Open Guilt and Secret Shame: the Difference Between Guilt and Shame as Depicted in The Scarlet Letter by: Noomi Sundström
This source is from an open archive called DiVA Portal of compiled scholarly sources from universities in Sweden. Written by Noomi Sundström, a researcher at Luleå University of Technology, this article begins with a background of Puritan society, differentiates between guilt and shame, defines each, and speaks of their nature and influence. Sundström does this by analyzing the characters of Hester Prynne and Arthur Dimmesdale, who have both experienced guilt and/or shame and public judgement. This article can help me argue against shame because it shows how it was used as a weapon, as well as other harmful systems in Puritan society.

Quote: “To make the people ‘good’ became the supreme task of the churches, and legalism followed as a matter of course…Critics declare that the Puritans were intolerant, and cite their persecution of religious dissenters…Puritanism was a grim affair, the theocratic historians concluded, because it was narrow-minded” (Sundström 5-6).
This quote supports my essential question’s claim by stating that the Puritan Church was not truly guiding their flock along the right path, but only shoving them into narrow boundaries. If one’s smallest toe happened to cross this boundary, there would be harsh punishment, public shame being one of the most prominent. This type of system not only promoted superficial righteousness (from fear), but blocked out any kind of creative thought/ variety. As the quote states, Puritanism itself came only to be known as a “grim affair” and lost all sense of freedom and joy.

“‘One of the major roles of the state is to coerce individuals into obedience and conformity to the laws established by the social order. This may be necessary to maintain order and to ensure the survival of the community, but it also implies that little room exists for individual expression’…Those who violate the laws or social codes, and even those who merely question them, face a punishment of rejection and isolation” (Sundström 7-8).
This quote also shows that whatever transformation public shaming may be intended to give, it ultimately threatens and humiliates rather than truly allowing the sinner a chance for repentance. It seems to be used more as a tool to force obedience, rather than one that makes room for pondering and change. This punishment causes “rejection and isolation”, which through the characters of Hester and Dimmesdale, we observe it can be very destructive to both an individual’s identity and place in the community.