I’ve been fascinated by the use of the term “evil” throughout many of the books we have read so far. In book five , Adam says that “evil into the mind of god or man/may come and go…” (117-118). A page later, both Adam and Eve say “if the night/have gatherered aught of evil or concealed,/disperse it as now light dispels the dark!” (206-208). And in book seven, the narrator speaks of “the evil soon/driv’n back redounded as a flood on those from whom it sprung…” (56-58). These are a few examples of evil mentioned throughout the work. Every time I see the word I wonder: how do Adam and Eve know what evil is? They live in Paradise, in an earthly Heaven, with no need for evil. They have yet to fall, to be tainted by Satan and sin–but they still have some concept of evil. At the very least, they have some idea that they use the word evil to describe…I wonder whether their signified differs from ours. And if they do have some kind of pre-Satanic notion of evil, it must have been created and introduced by God. This means that God must have created evil, even before Satan corrupted mankind. The line about evil in the mind of “god or mind” complicates this even further. It seems to present evil as a sort of archaic and natural force that affects gods and men but is also separate from their realms. I’m interested to see how the language of evil changes once Adam and Eve fall…
I found myself very intrigued by the way in which Milton has both God and Satan make use of humor. In Book VII, line 139, God says, “At least our envious foe hath failed”–which seems a little coy and smug. Of course, Satan could not have succeeded because he sought to overpower an omnipotent force, something which God is well aware of. Further, the idea that he barely failed could be the understatement of the ages: he failed miserably, landing himself in Hell for all eternity without any chance at the happiness for which he was created. All in all, this is one of the few moments in which God is given human characteristics–and we’re not really sure what to make of it.
Satan’s humor, on the other hand, is much more clever and sinister. His extended allegory of negotiation in Book VI is teeming with pride: “O friends! Why not come on these victors proud? … [when] to entertain them fair… [we] propounded terms / of composition, straight they changed their minds” (l. 609-612). Such humor is very consistent with Satan’s troubling portrayal as the quasi-hero of this epic. The words are wholly evil, but the humor is so ingenious (on a level that God’s is not) that we cannot help but appreciate, and even admire it.
Like many before me, I feel complicated emotions about Book Seven and how it seems to conflate and contradict Genesis in many key ways. One of the things that caught my attention was the creation of Adam and Eve. Only Adam, and the male sex, is mentioned as being “directed in devotion to adore/And worship God supreme who made him chief” (514-5). The “directed in devotion” also seems to complicate free will, but that’s not what I wanted to focus on here. What seems to be the case is that the male sex seems to be the one given “sanctity of reason” which “might erect/His stature” (508-9). Again, only male pronouns are used here.
Eve, as a female, seems like an afterthought at best. After man is created, Eve is created and referred to as “but thy consort” (529), implying that she has no real value besides keeping Adam company. The aforementioned values given to men seem to be just that, given to men, and the “female for race” (530) are not given any specific values besides being a lowly consort.
Given what we know happens with Eve, it seems that her creation would suggest that she is not “directed in devotion”, to God anyway. This creates a rather glaring oversight of God that we don’t see in the original text of Genesis. Here, Eve is intentionally left out of being granted dominion, divine devotion, or reason. As we’ve noted before, Milton seems to imply that her Fall is more like predestination rather than an intentional mistake on her part.
The description of creation in Book 7 intrigues me in that it complicates the work even more, in my opinion. First of all, I find it interesting that we get the explanation of the beginning of the world halfway through the work. Milton chooses to start this work with the image of Satan in Hell, and does not fully disclose how he got there and how Paradise was created until the middle of the poem. Of course, we already know the story, but it’s still interesting that Milton presents the story in this fashion. In a way, we are almost like Adam, looking around us and inferring what we can before the full story is revealed to us.
More importantly, aspects of the creation story interest me because they reiterate the idea that, since God created all, he created the bad along with the good. God created the day but also the night. Milton again mentions the Leviathan, which reminds me of the epic simile in Book 1, where the stranded skiff represents man and the Leviathan represents evil or Satan, which man unknowingly anchors on. Yet, in Book 7 Milton reiterates that God made the Leviathan, also repeating that he appears to be land. In addition, God created the serpent, and we know that God created Satan, though Satan disagrees. Why would God even create evil? Why would he give Adam free will and then plant the Tree of Knowledge? I know that Milton is trying to reconcile the existence of sin with the omnipotence of God, but that raises even more questions for me.
Within Book Seven, Milton’s story of creation, the use of imagery pertaining to food and digestion reflects on greater thematic elements of God’s creation in very interesting ways. When thinking about food within the story of Adam and Eve, obviously our first thoughts are of the gluttonous first sin. But Milton continues to use this imagery throughout the text to create more depth surrounding that moment. In Raphael’s words to Adam, he cautions against an excessive craving for knowledge. “But Knowledge is as food, and needs no less/ Her Temperance over Appetite, to know/ In measure what the mind may well contain,/ Oppresses else with Surfeit, and soon turns/ Wisdom to Folly, as Nourishment to Wind” (7.126-30). These images of digestion not only support the theme of temperance over physical and intellectual appetite, but also generate disgust within both Adam and the reader as it references the by product of excessive eating; flatulence. In Paradise Lost, descriptions of things that are of sinful nature often pertain to the images of the grotesque such as digestion and the by products of it. Furthermore, as the Son explores the bounds of the universe, he infuses “vital virtue” and “vital warmth/ Throughout the fluid mass but downward purged/ The black tartareous cold infernal dregs/ Adverse to life…” (7. 236-239). Here, Milton parallels sin to “dregs,” or the remnants or residue of food or drink. Therefore, it isn’t just gluttony, a human act, that can represent evil, but also Milton implies that sin is inherent within food itself.
Like several others, I was struck by the oddness of Book Seven. To me it felt like a sort of interlude, a break in the narrative of Satan, Paradise, and the Fall. Raphael’s reconstruction of the creation story seems somewhat unnecessary to me in the context of the rest of the story, despite its centrality to the story of the Fall. However, there were a few things I noticed that made the otherwise familiar story interesting to me – even with the seemingly endless descriptions of the animals and birds.
First of all, the way that Milton handles the idea of knowledge in the story continues to intrigue me. Raphael compares the pursuit of knowledge to appetite for food when he says that knowledge, “needs no less / Her temperance over appetite to know / In measure what the mind may well contain, / Oppresses else with surfeit and soon turns / Wisdom to folly as nourishment to wind” (Milton 7. 126-130). What interests me is not only the way in which Raphael uncharacteristically compares excessive curiosity to flatulence, but also the way in which he transcribes a limit on human knowledge. In Raphael’s view, humans may pursue knowledge, but only as much as their minds can handle. It is interesting that beings created perfect need this kinds of limits placed upon them.
I also noticed Raphael’s description of the moon: “Less bright the moon … His mirror with full face borrowing her light / From him, for other light she needed none” (Milton 7. 375-377). The sun and moon’s relationship draws a direct comparison to Adam and Eve, since all Eve needs comes from Adam. The politics of gender in the poem are fairly consistent, at least in these two instances, and focus on the woman deriving everything from the man in a relationship.
Book 6 of Paradise Lost, brings up an important theme in the poem of obedience. Through describing the war in heaven, Raphael tries to teach Adam that disobedience blinds people from the truth, perhaps even more specifically, the truth about religion. Raphael warns Adam that Satan will try to persuade and tempt him to “disobey” God in effort to ruin and destroy God’s beloved creation of human kind. If he gives in to this temptation, it will ultimately lead him away from the path of goodness, light and truth that God currently leads him down. After this illustration of the war in heaven, Milton creates a parallel to Satan and his fallen angels who function as a perfect example of that disobedience. Satan and his followers disobeyed God by “falling” from his heaven looking for power, however, they are actually left more powerless than ever before. I think Milton follows this lesson of obedience with this example of Satan to shed light on the consequences that will happen to one that disobeys God, religion and truth.
It is also important to note that the first line of Paradise Lost (Book 1) is, “Of Man’s first disobedience…” (line 1). From the start of the poem Milton stresses this theme and concept of obedience to God and this scene represents not only the theme but the consequences that may develop once disobedience has occurred. I am wondering at this point whether Satan represents the one type of disobedience or whether or not there will be other forms of it (of consequences/repercussions)? I am curious about this because we already know that Adam and Eve disobey, however, they do not take the same path that Satan takes afterward. Is Milton starting to get at an implication that there are different types of disobedience? Or different types of ways to deal with it afterward?
Towards the end of Book VII Adam asks Raphael to explain the creation of the world. Raphael implies that he need to give an abridged version that would allow Adam to understand. It is important to note that it is Adam who has a particular curiosity for something beyond himself. Milton seems to be suggesting that compared to woman, men are more intelligent. This event in particular could also support Adam was equally responsible for the fall of man because of his inherent curiosity. This event makes it appear as if Adam could possibly tempted to the forbidden fruit to satisfy his own curiosity.
The information Milton includes in Raphael’s story is very similar to the old testament. The general process and week long process of the creation of the world is preserved however Milton includes obvious changes. One particular difference is God’s son involvement and participation in the creation. God’s son is present all throughout the creation process, yet God’s son was not mentioned in the old testament’s creation of the world. Why does Milton include God’s son? Why does God’s son play such an important role in the text? (In regards to God’s son defeating Satan’s army). Orthodox Christian teachings imply that God can be represented through three forms, known as the holy trinity. Later teachings recognize Jesus as a son of God. Milton combines both of the teachings since he carries out God’s demands, yet still seems to have divine power. From the text Milton suggests that God is both himself and son, but his son acts as an image that allows humans to recognize and understand God.
Another detail that I noticed was the description of the serpent. The lines “The serpent, subtlest beast of all the field, of huge extent sometimes with brazen eyes and hairy mane terrific through to thee not noxious but obedient at thy call” appear to be additional to the original text that the event is based on. (Book 7 Lines 495-498). Firstly the serpent has an association with Satan. Traditionally Satan takes the form of a serpent and tricks Eve into eating the forbidden fruit. I found it interesting that Milton explicitly notes that the serpent is “not noxious” but just appears bold. The importance of this is to keep people aware that God’s creations are not inherently evil. While the serpent has a lot of negative association God created the serpent to be harmless, it is Satan’s evil influence that ruins the image of Gods creations. This is parallel to Satan’s attempt the image of humans.
For someone who is trying to exalt God and debase Satan, Milton sure goes about it in a strange way. If I hadn’t been told ahead of reading Paradise Lost that Milton was pro-God, I would have believed Paradise Lost to be a retelling of the Genesis/Fall story with a more sympathetic view of Satan. The war between the angels continues that trend.
To me, Satan’s reaction to God’s introduction of his Son makes sense. Satan believed himself close with and valuable to God, and probably believed that if god were to take a right hand of the Son’s stature, he would have taken Satan. Satan feels betrayed, and has a reaction that I can only classify, given the space of five hundred years, as human. In fact, a lot of Satan’s justification for rebelling against God sounds human. His desire for liberty seems almost noble in the context of God’s blindside. He wants a share in the world he inhabits. He wants to have a say in the decisions that affect him. Who wouldn’t?
Satan’s pride and his presumptions are human too. He lacks anything that resembles the wisdom and foresight of God. When his forces seem to make headway during battle, he takes their success at face value. “Then fallible, it seems, Of future we may deem him, though till now Omniscient thought” he says of God, when they are not stricken down at once. Thus, Satan has hope, which itself is a quality that separates him from God. How can God hope for anything when he knows all?
Surely Milton knew we would see ourselves in Satan. His spells of jealousy, anger, heartbreak, pride, etc. are things that all humans experience in some measure. Milton’s God, whom we are ostensibly meant to love, is distant and clinical. Satan is, simply put, more interesting—and any author ought to know that interesting characters, even if they are evil, are more compelling to readers. So what’s Milton’s aim with this? Why make claims for the infallibility and perfection of God, then tell a story that seems to side with Satan?
Gender roles are prominently illustrated throughout Paradise Lost, especially considering Eve (a female) falls before Adam (a male) does and is perpetually referred to as the weaker half. However, the time period covered in the poem precedes Adam and Eve procreating the human race therefore allusions to Eve’s ability to conceive—and motherhood in general—have been minimal. Therefore, when Raphael recounts to Adam the story of the creation, I was particularly struck by all the allusions to birth and motherhood. Phrases such as “The Earth was formed but in the womb as yet of waters,” implies that the Earth is like a human embryo at this point in creation, suggesting that further maturation is to come. (7.276) A few lines later Earth is deemed a “her” when Raphael describes the “warm prolific humor, soft’ning all her globe.” (7.279-280) However, in the line that follows the the narration flips and the Earth becomes not just the embryo but also the mother, “fermented the Great Mother to conceive, satiate with genial moisture,” thus asserting that Earth is the “Great Mother,” who must be ready to conceive all the further inhabitants her land the God will create the next day, creating an intruiging parallel to God who referred to throughout the poem as “the Father.” (7.281-282) Earth is then personified as a female with human body parts, such as “her universal face,” “her bosom smelling sweet.” (7.316,319) On the sixth and final day of creation God states, “Let Earth bring forth soul living in her kind,” and in response, “The Earth obeyed and straight, op’ning her fertile womb, teemed at a birth innumerous living creatures.” (7.451-455) It was a clear choice on Milton’s behalf to gender the Earth, for he could have kept this new world complete asexual and neutral, however he clearly deemed it necessary to involve motherhood and birthing imagery to describe how God create Earth and all subsequent living things. However, it seems almost to belittle God’s all powerful role in the creation story because he is almost working through a mediator, The Earth, who is identified as the weaker sex in order to fully create his new world. I wonder if this is Milton’s subtle way of acknowledging the power and importance of the female sex in the story of the creation and maybe in general?
After finishing Book 7, I’m not entirely sure how it fits in the context of the poem so far and moving forward. Once again, we can see the invocation of a muse from Milton, blending classical allusions with Christianity. After Urania’s introduction, Raphael then goes into describing how the world was created by God. This doesn’t exactly contain any new information, as Milton’s description of the Earth’s creation certainly seems to mirror its Biblical counterpart. Having said this, why spend almost an entire Book of the poem going through it? For me, at least, this portion didn’t illluminate anything new. It didn’t tell me more about God, I don’t think, because Milton does not take this time to discuss God’s intentions. Instead, Milton focuses on the imagery Raphael creates with his retelling. It was, however, interesting to note Adam’s allusions to knowledge as a vital element of life. So far, the concept of knowledge hasn’t been all that present to me in the poem, so it was interesting to see Adam’s thoughts on it here. Wisdom has always been discussed in terms of God’s all-knowing power, but knowledge within man has not been a topic discussed in that much detail so far, other than in the context of God granting knowledge to man in the form of ‘free will.’ The last important thing I took from this Book was the Son’s larger role near the end of this segment of the poem. It certainly seems as if God and his Son are becoming closer and closer and acting in more similar ways as the poem goes on, so I will continue to look for this trend.
Throughout Book V, I still found myself fascinated by Eve, and specifically by the fact that she is not present for Adam’s conversation with Raphael. Milton describes her preparing for Raphael’s visit, alluding to the sin she will engage in later on in the poem: “But I will haste and from each bough and brake / Each plant and juiciest gourd, will pluck such coice / To entertain our angel guest” (326-329). It’s interesting that she plucks fruit from the trees in this scene PRIOR to gaining more knowledge from a heavenly guest that should, in theory, convince her not to pluck the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge later on. However, as mentioned, she does not seem to be present in the conversation about Adam’s free will. What, then, can we say about Milton’s portrayal of Eve this far into the poem? She is absent from important exchanges in which she can increase her own knowledge, seemingly uninterested in furthering her own independent mind, but yet we know that in the end she succumbs to picking the fruit in order to gain more knowledge. In addition, she wonders in her dream “Is knowledge so despised?” This, to me, seems contradictory.
Book V was full of interesting episodes.
Firstly, I keyed in on God’s instructions to Raphael. With the language that Milton used it almost felt like God was trying to convince himself of the truth of his words when he said, “Happiness in his power left free to will, Left to his own free will; his will, though free, Yet mutable; whence warn him to beware He swerve not, too secure,” etc. It seems like God is grappling with the same question that we have labored over in class, which is, How could Man have fallen if he was created perfect and How do we reconcile the discussion of free will in this work?
Next, I found the comparison between the meal among Adam, Eve and Raphael and the meal in Heaven with God and the Son very interesting. In a way I felt as though Milton was placing Paradise in apposition to yet somehow subjugated to Heaven, much like the relationship between the Son and God. The Son is God, but the Son is also apart from God, and of course this discussion is circular to no end.
Next, I wondered about the emphasis on the fruit at the meal with Adam, Eve and Raphael. I was of course reminded of the apple that Eve will eventually eat, but it seemed like a long-winded foreshadowing if that is the only subtext, so I continue to wonder why there is such an emphasis on fruit.
But the most interesting lines of all came near the end of the Book. When God is talking to the Son about Satan, he says, “Nearly it now concerns us to be sure Of our omnipotence, and with what arms We mean to hold what anciently we claim Of deity or empire; such a foe Is rising, who intends to erect his throne Equal to ours, throughout the spacious north; Nor so content, hath in his thought to try, In battle, what our power is, or our right. Let us advise, and to this hazard draw With speed what force is left, and all employ In our defence, lest unawares we lose This our high place, our sanctuary, our hill” (721-732). I had to stop when I read these lines because I interpret them as God admitting to the Son that he is concerned that Satan could succeed in his attempt to dethrone God. The Son responds derisively, scoffing at Satan’s “vain designs,” but God’s words still ring in my ears. If there really is doubt in God’s mind, what does that say about the fall of Satan and of Man? Perhaps both events were not known beforehand to God, and in fact there is something going on here that God is unaware of. If that were true it would completely change the lens with which I read Paradise Lost.
Excellent–I always have exactly the same reaction when I read the passage about God’s apparent need to rally his forces. Why should this be here? I also like your comments about the motives behind God’s sending Raphael to Adam…
One passage in Book V of Paradise Lost that struck me as paradoxical, or at least unexpected, occurs in God’s conversation with his Son from lines 719-732. God says: “Nearly it now concerns us to be sure / Of our omnipotence” (720-1) because of the rise of Satan’s opposition. As God has previously established, his power in truly unmatched—and he knows it. When God describes Satan as one “who intends to erect his throne / Equal to ours, throughout the spacious north” (725-6), as readers we understand that Satan’s intent will never reach actuality, both because of God’s assertion of his omnipotence and the known outcome of Satan’s fall. So far God’s speech is reasoned and believable, so it was with surprise that I read the line: “lest unawares we lose / This our high place, our sanctuary, our hill” (731-2). If God is so sure of his power and omniscience, then to me, it is paradoxical to see him display any inkling of doubt that he would not prevail over Satan. If God is truly as powerful as he says he is, then why would he even entertain the possibility of losing heaven to Satan and his army?
This episode mirrors another section of Book V, when Raphael explains the creation of man to Adam, from lines 505-545. Adam asks: “What meant that cautioned joined, ‘If ye be found / Obedient’?” (512-3). Like I am asking why God even mentioned the idea of failure, so to is Adam wondering how man can be disobedient to God if God created man and god is all-powerful. Raphael replies: “God made thee perfect, not immutable; /… / ordained thy will / By nature free, not overrule by fate” (524-7). Adam wrestles with the same type of existential question that Milton pushes the reader to entertain. These instances make me think that Milton is an advocate of free will and free thought. Perhaps he disagrees with some of the Church’s forceful teachings, or maybe he doubts that God has a presence in a world where he witnesses so much sin. And yet, free will is the root cause of both Satan’s fall and the fall of Man. This seems like a paradox we will be juggling until the end of the narrative and probably afterwards as well.
Excellent–I always have exactly the same reaction when I read the passage about God’s apparent need to rally his forces. Why should this be here? I also like your comments about the paradoxical notion of “perfect, not immutable.” What exactly does that mean?
April 23, 2015 at 9:24 am
I’ve been fascinated by the use of the term “evil” throughout many of the books we have read so far. In book five , Adam says that “evil into the mind of god or man/may come and go…” (117-118). A page later, both Adam and Eve say “if the night/have gatherered aught of evil or concealed,/disperse it as now light dispels the dark!” (206-208). And in book seven, the narrator speaks of “the evil soon/driv’n back redounded as a flood on those from whom it sprung…” (56-58). These are a few examples of evil mentioned throughout the work. Every time I see the word I wonder: how do Adam and Eve know what evil is? They live in Paradise, in an earthly Heaven, with no need for evil. They have yet to fall, to be tainted by Satan and sin–but they still have some concept of evil. At the very least, they have some idea that they use the word evil to describe…I wonder whether their signified differs from ours. And if they do have some kind of pre-Satanic notion of evil, it must have been created and introduced by God. This means that God must have created evil, even before Satan corrupted mankind. The line about evil in the mind of “god or mind” complicates this even further. It seems to present evil as a sort of archaic and natural force that affects gods and men but is also separate from their realms. I’m interested to see how the language of evil changes once Adam and Eve fall…
April 23, 2015 at 9:04 am
I found myself very intrigued by the way in which Milton has both God and Satan make use of humor. In Book VII, line 139, God says, “At least our envious foe hath failed”–which seems a little coy and smug. Of course, Satan could not have succeeded because he sought to overpower an omnipotent force, something which God is well aware of. Further, the idea that he barely failed could be the understatement of the ages: he failed miserably, landing himself in Hell for all eternity without any chance at the happiness for which he was created. All in all, this is one of the few moments in which God is given human characteristics–and we’re not really sure what to make of it.
Satan’s humor, on the other hand, is much more clever and sinister. His extended allegory of negotiation in Book VI is teeming with pride: “O friends! Why not come on these victors proud? … [when] to entertain them fair… [we] propounded terms / of composition, straight they changed their minds” (l. 609-612). Such humor is very consistent with Satan’s troubling portrayal as the quasi-hero of this epic. The words are wholly evil, but the humor is so ingenious (on a level that God’s is not) that we cannot help but appreciate, and even admire it.
April 22, 2015 at 11:03 pm
Like many before me, I feel complicated emotions about Book Seven and how it seems to conflate and contradict Genesis in many key ways. One of the things that caught my attention was the creation of Adam and Eve. Only Adam, and the male sex, is mentioned as being “directed in devotion to adore/And worship God supreme who made him chief” (514-5). The “directed in devotion” also seems to complicate free will, but that’s not what I wanted to focus on here. What seems to be the case is that the male sex seems to be the one given “sanctity of reason” which “might erect/His stature” (508-9). Again, only male pronouns are used here.
Eve, as a female, seems like an afterthought at best. After man is created, Eve is created and referred to as “but thy consort” (529), implying that she has no real value besides keeping Adam company. The aforementioned values given to men seem to be just that, given to men, and the “female for race” (530) are not given any specific values besides being a lowly consort.
Given what we know happens with Eve, it seems that her creation would suggest that she is not “directed in devotion”, to God anyway. This creates a rather glaring oversight of God that we don’t see in the original text of Genesis. Here, Eve is intentionally left out of being granted dominion, divine devotion, or reason. As we’ve noted before, Milton seems to imply that her Fall is more like predestination rather than an intentional mistake on her part.
April 22, 2015 at 10:00 pm
The description of creation in Book 7 intrigues me in that it complicates the work even more, in my opinion. First of all, I find it interesting that we get the explanation of the beginning of the world halfway through the work. Milton chooses to start this work with the image of Satan in Hell, and does not fully disclose how he got there and how Paradise was created until the middle of the poem. Of course, we already know the story, but it’s still interesting that Milton presents the story in this fashion. In a way, we are almost like Adam, looking around us and inferring what we can before the full story is revealed to us.
More importantly, aspects of the creation story interest me because they reiterate the idea that, since God created all, he created the bad along with the good. God created the day but also the night. Milton again mentions the Leviathan, which reminds me of the epic simile in Book 1, where the stranded skiff represents man and the Leviathan represents evil or Satan, which man unknowingly anchors on. Yet, in Book 7 Milton reiterates that God made the Leviathan, also repeating that he appears to be land. In addition, God created the serpent, and we know that God created Satan, though Satan disagrees. Why would God even create evil? Why would he give Adam free will and then plant the Tree of Knowledge? I know that Milton is trying to reconcile the existence of sin with the omnipotence of God, but that raises even more questions for me.
April 22, 2015 at 9:47 pm
Within Book Seven, Milton’s story of creation, the use of imagery pertaining to food and digestion reflects on greater thematic elements of God’s creation in very interesting ways. When thinking about food within the story of Adam and Eve, obviously our first thoughts are of the gluttonous first sin. But Milton continues to use this imagery throughout the text to create more depth surrounding that moment. In Raphael’s words to Adam, he cautions against an excessive craving for knowledge. “But Knowledge is as food, and needs no less/ Her Temperance over Appetite, to know/ In measure what the mind may well contain,/ Oppresses else with Surfeit, and soon turns/ Wisdom to Folly, as Nourishment to Wind” (7.126-30). These images of digestion not only support the theme of temperance over physical and intellectual appetite, but also generate disgust within both Adam and the reader as it references the by product of excessive eating; flatulence. In Paradise Lost, descriptions of things that are of sinful nature often pertain to the images of the grotesque such as digestion and the by products of it. Furthermore, as the Son explores the bounds of the universe, he infuses “vital virtue” and “vital warmth/ Throughout the fluid mass but downward purged/ The black tartareous cold infernal dregs/ Adverse to life…” (7. 236-239). Here, Milton parallels sin to “dregs,” or the remnants or residue of food or drink. Therefore, it isn’t just gluttony, a human act, that can represent evil, but also Milton implies that sin is inherent within food itself.
April 22, 2015 at 9:32 pm
Like several others, I was struck by the oddness of Book Seven. To me it felt like a sort of interlude, a break in the narrative of Satan, Paradise, and the Fall. Raphael’s reconstruction of the creation story seems somewhat unnecessary to me in the context of the rest of the story, despite its centrality to the story of the Fall. However, there were a few things I noticed that made the otherwise familiar story interesting to me – even with the seemingly endless descriptions of the animals and birds.
First of all, the way that Milton handles the idea of knowledge in the story continues to intrigue me. Raphael compares the pursuit of knowledge to appetite for food when he says that knowledge, “needs no less / Her temperance over appetite to know / In measure what the mind may well contain, / Oppresses else with surfeit and soon turns / Wisdom to folly as nourishment to wind” (Milton 7. 126-130). What interests me is not only the way in which Raphael uncharacteristically compares excessive curiosity to flatulence, but also the way in which he transcribes a limit on human knowledge. In Raphael’s view, humans may pursue knowledge, but only as much as their minds can handle. It is interesting that beings created perfect need this kinds of limits placed upon them.
I also noticed Raphael’s description of the moon: “Less bright the moon … His mirror with full face borrowing her light / From him, for other light she needed none” (Milton 7. 375-377). The sun and moon’s relationship draws a direct comparison to Adam and Eve, since all Eve needs comes from Adam. The politics of gender in the poem are fairly consistent, at least in these two instances, and focus on the woman deriving everything from the man in a relationship.
April 22, 2015 at 8:58 pm
Book 6 of Paradise Lost, brings up an important theme in the poem of obedience. Through describing the war in heaven, Raphael tries to teach Adam that disobedience blinds people from the truth, perhaps even more specifically, the truth about religion. Raphael warns Adam that Satan will try to persuade and tempt him to “disobey” God in effort to ruin and destroy God’s beloved creation of human kind. If he gives in to this temptation, it will ultimately lead him away from the path of goodness, light and truth that God currently leads him down. After this illustration of the war in heaven, Milton creates a parallel to Satan and his fallen angels who function as a perfect example of that disobedience. Satan and his followers disobeyed God by “falling” from his heaven looking for power, however, they are actually left more powerless than ever before. I think Milton follows this lesson of obedience with this example of Satan to shed light on the consequences that will happen to one that disobeys God, religion and truth.
It is also important to note that the first line of Paradise Lost (Book 1) is, “Of Man’s first disobedience…” (line 1). From the start of the poem Milton stresses this theme and concept of obedience to God and this scene represents not only the theme but the consequences that may develop once disobedience has occurred. I am wondering at this point whether Satan represents the one type of disobedience or whether or not there will be other forms of it (of consequences/repercussions)? I am curious about this because we already know that Adam and Eve disobey, however, they do not take the same path that Satan takes afterward. Is Milton starting to get at an implication that there are different types of disobedience? Or different types of ways to deal with it afterward?
April 22, 2015 at 8:38 pm
Book VII
Towards the end of Book VII Adam asks Raphael to explain the creation of the world. Raphael implies that he need to give an abridged version that would allow Adam to understand. It is important to note that it is Adam who has a particular curiosity for something beyond himself. Milton seems to be suggesting that compared to woman, men are more intelligent. This event in particular could also support Adam was equally responsible for the fall of man because of his inherent curiosity. This event makes it appear as if Adam could possibly tempted to the forbidden fruit to satisfy his own curiosity.
The information Milton includes in Raphael’s story is very similar to the old testament. The general process and week long process of the creation of the world is preserved however Milton includes obvious changes. One particular difference is God’s son involvement and participation in the creation. God’s son is present all throughout the creation process, yet God’s son was not mentioned in the old testament’s creation of the world. Why does Milton include God’s son? Why does God’s son play such an important role in the text? (In regards to God’s son defeating Satan’s army). Orthodox Christian teachings imply that God can be represented through three forms, known as the holy trinity. Later teachings recognize Jesus as a son of God. Milton combines both of the teachings since he carries out God’s demands, yet still seems to have divine power. From the text Milton suggests that God is both himself and son, but his son acts as an image that allows humans to recognize and understand God.
Another detail that I noticed was the description of the serpent. The lines “The serpent, subtlest beast of all the field, of huge extent sometimes with brazen eyes and hairy mane terrific through to thee not noxious but obedient at thy call” appear to be additional to the original text that the event is based on. (Book 7 Lines 495-498). Firstly the serpent has an association with Satan. Traditionally Satan takes the form of a serpent and tricks Eve into eating the forbidden fruit. I found it interesting that Milton explicitly notes that the serpent is “not noxious” but just appears bold. The importance of this is to keep people aware that God’s creations are not inherently evil. While the serpent has a lot of negative association God created the serpent to be harmless, it is Satan’s evil influence that ruins the image of Gods creations. This is parallel to Satan’s attempt the image of humans.
April 22, 2015 at 6:53 pm
For someone who is trying to exalt God and debase Satan, Milton sure goes about it in a strange way. If I hadn’t been told ahead of reading Paradise Lost that Milton was pro-God, I would have believed Paradise Lost to be a retelling of the Genesis/Fall story with a more sympathetic view of Satan. The war between the angels continues that trend.
To me, Satan’s reaction to God’s introduction of his Son makes sense. Satan believed himself close with and valuable to God, and probably believed that if god were to take a right hand of the Son’s stature, he would have taken Satan. Satan feels betrayed, and has a reaction that I can only classify, given the space of five hundred years, as human. In fact, a lot of Satan’s justification for rebelling against God sounds human. His desire for liberty seems almost noble in the context of God’s blindside. He wants a share in the world he inhabits. He wants to have a say in the decisions that affect him. Who wouldn’t?
Satan’s pride and his presumptions are human too. He lacks anything that resembles the wisdom and foresight of God. When his forces seem to make headway during battle, he takes their success at face value. “Then fallible, it seems, Of future we may deem him, though till now Omniscient thought” he says of God, when they are not stricken down at once. Thus, Satan has hope, which itself is a quality that separates him from God. How can God hope for anything when he knows all?
Surely Milton knew we would see ourselves in Satan. His spells of jealousy, anger, heartbreak, pride, etc. are things that all humans experience in some measure. Milton’s God, whom we are ostensibly meant to love, is distant and clinical. Satan is, simply put, more interesting—and any author ought to know that interesting characters, even if they are evil, are more compelling to readers. So what’s Milton’s aim with this? Why make claims for the infallibility and perfection of God, then tell a story that seems to side with Satan?
April 22, 2015 at 5:38 pm
Gender roles are prominently illustrated throughout Paradise Lost, especially considering Eve (a female) falls before Adam (a male) does and is perpetually referred to as the weaker half. However, the time period covered in the poem precedes Adam and Eve procreating the human race therefore allusions to Eve’s ability to conceive—and motherhood in general—have been minimal. Therefore, when Raphael recounts to Adam the story of the creation, I was particularly struck by all the allusions to birth and motherhood. Phrases such as “The Earth was formed but in the womb as yet of waters,” implies that the Earth is like a human embryo at this point in creation, suggesting that further maturation is to come. (7.276) A few lines later Earth is deemed a “her” when Raphael describes the “warm prolific humor, soft’ning all her globe.” (7.279-280) However, in the line that follows the the narration flips and the Earth becomes not just the embryo but also the mother, “fermented the Great Mother to conceive, satiate with genial moisture,” thus asserting that Earth is the “Great Mother,” who must be ready to conceive all the further inhabitants her land the God will create the next day, creating an intruiging parallel to God who referred to throughout the poem as “the Father.” (7.281-282) Earth is then personified as a female with human body parts, such as “her universal face,” “her bosom smelling sweet.” (7.316,319) On the sixth and final day of creation God states, “Let Earth bring forth soul living in her kind,” and in response, “The Earth obeyed and straight, op’ning her fertile womb, teemed at a birth innumerous living creatures.” (7.451-455) It was a clear choice on Milton’s behalf to gender the Earth, for he could have kept this new world complete asexual and neutral, however he clearly deemed it necessary to involve motherhood and birthing imagery to describe how God create Earth and all subsequent living things. However, it seems almost to belittle God’s all powerful role in the creation story because he is almost working through a mediator, The Earth, who is identified as the weaker sex in order to fully create his new world. I wonder if this is Milton’s subtle way of acknowledging the power and importance of the female sex in the story of the creation and maybe in general?
April 22, 2015 at 11:46 am
After finishing Book 7, I’m not entirely sure how it fits in the context of the poem so far and moving forward. Once again, we can see the invocation of a muse from Milton, blending classical allusions with Christianity. After Urania’s introduction, Raphael then goes into describing how the world was created by God. This doesn’t exactly contain any new information, as Milton’s description of the Earth’s creation certainly seems to mirror its Biblical counterpart. Having said this, why spend almost an entire Book of the poem going through it? For me, at least, this portion didn’t illluminate anything new. It didn’t tell me more about God, I don’t think, because Milton does not take this time to discuss God’s intentions. Instead, Milton focuses on the imagery Raphael creates with his retelling. It was, however, interesting to note Adam’s allusions to knowledge as a vital element of life. So far, the concept of knowledge hasn’t been all that present to me in the poem, so it was interesting to see Adam’s thoughts on it here. Wisdom has always been discussed in terms of God’s all-knowing power, but knowledge within man has not been a topic discussed in that much detail so far, other than in the context of God granting knowledge to man in the form of ‘free will.’ The last important thing I took from this Book was the Son’s larger role near the end of this segment of the poem. It certainly seems as if God and his Son are becoming closer and closer and acting in more similar ways as the poem goes on, so I will continue to look for this trend.
April 20, 2015 at 10:49 pm
Throughout Book V, I still found myself fascinated by Eve, and specifically by the fact that she is not present for Adam’s conversation with Raphael. Milton describes her preparing for Raphael’s visit, alluding to the sin she will engage in later on in the poem: “But I will haste and from each bough and brake / Each plant and juiciest gourd, will pluck such coice / To entertain our angel guest” (326-329). It’s interesting that she plucks fruit from the trees in this scene PRIOR to gaining more knowledge from a heavenly guest that should, in theory, convince her not to pluck the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge later on. However, as mentioned, she does not seem to be present in the conversation about Adam’s free will. What, then, can we say about Milton’s portrayal of Eve this far into the poem? She is absent from important exchanges in which she can increase her own knowledge, seemingly uninterested in furthering her own independent mind, but yet we know that in the end she succumbs to picking the fruit in order to gain more knowledge. In addition, she wonders in her dream “Is knowledge so despised?” This, to me, seems contradictory.
April 21, 2015 at 9:17 am
NIce! I especially like your observation about her plucking of fruit but then her absence from the conversation…
April 20, 2015 at 9:46 pm
Book V was full of interesting episodes.
Firstly, I keyed in on God’s instructions to Raphael. With the language that Milton used it almost felt like God was trying to convince himself of the truth of his words when he said, “Happiness in his power left free to will, Left to his own free will; his will, though free, Yet mutable; whence warn him to beware He swerve not, too secure,” etc. It seems like God is grappling with the same question that we have labored over in class, which is, How could Man have fallen if he was created perfect and How do we reconcile the discussion of free will in this work?
Next, I found the comparison between the meal among Adam, Eve and Raphael and the meal in Heaven with God and the Son very interesting. In a way I felt as though Milton was placing Paradise in apposition to yet somehow subjugated to Heaven, much like the relationship between the Son and God. The Son is God, but the Son is also apart from God, and of course this discussion is circular to no end.
Next, I wondered about the emphasis on the fruit at the meal with Adam, Eve and Raphael. I was of course reminded of the apple that Eve will eventually eat, but it seemed like a long-winded foreshadowing if that is the only subtext, so I continue to wonder why there is such an emphasis on fruit.
But the most interesting lines of all came near the end of the Book. When God is talking to the Son about Satan, he says, “Nearly it now concerns us to be sure Of our omnipotence, and with what arms We mean to hold what anciently we claim Of deity or empire; such a foe Is rising, who intends to erect his throne Equal to ours, throughout the spacious north; Nor so content, hath in his thought to try, In battle, what our power is, or our right. Let us advise, and to this hazard draw With speed what force is left, and all employ In our defence, lest unawares we lose This our high place, our sanctuary, our hill” (721-732). I had to stop when I read these lines because I interpret them as God admitting to the Son that he is concerned that Satan could succeed in his attempt to dethrone God. The Son responds derisively, scoffing at Satan’s “vain designs,” but God’s words still ring in my ears. If there really is doubt in God’s mind, what does that say about the fall of Satan and of Man? Perhaps both events were not known beforehand to God, and in fact there is something going on here that God is unaware of. If that were true it would completely change the lens with which I read Paradise Lost.
April 21, 2015 at 9:18 am
Excellent–I always have exactly the same reaction when I read the passage about God’s apparent need to rally his forces. Why should this be here? I also like your comments about the motives behind God’s sending Raphael to Adam…
April 20, 2015 at 6:57 pm
One passage in Book V of Paradise Lost that struck me as paradoxical, or at least unexpected, occurs in God’s conversation with his Son from lines 719-732. God says: “Nearly it now concerns us to be sure / Of our omnipotence” (720-1) because of the rise of Satan’s opposition. As God has previously established, his power in truly unmatched—and he knows it. When God describes Satan as one “who intends to erect his throne / Equal to ours, throughout the spacious north” (725-6), as readers we understand that Satan’s intent will never reach actuality, both because of God’s assertion of his omnipotence and the known outcome of Satan’s fall. So far God’s speech is reasoned and believable, so it was with surprise that I read the line: “lest unawares we lose / This our high place, our sanctuary, our hill” (731-2). If God is so sure of his power and omniscience, then to me, it is paradoxical to see him display any inkling of doubt that he would not prevail over Satan. If God is truly as powerful as he says he is, then why would he even entertain the possibility of losing heaven to Satan and his army?
This episode mirrors another section of Book V, when Raphael explains the creation of man to Adam, from lines 505-545. Adam asks: “What meant that cautioned joined, ‘If ye be found / Obedient’?” (512-3). Like I am asking why God even mentioned the idea of failure, so to is Adam wondering how man can be disobedient to God if God created man and god is all-powerful. Raphael replies: “God made thee perfect, not immutable; /… / ordained thy will / By nature free, not overrule by fate” (524-7). Adam wrestles with the same type of existential question that Milton pushes the reader to entertain. These instances make me think that Milton is an advocate of free will and free thought. Perhaps he disagrees with some of the Church’s forceful teachings, or maybe he doubts that God has a presence in a world where he witnesses so much sin. And yet, free will is the root cause of both Satan’s fall and the fall of Man. This seems like a paradox we will be juggling until the end of the narrative and probably afterwards as well.
April 21, 2015 at 9:19 am
Excellent–I always have exactly the same reaction when I read the passage about God’s apparent need to rally his forces. Why should this be here? I also like your comments about the paradoxical notion of “perfect, not immutable.” What exactly does that mean?