Academic literature on the topic 'John Milton (1608-1674)'

Se exploran las posibilidades intertextuales existentes entre la Utopía de Tomás Moro (1478-1535) y algunos textos en prosa y verso del poeta y polemista John Milton (1608- 1674). La discusión se da a partir de la novela Milton in America, del británico Peter Ackroyd (1949), en la que se sugieren ciertas relaciones (y controversias) confesionales, literarias e ideológicas entre los pensadores. A partir de ahí, se hace una revisión de pasajes en los que la presencia de Moro en la obra de Milton, tema casi inexplorado académicamente, resulta más evidente. Se propone aquí que, a pesar de las diferencias entre ambos, Milton abrevó en las ideas utópicas de su predecesor para construir una idea de 'lugar ideal' o 'no lugar' que daría pie a la configuración del paraíso en el poema épico Paradise Lost.

Arguably, the three most important early writers in the English language – indeed, one might say the founders of the language – are Geoffrey Chaucer (1343-1400), William Shakespeare (1564-1616), and John Milton (1608-1674). Yet our experience at the higher level of education is that students have had little exposure to the life and times of these writers or of their work. Our study shows that, while some Georgian school leavers have been exposed briefly to a bit of Shakespeare, few have chanced to encounter Chaucer and none to Milton. Moreover, while teaching what we might call “The Big Three” of English language and literature, much the same might be said at the master’s level: a bit of Shakespeare, little of Chaucer, and none of Milton. To the extent that students of English as a foreign language encounter any literature at all, they tend to be offered little other than literal translation. “Retell the text.” They miss the nuances of the English language as they would encounter them through the greatest of writers. It is, therefore, essential that those who teach any or all of these great writers develop a strategy to fit the needs of the students while meeting the objectives of the course. The key to making sense of Chaucer, Shakespeare, and Milton is to make connections to what students already know, to their own experiences, to make these greatest of all English writers relevant to the lives of the students in ways they can understand. Keywords: English literature, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton

A fama internacional de John Milton (1608-74) se deve a seu épico Paradise Lost (1667; 2.ed.1674), cujo explícito objetivo é “justificar aos homens os procedimentos de Deus” (01.26), ou seja: promover uma justificativa da queda, responsabilizando a humanidade por sua ruína, isentando a divina providência e lhe confirmando a misericórdia. O artigo propõe que se pense Paradise Lost como um experimento mental centrado no conceito de livre-arbítrio: a estratégia de Milton consistiria em manipular ou inserir episódios nas possíveis lacunas do básico enredo bíblico que lhe serve de base, que preenchessem as condições necessárias para se dizer que as personagens agem de modo consciente e suficientemente racional para que sejam responsabilizadas por suas infelizes escolhas. Milton ofereceria, assim, uma solução narrativa a um problema filosófico.

A presença de Satanás enquanto personagem literária é, hoje, um lugar comum, habitando ele em obras clássicas, em romances populares, quadrinhos, séries de televisão entre outros; além de sua presença explícita, há ainda seu arquétipo, que o torna ainda mais fecundo e abrangente. É desejo do autor do presente artigo estudar as formas como esse personagem e seu tipo se manifestam na literatura ocidental moderna; para tanto, aqui será analisada uma das mais importantes aparições do Satanás literário, Paradise Lost, de John Milton (1608-1674). Neste poema épico Satanás representa mais do que apenas uma figura do universo religioso: principalmente nos dois primeiros cantos da obra ele é quase um anti-herói, dada a sedução, eloquência e protagonismo que apresenta. A análise levará em conta, principalmente, sua função de antagonista em contraposição à novidade de sua caracterização, a qual serviu de modelo para as futuras obras literárias, principalmente a partir do romantismo.

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. —John Milton (1608-1674) Introduction The publication of 12 cartoons depicting images of Prophet Mohammed [Peace Be Upon Him] first in Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten on 30 September 2005, and later reprinted in European media and two New Zealand newspapers, sparked protests around the Muslim world. The Australian newspapers – with the exception of The Courier-Mail, which published one cartoon – refrained from reprinting the cartoons, acknowledging that depictions of the Prophet are regarded as “blasphemous by Muslims”. How is this apparent act of restraint to be assessed? Edward Said, in his book Covering Islam has acknowledged that there have been many Muslim provocations and troubling incidents by Islamic countries such as Iran, Libya, Sudan, and others in the 1980s. However, he contends that the use of the label “Islam” by non-Muslim commentators, either to explain or indiscriminately condemn “Islam”, ends up becoming a form of attack, which in turn provokes more hostility (xv-xvi). This article examines how two Australian newspapers – The Australian and The West Australian – handled the debate on the Prophet Muhammad cartoons and considers whether in the name of “free speech” it ended in “a form of attack” on Australian Muslims. It also considers the media’s treatment of Muslim Australians’ “free speech” on previous occasions. This article is drawn from the oral testimonies of Muslims of diverse ethnic background. Since 1998, as part of PhD and post-doctoral research on Muslims in Australia, the author conducted 130 face-to-face, in-depth, taped interviews of Muslims, aged 18-90, both male and female. While speaking about their settlement experience, several interviewees made unsolicited remarks about Western/Australian media, all of them making the point that Muslims were being demonised. Australian Muslims Many of Australia’s 281,578 Muslims — 1.5 per cent of the total population (Australian Bureau of Statistics) — believe that as a result of media bias, they are vilified in society as “terrorists”, and discriminated in the workplace (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission; Dreher 13; Kabir 266-277). The ABS figures support their claim of discrimination in the workplace; in 1996 the unemployment rate for Muslim Australians was 25 per cent, compared to 9 per cent for the national total. In 2001, it was reduced to 18.5 per cent, compared to 6.8 per cent for the national total, but the ratio of underprivileged positions in the labour market remained almost three times higher than for the wider community. Instead of reflecting on Muslims’ labour market issues or highlighting the social issues confronting Muslims since 9/11, some Australian media, in the name of “free speech”, reinforce negative perceptions of Muslims through images, cartoons and headlines. In 2004, one Muslim informant offered their perceptions of Australian media: I think the Australian media are quite prejudiced, and they only do show one side of the story, which is quite pro-Bush, pro-Howard, pro-war. Probably the least prejudiced media would be ABC or SBS, but the most pro-Jewish, pro-America, would be Channel Seven, Channel Nine, Channel Ten. They only ever show things from one side of the story. This article considers the validity of the Muslim interviewee’s perception that Australian media representation is one-sided. On 26 October 2005, under the headline: “Draw a Cartoon about Mohammed and You Must Die”, The Australian warned its readers: ISLAM is no laughing matter. Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, is being protected by security guards and several cartoonists have gone into hiding after the newspaper published a series of 12 cartoons about the prophet Mohammed. According to Islam, it is blasphemous to make images of the prophet. Muslim fundamentalists have threatened to bomb the paper’s offices and kill the cartoonists (17). Militant Muslims The most provocative cartoons appearing in the Danish media are probably those showing a Muhammad-like figure wearing a turban shaped as a bomb with a burning fuse coming out of it, or a queue of smoking suicide bombers on a cloud with an Islamic cleric saying, “Stop stop we have run out of virgins”. Another showed a blindfolded Muslim man with two veiled Muslim women standing behind him. These messages appeared to be concerned with Islam’s repression of women (Jyllands-Posten), and possibly with the American channel CBS airing an interview in August 2001 of a Palestinian Hamas activist, Muhammad Abu Wardeh, who recruited terrorists for suicide bombings in Israel. Abu Wardeh was quoted as saying: “I described to him [the suicide bomber] how God would compensate the martyr for sacrificing his life for his land. If you become a martyr, God will give you 70 virgins, 70 wives and everlasting happiness” (The Guardian). Perhaps to serve their goals, the militants have re-interpreted the verses of the Holy Quran (Sura 44:51-54; 55:56) where it is said that Muslims who perform good deeds will be blessed by the huris or “pure being” (Ali 1290-1291; 1404). However, since 9/11, it is also clear that the Muslim militant groups such as the Al-Qaeda have become the “new enemy” of the West. They have used religion to justify the terrorist acts and suicide bombings that have impacted on Western interests in New York, Washington, Bali, Madrid amongst other places. But it should be noted that there are Muslim critics, such as Pakistani-born writer, Irshad Manji, Bangladeshi-born writer Taslima Nasreen and Somalian-born Dutch parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who have been constant critics of Muslim men’s oppression of women and have urged reformation. However, their extremist fellow believers threatened them with a death sentence for their “free speech” (Chadwick). The non-Muslim Dutch film director, Theo van Gogh, also a critic of Islam and a supporter of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, advocated a reduction in immigration into Holland, especially by Muslims. Both van Gogh and Hirsi Ali – who co-scripted and co-produced the film Submission – received death threats from Muslim extremists because the film exhibited the verses of the Quran across the chest, stomach and thighs of an almost naked girl, and featured four women in see-through robes showing their breasts, with texts from the Quran daubed on their bodies, talking about the abuse they had suffered under Islam (Anon 25). Whereas there may be some justification for the claim made in the film, that some Muslim men interpret the Quran to oppress women (Doogue and Kirkwood 220), the writing of the Quranic verses on almost-naked women is surely offensive to all Muslims because the Quran teaches Muslim women to dress modestly (Sura 24: 30-31; Ali 873). On 4 November 2004, The West Australian reported that the Dutch director Theo van Gogh was murdered by a 26-year-old Dutch-Moroccan Muslim on 2 November 2004 (27). Hirsi Ali, the co-producer of the film was forced to go into hiding after van Gogh’s murder. In the face of a growing clamour from both the Dutch Muslims and the secular communities to silence her, Ayaan Hirsi Ali resigned from the Dutch Parliament in May 2006 and decided to re-settle in Washington (Jardine 2006). It should be noted that militant Muslims form a tiny but forceful minority of the 1.4 billion Muslims worldwide. The Muslim majority are moderate and peaceful (Doogue and Kirkwood 79-80). Some Muslim scholars argue that there is specific instruction in the Quran for people to apply their knowledge and arrive at whatever interpretation is of greatest benefit to the community. It may be that stricter practitioners would not agree with the moderate interpretation of the Quran and vice versa (Doogue and Kirkwood 232). Therefore, when the Western media makes a mockery of the Muslim religion or their Prophet in the name of “free speech”, or generalises all Muslims for the acts of a few through headlines or cartoons, it impacts on the Muslims residing in the West. Prophet Muhammad’s Cartoons With the above-mentioned publication of Prophet Muhammad’s cartoons in Denmark, Islamic critics charged that the cartoons were a deliberate provocation and insult to their religion, designed to incite hatred and polarise people of different faiths. In February 2006, regrettably, violent reactions took place in the Middle East, Europe and in Asia. Danish embassies were attacked and, in some instances, were set on fire. The demonstrators chanted, “With our blood and souls we defend you, O Prophet of God!”. Some replaced the Danish flag with a green one printed with the first pillar of Islam (Kalima): “There is no god but God and Mohammed is the messenger of God”. Some considered the cartoons “an unforgivable insult” that merited punishment by death (The Age). A debate on “free speech” soon emerged in newspapers throughout the world. On 7 February 2006 the editorial in The West Australian, “World Has Had Enough of Muslim Fanatics”, stated that the newspaper would not publish cartoons of Mohammad that have drawn protests from Muslims around the world. The newspaper acknowledged that depictions of the prophet are regarded as “blasphemous by Muslims” (18). However, the editorial was juxtaposed with another article “Can Liberty Survive a Clash of Cultures?”, with an image of bearded men wearing Muslim head coverings, holding Arabic placards and chanting slogans, implying the violent nature of Islam. And in the letters page of this newspaper, published on the same day, appeared the following headlines (20): Another Excuse for Muslims to Threaten Us Islam Attacked Cartoon Rage: Greatest Threat to World Peace We’re Living in Dangerous Times Why Treat Embassies with Contempt? Muslim Religion Is Not So Soft Civilised World Is Threatened The West Australian is a state-based newspaper that tends to side with the conservative Liberal party, and is designed to appeal to the “man in the street”. The West Australian did not republish the Prophet Muhammad cartoon, but for 8 days from 7 to 15 February 2006 the letters to the editor and opinion columns consistently criticised Islam and upheld “superior” Western secular values. During this period, the newspaper did publish a few letters that condemned the Danish cartoonist, including the author’s letter, which also condemned the Muslims’ attack on the embassies. But the overall message was that Western secular values were superior to Islamic values. In other words, the newspaper adopted a jingoistic posture and asserted the cultural superiority of mainstream Australians. The Danish cartoons also sparked a debate on “free speech” in Australia’s leading newspaper, The Australian, which is a national newspaper that also tends to reflect the values of the ruling national government – also the conservative Liberal party. And it followed a similar pattern of debate as The West Australian. On 14 February 2006, The Australian (13) published a reader’s criticism of The Australian for not republishing the cartoons. The author questioned whether the Muslims deserved any tolerance because their Holy Book teaches intolerance. The Koran [Quran] (22:19) says: Garments of fire have been prepared for the unbelievers. Scalding water shall be poured upon their heads, melting their skins and that which is in their bellies. Perhaps this reader did not find the three cartoons published in The Australian a few days earlier to be ‘offensive’ to the Australian Muslims. In the first, on 6 February 2006, the cartoonist Bill Leak showed that his head was chopped off by some masked people (8), implying that Muslim militants, such as the Hamas, would commit such a brutal act. The Palestinian Hamas group often appear in masks before the media. In this context, it is important to note that Israel is an ally of Australia and the United States, whereas the Hamas is Israel’s enemy whose political ideology goes against Israel’s national interest. On 25 January 2006, the Hamas won a landslide victory in the Palestine elections but Israel refused to recognise this government because Hamas has not abandoned its militant ideology (Page 13). The cartoon, therefore, probably means that the cartoonist or perhaps The Australian has taken sides on behalf of Australia’s ally Israel. In the second cartoon, on 7 February 2006, Bill Leak sketched an Arab raising his sword over a school boy who was drawing in a classroom. The caption read, “One more line and I’ll chop your hand off!” (12). And in the third, on 10 February 2006, Bill Leak sketched Mr Mohammed’s shadow holding a sword with the caption: “The unacceptable face of fanaticism”. A reporter asked: “And so, Mr Mohammed, what do you have to say about the current crisis?” to which Mr Mohammed replied, “I refuse to be drawn on the subject” (16). The cartoonist also thought that the Danish cartoons should have been republished in the Australian newspapers (Insight). Cartoons are supposed to reflect the theme of the day. Therefore, Bill Leak’s cartoons were certainly topical. But his cartoons reveal that his or The Australian’s “freedom of expression” has been one-sided, all depicting Islam as representing violence. For example, after the Bali bombing on 21 November 2002, Leak sketched two fully veiled women, one carrying explosives under her veil and asking the other, “Does my bomb look big in this”? The cartoonist’s immediate response to criticism of the cartoon in a television programme was, “inevitably, when you look at a cartoon such as that one, the first thing you’ve got to do is remember that as a daily editorial cartoonist, you’re commenting first and foremost on the events of the day. They’re very ephemeral things”. He added, “It was…drawn about three years ago after a spate of suicide bombing attacks in Israel” (Insight). Earlier events also suggested that that The Australian resolutely supports Australia’s ally, Israel. On 13-14 November 2004 Bill Leak caricatured the recently deceased Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in The Weekend Australian (18). In the cartoon, God appeared to be displeased with him and would not allow him to enter paradise. Arafat was shown with explosives strapped to his body and threatening God by saying, “A cloud to myself or the whole place goes up….”. On the other hand, on 6 January 2006 the same cartoonist sympathetically portrayed ailing Israeli leader Ariel Sharon as a decent man wearing a black suit, with God willing to accept him (10); and the next day Sharon was portrayed as “a Man of Peace” (12). Politics and Religion Thus, the anecdotal evidence so far reveals that in the name of “freedom of expression”, or “free speech” The West Australian and The Australian newspapers have taken sides – either glorifying their “superior” Western culture or taking sides on behalf of its allies. On the other hand, these print media would not tolerate the “free speech” of a Muslim leader who spoke against their ally or another religious group. From the 1980s until recently, some print media, particularly The Australian, have been critical of the Egyptian-born Muslim spiritual leader Imam Taj el din al-Hilali for his “free speech”. In 1988 the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils bestowed the title of Mufti to Imam al- Hilali, and al-Hilali was elevated to a position of national religious leadership. Al-Hilali became a controversial figure after 1988 when he gave a speech to the Muslim students at Sydney University and accused Jews of trying to control the world through “sex, then sexual perversion, then the promotion of espionage, treason and economic hoarding” (Hewett 7). The Imam started being identified as a “Muslim chief” in the news headlines once he directly criticised American foreign policy during the 1990-91 Gulf crisis. The Imam interpreted US intervention in Kuwait as a “political dictatorship” that was exploiting the Gulf crisis because it was seen as a threat to its oil supply (Hewett 7). After the Bali bombings in 2002, the Howard government distributed information on terrorism through the “Alert and Alarmed” kit as part of its campaign of public awareness. The first casualty of the “Be alert, but not alarmed” campaign was the Imam al-Hilali. On 6 January 2003, police saw a tube of plastic protruding from a passenger door window and suspected that al-Hilali might have been carrying a gun when they pulled him over for traffic infringements. Sheikh al-Hilali was charged with resisting arrest and assaulting police (Morris 1, 4). On 8 January 2003 The Australian reminded its readers “Arrest Adds to Mufti’s Mystery” (9). The same issue of The Australian portrayed the Sheikh being stripped of his clothes by two policemen. The letter page also contained some unsympathetic opinions under the headline: “Mufti Deserved No Special Treatment” (10). In January 2004, al-Hilali was again brought under the spotlight. The Australian media alleged that al-Hilali praised the suicide bombers at a Mosque in Lebanon and said that the destruction of the World Trade Center was “God’s work against oppressors” (Guillatt 24). Without further investigation, The Australian again reported his alleged inflammatory comments. Under the headline, “Muslim Leader’s Jihad Call”, it condemned al-Hilali and accused him of strongly endorsing “terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas, during his visit to Lebanon”. Federal Labor Member of Parliament Michael Danby said, “Hilali’s presence in Australia is a mistake. He and his associates must give authorities an assurance he will not assist future homicide attacks” (Chulov 1, 5). Later investigations by Sydney’s Good Weekend Magazine and SBS Television found that al-Hilali’s speech had been mistranslated (Guillatt 24). However, the selected print media that had been very critical of the Sheikh did not highlight the mistranslation. On the other hand, the Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell has been critical of Islam and is also opposed to Australia’s involvement in the Iraq war in 2003, but the print media appeared to ignore his “free speech” (Dateline). In November 2004, Dr Pell said that secular liberal democracy was empty and selfish, and Islam was emerging as an alternative world view that attracted the alienated (Zwartz 3). In May 2006, Dr Pell said that he tried to reconcile claims that Islam was a faith of peace with those that suggested the Quran legitimised the killings of non-Muslims but: In my own reading of the Koran [Quran], I began to note down invocations to violence. There are so many of them, however, that I abandoned this exercise after 50 or 60 or 70 pages (Morris). Muslim leaders regarded Dr Pell’s anti-Islam statement as “inflammatory” (Morris). However, both the newspapers, The Australian and The West Australian remained uncritical of Dr Pell’s “free speech” against Islam. Conclusion Edward Said believed that media images are informed by official definitions of Islam that serve the interests of government and business. The success of the images is not in their accuracy but in the power of the people who produce them, the triumph of which is hardly challenged. “Labels have survived many experiences and have been capable of adapting to new events, information and realities” (9). In this paper the author accepts that, in the Australian context, militant Muslims are the “enemy of the West”. However, they are also the enemy of most moderate Australian Muslims. When some selected media take sides on behalf of the hegemony, or Australia’s “allies”, and offend moderate Australian Muslims, the media’s claim of “free speech” or “freedom of expression” remains highly questionable. Muslim interviewees in this study have noted a systemic bias in some Australian media, but they are not alone in detecting this bias (see the “Abu Who?” segment of Media Watch on ABC TV, 31 July 2006). To address this concern, Australian Muslim leaders need to play an active role in monitoring the media. This might take the form of a watchdog body within the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils. If the media bias is found to be persistent, the AFIC might then recommend legislative intervention or application of existing anti-discrimination policies; alternatively, AFIC could seek sanctions from within the Australian journalistic community. One way or another this practice should be stopped. References Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Holy Quran: Text, Translation and Commentary. New Revised Ed. Maryland, USA: Amana Corporation, 1989. Anonymous. “Dutch Courage in Aftermath of Film-Maker’s Slaying.” The Weekend Australian 6-7 Nov. 2004. Chadwick, Alex. “The Caged Virgin: A Call for Change in Islam.” 4 June 2006 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5382547>. Chulov, Martin. “Muslim Leader’s Jihad Call.” The Australian 19 Feb. 2004. Dateline. “Cardinal George Pell Interview.” SBS TV 6 April 2005. 7 June 2006 http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/>. Dreher, Tanya. “Targeted”, Experiences of Racism in NSW after September 11, 2001. Sydney: University of Technology, 2005. Doogue, Geraldine, and Peter Kirkwood. Tomorrow’s Islam: Understanding Age-Old Beliefs and a Modern World. Sydney: ABC Books, 2005. Insight. “Culture Clash.” SBS TV 7 March 2006. 11 June 2006 http://news.sbs.com.au/insight/archive.php>. Guillatt, Richard. “Moderate or Menace.” Sydney Morning Herald Good Weekend 21 Aug. 2004. Hewett, Tony. “Australia Exploiting Crisis: Muslim Chief.” Sydney Morning Herald 27 Nov. 1990. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Ismaa – Listen: National Consultations on Eliminating Prejudice against Arab and Muslim Australians. Sydney: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 2004. Jyllands-Posten. 24 Jan. 2006. http://www.di2.nu/files/Muhammad_Cartoons_Jyllands_Posten.html>. Jardine, Lisa. “Liberalism under Pressure.” BBC News 5 June 2006. 12 June 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5042418.stm>. Kabir, Nahid. Muslims in Australia: Immigration, Race Relations and Cultural History. London: Kegan Paul, 2005. Media Watch. “Abu Who?” ABC Television 31 July 2006. http://abc.net.au/mediawatch/>. Morris, Linda. “Imam Facing Charges after Row with Police.” Sydney Morning Herald 7 Jan. 2003. Morris, Linda. “Pell Challenges Islam – O Ye, of Little Tolerant Faith.” Sydney Morning Herald 5 May 2006. Page, Jeremy. “Russia May Sell Arms to Hamas.” The Australian 18 Feb. 2006. Said, Edward. Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World. London: Vintage, 1981, 1997. Submission. “Film Clip from Short Submission.” Submission. 11 June 2006. http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2655656?htv=12> The Age. “Embassies Torched over Cartoons.” 5 Feb. 2006. http://www.theage.com.au>. The Guardian. “Virgins? What Virgins?” 12 Jan. 2002. 4 June 2006 http://www.guardian.co.uk/>. Zwartz, Barney. “Islam Could Be New Communism, Pell Tells US Audience.” Sydney Morning Herald 12 Nov. 2004. Citation reference for this article MLA Style Kabir, Nahid. "Depiction of Muslims in Selected Australian Media: Free Speech or Taking Sides." M/C Journal 9.4 (2006). echo date('d M. Y'); ?> <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0609/1-kabir.php>. APA Style Kabir, N. (Sep. 2006) "Depiction of Muslims in Selected Australian Media: Free Speech or Taking Sides," M/C Journal, 9(4). Retrieved echo date('d M. Y'); ?> from <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0609/1-kabir.php>.

Cette étude se propose d'examiner les interactions du discours sur Dieu de Milton avec sa vision de l'organisation de la cité dans ses pamphlets, où il s'est appliqué aux divers champs de la liberté. Lorsqu'il se penche sur la vie privée pour prouver que le divorce se justifie en cas d'incompatibilité d'humeur, le publiciste se voit obligé de créer une herméneutique : "la règle de charité" devait servir d'argumentaire à sa politique. Sa théologie, essentiellement christologique, aboutit à une revalorisation de l'homme faillible. L'évocation de l'éducation des enfants l'amène à souligner la perfectibilité de l'homme par le savoir. Si elle forme à la connaissance de Dieu, l'école prépare une élite au commandement des affaires publiques : le théologique, sans le politique, reste vide. Avec le dossier de la liberté d'imprimer, où il plaide pour l'abolition de la censure d'avant publication, le polémiste cherche à cautionner par sa théologie un projet politique, bien que celui-ci déborde son cadre spécifique : Milton souligne la responsabilité de l'homme pour demander l'affranchissement des consciences. Avec la cause ecclésiastique, il affirme l'irréductible dignité des croyants, d'où son antiprélatisme ; il se prononce pour une séparation des 2 sphères. Il dégage complétement l'église du politique, jusque dans ses infrastuctures, pour l'investir d'une dimension supra-théologique. Sa conception de l'autorité fait apparaître que le politique, sans le théologique, n'aurait aucune assise. Il réfute le jure divino des rois pour avancer le droit inaliénable des peuples à disposer d'eux-mêmes ; à l'aide d'arguments philosophico-historiques, il légitime le tyrannicide ; aux prises à l'anarchie, il préconise un républicanisme aristocratique. Ce schéma fait voir une symbiose théologie-politique : la minorité, dirigeants ou hommes bons, ne correspond-elle pas à la poignée d'élus de Dieu ? Cependant, les 2 pôles ne sauraient obéir à une logique identique : l'homme ne voit pas comme Dieu voit ; d'autre part, chez Milton, ils suivent une évolution parallèle : le politique doit disparaître dans la mesure où chacun est appelé à la discipline de soi, à une intériorisation de la loi ; le théologique cesse d'être un prototype pour les situations collectives présentes pour s'employer à une transformation de l'individu : il s'efface au profit de l'écriture non-écrite : la parole
This study purports to analyse the interactions between j. Milton's discourse on god and his view of man's organized society in the works "of (his) left hand", where he applied himself to the various fields of liberty. Examining private life, the polemicist must devise his own hermeneutics to justify divorce in case of mutual incompatibility; "the rule of charity" was to account for his politics of marriage. What is essentially a christology leads to a radical upgrading of fallible man. When he deals with the problem of education, he insists on the perfectibility of man through learning. If j. Milton's accademy forms man to a knowledge of god, its program prepares an elite to leadership. Theology, without politics, appears to be an empty husk. Then the pamphleteer pleads for the abolition of pre-publication censorship: he strives to support a political project by his theology, although the former will further ask for liberty of conscience. Emphasizing the responsibility of man, j. Milton rejects calvins and come close to arminianism. In discussing the ecclesiastical cause he asserts the dignity of believers and positions himself for a segregation of the two spheres. Divesting the church of politics, he would invest the institution with a supra theological dimension. That politics, without theology, would be unfounded is the conclusion of his vision of power. Confuting the jure divino of kings to put forward the imprescriptible rights of the people to self-government, he legitimizes tyrannicide with philosophical and historical arguments, before advocating an aristocratic republic. Thus theology and politics would completely agree : the minority of good men or of rulers corresponds to the handful of god's elect. Yet the two poles cannot obey one logic, for man sees not as god sees, but they follow the same pattern of evolution. Just as politics is eventually t o disappear because man should master himself by interiorizing the law, theology will no longer be a prototype for all present collective situations: the ways of god to man aim at a renewing of the individual(s) and are to be found in the unwritten scripture - the word

This survey focuses on German-language studies of John Milton's Paradise Lost, based on a bibliography of more than 140 German-language publications dating from 1651 to the present. Its purpose is to describe and evaluate these studies and to make their arguments accessible to readers who have difficulties locating, obtaining, and/or reading these texts.Chapters 1-4 give an account of Milton's reception in Germany and Switzerland. Topics discussed include the evaluation of Milton as poet and man, the influence of Milton's Paradise Lost on the development of German literature (Klopstock's Messias), early Milton studies, German translations of Milton's Paradise Lost, the teaching of Milton's works in Germany, and the evaluation of the poem for the present generation. Chapters 5 to 10 survey twentieth-century German-language criticism of Paradise Lost. Topics include the literary tradition; the drama plans; structure and style; cosmology and theology; and interpretations of the fall.Outstanding twentieth-century German studies include Hiibener's analysis of stylistic tension (1913); Bastian's analysis of the problem of temptation (1930); Wickert's examination of Milton's drama plans (1955); Grun's interpretation of the fall (1956); MoritzSiebeck's structural and aesthetic justification of the last two books of Paradise Lost (1963); Spevack-Husmann's examination of the relevance of the medieval tradition of allegorical and typological myth interpretation for Milton's mythological comparisons (1963); Markus's study of the parenthesis as rhetorical means of psychological influence (1965); Hagenbuchle's analysis of the fall(1969); Maier's examination of contrast and parallel as structural elements (1974); Slogsnat's exploration of the dramatical structure and tragic nature (1978); Schrey's account of Milton's reception in Germany (1980); and Klein's study of astronomy and anthropocentric in Milton's attitude towards science (1986). These studies deserve to be better known by the English-speaking scholarly community for their different points of view and their good understanding of Milton's art.Milton's Paradise Lost is still appreciated in Germany and continues to have many readers.
Department of English

An overview of the prose writings of John Wesley, and the hymn writing of his brother Charles, shows that John Milton was an important influence on both men. A search of the literature indicates that critics have rarely noticed this, and although some work has been done on John's abridgement of Paradise Lost, there are no qualitative studies of its effect on the hymnody of Charles. Although the singing of hymns is a potential way of influencing language and doctrine of all singers, it is particularly important for people who have little other education. Charles Wesley, as the most prolific English hymnwriter, was influential in educating generations of church-goers. He used Paradise Lost in several ways: l)by simple appropriation of diction, 2) by combining it with the Bible in four specific ways, i.e., a) simple addition of images and language from Paradise Lost to biblical sources, b) magnification of a biblical idea by projecting it through a scene in Paradise Lost, as in the case of the hymn, "Soldiers of Christ Arise" which is influenced by Book 5, c) the use of the Bible and Paradise Lost as joint "pre-text" to create a new concept, and d) the use of Paradise Lost to "Christianise" a Psalm. Psalm 24 is used as an example. Obvious reasons why Charles Wesley might wish to imitate Milton, such as Milton's popularity in the eighteenth century, and Wesley family connections with Milton, are explored and considered not significant, but a common classical education is important. The two men have similar theological views in two doctrines essential to the Wesleyan revival: a) justification by faith and b) universal redemption. Other similarities are their expression of views on covenant theology, the nature of the goodness of God, and the name of God as "all in all." Their audiences were different but their purposes were similar: to teach "serious godliness" by inculcating doctrine and inspiring faith in a way that would touch the minds and hearts of their readers. Three appendices are presented: one on the problem of the hymn as a literary genre, the second on the audience for Wesley hymns, and the third on the history of literary criticism of the Wesleys.
Arts, Faculty of
English, Department of
Graduate

John Milton's Christian Doctrine reveals a number of doctrinal opinions clearly in disagreement with the orthodox Christianity of his day. His four major heresies, his monism itself, his theory of creation ex Deo, his anti-Trinitarianism, and his mortalism, form a logical system, developed in accordance with his monistic conception of the cosmos.Milton's monism denies the Platonic dualism between matter and spirit. He presents a world which is a continuum in which that which is usually called material is merely further removed from God than that which is normally called spiritual. This monism serves as the basis of his concepts of the universe, God, and humanity.Since Milton sees God as the total of reality, the things of this world cannot have their source in anything outside God. They cannot be created either from a preexistent prime matter or from nothing. His monism requires that they somehow be created ex Deo, from God's own substance.Milton's monism denies the possibility of the traditional concept of the Trinity. The Son is neither coeternal, co-essential, nor co-equal with the Father. The Holy Spirit is even less important, subordinate to both Father and Son. Since Christ must also be a unity, Milton presents a unique concept of the Incarnation, in which two total persons are mysteriously combined into one new person.His monism requires that the human being also be a unity. Two heresies result: (1) Traducianism, in which the soul is generated by the parents just as is the body; (2) Thnetopsychic mortalism, in which the entire human being dies together and then is resurrected to either reward or punishment.Through a study of monism, Milton's reader can find a key to the phenomenon of John Milton. He uniquely combines his monism with a staunch Biblical literalism, presenting himself as a Christian, but a Christian with a difference-a Christian who will allow no outside authority of any kind to define his faith. As a part of Milton's general application of a monistic cosmos to all his thought, the monistic continuity of the Miltonic heresy can clearly be discovered.

This dissertation tries to locate Milton's optimistic view of man and nature as expressed in Comus, Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, and Paradise Lost in the long tradition of natural law that goes back to Aristotle, Cicero, and Aquinas.

Les pamphlets anti-royalistes de John Milton sont composés dans la grande tradition des duels rhétoriques. Il se préoccupe peu de théorie politique et s'intéresse, avant tout, à la liberté de conscience et d'expression. Il critique une société qui se laisse trop facilement manipuler par la propagande. Milton devient le chantre du nouveau gouvernement républicain et compose pour lui plusieurs défenses destinées à un public européen. Sa première cible est le roi Charles Ier, dont il critique point par point les supposées « mémoires », publiées au lendemain de son exécution. Il s'en prend à un roi-acteur qui, à l'image des personnages shakespeariens, joue plusieurs rôles, tantôt poète, tantôt martyr éploré. Ses deux principaux adversaires sont des royalistes étrangers, les Français Claude Saumaise et Alexandre More. Pour les discréditer, il utilise contre eux un bestiaire foisonnant et une satire aux nombreuses références sexuelles. Il développe aussi toute une série de signes de l'étranger auxquels il oppose, avec un patriotisme virulent, un portrait glorieux de la nation anglaise. Ses ennemis l'accablent d'injures, relatives notamment à sa cécité et il se réfugie dans la littérature et le mythe pour élever le débat, jusqu'à créer pour lui-même le personnage du barde aveugle, qu'il reprend dans sa tragédie de Samson Agonistes. Il affronte ses adversaires royalistes au moyen de signes qu'il partage avec eux, mais dont chacun use différemment. Il s'intéresse avant tout à la responsabilité de l'homme à l'égard de son choix du juste ou du faux. Le tyran sous tous ses avatars, de Charles Ier à Satan, symbolise la tentation de l'illusion. Milton se transforme souvent en médecin du corps politique lorsqu'il pratique une dissection des textes de ses adversaires, pour en exposer les artifices, en ayant recours à de nombreuses images liées au corps humain et à la médecine. Il met en scène les illusions de ses ennemis, en puisant abondamment dans le répertoire théâtral de l'époque et s'inspire abondamment des tragédies de William Shakespeare
In his republican pamphlets, John Milton fights against three main enemies, i. E. The late king Charles I and two French monarchists, Claude Saumaise and Alexander More. Against them, he builds up a lot of satirical images, involving animals, sexual behaviours, the medicine and the theatre. He is influenced by William Shakespeare. A lot of bodily images and symbols are derived from contemporary medical thought. Milton's main purpose in his republican pamphlets is to expose in public view the illusions which enslave men and to fight political propaganda. He presents himself like a hero, a bard, a prophet and a soldier, with a mission. In doing so, lie compares himself with a lot of mythological figures, from Orpheus and Osiris, to Samson and Hercules

Comment le poète miltonien peut-il affirmer qu’il va voir et dire les choses invisibles aux yeux des mortels (« […] see and tell / Of things invisible to mortal eyes » (III, 54-55)) ou encore qu’il va montrer les exploits invisibles des anges (« invisible exploits » V, 565) dans son épopée ? L’objectif de la présente étude est de montrer que l’entreprise de rendre visible l’invisible est profondément originale d’un point de vue à la fois esthétique et théologique. En effet, pour formuler un tel argument, John Milton s’appuie sur une théologie qui lui est propre et qu’il revendique comme hérétique. Ainsi, en refusant la prédestination calviniste pour lui préférer la pensée d’Arminius sur le libre-arbitre, Milton forge une personnalité poétique qui bénéficie d’une illumination spécifique et supérieure. Par ailleurs, en réfutant le dogme de la Trinité pour lui préférer une conception unitaire, Milton conçoit le Fils de Dieu comme la première image visible et créée du Père invisible. Le modèle du Fils lui permet de penser une poétique de l’invisible. Enfin, sa poétique s’appuie sur une définition de l’accommodation scripturaire qui contredit celle de Saint Augustin, pourtant couramment utilisée par les protestants. Pour donner forme à son projet, Milton élabore une poétique épique, centrée sur les personnes du poète et du Fils, dont la fin dernière est la représentation visuelle. Pour rendre visible l’invisible gloire divine, il met en place une hiérarchie des images et du lexique de la lumière analogue à celle des créatures. La fragmentation du regard et sa réunification par le narrateur omniscient constituent le second élément de son esthétique visuelle
How can Milton’s poet claim that he intends to «see and tell / Of things invisible to mortal eyes » (III, 54-55) or that he is going to disclose the « invisible exploits » (V, 565) of the angels in the epic? The aim of this study is to show that Milton’s project to make invisible things visible, is profoundly original in both aesthetic and theological terms. His argument is rooted in a theology of his own which he acknowledges to be heretical. By rejecting the Calvinist idea of predestination, preferring instead the doctrine of Arminius, Milton forges a poetic persona who is granted a specific and superior illumination. Moreover, Milton refutes the dogma of the Trinity, and conceives the Son as the first created image of the invisible Father. Such a conception of the Son provides him with a model for his poetics of the invisible. Finally, Milton's poetics is based on a definition of scriptural accommodation which is in opposition to the Augustinian definition usually adopted by the Protestants. To give coherence to his project Milton elaborates an epic poetics which is centred on the figures of the poet and the Son and whose final aim is the representation of the invisible. To make the invisible glory of God visible, he introduces a hierarchy of images and words concerning the manifestations of light which parallels the hierarchy of living things in the universe. The second aspect of Milton’s visual aesthetics concerns a fragmenting of unified sight and its subsequent reconstruction by the omniscient narrator

Milton & Melville : Le Démon de l'allusion étudie la signification de l'allusion à Milton dans Taïpi, Moby¬Dick, L'Escroc à la confiance et Billy-Budd, Marin. Un état détaillé de la recherche sur les rapports entre les deux auteurs montre la prédominance d'une conception de l'allusion comme moyen d'identifier le sens d'un texte incertain à celui d'un autre, supposé stable ; or, il s'agit, en réalité, d'une relation dynamique et réciproque. Ludique, satirique, impie, ou érotique, l'allusion melvillienne est multiforme et variable ¬ondoiement qui la dérobe à une approche trop générale, mais en lequel réside justement un sens plus global, au-delà de simples effets locaux. Loin d'être un ornement ou un supplément, elle fait partie de la trame même du texte ; oblique, déroutante, elle n'en sert pas moins la grande ambition melvillienne d'« énoncer la Vérité ». C'est, en effet, allusivement — dans une relation, en particulier, au Paradis perdu — que Melville décrit à la fois les travers de la société contemporaine, l'aliénation du moi et la terreur des « sphères invisibles ». Le poème melvillien peut se concevoir comme un lieu où la vérité est, dans le même mouvement, dégagée et exhibée, par une chimie à la fois expérimentale et picturale. Le processus mobilise ¬selon un modèle fédéral où s'affirme une originalité américaine — une allusion complexe, dont le sens ne réside pas seulement dans les éléments importés par les textes simultanément convoqués, mais aussi dans leur interaction conflictuelle. Cet agôn allusif récurrent — qui définit notamment l'écrire-blanc de Moby-Dick — participe d'une violence relationnelle dont le Satan de Milton est le plus puissant symbole
Milton & Melville: The Demon of Allusion studies the significance of allusions to Milton in Typee, Moby¬Dick, The Confidence-Man and Billy-Budd, Sailor. Examining the state of research shows that allusion tends to be seen as a way to identify the meaning of an ambiguous Melvillean text with a supposedly stable Miltonic one – when in fact the allusive relationship is dynamic and reciprocal. All at once playful, satirical, impious, and erotic, Melvillean allusion is protean and thus eludes generalization. However, its very elusiveness hints at a more global significance, going beyond merely local import. Far from being just a flourish or a supplement, it is the very stuff that the text is made of. However oblique and disconcerting, it plays a crucial part in Melville's ambition to master the "great Art of Telling the Truth". Indeed, it is through allusion—in particular to Paradise Lost—that he satirizes contemporary society, explores the alienation of the self and expresses the terror of the "invisible spheres". Melville's text can be conceived of as the locus where truth is both achieved and exhibited to the reader, through a chemistry that is experimental as well as pictorial in nature. Based on a uniquely American federal model, such a process involves a complex allusive mix, the meaning of which lies not only in what the different texts bring to their host, "'but also in the destructive interaction between them. This recurrent allusive agon – the "colorless all-color" of writing – speaks to the violence of Melvillean relationships, the most powerful symbol of which is Milton's Satan