“The Minister’s Black Veil,” by Nathaniel Hawthorne zeros in on a Puritan town in New England called Milford where a minister, Reverend Hooper, makes the decision to cover his own face with a black veil. Throughout the rest of the short story, many people speculate why the reverend made the decision to don the veil. The reasoning for the veil is largely debated amongst the town, but modern-day analysts of the story present their own ideas for the symbol.  In Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “The Minister's Black Veil,” he presents the veil as a symbol for predestination, a lesson, and a paradox to demonstrate the effects of sin and guilt.

Nathaniel Hawthorne’s veil can be analyzed as a symbol for predestination by examining the struggle to see God’s Word, isolation from the congregation, and effects on the community. Throughout the short story, the minister experiences a different world view through the veil literally through the darkened fabric and symbolically through the reminder of his fate: “Symbolically, the veil denies him meaningful and complete access to God’s presence in both Scripture and prayer. Realizing that he can never be certain whether God has elected or damned him taints a clear and uncomplicated view of worldly and spiritual things” (Montbriand 213). Through Montbriand’s explanation, the reminder the veil gives to the minister bothers him so much to the point where he cannot preach and understand the Word completely. Since preaching is Hooper’s entire life’s purpose, this throws into proportion just how much the idea of predestination bothers Hooper. Another way the veil causes Reverend Hooper to struggle to see God’s Word is through the fear the veil places on him. In the story, Reverend Hooper is celebrating a marriage when he sees himself and becomes frightened: “At that instant, catching a glimpse of his figure in the looking-glass, the black veil involved his own spirit in the horror with which it overwhelmed all others. His frame shuddered, his lips grew white, he spilled the untasted wine upon the carpet, and rushed forth into the darkness” (Hawthorne 309).  This quote explains that Hooper sees himself and gets scared, but in reality he is not scared of himself but instead of the reminder that he has no control over his fate. He sees the veil he takes up as a symbol of his fate and realizes once again that no matter what he does, God already has decided whether the minister will go to heaven or hell. The veil also withholds Hooper from experiencing God’s Word by reminding him of his fate. Reverend Hooper’s veil or rather, the realization of the possibility he could go to hell that is shared with the veil, separates him from the Lord and from fully cherishing His words: “It shook with his measured breath, as he gave out the psalm; it threw its obscurity between him and the holy page, as he read the Scriptures; and while he prayed, the veil lay heavily on his uplifted countenance. Did he seek to hide it from the dread Being whom he was addressing?” (Hawthorne 304). This quote depicts the struggle the minister has with seeing God’s Word after the veil is placed. The last question makes the reader wonder if the minister places the veil as a symbol for the separation he feels from God once realizing he has no control over his fate. Another way the veil serves as a symbol for predestination is the isolation from the congregation it creates. Reverend Hooper is unaware of his own destiny, so he begins to wear a veil and a symbol for the veil he will now experience when trying to see the world. He will never see the world the same and will experience intense isolation after realizing he will not know his final resting place until his death. The isolation is not caused by the veil but instead it symbolizes it (Montbriand 211). On the contrary to the isolation, the veil supposedly creates to Reverend Hooper, Montbriand touches on the fact that Hooper is not leaving behind his congregation by placing the veil on himself because, in all actuality, there is nothing Hooper can do to save them: “More importantly, Hooper cannot be accused of neglecting his congregation. As a Puritan minister aware of the Calvinist notion of predestination, he knows that his parishioners are predestined to either heaven or hell, there is nothing he can do to help them” (Montbriand 213). In this quote, the writer introduces the idea that although the veil is keeping Reverend Hooper from completely conveying the Word, the hindrance is not actually keeping the parishioners from entering the kingdom of Heaven. If they actually do not make it, it is no one’s fault but God’s.  The last way the audience can see the veil as a symbol for predestination is the effect that the community takes on once the veil is donned. The congregation initially sees the veil while the minister preaches about secret sin, so the people begin to wonder what their fate holds. Becnel says that given the religious context of the story, the minister most likely wears the veil in order to remind his congregation that its fate is not certain. He himself wears the veil because he feels that his own future is not known even if he devotes much of his life to serving God. He initially wears the veil while preaching about secret sin, so this also strengthens the argument that he wishes to remind his audience of their unknown fate (Becnel). Predestination is many analysts initial argument for the symbol of the veil due to Hooper’s struggle to see God, his isolation from the congregation, and the effects of the community.

The second possible symbol for the veil is a lesson; this claim is supported by separation from joy, a powerful sermon, and a sinful minister. Through the mental journey the minister takes with the veil, he learns that acknowledgement of sin is a lonely path. Reed explains that the minister did not take on the veil in order to teach how heavy a price sins are, but the story begins to take this theme upfront: “The black veil ‘separated him from cheerful brotherhood and woman’s love.’ Hence, one of the major themes of ‘The Minister’s Black Veil’ is that those who acknowledge the secrets of their hearts and those who choose to stand apart from their fellows will often find that they are ostracized and may well lead lives of loneliness, prisoners in their own hearts” (Reed 2673). This quote explains just how badly the veil has tarnished the minister's life, but he continues to wear it. The minister chooses to allow himself to be a prisoner for his congregation to learn a lesson. Hooper’s first sermon after donning the veil is another example of the veil as a lesson. Though the minister has a similar approach to his sermon, his words stick with the congregation much more when the veil is present: “But there was something, either in the sentiment of the discourse itself, or in the imagination of the auditors, which made it greatly the most powerful effort they had ever heard from their pastor’s lips” (Hawthorne 305). By writing this quote, Hawthorne strengthens the idea that the veil is placed as a lesson for the community because the consequences of the veil reflect the deeper listening of the audience that the minister most likely is attempting to reach. Also, the sermon creates immense confusion among the congregation as the veil creates a certain aura around the minister. A physician in the story realizes just how much the veil affects the auditors even though it is a simple veil: “But the strangest part of the affair is the effect of this vagary, even on a sober-minded man like myself. The black veil, though it covers only our pastor’s face, throws its influence over his whole person, and makes him ghostlike from head to foot” (Hawthorne 307). Hawthorne depicts the large effect on the people just as the minister wishes for if he is, in fact, hoping to teach a lesson to his audience. The impact the veil has on everyone further implies that the veil is used by the minister to plant a sinful aura around himself in order for the people to understand that sin creates an invisible veil around sinners. When Reverend Hooper dons the veil, his congregation is unsettled when it realize its minister is not sinless. Becnel explains the historical context of the short story and in doing so teaches why the black veil has such an effect on the congregation: “When Hooper begins to wear the veil, he introduces the idea that even the minister may have dark sins to hide. It is not surprising that this so unsettles his congregation who depend on him to be the cornerstone of their good and orderly society” (Becnel). Becnel states that the minister is a beacon of pure light in his community, so when he begins to wear the veil, the community cannot help but be unsettled. The idea that its sinless minister and leader goes astray is enough to make the town question everything their minister does. Hooper wears the veil to symbolize that although sins are invisible, their effect is invisible. Reed explains that throughout the story, the symbol of the veil is rather confusing, but at the minister's deathbed all becomes clear. The reason for the wearing of the black veil is to teach a lesson by making everyone’s invisible “veil” seen. The “veil” each person carries around invisibly is his or her sins in which he keep hidden from all others. The minister decides to make his visible as a way for his congregation to understand how grave the consequences are to expose one’s sins (Reed 2672). A separation from joy, powerful sermons, and sinful ministers all point towards the veil as a lesson.   

Lastly, analysts believe the veil may be a paradox in itself due to its unsolvability, tempting characteristic, a symbolism of itself, and complexity as an artist’s symbol. The veil seems to be an inscrutable puzzle, which allows for the veil to be a paradox because of the various solutions and situations it caters to. In this way, the nature of which the characters of the story approach the mystery implies that the symbol of the veil is unsolvable: “A few shook their sagacious heads, intimating that they could penetrate the mystery; wile one or two affirmed that there was no mystery at all, but only that Mr. Hooper’s eyes were so weakened by the midnight lamp, as to require a shade”  (Hawthorne 306). The various reasonings for the veil depict conflicting sides to show how mysterious and odd the minister's new look is. Also, the use of the word “sagacious” almost appears to be used sarcastically to tease anyone who attempts to crack the true meaning of the veil. The veil in its mysterious nature tempts many to attempt to crack the meaning of the symbol, but many make the mistake of contemplating the story itself rather than the effects of the veil. The effects of the veil hold the true significance, and the effects are different for every person. Once one looks at the various effects of the veil, it is easy to realize that there are infinitely many interpretations of the symbol (Freedman 215). The temptation the veil supplies to the audience also provides a basis for the paradox it causes by creating an aura of mystery through all the questions it extracts. Freedman explains that it is not the fabric of the veil that is so unsettling but rather the idea itself that the veil is hiding something. The veil does not put forth questions but instead is a mystery in and of itself. Freedman goes on to explain that the veil puzzles the community, which only makes it that much more tempting and frustrating to assign a truth to the veil (Freedman 217). The veil symbolizes itself in such a way that provides a paradox through concealing its meaning.  Freedman explains that the veil does not have one simple meaning but instead has different ideas for every single person’s circumstance and outlook. The veil’s symbol all depends on the intent of who uses the symbol, in this case the minister, the context of the veil, and the intentions of the veil. In the case of the story, the veil is a symbol and is symbolized to show that with concealment comes revelations of said concealment (Freedman 216). In concealing itself, the veil portrays the concealing of its own meaning. Freedman explains that the paradox of the veil as concealment is a symbol upon itself: “The veil as veiling or veiledness is itself the message. The ambiguity and mystery of the concealing veil become themselves the meaning, suggesting the inaccessibility of determinate meaning of truth” (Freedman 216). Freedman sheds light on the paradoxical aura of the veil by explaining how simple yet complex the symbol is. It is a symbol of concealment as a veil usually would symbolize, but the concealing nature of the veil itself in turn conceals more symbolism. The veil also may be an artist’s symbol; therefore, the symbol has an abundance of meaning when examining the author but very little in context to the story. The way the artist’s symbol supplies a large amount of information at the same time as hiding a surplus of information creates a paradox. The veil works to educate some but also limit the learning of others just as a parable does.  Hawthorne describes his short story as a parable; he even writes it in the title. Parables are used, specifically in the Bible, to educate those who are worthy and to confuse those who are not ready to fully understand the circumstances. Since the story is called a parable by Hawthorne himself, the story is considered a paradox because it is made both to confuse and to educate (Montbriand 214). The artistic symbol of the black veil creates more of a paradoxical symbol than a simple and direct theme. Montbriand explains that the symbolic veil is not a symbol of a concealed sin but instead is much more complex: “In Carnochan’s view, ‘The Minister’s Black Veil,’ is less a parable of hidden guilt than an exercise in the complex employment of the artistic symbol, and, ultimately, a tale about the nature of such symbols” (Montbriand 214). The idea of the veil as an artistic symbol rather than a symbol within the story portrays the veil as a paradox in the way it symbolizes itself and the author’s style of mysterious symbolism. Hawthorne purposefully makes the veil symbolize something and in the same phrase hides the meaning. Through being unsolvable, tempting, symbolizing, and an artist’s symbol, the black veil Reverend Hooper wears appears to be a paradox rather than any other simpler option.

A symbol for predestination, a lesson, and a paradox are all presented for being the purpose of the veil, and each possibility has its own explanations and reasons. Predestination creates a reason for the reverend to struggle to feel God’s Word, an explanation for the isolation from the congregation, and effects the veil has on the community. The lesson explains the separation from joy Hooper feels when exemplifying sins, creates sermons with power, and embodies the minister as a sinner. The paradox explains itself through being insoluble, tempting, symbolism, and an artist’s symbol. The true reason for the veil is not known due to the death of Hawthorne, but speculation of what he may have been trying to depict will still plague the literary community through many years to come.

Works Cited

Becnel, Kim. “Literary Contexts in Short Stories: Nathaniel Hawthorne’s ‘The Minister’s Black

Veil: A Parable.’” Literary Contexts in Short Stories: Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “The

Minister’s Black Veil,” Apr. 2008, pp. 1. EBSCOhost.

Carnochan, W. B. “The Minister’s Black Veil.” Short Stories for Students, edited by Ira Mark

Milne, Vol. 7, Gale, 2000, pp. 219- 222.

Davis, William V. “Hawthorne’s ‘The Minister’s Black Veil’: A Note on the Significance of the

Subtitle.” Studies in Short Fiction, vol. 23, no. 4, Fall 1986, p. 453. EBSCOhost.

Freedman, William. “The Artist’s Symbol and Hawthorne’s Veil: ‘The Minister’s Black Veil’

Resartus.” Short Stories for Students, edited by Ira Mark Milne, Vol. 7, Gale, 2000, pp. 214- 219.

Hawthorne, Nathaniel. “The Minister's Black Veil.” The Minister's Black Veil, The Token and

Atlantic Souvenir, 1832.

Montbriand, Timothy. “Overview of ‘The Minister’s Black Veil.’” Short Stories for Students,

edited by Ira Mark Milne, Vol. 7, Gale, 2000, pp. 211- 214.

Reed, Michael D. “The Minister’s Black Veil.” Masterplots II. edited by Charles May, Vol. 5,

Salem Press, 1986, 1996, 2004, pp. 2671- 2674.