[Milton-L] Milton and Gardens: queries on JM's aesthetics
jonnyangel
junkopardner at comcast.net
Tue Jun 23 00:13:52 EDT 2009
Salwa my C.S. Lewis hero...
J
On 6/23/09 12:11 AM, "Salwa Khoddam" <skhoddam at cox.net> wrote:
> Did anyone mention A. Bartlett Giamatti's The Earthly Paradise and the
> Renaissance Epic (Norton, 1989)? Giammati discusses all the traditional
> garden motifs from the Greeks to Milton's time. I found his book as well as
> Stanley Stewart's the most useful in writing my article "The Enclosed Garden
> in C.S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia" published in CSL: The Bulletin of
> The New York C.S. Lewis Society 37.1 (2006): 1-10.
>
> Salwa Khoddam
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: Campbell, W. Gardner <mailto:Gardner_Campbell at baylor.edu>
>>
>> To: 'John Milton Discussion List' <mailto:milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
>>
>> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 5:41 PM
>>
>> Subject: RE: [Milton-L] Milton and Gardens: queries on JM's aesthetics
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I¹ve tried to work through some of these arguments myself in a couple of
>> conference papers (esp. one called ³Milton Bound²) as well as in ³Paradisal
>> Appetite and Cusan Food in *Paradise Lost*² (*Arenas of Conflict: Milton and
>> the Unfettered Mind*, 1997). In my view, the Empsonian arguments are not so
>> much wrong as incomplete. I think Milton is shaping the complexities of
>> these situations much more deliberately and provocatively‹and in a richer,
>> more nuanced theological manner‹than Empson believed him to be.
>>
>> Gardner Campbell
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu
>> [mailto:milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Bryson
>> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 12:32 PM
>> To: John Milton Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Milton and Gardens: queries on JM's aesthetics
>>
>>
>>
>> As one who has been accused of making too-large leaps myself, I'd like to
>> chime in on behalf of both leap-making, and the idea of associating the
>> garden walls with both restriction (for Adam and Eve) and focus (perhaps for
>> Adam and Eve, but definitely for Satan).
>>
>> It is true that not all of the boundaries in the epic are equivalent, but
>> that is a truth not particularly revelatory. What would be more to the
>> point, I think, is to argue for/against a construction of which boundaries
>> *are* equivalent, or at least functionally similar. The walls of Hell and
>> the walls of Eden are--at least to this reader--similar in a crucial way.
>> They *seem* designed to keep inhabitants (temporarily) inside, but neither
>> does in the end. In each case, an encounter with Sin and/or sin leads to
>> moving outside the walls. In fact, in each case, the boundaries have the
>> effect of bringing the potential sinner in contact with the object of, and
>> opportunity for sin. Almost an arranged marriage of sin and sinner, it
>> seems...at the very least, a nicely set up blind date. Without the walls,
>> Satan may never be reunited with that touching little family of his (and
>> without the family, he never would have managed to get outside the walls),
>> and without the walls of Eden, Satan would, at the very least, have had to
>> expend more time and effort to find and tempt Adam and Eve (can't have one's
>> intended victims simply wandering all about, now can one?).
>>
>> And coming to a richer knowledge of creation through horticultural tasks?
>> That is one of the loveliest euphemisms for manual labor I've encountered in
>> the years since I have been fortunate enough not to have to support myself
>> by sweating in the noonday sun. It is also a lovely euphemism for the Near
>> Middle Eastern mythic motif of humans being created as agricultural worker
>> drones, labor-saving devices for the gods. In the epic Atrahasis, man is
>> created specifically as a servant or beast of burden: "So that he may bear
>> the yoke... / So that he may bear the yoke, the work of Ellil, / Let man
>> bear the load of the gods!"
>>
>> The Genesis accounts include agricultural labor, but do not cast that labor
>> as something done to ease the divine workload. They do, however, offer
>> conflicting perspectives on the significance, location, and division of the
>> labor--The El/Elohim creation story in Genesis 1 has man (both male and
>> female) subduing the *entire* earth (no mean feat, that), while the Yahweh
>> creation story of Genesis 2-3 has man (Adam) tending the garden of Eden only,
>> and then Adam and Eve tossed out of the garden into the wider world, where
>> hard agricultural labor awaits Adam and hard pregnancy labor awaits Eve.
>> Milton, as so often, seems to be attempting to mix these two perspectives
>> from Genesis, with Adam *and* Eve sharing the "horticultural" labor in the
>> garden, and dividing their "labors" after their expulsion therefrom.
>>
>> It has been a while since I read Richard Strier's article, but I remember
>> quite clearly the Newberry Library Milton Seminar presentation he gave based
>> on the material therein, and the sense I had was that he was arguing at
>> least as much from a "criticizing Milton's Heaven" perspective as anything
>> else (and that seemed to rile up certain audience members rather nicely--an
>> object lesson in the value of certain kinds of contrarian arguments).
>>
>> And Raphael has always seemed to me to be a bit of a joke, though one that
>> is important to the plot. "Here's the knowledge! Here's the
>> knowledge!...now, now...don't be *too* curious..." Much of Satan's
>> temptation--in terms of technique, items of appeal, and even specific
>> arguments, has its source in Raphael's garrulous nature (his big mouth).
>> Satan never even gets the chance to "excite their minds / With more desire
>> to know" (4.522-23), because Raphael beats him to it. Withholding
>> astronomical knowledge is, by that point, another in a series of gestures
>> that suggest the idea that Adam and Eve will have to "open to themselves"
>> (7.158), not only "the way / Up hither" but the way to all knowledge, and
>> that the opening to themselves is going to require the experience of
>> transgression, taking something that is forbidden, crossing a boundary.
>> After that--after the transgression, after the taking, after the
>> crossing--*then* repentance, contrition, obedience will bring "Fruits of more
>> pleasing savour [...] / than those / Which, his own hand manuring, all the
>> trees / Of Paradise could have produced, ere fallen / From innocence"
>> (11.26-30). But not before.
>>
>>
>> Michael Bryson
>>
>>
>> ---- Original message ----
>>
>> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:39:26 -0400
>> From: "Jeffrey Theis" <jtheis at salemstate.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Milton and Gardens: queries on JM's aesthetics
>> To: "John Milton Discussion List" <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
>>> >I would strongly agree with Jeffery Hodges that Alexandra Dimakos is
>>> >making too big a leap in associating the garden walls with Raphael's
>>> >warning Adam off from astronomical knowledge. There are many boundaries
>>> >in this epic, and they are not all equivalent. As Hodges correctly
>>> >notes, Adam and Eve would have populated the entire earth, not just
>>> >Eden. Thus prohibition of knowledge of the rest of the earth does not
>>> >seem a compelling argument here. I also think of Richard Strier's
>>> >argument that Eden is better than heaven as a nice reminder that staying
>>> >in Eden is no punishment--it is world and pleasure enough.
>>> >
>>> >I do think that it helps to think of boundaries not only as markers of
>>> >control or power (though they often serve that function); rather, they
>>> >also have a means of focusing one's attention. If we remember that Adam
>>> >and Eve are charged to till and keep nature, it is a more feasible
>>> >occupation if the two of them do not have to take on the entire planet
>>> >right away. The walls allow for a kind of focus that does not really
>>> >keep out knowledge or keep Adam and Eve ignorant. Instead, the walls
>>> >focus their attention so that they are a) near the interdicted tree (as
>>> >Jeffery nicely argues), and b) come to a richer knowledge of creation
>>> >itself as they engage in their horticultural tasks.
>>> >
>>> >Stella's advice to look at John Evelyn is also a very good idea. I'd
>>> >recommend Douglas Chambers' *The Planters of the English Landscape
>>> >Garden: Botony, Trees, and the Georgics.* Yale UP, 1993. Also look at
>>> >Chambers' essay, ³ŒWild Pastorall Encounter¹: John Evelyn, John
>>> >Beale and the Renegotiation of Pastoral in the Mid-Seventeenth
>>> >Century.² In Culture and Cultivation in Early Modern England:
>>> >Writing and the Land, edited by Michael Leslie and Timothy Raylor,
>>> >173-94. Beale and Evelyn engaged in an interesting discussion of adding
>>> >wildness/wilderness to English gardens. Beale is a bit more radical in
>>> >his reform ideas than is Evelyn.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> >Jeffrey S. Theis
>>> >Assistant Professor; Department of English
>>> >233 Meier Hall
>>> >Mailing Address:
>>> > Salem State College
>>> > 352 Lafayette Street
>>> > Salem, MA 01970-5353
>>> >Phone:(978) 542-6845
>>> >E-Mail: jtheis at salemstate.edu
>>> >SSC Web Profile: https://www.salemstate.edu/profile/jtheis/
>>> >Home Page: http://www.salemstate.edu/~jtheis/
>>> >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> >
>>> >
>>>>>> >>>> Horace Jeffery Hodges <jefferyhodges at yahoo.com> 6/19/2009 6:07 PM
>>>>>> >>>>
>>> >Alexandra Dimakos suggests that "the walls are meant to keep a curious
>>> >Adam from exploring the outside world," and she cites Raphael's words to
>>> >Adam in Book VIII:
>>> >
>>> >Dream not of other Worlds, what Creatures there
>>> >Live, in what state, condition or degree,
>>> >Contented that thus far hath been reveal'd
>>> >Not of Earth only but of highest Heav'n. (8:175-78)
>>> >
>>>> >>From the context, however, Adam and Raphael would seem to be speaking
>>> >of astronomy and worlds beyond the earth. I don't yet see strong
>>> >evidence that this also includes the "outside world" beyond the Garden's
>>> >walls.
>>> >
>>> >I do agree that Adam and Eve are expected to remain within the Garden,
>>> >for they have work to do there. Eventually, however, they would be able
>>> >to leave, for with their offspring borne to populate the earth, the
>>> >Garden would one day grow too restricted. Presumably, their work in the
>>> >Garden would have prepared them for making a garden of the entire earth
>>> >. . . though they would ultimately (perhaps) have sublimated their
>>> >grossly corporeal bodies into subtler spirit (or some such wording).
>>> >
>>> >The walls also serve to keep the two within range of the provoking
>>> >object, that interdicted, testing tree.
>>> >
>>> >On keeping Satan out . . . well, the walls of Hell were intended to
>>> >keep Satan in but give him an out if he should choose to defy God's
>>> >limits anyway. By leaving Satan free to escape Hell and break into
>>> >Paradise, God leaves open Satan's path toward greater damnation -- a
>>> >puzzling economy of damnation that seems less than economical, but it
>>> >appears to be part of Milton's great argument.
>>> >
>>> >Jeffery Hodges
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >--- On Fri, 6/19/09, Alexandra Dimakos <adimakos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >From: Alexandra Dimakos <adimakos at gmail.com>
>>> >Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Milton and Gardens: queries on JM's aesthetics
>>> >To: "John Milton Discussion List" <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
>>> >Date: Friday, June 19, 2009, 4:01 PM
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Hi Susan,
>>> >
>>> >Your statement "I am not certain of the roots but "Paradise" might come
>>> >from 'walled garden.' " sparked my curiosity as I have been recently
>>> >researching and writing about this idea.
>>> >
>>> >I've found that in Michael Lieb's article "'Holy Place': A Reading of
>>> >Paradise Lost" that "the Renaissance understanding of the 'paradise'
>>> >itself -- pairidaeza formed on pairi ('around') and diz ('to mould,'
>>> >''to form') -- not only as a 'park' or 'pleasure ground' but also,
>>> >significantly, as an 'enclosure' or a 'place walled in''" (135).
>>> >
>>> >I also wanted to address Michael's idea or question: "As to why the
>>> >whole Garden needs to be fenced off from the rest of the world."
>>> >
>>> >Although there are many theories, it seems to me that Eden is fenced
>>> >off because it is meant from keeping Adam and Eve from leaving. I
>>> >understand that many will say that the wall is meant to keep Satan out
>>> >of the garden. But, does it work? Satan doesn't have much trouble
>>> >"jumping the fence" and entering into Eden. If the walls are there to
>>> >protect Adam and Eve, they do not serve them well.
>>> >
>>> >In contrast, the walls are meant to keep a curious Adam from exploring
>>> >the outside world. Raphael tells Adam in Book IIX:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Dream not of other Worlds, what Creatures there
>>> >Live, in what state, condition or degree,
>>> >Contented that thus far hath been reveal¹d Not of Earth only but of
>>> >highest Heav¹n. (8:166-78)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >The walls may also serve this purpose: to keep Adam from exploring the
>>> >"other Worlds" that lay beyond Eden. Also there is only one Gate that
>>> >leads in and out of Eden, but Adam and Eve are only allowed to cross
>>> >that threshold when they are expelled from their home. They are never
>>> >told they can freely enter and exit Eden at their leisure. There is a
>>> >great sense of control that stems from these walls and this one gate.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Susan Allison <jbase484 at gmail.com>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I am not certain of the roots but "Paradise" might come from "walled
>>> >garden." Of course that is not the only reason but "Paradise" may have
>>> >retained that meaning.
>>> >Susan
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >As to why the whole Garden needs to be fenced off from the rest of the
>>> >world, that¹s an interesting question.
>>> >
>>> >Michael
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >Milton-L mailing list
>>> >Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
>>> >Manage your list membership and access list archives at
>>> >http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>>> >
>>> >Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >--
>>> >Lecturer
>>> >English Department
>>> >California State University, Northridge
>>> >18111 Nordhoff St,
>>> >Northridge, CA 91330-8248
>>> >(818) 677-3434
>>> >
>>> >-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >Milton-L mailing list
>>> >Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
>>> >Manage your list membership and access list archives at
>>> >http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>>> >
>>> >Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>>> >_______________________________________________
>>> >Milton-L mailing list
>>> >Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
>>> >Manage your list membership and access list archives at
>>> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>>> >
>>> >Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Milton-L mailing list
>> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
>> Manage your list membership and access list archives at
>> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>>
>> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at
> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20090623/0e064fa9/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Milton-L
mailing list