book IX

In terms of the question of Milton's purpose in writing Paradise Lost, I have to say I think its mostly for entertainment value. Yes, there is a lot within the text that is considered truth, but his numerous references to Greek mythology seem to serve as a constant reminder that this is merely his embellishment of the story of original sin. As for the text of book IX, I found Satan's speech beginning on line 99 to be particularly intriguing. His reasoning here for corrupting man seems to be two fold: he appears to be incredibly envious of man and therefore punishes man not only as revenge against God, but out of spite for man being the favorite child so to speak. Satan states that "spite then with spite is best repaid." This spite is not only revenge in the form of his own spite for God, but also in the form of man's spite for God. Milton uses a combination of language and snake imagery to really emphasize the context of the speech. Lines such as "Revenge, at first though sweet,/Bitter ere long back on itself recoils," and the overuse of the word "spite" here were very amusing. The constant "s" sound here not only reminds us of his serpent form, but also enhances the passage's evil flavor.

The subject of free will, though only breifly touched upon in this speech, is one that made me think more than I would have liked. Satan's claim that "I in one night freed/From servitude inglorious well-nigh half/Th' angelic name..." seems to support the idea that free will does not exist. The fallen angels see themselves as escaped from forced worship and that only in their escape have they gained free will. However, God knows where they are and could easily force them back into Heaven to laud his name, yet he doesn't. The fact that they were able to make the decision to escape at all seems like enough proof of free will. Of course, considering the larger picture and the grand scale of eternity, who knows if God is merely allowing them the illusion of free will. Free will seems to have a slightly different application when it comes to mankind. Man is caught between God and Satan but since God created man, could he not create man in a way that would make him immune to the temptations of sin? Assuming that God is benevolent, why would he knowingly condemn his prized creation? He, being all powerful, could easily have made every one of us to love and worship him, yet is it really love if its not a choice? Since this is a debate that perhaps no one knows the answer to, maybe its futile to even think about it.

Paradise Lost

In book II of Paradise Lost, Beelzebub's speech is preceeded with such an elaborate description of his standing up and of his stature that it automatically alerts the reader that something of great importance is about to be said or done. Milton uses anastrophe in lines 299-300 to emphasize Beelzebub's status and to draw the reader's attention to what he is about to say. Everything is exaggerated and stated in a grand way- he is not wise, he is sage; he is not strong, he has the shoulders of Atlas; he does not merely stand, he becomes a pillare of state. What is interesting about this description however, is not that it glorifies Beelzebub, but that it glorifies him to a point that is almost Christ-like. Going through and pulling out certain words and phrases ("grave...he rose...a pillar of state...princely counsel in his face yet shone, majestic though in ruin...shoulders fit to bear the weight...drew audience and attention still as night..."), it would be hard to distinguish this description from one of Christ. Although at the time of the action in the epic, Christ has not yet come, his parallel seems intended and blatant. Not only does he make him seem Christ-like, he also assigns to him what appear to be concern and compassion in the lines, "deep on his front engraven/deliberation sat and public care." Honestly, this description left me confused as to Milton's intended message. Is he glorifying Hell and these fallen angels and asking us to be skeptical of Christ? Or is it a warning that often times what seems good and enticing is often times not, as seen in the consequence to mankind of Beelezbub's proposal? Or further still, is he asking us to see good in evil, proposing that even the lowest of the low possess redeeming qualities even though not always appropiately applied? Perhaps the grand and noble image that Beelzebub projects is merely a facade and therefore a commentary by Milton on politicians. Maybe the prince and monarchy that he refers to are not heavenly ones, but those on earth and specifically, corrupt ones who pretend to be looking out for the public's best interest, but in reality, have their own agenda.

The final thought I have as to an intended meaning is found in line 298. It states that they should create Hell "In emulation opposite to Heav'n," yet immediately after, the lines are flooded with allusions to Christ. Perhaps Milton is emphasizing the fact that their is no escaping God.

milton

In L'Allegro and Il Penseroso, Milton examines happiness in terms of melancholy. In L'Allegro, melancholy is essentially exiled in the first few lines of the poem and following lines start to create the image of a bunch of hippies on an acide trip frolicing through a field on a beautiful summer's day with music playing in the background. Ok, so maybe not this exact image, but you get the feeling that happiness is epitomized and the flow of the verse is almost melodic. Everything is filled with granduer; a sunrise is not just a sunrise, its "robed in flames and amber light,/the clouds in thousand liveries dight." He is personifying inanimate objects as well as emotion and by doing so, literally fills everything around with happiness. Simple, mundane tasks of ordinary people, like the mower whetting his scythe, seem to be enjoyable simply because melancholy has been banished. It is almost as if the world is being viewed through the eyes of someone who is heavily drugged. It is obvious that although he makes this world appealing, he does not fully support it. In the poem he alludes to the forest in a Midsummer Night's dream, a place where order is inverted and it becomes quite apparent that society is not meant to be in such an uphealved state. He then proceeds in Il Penseroso to describe joys as the "fickle pensioners of Morpheus' train," suggesting that they are dreams and should be left in that realm.

Il Penseroso on the other hand, he criticizes this immediately stating "hence vain deluding joys,/the brood of Folly without father bred." To me, the absent father is melancholy and these "bastard"children are not to be seen as wonderful products of "mother mirth," but rather as dangerous and sinful. His message here seems to be that both elements are needed and that true happiness results from the recognition of melancholy in the world. Everything needs an antithesis. In order to have compassion there must be suffering, in order to have love there must be hate, in order to have right there must be wrong, and in order to have mirth there must be melancholy. But this goes beyond needing sadness to appreciate what happiness is. It extends melancholy to to seriousness, not purely sadness, in order that pure mirth does not allow our minds to become idle. He wishes for a life where he can "sit and rightly spell/of every star that heaven doth shew,/and every herb that sips the dew;" a life where knowledge and religion lead to happiness.

The last few lines of each of the poems make it seem like he is choosing between the two states of being. Going back to the mother/father analysis, its like he is caught in the middle of a brutal custody battle. Does he live with mom who will spoil him and shelter him or does who live with the strict disciplinarian father who will push him towards a fulfilled life? He seems to favor the latter and with good reason. We can't all be on drugs all of the time, that would just be downright unproductive.

Easter Wings

The first thing I noticed, even before reading the poem was the shape the lines create. After reading the poem, I saw the formation as representative of his relationship with God. As he falls further away from Him at the beginning of each verse, the lines become smaller to symbolize his weakening. As he then turns to God and combines himself with God's power and forgiveness, he gains strength and the lines grow with him. Of course after contemplating this and how it relates to the message of the poem, I looked down and saw an explanation in the footnotes. Oh well. However I also interpreted the shape in a way that the footnote didn't mention. Each stanza presents the bottom half as a literal reflection of the top half. If you assume that man is created in the image of God then this very effectively illustrates this idea. I also thought his use of a bird was great. What better way to get close to Heaven than to literally fly up towards it? If one considers their spiritual journey as a flight then its easy to see the parallel. The bird flies upwards but when its wings become tired it comes back down to rest. When trying to achieve the ideal relationship with God, there are often many things that make people fly back down. Its a struggle and this is illustrated greatly by the bird imagery as well as the expanding and shrinking of the lines.

On Giles and Joan

I found this poem, like most of the cavalier poetry, to be very entertaining. Johnson uses litotes as he tells his audience about the married couple Giles and Joan who are in accord only in the sense that they are at discord. The poem itself emphasizes this agreeance in many ways. First, it is very neatly structured with rhyming couplets and a fairly regular meter. Also, their names are very similar sounding although interestingly enough, they being with different letters. This is a great demonstration of Johnson's point that things can seem to be the same but in actuality are quite different. The poem is very patterned in that there is a line or so describing Gile's feeling and then a short sentence that states in some way that Joan concurrs. I saw this construct as having more than one potential purpose. First, it could be an obvious stab at women since he gives Joan short three to four word sentences that merely agree with Giles, which perhaps suggests that women are unintelligent and unable to think for themselves. Or it could be seen almost as an argument since we hear Giles then Joan then Giles then Joan and on and on. Of course the lines say that they are agreeing with one another but it again goes back to the idea of discord masquerading as accord. And finally I saw this pattern to suggest that maybe Joan doesn't agree. All we know is that "the like is Joan" and "all this doth Joan" and so on. It made me wonder if perhaps she didn't agree at all since we never know her own opinions, only that she supposedly agrees with those of her husband. I thought Johnson was very clever here with his construct and use of other devices to really emphasize what he is saying.

Unlike most of the love poetry that we have read thus far, Donne examines the joint soul-body effort in falling in love. Previous poets have either glorified only the body with numerous blazons or glorified themselves for being so noble as to love a beautiful soul which does not belong to a beautiful body. It has been either lust or love but rarely both. Donne isn’t even really advocating sex and physical attraction but instead makes the point that we must have a body in order for our souls to meet. Not only does he say we need this body but that we should be thankful for it for alerting us to the fact that we have found our soul mate. Donne’s language slips the reader in and out of soul/body imagery and makes the two concepts seem like one. He continually refers to the idea of a new soul made with the joining of two, or essentially the thought that two become one. But this could also be seen on a physical level as conception, especially with lines such as “redoubles still, and multiplies,” and “the subtle knot which makes us man,” that conjure the image of conception and DNA replication. Another great use of language is Donne’s constant reference to the color violet. The two colors that must combine to create violet are pink and blue, colors that are often representative of gender. I thought this poem, along with the others that we read of Donne’s, was incredibly thought provoking and insightful.

twelfth night

Sebastian’s soliloquy at the beginning of act 4 scene 3 gives the reader insight into his character and emphasizes many of the major ideas that the play attempts to convey. Shakespeare employs meticulous diction in this passage which not only highlights Sebastian’s thoughts, but the irony contained within them. Although it is a short passage, to examine every line would require numerous pages. Therefore, I have chosen a few instances which I found especially entertaining and intriguing. In the first line, Sebastian verifies to himself that he is not in fact insane by identifying the air and sun. The use of the sun is interesting for two reasons. For one, since Sebastian, and the majority of the characters for that matter, are in the dark in a figurative sense, Shakespeare chooses perhaps the greatest contrast to darkness in order to emphasize their obliviousness. Also, the sun and light are often correlated with reason and clear thinking which Sebastian is claiming to have throughout his soliloquy. However, it is difficult to believe that he is in a totally sane state of mind because just a few lines later he agrees to marry Olivia. He is not reasonable at all but foolish and obviously a bit in love with himself since he only briefly questions Olivia’s seemingly random love for him before he goes along with it. Another clever choice of words, or in this case, an object, is the pearl. The play, like most of Shakespeare’s comedies, focuses a great deal on disguise and appearance versus reality. The pearl then, being contained within a rugged exterior and therefore in disguise itself, is an ideal object to illustrate this. Another great use of language is the name Elephant. The elephant in the room is the incredibly obvious thing that people either are oblivious to or refuse to see and acknowledge. In this case, the audience is aware of the mistaken identities but the characters are completely ignorant of it. And finally, what would a Shakespeare play be without a hint of underlying sexual implication? A few lines that I thought perhaps eluded to this were, “this pearl she gave me, I do feel’t and see’t,” “yet doth this accident and flood of fortune,” and “with such a smooth, discreet and stable bearing.” Interpret as you will, and perhaps I have interpreted too much, but I always assume Shakespeare is trying to dirty it up a bit.

Straying from Sebastian’s character and more towards the relation of the soliloquy to the play in general, numerous points can be found. First, the fact that Sebastian and Viola are so easily confused, especially by Olivia, undermines any claims made about love in the play. While some love (like that of Viola for the Duke) appears to be somewhat legitimate, the fact that other characters can mistake their lovers for someone else discredits the emotion. Another blow to love illustrated in this scene and throughout the play is the ability of characters to be so easily persuaded to love someone. Sebastian figures that if Olivia loves him, then why not love her back even though he has scarcely spoken to her. Another example of this is the fact that the Duke eagerly marries Viola at the end only moments after finding out that she is actually a woman and not a man. Also in this soliloquy, the thread woven throughout the play of deceit, disguise, and appearance versus reality is neatly condensed and summarized. We quickly learn that few things are as they seem and though we may think that our own minds deceive us, often times it is others doing the deceiving. So, the question that Sebastian struggles with is what or who to believe. Do we assume that we are insane or trust our sanity? Do we trust others or question everything we see? For the most part, the characters believe that they are mentally stable but at the same time, they are too willing to assume that what they see is true and therefore, they are often conveyed as foolish.