The Scarlet Letter Preface to the Second Edition Summary

Summary

The author of the introductory sketch to The Scarlet Letter addresses a recent local uproar over that piece. He opens by expressing surprise and amusement at the intensity of the reaction among the respectable community around him, noting that the excitement is out of proportion to anything he intended. He insists that, although critics have treated the sketch as an attack on a particular venerable official, he harbors no personal malevolence and did not intend to harm anyone.

He explains that he reviewed the introductory pages with an eye to correcting or removing anything objectionable, out of respect for public feeling. After careful consideration, however, he finds that the sketch’s notable qualities are its frank, good-humored spirit and its truthful impressions of the characters described. He emphatically disclaims any enmity or political malice and suggests the sketch could have been omitted without harming the book, yet contends that having written it, he could not have done it in a kinder or truer way. Concluding his defense, he states his decision to republish the introductory sketch “without the change of a word,” and signs the note from Salem, dated March 30, 1850.

Key events

1. Author notes unexpected and intense local criticism of his introductory sketch
2. Critics treat the sketch as a malicious attack on a venerable official
3. Author rereads the introduction intending to alter anything offensive
4. He judges the sketch to be good-humored and accurate, not malicious
5. Author disclaims personal or political ill-feeling
6. Decides to republish the introduction unchanged; signs the notice from Salem

Analysis

This preface frames the author's relationship with his immediate readership and establishes a defensive, yet convivial, narrative voice. It functions as a paratextual buffer between the author and the public, anticipating and defusing objections to the work’s opening sketch. The tone—surprised, amused, conciliatory—serves to humanize the author and to position him as fair-minded: he undertakes self-scrutiny but ultimately affirms the sketch’s truthfulness and good humor. That dual posture (self-critical yet resolute) prepares readers to regard the forthcoming narrative as mindful of social sensitivities while committed to candid representation.

Formally, the preface asserts authorial authority by insisting on the sketch’s accuracy and by explicitly refusing to alter it, which also highlights concerns about reception, reputation, and censorship. Symbolically, the debate over whether to excise or keep the sketch gestures toward larger themes of public judgment and private conscience that the novel will explore: how communities interpret actions and how authors (or individuals) respond to external condemnation. The preface’s measured rhetoric, evasive of direct insult yet pointed about public excess, models a narrative technique of ironic reserve that the novel will carry forward.

Important quotes

“As the public disapprobation would weigh very heavily on him, were he conscious of deserving it, the author begs leave to say, that he has carefully read over the introductory pages, with a purpose to alter or expunge whatever might be found amiss, and to make the best reparation in his power for the atrocities of which he has been adjudged guilty.”

AuthorThe author explains that he reviewed the introduction intending to correct any offensive passages, showing his willingness to respond to criticism while also distancing himself from guilt.

“But it appears to him, that the only remarkable features of the sketch are its frank and genuine good-humor, and the general accuracy with which he has conveyed his sincere impressions of the characters therein described.”

AuthorHere the author defends the sketch’s tone and truthfulness, arguing there is no malice—only honest depiction.

“Salem, March 30, 1850.”

AuthorThe formal dateline that signs the preface, anchoring the defense to a specific place and time.