John Milton's Paradise Lost

A few days ago my teacher handed me an old edition of Paradise Lost and told me to give my opinion on it. This particular edition contained criticism by Joseph Addison, the one who founded The Spectator magazine along with his friend Richard Steele. Later on I went on the net and found that there were many times when Addison criticised Paradise Lost but this edition had the ones from 5 January, 1712 – 9 February, 1712.  

The purpose of Mr. Addison was to determine whether Milton’s Paradise Lost may be called a Heroic poem. It might even be called a divine poem.

Similar to Homer’s Iliad in Greek and Virgil’s Aeneid in Latin; rhyme was not a necessary ornament in Paradise Lost. He constantly compared it with Iliad or Aeneid to see whether it fell short in any way.

While doing this it should be considered that the above mentioned epics (Iliad and Aeneid) are actually heroic poems which were made around 8^th century BC and 19^th century BC respectively. While Paradise Lost was first published in 1667, won’t exactly qualify as a heroic poem according to me. It could even be debated whether Iliad or Aeneid are heroic poems. I do agree they are heroic poems in the spirit and the content but being in the shoes of a reader from 21^st century, it is quiet visible that Aeneid is the heroic story of a Greek fled to Rome during the climax of the Trojan war and where he became the ancestor of the Romans. Iliad is the story of siege of the city of Troy by a coalition of Greek states, it tells of how Troy was destroyed to the last brick by the Greeks. Compared to these mythological recollections, Paradise Lost happens to be the story of mankind and how it has to carry the curse of living on Earth due to Adam and Eve consuming an apple which apparently was filled with magic/knowledge and it was tasty too. (No offence)

According to Addison, Milton imitates Homer and Virgil as he opens with an infernal council plotting the fall of Man, which is the action he proposed to celebrate: the sin Adam and Eve did.

Milton’s subject was greater than either of the former as it does not determine the fate of single persons or nations, but of a whole species.

According to Addison, Milton had only a very few circumstances upon which to raise his poem, but was also obliged to proceed with the greatest caution in everything that he added out of his own invention.

This point caught my attention and I wondered why he would write such a poem. Later I got it that Milton had gone blind and had narrated it to his wife at least that’s what my teacher told me. Then I went on and concluded that after Milton had gone blind, I supposed that he wrote it (the poem) so long as it satisfied him, so long as the blindness had a spiritual excuse but actually that’s not important right now.

Paradise Lost is about how mankind lost its place in Eden due to Adam and Eve and he does not restrain himself while blaming them. I wonder why he did not blame it on God, why he did not think that God should have acted more mature. I conclude that Milton was blinded but in faith too.

Addison appreciated Homer’s characterisation in his poem Iliad and was of the view that each character was dignified but he also thought that Virgil had failed to accomplish this well in his Aeneid.

Addison appreciated how Milton depicted the principal actor of his poem: greatest enemy of mankind. He appreciated how the crafty being, Satan, makes a long voyage, puts in practice many more wiles and stratagems, and hides himself under a variety of shapes and appearances all of which are severally detected, to the great delight and surprise of the reader.

He admired the poem further since it is possible for any of its readers, whatever nation, country or people he or she may belong to, relate to it. This could not be achieved by Homer and Virgil. Further, he praised how Milton shines very much in the propriety of his sentiments and his chief talent, and indeed his distinguishing excellence in the sublimity of his thoughts.     

According to Addison, sentiments which raise laughter can very seldom be admitted with any decency into an heroic poem, whose business is to excite passions of a much nobler nature. Further he says that the only piece of pleasantry in Paradise Lost is where the evil spirits are described as rallying the Angels upon the success of their new invented artillery. This passage he thought was the most exceptional in the whole poem, as being nothing else but a string of puns, and those also very different.

That said I read this particular passage that Mr. Addison talked of as ‘pleasantry’ and found it to be ‘ not at all comprehensible’ meaning let alone the laughs I did not understand what I was supposed to laugh on. The passage seemed to me like a series of sarcastic comments by Satan. After this he talked about how a heroic poem should perspicuous which literally means expressing things clearly. He says that this quality is the first and most necessary qualification. He does say the poem is perspicuous but I disagree.

For instance let me give an example of a dialogue from a movie. The movie is As Good As It Gets starring Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt (who happens to be one of my favourite). The scene goes like this: both of them are at a restaurant going to have dinner and Helen’s character Carol asks Jack’s character Melvin to give her a compliment. This is what he says:

I have this - - what? Ailment… And my doctor—a shrink… who I used to go all the time… he says that in 50 or 60 per cent of the time a pill can really help. I hate pills. Very dangerous things, pills. ‘Hate,’ I am using the word ‘hate’ about pills. My compliment is that when you came over to my house that time and told how you’d never—well, you were there, you know… the next morning I started taking the pills

This isn’t perspicuous enough is it?!

He then says, “You make me want to be a better man.” That’s easy to understand.

I know that a movie and a poem cannot be compared. But the point was about being perspicuous. The language that Milton used would be proportional to the greatness of the origin, of its inspiration and different from the most obvious phrases and those which are used in ordinary conversation. But I’d say after the first 4 lines I had to refer to the summary. It was tough and so I don’t think Milton was perspicuous enough.

About the ‘humour’ that Addison mentioned, I think Milton failed in that aspect since he was not perspicuous enough. Contrast to that in Ogden Nash’s the Muddle head, the poet used simplicity to humour the reader which works quite well.

 Addison who used Aristotle’s principles to analyse and opine Paradise Lost as a heroic poem should have skipped that ‘humour’ part.

Overall, the poem is a divine poem and I appreciate all the work he must have done to accomplish this.