So my name is Caitlin... Which you already know. That's what's so awkward about these Bio things; you already know all this stuff I'm about to tell you. I'm a junior, a member of Show Chorus and the debate team, and I'm hoping to go to college at USC. I play the piano and I write short stories in my free time (which, lately, is never). I love reading and yes, I'm one of those stereotypical teenage girls addicted to Pretty Little Liars. I have been blessed with amazing friends and an awesome family! I promise I'm a nice person (unless you catch me on a bad day) and I'm really not THAT weird. I think.
Reader Response for February 26th: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." This first line of the Bible, a book I love more than any other, seems to get clouded over or just plain forgotten in today's society. I grew up reading these first three chapters of the Bible very literally; I was raised in a Southern Baptist Church. (My pastor still upholds the tradition of reading out of the King James Version in all of his sermons, so I was also used to the format.) I believe that God made the entire universe in six days, real-time, and he took the seventh one as resting time. He then named this seventh day the Sabbath, and although it was originally designed for Saturdays, we honor it on Sundays. I'm a firm believer in Creation; anyone who takes a look at the human body should be able to recognize the divine motivations behind its structure. Just take a look at every time we breathe, how much we breathe, and how little time it takes for us to do so. I love how much compassion that God had for mankind even in the very beginning; he does NOT want Adam to be alone, so he makes a woman to keep him company. Also, I've always envied Adam for being allowed to name all the animals; I think that job would have been pretty interesting! God blesses the two humans with a beautiful garden called Eden, and he makes plants and herbs of all kinds for them to eat safely. However, he is very specific with their one and only restriction: Do not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. At the beginning of Chapter 3, I always get a visual of a script note saying, "Enter villain." The serpent is described as more subtil (subtle) than any of the other creatures God had made. He must have seen Eve as more weak and impressionable than her mate, and he was right. This is the first instance we see of temptation in the Bible, and I have to admit it would be hard to turn down. I mean, a god? I get to be a god if I eat of this tree? Not to mention the fruit was clearly good for food. As soon as Eve takes a bite of the fruit, she immediately turns to Adam and offers him some. This is an example of how we always want to bring someone in with us if we think we're in trouble. Their eyes are opened, and they become embarrassed that they're naked, making aprons out of fig leaves and hiding themselves. And thus, sin enters the world. The Lord searches for them and asks, "Where art thou?" He already knew exactly where the two were hiding, but he wanted Adam to answer and admit to it. Looking back at these passages and reading them with such an analytical mindset has really helped me see even deeper into this text. I grew up knowing these stories, but now I'm beginning to realize a lot of details that I never realized before.
Molly's Response for Feb. 25th: It is interesting how you can get so much out of something you've read/heard a thousand times if you read it again from a different perspective. You notice details that you would've skipped in the past; you also can get a different "feel" from different translation. Even though the King James Version can be harder to understand sometimes, it seems to be more poetic.
As I said on my wall, I agree in that how would anything be so complex and interwoven if it were not for an intelligent design. Even people wouldn't be able to come close to creating even the smallest parts, so how can someone expect for this to come out of nothing, all by itself. In science, nothing is brought about without a instigating force, so why would it be different in this case?
On another subject, I love your picture Satan's "script notes". :) It's funny how people picture things like that, and yes, I'm a little envious of Adam and Eve too for being able to live in such an amazing place, not to mention being able to just take a morning stroll with God everyday. Imagine being told that all of that had been created just for you; it almost like being an only child! Haha. (Mr. Alexander, please understand I know this is not a sentence, but it just doesn't look right without a period). :)
I also find it pretty humorous that some things never change. Adam and Eve had absolutely everything they wanted, except the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and what do they end up doing? I hate to say it, but I suppose I would've done exactly the same thing. Curiosity kills the cat I suppose. But seriously, I don't think it was the knowledge of sin that was the first and greatest sin, as it is this knowledge that God reveals to us, so that we will have a relationship with him. I believe it was using the act of away from their belief that God was looking out for their best interest, instead of just eating the fruit. It's kind of ironic that instead of becoming more godlike that they became more earthly.
Reader Response for March 8th:
I didn't particularly enjoy the first part of this selection, On the Marionette Theatre. I was a bit confused about all of the puppet terminology and I couldn't exactly understand why someone would spend so much time thinking about this sort of thing. However, as I got into the middle and continued on to the end, I started liking it a lot more. I think that the part about the soul being located in a certain part of the body was really insightful. I interpreted it as meaning that the center point of the dance moves determines where the soul is. In the example about the girl pursued by Apollo, Daphne, I imagine her dance as centered around the small of the back, as if a string were attached to it. I guess that makes sense considering the puppet theme of this story; the soul is where the string would be.
For some reason the part about the fifteen-year-old boy reminded me of a book I read last year, The Picture of Dorian Gray. Dorian Gray was a beautiful man who became obsessed with youth and vanity, and he made a wish that a portrait of him would grow old and ugly instead of him. He keeps his beauty and the portrait becomes hideous, but he loses all of his innocence and grace, and he ends up committing suicide. Once this young boy became so concerned with looking in a mirror and trying to repeat a movement he couldn't duplicate, all of "the lovely grace which had given pleasure to all who looked at him" is lost. I appreciate this tidbit of the story because I've always thought that someone who tries too hard to be attractive or likable, ends up being completely opposite. People should just embrace what they have and not obsess over enhancing it.
I can already tell the last few lines of the story are going to last with me for a while. The other night at dinner my dad was talking to me about when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge, and that at that point in time, they had the understanding of God. When Eve bore Cain and Abel, some of that knowledge slipped away; it couldn't all be passed down. As time has progressed, we've lost that knowledge bit by bit, and the only way to regain it would be to eat from the tree again. That sort of matches up with what the end of this story says, except it talks about regaining the innocence. It's ironic that eating of the tree was when innocence was lost, yet this selection says to get that innocence back means to eat of the tree again. I'm not sure I fully agree with that theory, but I do agree with the very last line. Eating of the tree of knowledge would be the last act of humanity.
I agree, I love the last few lines, they're so profound! It makes sense in a way though, that when God creates a new heaven and a new earth, that we would have the consciousness of a "puppet" by returning to the innocence of Adam and Eve. I think the author was implying that a soul (can that be interchangeable with consciousness in a way??) was something that God gave Adam and Eve after the fall, because, according to him, this is when Adam and Eve decided to break off the puppet-puppeteer relationship in a way. In the end, we wouldn't need a consciousnesses or a soul technically, but personally I don't think that is how it is going to play out. While Adam and Eve were most definitely naive and possibly ignorant of right and wrong, I don't believe they were at a state of no-consciousnesses. I like to think that God gave us the ability to or at least the perception of being able to make choices, even before the fall. Besides, being a puppet isn't the only way mankind can achieve "perfection". Jesus, while being fully God and fully man, was in every way perfect. He choose to always do God's will (wow, that's really crazy to think about...God choosing or not choosing to do God's will...) out of love and respect for his father, even when faced with human temptations. Besides, the Bible does say Jesus was the second Adam. Maybe this is something like how our glorified bodies will be like.
That interesting though about the Tree of Knowledge giving Adam and Eve the understanding of God. Personally though, I don't think that Adam and Eve actually reached God's understanding when they ate of the fruit - that was just a ploy Satan used to tempt them to eat it. I believe it most definitely gave them the (or at least a much greater) understanding of what was right and wrong, but I don't think that in any way man (okay, other than Jesus) has or ever will reach God's infinite knowledge. I do believe that we are in a way devolving, we are constantly falling away bit by bit from the point of perfection we reached at our creation. People like to think that we have come so far, but what can we say about having long life expectancy when Adam and his descendants lived to be in there 900s or something like that!
On another subject, I like what you said about, "people should just embrace what they have and not obsess over enhancing it." I think self-awareness can be a beautiful thing, but a lot of times it leads to people conforming to the image other people have of them, trying too hard to become opposite of what other people see of them as, or sometimes even self-denial (think about middle school...haha). The author seems to support this in a way, with man's self-awareness (through knowledge) being his downfall from gracefulness. However, part of growing up (spiritually and mentally) is knowing your imperfections and lack of knowledge so that mentally or physically you can learn where to improve and spiritually so that you can learn to depend on God's grace.
Reader Response for March 13th:
I have to get into a certain mindset to read Paradise Lost. I have to remind myself that it isn't a retelling of Genesis and the stories within it, but rather a separate work based off of those stories. In the beginning (that seems to be a very important phrase) of Book 1, Milton talks about having a Heavenly Muse, the same one who gave Moses the Commandments. I have to say that I believe he was inspired by some kind of muse to write this simply because of the complexity of it all. How one man could think of so many layered phrases and clever word choices to piece together something so mind-blowing is beyond me. I feel like a lot of this goes over my head, but I can try to unpack some of it... Bare with me.
I'm a little confused about the separation of Satan and Beelzebub. I thought they were the same person? In Book 1, Beelzebub seems to be Satan's right-hand demon, or rather fallen angel. Beelzebub is "next him in power, and next in crime." I've always thought that Beelzebub was just a different name for Satan, like Lucifer. But almost all of this book is a dialogue between Satan and Beelz (I call him that because of a song I heard from a comedian; it's pretty funny if you want to check it out.) so I suppose they must be two separate people. Still a little fuzzy on that though. I think it's otdd how many Greek mythology terms I'm finding in Book 1. Satan's "other Parts" are compared to the Titans due to their huge bulk. Or perhaps Milton is saying that Satan's other fallen angels are the Titans? I mean once again, this is a work based off of Genesis and its events. Also, the mention of the River Styx, in the sentence about "the Stygian flood" threw me for a loop. Is Milton saying that these fallen angels crossed the River Styx? He goes so far as to say they did it by their own strength and not by some divine, supernal Power. The Stygian water was used to attain invincibility, so that could be very significant later on if these demons have bathed in it (like Achilles), even though the text never specifically says that they have. Milton also makes use of the term Gods very often, and immediately my mind is drawn to the imperfect, human-like gods that the Greeks worshiped. Maybe Milton is trying to make that connection to these fallen angels because he wants us to see how flawed they are (which kind of goes back to the Marionette story...). My favorite statement from Book 1 has to be, "The mind is its own place." That's so true if you think about it. It goes along with what we talked about in class about relativity and the Cave theory because our minds are what form the perceptions we have about certain things; we can get so caught up in perception that it's easy to get lost inside of our own minds. I know I do it sometimes, when I've already come to a conclusion about something that I don't want to change my mind about. Also, as far as I know, mind-reading isn't possible (much like time-traveling, guys) so if you think about it, our minds are our own personal places where no one else can see into, unless we make the decision to express the thoughts inside our mind. It's not as if someone can simply step inside your mind and invade it; it's your place to think whatever you like.
Molly's Response to Book 1: Like I said on my response, Milton really does seem to portray Genesis from the perspective of an epic/myth story teller. It reminds me very much of Greek mythology, and not only because of allusions (even though there are a lot of those too). I suppose Paradise Lost is known as Britian's greatest epic, isn't that what we learned on that power point? Well, anyway I get what you mean about how this perspective might show the imperfections and "human-like" character traits of the angels. I was kind of getting the same reaction, except maybe that Milton was trying to show God in this light? I'm not sure, but it almost seems like Milton was trying to not justify God's almighty power and allows he reader to see God in the same way the Greeks viewed their gods, extremely powerful, but flawed and at times very selfish. At least that's the kind of vibes I'm getting from it, but I suppose you would when the whole entire Book 1 is from Satan's point of view as questions God's right to power. I like mythology a lot though, so it's interesting to me to read the Genesis story in this light, especially where it almost intertwines with Greek mythology (like the part you mentioned about the Titans being fallen angels). But I guess like all things, you have to understand the author's bias. He is using this whole story to "undeify" the so-called moral right of the English monarchy, so I suppose that would make sense that he would portray God in this light. I can definitely see how some people thought he was a heretic!
I was a little confused about Satan and Beelz (haha) too, because like you, I had always heard of Beelz as just another name for Satan. To be honest, I still thought it was talking about the same person, and I assumed Satan's "Mate" was just another of the fallen angels. Now I know differently, but another way I thought of it was that maybe Beelzebub was simply the more cautious side of Satan. In Greek mythology, the gods seem to take hlot of different "personas" depend on the character trait they are showing. Have you ever read Pilgrim's Progress? Satan shows up a lot, but from what I remember it is very rarely that he actually is named "Satan" or the Devil. Instead, h usually goes by different names (Beelzebub was one) and appears to be a different character each time, but you know who he really is. I don't know if that is what Milton is trying to get at, but it's just a thought. Maybe Milton is even personifying two attitudes towards revolution???
Reader Response for Book 2:
To my surprise, this book wasn't quite as interesting to me as the first. I feel like not enough happens in this one. The demons are basically debating on a moot point, because Satan was plotting to wage a war on Heaven no matter what. What his "council" said to him didn't really matter because he had already made up his mind. So I think I saw this book as almost a filler, like an in-between story to get you from one big point to the next.
However, that doesn't mean there weren't some interesting points that Milton brought up. (I mean, it is Milton.) First off, I found it very odd how he described Hell. I have always imagined it as blackened, charred, and consisting mostly of flames. Here, it is beautiful, gorgeous, and it outshines "the wealth of Ormus and of Ind." I think my mental image of Hell has always originated from what I imagine Satan to look like: ugly and hideous, obviously full of pure evil. I know this is somewhat of a child's interpretation, with the villain so clearly indicated by their outward appearance alone, but I think that's a result of growing up with the same mindset about it all and never really challenging that. Paradise Lost has taught me to do just this. With this new description of Hell fresh on my brain, I can't help but think that its king could look very different than I had previously thought, as well. After all, Satan is a fallen angel. He could have crystal blue eyes and golden hair for all I know. He could look as innocent and harmless as a little child. Considering the fact that sin, his greatest tool, looks fun and beautiful at first but is poisonous on the inside, why would Satan be any different?
I'm starting to see a connection that Satan shares with his followers. I've always wondered what made some of them decide to rebel with him. They were in Heaven. A perfect, flawless place full of happiness. Why would they even consider leaving? Then I remember the root of what corrupted Satan, the main reason he chose to rise up against God. When reading about the first demon to speak, Moloch, we learn that he always wanted to be "equal in strength," but when he discovered that he was less, he "cared not to be at all." And when he lost this care, he lost all fear of God and Hell. The second demon, Belial, is described to be a deceiver, a silver-tongued liar. He can make the worst appear the best; he makes himself appear noble and just, but is actually "slothful." (I like that adjective!) The reason he lives off of this deception is exactly the same as why people do it today: to make themselves feel superior by fooling others. Then the third demon speaks, Mammon, and the reader can almost feel his bitterness as he talks about God sitting on His throne; he even goes so far as to call Him "our envied sovran (sovereign)." He talks about wanting to "seek our own good from ourselves, and from our own live to ourselves" as if God had given them nothing they had wanted. So what is the connection? Pride. Thinking that they didn't need God, and that if they could not be equal with Him, then they weren't going to be with Him at all. They decided to strive to be greater than the one who made them, the one who gave them life. That's something I know I'm guilty of day by day, even when I don't realize it.
So even though I didn't necessarily enjoy reading Book 2, I still got a lot out of it, and Milton never fails to challenge some of my most deep-rooted thoughts and beliefs. Molly's Response to Book 2: Its funny how I was thinking the same things about Milton's description of Hell as you were. You know you always get those delightful pictures in your head of eternal fires and brimstone, but Milton paints quite a different picture (wait...on a second thought, didn't Milton describe a stereotypical hell in Book 1 with flames that burn without light?? Oh well...). It brings to mind something I heard somewhere that to those in Hell the greatest punishment isn't physical pain or anguish, but eternal separation from God. I'm not quite sure the effect it would have on those who believed in a God and didn't "want" (I'll just leave it there and not get into the predestination/free will stuff right now) to have a relationship with him, but can you imagine finding yourself in Hell if you didn't even believe it or God existed? When I was little, I always pictured heaven being right over Hell so that everyone there would have to live in the eternal torment of knowing what heaven was like and seeing God's goodness, but knowing they were never going to be able to experience it. I kind of doubt that's the case, but I think everyone will still be filled with this type of longing for God, even if they never experienced it on earth. So I guess my point is, that even though Hell is beautiful and pleasing to look at, it is still the place it is due to the lack of God's presence and the fulfillment he brings with it.
On the other hand, for some reason I have always pictured Satan as being very much a shapeshifter in a way. I very much doubt that as a fallen angel or a the Greatest Tempter that he would be that little red, go-teed, fork taled figure you see on hot sauce botttles. I would think he is very beautiful on the outside really, because isn't that the way it can be with people most of the time anyway? However, like I said, I think that Satan is able to change into whatever image that would be most appealing to his "victum (?)" at the moment, like Adam and Eve and the serpent.
While I can find it hard to question Satan's reasoning sometimes, like when he decided to rebel against God knowing that he would be cast out of heaven, I have to stop and think about how the thoughts and feelings he was having doesn't always have to be on a large scale. It's easy for me to think, "Wow, I can't believe he would rebel against God like that, after God gave him all of those wonderful things", but then I have to think how in my own life I have a really hard time giving up control and what I think is best at the moment for relying on God. It can be hard to accept the fact that you need help sometimes! I suppose that this is rebellion in a way, and as you said, comes out of the pride in thinking that we could do everything within our own resources and without help from someone who understands us and our situation the best.
(And I'm sorry this was late Mr. Alexander, I was really sick yesterday evening...I guess that's a pretty good lesson for NOT procrastinating and waiting until Sunday night...)
Caitlin's Response to Books 9-12: It's finally over. We have finished the great feat that is Paradise Lost! Well, not really because we didn't even read the whole thing... But it makes me feel good saying it! I have to say that this is my favorite selection of the work that we've read, and not just because it's the last one but because it is a nice, condensed version that gets right to the point. I'm glad we didn't read all four of the last few books in their entirety because reading them this way helped me get right to the point of things without the danger of getting bored along the way. The first thing that caught my attention was the fact that Satan entered into a sleeping serpent. I had always thought he had changed himself into the serpent, but Milton makes it very clear that he possesses it. And what about God taking away his legs? The serpent had legs before he led Adam and Eve to their fall, and God punished him by taking them away, which is why snakes have no legs today. Maybe that part was included in the bits that were left out of this version we read. Or maybe Milton intentionally left it out. I guess I'll have to go read the whole thing to find out for sure!
Next, in the Argument for Book 9, it talks about Adam and Eve going forth to their labors and that they labored apart. I never thought that Adam and Eve had had to work while in the garden before their first sin, but Milton must see it differently. Personally it doesn't make sense to me that they had to work before their fall because God's punishment, along with kicking them out of Eden, was that they had to be laborers upon the earth. Why would he punish them with something they already had to do? Maybe their work done in Eden wasn't difficult or exhaustive, but I still think that they weren't required to do any kind of work while in the garden.
In the beginning of Book 11, I love how Milton says that "God accepts them." This goes all the way back to what we always seem to bring up in class: If God loved Adam and Eve, truly loved them, then why would he have let them fall in the first place? But we see that exhibited here in Paradise Lost. God was not happy with their sin; he cast them out of paradise. But in the midst of it all, even when he knew it would happen, he accepted them. It doesn't say he accepted their sin, but he accepted them. Then why did he allow us to fall? Why was that part of his plan? Well, if you think about it, you're never truly grateful for something until you don't have it anymore. It's like when your parents say, "You should be thankful for me and all this work I do for you," while you're a little kid, but you don't realize just how much work that entails until you spend a little time away from them, without all of their TLC. God wanted us to fully understand what we lost because by fully understanding that, we could comprehend completely how much he's given to us. And I know that we won't ever be able to reach Eden again, and live in it the same way as Adam and Eve had, but doesn't it still show just how much God works for us each and every day? He cast them out so that they would appreciate the work he had done for them, and even after he sent them away he continued to bless them and their descendants.
It's hard to wrap your brain around some of the things that Milton brings up, but I have to remind myself that there is no way on earth I will ever be able to fully understand God. Milton certainly came closer than I ever have, but I still don't see eye to eye with him on some things. But we're merely humans, and we will never be able to understand God's motives entirely. (But it is nice to talk about all of these questions.)
So my name is Caitlin... Which you already know. That's what's so awkward about these Bio things; you already know all this stuff I'm about to tell you. I'm a junior, a member of Show Chorus and the debate team, and I'm hoping to go to college at USC. I play the piano and I write short stories in my free time (which, lately, is never). I love reading and yes, I'm one of those stereotypical teenage girls addicted to Pretty Little Liars. I have been blessed with amazing friends and an awesome family! I promise I'm a nice person (unless you catch me on a bad day) and I'm really not THAT weird. I think.
Reader Response for February 26th:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." This first line of the Bible, a book I love more than any other, seems to get clouded over or just plain forgotten in today's society. I grew up reading these first three chapters of the Bible very literally; I was raised in a Southern Baptist Church. (My pastor still upholds the tradition of reading out of the King James Version in all of his sermons, so I was also used to the format.) I believe that God made the entire universe in six days, real-time, and he took the seventh one as resting time. He then named this seventh day the Sabbath, and although it was originally designed for Saturdays, we honor it on Sundays. I'm a firm believer in Creation; anyone who takes a look at the human body should be able to recognize the divine motivations behind its structure. Just take a look at every time we breathe, how much we breathe, and how little time it takes for us to do so. I love how much compassion that God had for mankind even in the very beginning; he does NOT want Adam to be alone, so he makes a woman to keep him company. Also, I've always envied Adam for being allowed to name all the animals; I think that job would have been pretty interesting! God blesses the two humans with a beautiful garden called Eden, and he makes plants and herbs of all kinds for them to eat safely. However, he is very specific with their one and only restriction: Do not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
At the beginning of Chapter 3, I always get a visual of a script note saying, "Enter villain." The serpent is described as more subtil (subtle) than any of the other creatures God had made. He must have seen Eve as more weak and impressionable than her mate, and he was right. This is the first instance we see of temptation in the Bible, and I have to admit it would be hard to turn down. I mean, a god? I get to be a god if I eat of this tree? Not to mention the fruit was clearly good for food. As soon as Eve takes a bite of the fruit, she immediately turns to Adam and offers him some. This is an example of how we always want to bring someone in with us if we think we're in trouble. Their eyes are opened, and they become embarrassed that they're naked, making aprons out of fig leaves and hiding themselves. And thus, sin enters the world. The Lord searches for them and asks, "Where art thou?" He already knew exactly where the two were hiding, but he wanted Adam to answer and admit to it.
Looking back at these passages and reading them with such an analytical mindset has really helped me see even deeper into this text. I grew up knowing these stories, but now I'm beginning to realize a lot of details that I never realized before.
Molly's Response for Feb. 25th:
It is interesting how you can get so much out of something you've read/heard a thousand times if you read it again from a different perspective. You notice details that you would've skipped in the past; you also can get a different "feel" from different translation. Even though the King James Version can be harder to understand sometimes, it seems to be more poetic.
As I said on my wall, I agree in that how would anything be so complex and interwoven if it were not for an intelligent design. Even people wouldn't be able to come close to creating even the smallest parts, so how can someone expect for this to come out of nothing, all by itself. In science, nothing is brought about without a instigating force, so why would it be different in this case?
On another subject, I love your picture Satan's "script notes". :) It's funny how people picture things like that, and yes, I'm a little envious of Adam and Eve too for being able to live in such an amazing place, not to mention being able to just take a morning stroll with God everyday. Imagine being told that all of that had been created just for you; it almost like being an only child! Haha. (Mr. Alexander, please understand I know this is not a sentence, but it just doesn't look right without a period). :)
I also find it pretty humorous that some things never change. Adam and Eve had absolutely everything they wanted, except the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and what do they end up doing? I hate to say it, but I suppose I would've done exactly the same thing. Curiosity kills the cat I suppose. But seriously, I don't think it was the knowledge of sin that was the first and greatest sin, as it is this knowledge that God reveals to us, so that we will have a relationship with him. I believe it was using the act of away from their belief that God was looking out for their best interest, instead of just eating the fruit. It's kind of ironic that instead of becoming more godlike that they became more earthly.
Reader Response for March 8th:
I didn't particularly enjoy the first part of this selection, On the Marionette Theatre. I was a bit confused about all of the puppet terminology and I couldn't exactly understand why someone would spend so much time thinking about this sort of thing. However, as I got into the middle and continued on to the end, I started liking it a lot more. I think that the part about the soul being located in a certain part of the body was really insightful. I interpreted it as meaning that the center point of the dance moves determines where the soul is. In the example about the girl pursued by Apollo, Daphne, I imagine her dance as centered around the small of the back, as if a string were attached to it. I guess that makes sense considering the puppet theme of this story; the soul is where the string would be.
For some reason the part about the fifteen-year-old boy reminded me of a book I read last year, The Picture of Dorian Gray. Dorian Gray was a beautiful man who became obsessed with youth and vanity, and he made a wish that a portrait of him would grow old and ugly instead of him. He keeps his beauty and the portrait becomes hideous, but he loses all of his innocence and grace, and he ends up committing suicide. Once this young boy became so concerned with looking in a mirror and trying to repeat a movement he couldn't duplicate, all of "the lovely grace which had given pleasure to all who looked at him" is lost. I appreciate this tidbit of the story because I've always thought that someone who tries too hard to be attractive or likable, ends up being completely opposite. People should just embrace what they have and not obsess over enhancing it.
I can already tell the last few lines of the story are going to last with me for a while. The other night at dinner my dad was talking to me about when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge, and that at that point in time, they had the understanding of God. When Eve bore Cain and Abel, some of that knowledge slipped away; it couldn't all be passed down. As time has progressed, we've lost that knowledge bit by bit, and the only way to regain it would be to eat from the tree again. That sort of matches up with what the end of this story says, except it talks about regaining the innocence. It's ironic that eating of the tree was when innocence was lost, yet this selection says to get that innocence back means to eat of the tree again. I'm not sure I fully agree with that theory, but I do agree with the very last line. Eating of the tree of knowledge would be the last act of humanity.
I agree, I love the last few lines, they're so profound! It makes sense in a way though, that when God creates a new heaven and a new earth, that we would have the consciousness of a "puppet" by returning to the innocence of Adam and Eve. I think the author was implying that a soul (can that be interchangeable with consciousness in a way??) was something that God gave Adam and Eve after the fall, because, according to him, this is when Adam and Eve decided to break off the puppet-puppeteer relationship in a way. In the end, we wouldn't need a consciousnesses or a soul technically, but personally I don't think that is how it is going to play out. While Adam and Eve were most definitely naive and possibly ignorant of right and wrong, I don't believe they were at a state of no-consciousnesses. I like to think that God gave us the ability to or at least the perception of being able to make choices, even before the fall. Besides, being a puppet isn't the only way mankind can achieve "perfection". Jesus, while being fully God and fully man, was in every way perfect. He choose to always do God's will (wow, that's really crazy to think about...God choosing or not choosing to do God's will...) out of love and respect for his father, even when faced with human temptations. Besides, the Bible does say Jesus was the second Adam. Maybe this is something like how our glorified bodies will be like.
That interesting though about the Tree of Knowledge giving Adam and Eve the understanding of God. Personally though, I don't think that Adam and Eve actually reached God's understanding when they ate of the fruit - that was just a ploy Satan used to tempt them to eat it. I believe it most definitely gave them the (or at least a much greater) understanding of what was right and wrong, but I don't think that in any way man (okay, other than Jesus) has or ever will reach God's infinite knowledge. I do believe that we are in a way devolving, we are constantly falling away bit by bit from the point of perfection we reached at our creation. People like to think that we have come so far, but what can we say about having long life expectancy when Adam and his descendants lived to be in there 900s or something like that!
On another subject, I like what you said about, "people should just embrace what they have and not obsess over enhancing it." I think self-awareness can be a beautiful thing, but a lot of times it leads to people conforming to the image other people have of them, trying too hard to become opposite of what other people see of them as, or sometimes even self-denial (think about middle school...haha). The author seems to support this in a way, with man's self-awareness (through knowledge) being his downfall from gracefulness. However, part of growing up (spiritually and mentally) is knowing your imperfections and lack of knowledge so that mentally or physically you can learn where to improve and spiritually so that you can learn to depend on God's grace.
Reader Response for March 13th:
I have to get into a certain mindset to read Paradise Lost. I have to remind myself that it isn't a retelling of Genesis and the stories within it, but rather a separate work based off of those stories. In the beginning (that seems to be a very important phrase) of Book 1, Milton talks about having a Heavenly Muse, the same one who gave Moses the Commandments. I have to say that I believe he was inspired by some kind of muse to write this simply because of the complexity of it all. How one man could think of so many layered phrases and clever word choices to piece together something so mind-blowing is beyond me. I feel like a lot of this goes over my head, but I can try to unpack some of it... Bare with me.
I'm a little confused about the separation of Satan and Beelzebub. I thought they were the same person? In Book 1, Beelzebub seems to be Satan's right-hand demon, or rather fallen angel. Beelzebub is "next him in power, and next in crime." I've always thought that Beelzebub was just a different name for Satan, like Lucifer. But almost all of this book is a dialogue between Satan and Beelz (I call him that because of a song I heard from a comedian; it's pretty funny if you want to check it out.) so I suppose they must be two separate people. Still a little fuzzy on that though.
I think it's otdd how many Greek mythology terms I'm finding in Book 1. Satan's "other Parts" are compared to the Titans due to their huge bulk. Or perhaps Milton is saying that Satan's other fallen angels are the Titans? I mean once again, this is a work based off of Genesis and its events. Also, the mention of the River Styx, in the sentence about "the Stygian flood" threw me for a loop. Is Milton saying that these fallen angels crossed the River Styx? He goes so far as to say they did it by their own strength and not by some divine, supernal Power. The Stygian water was used to attain invincibility, so that could be very significant later on if these demons have bathed in it (like Achilles), even though the text never specifically says that they have. Milton also makes use of the term Gods very often, and immediately my mind is drawn to the imperfect, human-like gods that the Greeks worshiped. Maybe Milton is trying to make that connection to these fallen angels because he wants us to see how flawed they are (which kind of goes back to the Marionette story...).
My favorite statement from Book 1 has to be, "The mind is its own place." That's so true if you think about it. It goes along with what we talked about in class about relativity and the Cave theory because our minds are what form the perceptions we have about certain things; we can get so caught up in perception that it's easy to get lost inside of our own minds. I know I do it sometimes, when I've already come to a conclusion about something that I don't want to change my mind about. Also, as far as I know, mind-reading isn't possible (much like time-traveling, guys) so if you think about it, our minds are our own personal places where no one else can see into, unless we make the decision to express the thoughts inside our mind. It's not as if someone can simply step inside your mind and invade it; it's your place to think whatever you like.
Molly's Response to Book 1:
Like I said on my response, Milton really does seem to portray Genesis from the perspective of an epic/myth story teller. It reminds me very much of Greek mythology, and not only because of allusions (even though there are a lot of those too). I suppose Paradise Lost is known as Britian's greatest epic, isn't that what we learned on that power point? Well, anyway I get what you mean about how this perspective might show the imperfections and "human-like" character traits of the angels. I was kind of getting the same reaction, except maybe that Milton was trying to show God in this light? I'm not sure, but it almost seems like Milton was trying to not justify God's almighty power and allows he reader to see God in the same way the Greeks viewed their gods, extremely powerful, but flawed and at times very selfish. At least that's the kind of vibes I'm getting from it, but I suppose you would when the whole entire Book 1 is from Satan's point of view as questions God's right to power. I like mythology a lot though, so it's interesting to me to read the Genesis story in this light, especially where it almost intertwines with Greek mythology (like the part you mentioned about the Titans being fallen angels). But I guess like all things, you have to understand the author's bias. He is using this whole story to "undeify" the so-called moral right of the English monarchy, so I suppose that would make sense that he would portray God in this light. I can definitely see how some people thought he was a heretic!
I was a little confused about Satan and Beelz (haha) too, because like you, I had always heard of Beelz as just another name for Satan. To be honest, I still thought it was talking about the same person, and I assumed Satan's "Mate" was just another of the fallen angels. Now I know differently, but another way I thought of it was that maybe Beelzebub was simply the more cautious side of Satan. In Greek mythology, the gods seem to take hlot of different "personas" depend on the character trait they are showing. Have you ever read Pilgrim's Progress? Satan shows up a lot, but from what I remember it is very rarely that he actually is named "Satan" or the Devil. Instead, h usually goes by different names (Beelzebub was one) and appears to be a different character each time, but you know who he really is. I don't know if that is what Milton is trying to get at, but it's just a thought. Maybe Milton is even personifying two attitudes towards revolution???
Reader Response for Book 2:
To my surprise, this book wasn't quite as interesting to me as the first. I feel like not enough happens in this one. The demons are basically debating on a moot point, because Satan was plotting to wage a war on Heaven no matter what. What his "council" said to him didn't really matter because he had already made up his mind. So I think I saw this book as almost a filler, like an in-between story to get you from one big point to the next.
However, that doesn't mean there weren't some interesting points that Milton brought up. (I mean, it is Milton.) First off, I found it very odd how he described Hell. I have always imagined it as blackened, charred, and consisting mostly of flames. Here, it is beautiful, gorgeous, and it outshines "the wealth of Ormus and of Ind." I think my mental image of Hell has always originated from what I imagine Satan to look like: ugly and hideous, obviously full of pure evil. I know this is somewhat of a child's interpretation, with the villain so clearly indicated by their outward appearance alone, but I think that's a result of growing up with the same mindset about it all and never really challenging that. Paradise Lost has taught me to do just this. With this new description of Hell fresh on my brain, I can't help but think that its king could look very different than I had previously thought, as well. After all, Satan is a fallen angel. He could have crystal blue eyes and golden hair for all I know. He could look as innocent and harmless as a little child. Considering the fact that sin, his greatest tool, looks fun and beautiful at first but is poisonous on the inside, why would Satan be any different?
I'm starting to see a connection that Satan shares with his followers. I've always wondered what made some of them decide to rebel with him. They were in Heaven. A perfect, flawless place full of happiness. Why would they even consider leaving? Then I remember the root of what corrupted Satan, the main reason he chose to rise up against God. When reading about the first demon to speak, Moloch, we learn that he always wanted to be "equal in strength," but when he discovered that he was less, he "cared not to be at all." And when he lost this care, he lost all fear of God and Hell. The second demon, Belial, is described to be a deceiver, a silver-tongued liar. He can make the worst appear the best; he makes himself appear noble and just, but is actually "slothful." (I like that adjective!) The reason he lives off of this deception is exactly the same as why people do it today: to make themselves feel superior by fooling others. Then the third demon speaks, Mammon, and the reader can almost feel his bitterness as he talks about God sitting on His throne; he even goes so far as to call Him "our envied sovran (sovereign)." He talks about wanting to "seek our own good from ourselves, and from our own live to ourselves" as if God had given them nothing they had wanted. So what is the connection? Pride. Thinking that they didn't need God, and that if they could not be equal with Him, then they weren't going to be with Him at all. They decided to strive to be greater than the one who made them, the one who gave them life. That's something I know I'm guilty of day by day, even when I don't realize it.
So even though I didn't necessarily enjoy reading Book 2, I still got a lot out of it, and Milton never fails to challenge some of my most deep-rooted thoughts and beliefs.
Molly's Response to Book 2:
Its funny how I was thinking the same things about Milton's description of Hell as you were. You know you always get those delightful pictures in your head of eternal fires and brimstone, but Milton paints quite a different picture (wait...on a second thought, didn't Milton describe a stereotypical hell in Book 1 with flames that burn without light?? Oh well...). It brings to mind something I heard somewhere that to those in Hell the greatest punishment isn't physical pain or anguish, but eternal separation from God. I'm not quite sure the effect it would have on those who believed in a God and didn't "want" (I'll just leave it there and not get into the predestination/free will stuff right now) to have a relationship with him, but can you imagine finding yourself in Hell if you didn't even believe it or God existed? When I was little, I always pictured heaven being right over Hell so that everyone there would have to live in the eternal torment of knowing what heaven was like and seeing God's goodness, but knowing they were never going to be able to experience it. I kind of doubt that's the case, but I think everyone will still be filled with this type of longing for God, even if they never experienced it on earth. So I guess my point is, that even though Hell is beautiful and pleasing to look at, it is still the place it is due to the lack of God's presence and the fulfillment he brings with it.
On the other hand, for some reason I have always pictured Satan as being very much a shapeshifter in a way. I very much doubt that as a fallen angel or a the Greatest Tempter that he would be that little red, go-teed, fork taled figure you see on hot sauce botttles. I would think he is very beautiful on the outside really, because isn't that the way it can be with people most of the time anyway? However, like I said, I think that Satan is able to change into whatever image that would be most appealing to his "victum (?)" at the moment, like Adam and Eve and the serpent.
While I can find it hard to question Satan's reasoning sometimes, like when he decided to rebel against God knowing that he would be cast out of heaven, I have to stop and think about how the thoughts and feelings he was having doesn't always have to be on a large scale. It's easy for me to think, "Wow, I can't believe he would rebel against God like that, after God gave him all of those wonderful things", but then I have to think how in my own life I have a really hard time giving up control and what I think is best at the moment for relying on God. It can be hard to accept the fact that you need help sometimes! I suppose that this is rebellion in a way, and as you said, comes out of the pride in thinking that we could do everything within our own resources and without help from someone who understands us and our situation the best.
(And I'm sorry this was late Mr. Alexander, I was really sick yesterday evening...I guess that's a pretty good lesson for NOT procrastinating and waiting until Sunday night...)
Caitlin's Response to Books 9-12:
It's finally over. We have finished the great feat that is Paradise Lost! Well, not really because we didn't even read the whole thing... But it makes me feel good saying it! I have to say that this is my favorite selection of the work that we've read, and not just because it's the last one but because it is a nice, condensed version that gets right to the point. I'm glad we didn't read all four of the last few books in their entirety because reading them this way helped me get right to the point of things without the danger of getting bored along the way.
The first thing that caught my attention was the fact that Satan entered into a sleeping serpent. I had always thought he had changed himself into the serpent, but Milton makes it very clear that he possesses it. And what about God taking away his legs? The serpent had legs before he led Adam and Eve to their fall, and God punished him by taking them away, which is why snakes have no legs today. Maybe that part was included in the bits that were left out of this version we read. Or maybe Milton intentionally left it out. I guess I'll have to go read the whole thing to find out for sure!
Next, in the Argument for Book 9, it talks about Adam and Eve going forth to their labors and that they labored apart. I never thought that Adam and Eve had had to work while in the garden before their first sin, but Milton must see it differently. Personally it doesn't make sense to me that they had to work before their fall because God's punishment, along with kicking them out of Eden, was that they had to be laborers upon the earth. Why would he punish them with something they already had to do? Maybe their work done in Eden wasn't difficult or exhaustive, but I still think that they weren't required to do any kind of work while in the garden.
In the beginning of Book 11, I love how Milton says that "God accepts them." This goes all the way back to what we always seem to bring up in class: If God loved Adam and Eve, truly loved them, then why would he have let them fall in the first place? But we see that exhibited here in Paradise Lost. God was not happy with their sin; he cast them out of paradise. But in the midst of it all, even when he knew it would happen, he accepted them. It doesn't say he accepted their sin, but he accepted them. Then why did he allow us to fall? Why was that part of his plan? Well, if you think about it, you're never truly grateful for something until you don't have it anymore. It's like when your parents say, "You should be thankful for me and all this work I do for you," while you're a little kid, but you don't realize just how much work that entails until you spend a little time away from them, without all of their TLC. God wanted us to fully understand what we lost because by fully understanding that, we could comprehend completely how much he's given to us. And I know that we won't ever be able to reach Eden again, and live in it the same way as Adam and Eve had, but doesn't it still show just how much God works for us each and every day? He cast them out so that they would appreciate the work he had done for them, and even after he sent them away he continued to bless them and their descendants.
It's hard to wrap your brain around some of the things that Milton brings up, but I have to remind myself that there is no way on earth I will ever be able to fully understand God. Milton certainly came closer than I ever have, but I still don't see eye to eye with him on some things. But we're merely humans, and we will never be able to understand God's motives entirely. (But it is nice to talk about all of these questions.)