， while Judge Jaffrey transgresses against the written law depriving Clifford of his inheritance by distorting the written law. Jaffrey's offense is smaller in scale than the Colonel's， just as he is physically smaller than the Colonel， but more unpardonable because his claim for the Pyncheon legacy indicates his indifference to Clifford's， and also the Maules'， right; in other words he latently transgresses the natural law at the same time: he doubly violates the priority based on the naturallaw. Manifesting the claim of Jaffrey more unjust than that of the Colonel， Hawthorne fulfills the exhibition of his moralヲashe states in the Preface:
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles 73 the Author has provided himself with a moral;‑‑the truth， namely， that the wrong‑doing of one generation lives into the successive onesラ anddivesting itself of every temporary advantage， becomes a pure and uncontrollable mischief. . . . (2)
IV
Considering that Hawthorne regards the natural law superior to the written law， the reasons for what Rudolph Von Abele calls Holgrave's curious conversion"ll and the forced ending of the romance are explicable.
Abele regards the conversion of Holgrave as the artistic tempers . . . corrupted by the power of economics" in a democratic society and his marriage to Phoebe as his capitulaton to Jaffrey's money，1，，2 but this is not the precise reason for his declaration of love. If Holgrave's approach to Phoebe is no more than his cunning maneuver to regain the property of his ancestor by legitimate marriage， he also would inherit the curse of the past and would be unable to evade the cyclical repetition of sin as Matthiessen says.13 Holgrave， as the author of the inserted tale of the second Matthew Maule and Alice Pyncheon， has conceived that any substance obtained through ill purpose and measure will generate the catastrophic result. Therefore his motivation must be a different one.
In his tale， it is obvious Matthew and Alice are attracted each other. Alice is attracted by Matthew's sex appeal at her first glance:
As Alice came into the room， her eyes fell upon the carpenter， who was standing near its centre， clad in a green， woollen jacket， a pair of loose breeches， open at the knees， and with a long pocket for his rule， the end of which protruded; it was as
74 Holgrave the Right lnheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles proper a mark of the artizan's calling， as Mr. Pyncheon's full dress sword， ofthat gentleman's aristocratic pretensions. A glow of artistic approval brightened over Alice Pyncheon' s face; she was struck with admiration‑‑which she made no attempt to conceal‑‑of the remarkable comeliness， strength， and energy of Maule's fi♂lre. (201)
Here Matthew's rule protruding from his pocket represents his virility as a full dress sword" represents the Colonel's; it also， though there is a class difference， signifies patriarchy as the Colonel's sword is represented as the sign of it; and just as the Colonel，an autocrat in his own household， had worn out three wives" (123)， Matthew wears out Alice. Whereas Matthew does not forgive this haughty glance which most other men， perhaps， have cherished as a sweet recollection， all through life" (201) and strives with her pride which a man of generous nature would have forgiven" (201)， he then victimizes her by his mesmeric power， his asking after Alice加 Scipiowhen he is summoned to the Pyncheon house and regretting the result of his mischief at her funeral indicate his fondness for Alice. Recognizing that Alice's pride and Matthew's mischievous act have been the cause of ruination of their undeveloped and abortive love， Holgrave abandons his family trait， mesmeric power. Although he notices that Phoebe falls in an incipient stage of that curious psychological condition" (211) similar to Alice by hearing the recitation of his story and conceives that with but one wave of his hand and a corresponding effort of his will， he could complete his mastery over Phoebe's yet free and virgin spirit" (211・12)，he dare not to enslave Phoebe and reiterate the same tragedy between Alice and Matthew.
Holgrave the Right lnheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles 75 His idea that not‑i11 intended， natural measures will bring fruitful consequences can be observed in his statement after the five consecutive days storm: the water of the Maule's Well suits those flowers [Alice's posies] best' " (288). This statement also indicates his presumption that the Pyncheons and the Maules are neither incompatible nor irreconcilable but consonant and interdependent. The only resource this statement suggests for both posterities to evade the cyc1e of cursed inheritance and attain reconciliation is to apply natural measures derived from their genuine emotion，a symbolic marriage" between Holgrave and Phoebe as John P. McWilliams Jr. suggests， instead of reiterating unlawful conducts for the pursuit for the wealth or the revenge for dispossession as their ancestors have done.14 Therefore Holgrave， unlike the second Matthew has done to Alice， refuses to enslave Phoebe under the influence of his mesmerism， and says the manuscript must serve to light lamp with" (212)， that is he will forsake his mesmeric power forever.
As he abandons his inherited evil force and refrains from infringing on Phoebe's individuality， Hawthorne sends the moonlight into the scene as the apostle of the nature， and it transfigures both Holgrave and Phoebe: its reviving influence transforms Holgrave's radical idea and removes his hatred toward the moss‑grown and rotten Past" (179) while it transfigures Phoebe from a girl to a woman though she will not conceive it until Clifford points out. This sequence implies that the force of nature would give support to those who respect other people's right. Thus Holgrave's humane behavior， which Hawthorne praises as the rare and high quality of reverence to another' s individuality" (212)， leads the help of natural force to develop their love and introduces the denouement of
76 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House ofthe Seuen Gαbles the romance.
For Holgrave is convinced that any accomplishment derived from malicious purpose would be damned and from charitable purpose would be praised. He holds himself as the observer in the conflict between Clifford and J affrey and dares not help each person spontaneously not to harm other people's individuality. He only supports Clifford and Hepzibah in a moderate manner. Standing on his view， it is apparent that Jaffrey's malevolence will receive some sort of retribution， and Holgrave's revelation of Jaffrey's resemblance to the Colonel in his daguerreotype implies his conviction that the end of Jaffrey will be somewhat similar to that of the Colonel. Thus Holgrave remains apart from the conflict and lets it be consummated by itself. Consequently he who never violates the nature of human beings obtains the fortune at the end.
Notes
1. For example， F. O. Matthiessen regards the ending ironical and considers that The ending of this book has satisfied very few. . . . [for] the reconciliation is somewhat too lightly made" (AmericαnRenαissαnce: Artαnd Expression in the Age of Emersonαnd Whitlηαn [New York: Oxford UP， 1941] 331‑33). Rudolph Von Abele， who also argues that the ending can be read ironically， discusses that the death of Jaffrey's son， which brings Holgrave and Phoebe七hePyncheon legacy， seems the deus ex mαchina and questions the necessity of their marriage to extinguish the name of Pyncheon (The Deαth of the Artist: A Study of H，αwthorne's Disintegrαtion [The Hague:
Martinus Nijhoff ， 1955] 66・67).On the other hand Hyatt H. Waggoner regards the ending nonironical and discusses that it is not Hawthorne's fault but a stubborn skepticism [of the modern reader] directed toward both Hawthorne's idea of redemptive power and faith in immorality" that makes them unable to accept the ending (Rαwthorne， rev. ed. [Cambridge: Harvard
Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House ofthe Seven Gαbles 77 UP， 1963] 186‑87). Francis Joseph Battaglia also argues that the ending is not forced and defends against the critics who regard the plot episodic and the ending forced by tracing the development of the relationship between Holgrave and Phoebe to show that their marriage is appropriately prepared for (The House of the Seven Gables: New Light on Old Problems，" PMLA 82 [1967]: 579‑90).
2. Brodhead regards the mutual victimization of Pyncheon and Maule" as a model of class warfare" and declares that it is most clearly exhibited in the conflict between the second Matthew Maule and Alice Pyncheon (H.αwthorne， Melville，αnd the Novel [Chicago: U of Chicago P， 1977] 79).
3. Nathaniel HawthorneラTheHouse of the Seven Gαbles， ed. William Charγat et a ，.lvol. 2 of The CentenαryEd師onofThe Works ofThe Works ofNαthaniel Hαωthorne (Columbus: Ohio State UP， 1965) 7. Subsequent page references are to this edition.
4. Brook Thomas determines the Colonel's attempt to build the house as his monument as Hawthorne's demonstration of the folly of human attempts to build monuments in a temporal world，" and presumes that Hawthorne's subversive vision can be traced to his Puritan heritage， which refuses to grant to any human constructs the divine authority accorded to nature"
CCross‑Exαminαtions of Lαωαnd Literature: Cooper， H.αωthorne， Stowe，αnd Melville [Cambridge: Cambridge UP， 1987] 46).
5. Battaglia argues the possibility of evading the curse by returning the pilfered wealth . . . to its original owner，" and refers to the failure of Gervayse's attempt to give up the House was ineffectual [to dissipate the curse of the Past] both because he would do so only as part of a bargain extremely profitable to himself， and because for the sake of this bargain he violated his own daughter to halt the proceedings with Matthew Maule"
(Battaglia 587). 6. See Thomas 54. 7. Thomas 46.
8. Thomas argues that the American legal system may rest on a false foundation becaus巴 lawspassed by a legislature whose point of view reflects the will ofthe powerful， not the will ofthe people" (Thomas 53‑54).
9. Thomas 47. 10. Waggoner 174.
78 Holgrave the Right Inheritor: A Study of The House of the Seven Gαbles 11. Ab巴le58. Abele uses this phrase for the title of the chapter he discusses The
House ofthe Seven Gαbles in his volume cited in n. 1. 12. Abele 65.
13. Matthiessen criticizes the ending of the romance by pointing out the young couple's possibility of inheriting the curse of the Past by obtaining the 町mcheonlegacy:守etin the poetic justice of bestowing opulence on all those who had previously deprived of it by the Judge， Hawthorne overlooked the fact that he was sowing a11 over again the same seeds of evil" (Matthiessen 332).
14. McWilliams assumes that the Pyncheons and the Maules are representations of the different side of the Puritan character: the former represents the dominant traits" and the latter the underside，" and considers The wasting conflict between these two types of Puritan character can be resolved in the present by a symbolic marriage between them"
(Hα，ωthorne， Melville，αnd the AmericαnChαracter: A Looking‑Glαss Business [Cambridge: Cambridge UP， 1984]108).
