I had to read it for a lit class.(Where I also read The Scarlet Letter.)

I had a lot of trouble accepting the premise, even moreso than with The Giver. It's one of those outlandish situations that actually seems pretty feasible in the light of world events mixed with some open-minded consideration of conspiracy theories.

It almost seems like something the WBC might pull if they had the manpower and resources to pull off a large-scale operation.

Scarlett Letter showed church power through a lens which exposed the clumsily humorous backward thinking that went on beneath the facade.
This is a shockingly believable projection of just how dangerous Christianity could be if the majority decide that the Bible is not to be interpreted, but taken as absolute law.

also, the artwork on my copy wasn't quite as picasso-y.

Looking back on it, I can see what you mean. What really hit me with the story was the total lack of hope for the main character. I think I just accepted the premise as a device to explore the main character's psyche. At the time I didn't really think about the believability of it.

When you discuss "church power" in the Scarlett Letter, are you suggesting the events are primarily caused by a church organization, or are you referring to the religious zealotry in general? It's been a while since I read it, but that's what I got out of it. Actually both books. I perceived a massive unfairness stemming from religious hypocrisy.

>>277
I was mostly referring to the the way the church ostracizes the woman from society, and she goes on to be a better person than the "respectable" god-fearing villagers. And then there's the whole ordeal of the pastor mutilating himself in private and still playing high and mighty in the eyes of the people. I almost got the feeling like he didn't really believe in god, but knew he should, and tried to beat his common sense into submission because of his societal obligation to a misguided faith.

I more or less got the sense that he was very devout but had come across a moral and philosophical situation he wasn't prepared to handle. In essence, trying to solve the problem by going about it the wrong way. And of course, there were the expected guilt issues.

I never understood the point of the husband, though. The guy was portrayed as mean for the sake of being mean, which seemed an excessive addition. I think it would have been better for him to start out fairly decent but then warp over time. As it was, he just seemed to arrive warped.