No Middle Ground: The Patriarchal Environment In Milton\u2019s Paradise Lost<\/p>\n
On the relationship between Adam and Eve in Paradise Lost, Susanne Woods perhaps states it best when she argues that Milton, for the most part, appropriates his culture\u2019s views on the inferior position of woman. Milton is in the awkward predicament between following cultural and biblical authority while attempting to give Eve a semblance of dignity, respect, and intelligence\u2014a situation which motivates some Milton scholars to work around Milton\u2019s often ambiguous message by asserting that the first marriage is both equal in some aspects while identifying a patriarchal hierarchy in other aspects of the work. A situation particularly difficult to assess are the prelapsarian and postlapsarian conditions of Eve\u2019s inferiority to Adam.<\/p>\n
Margaret Thickstun emphasizes Milton\u2019s stance, which in The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce emphasizes that woman was created for the needs of man. As Thickstun contends, this inferior role reveals itself even in the prelapsarian Eden. She suggests that even though Eve departs yet sinless from Adam in Book IX to tend the garden on her own, it is \u201cthe independence of Eve\u2019s action, not just the sinfulness of it, for which she is guilty\u201d (74). Thus, Eve\u2019s separation is the disobedience towards Adam before the disobedience of eating the fruit, for Adam clearly warns her to \u201cleave not the faithful side \/ that gave thee being, still shades thee and protects\u201d\/ (9. 265-6). Mary Nyquist argues that many apologetic feminist scholars\u2019 intentions of Adam and Eve\u2019s equality are misplaced in light of the \u201cman\/men\u201d noun discrepancies in chapters I and II of Genesis. She also frames her argument around Rachel Speght\u2019s defense of Eve and \u201cthe spiritual equality of the sexes\u201d (107) regardless of Eve being the second human formed. Diane McColley comes close to a middle-ground view of the Edenic marriage while foregrounding her argument within an almost apologetic framework. She argues that Adam and Eve are merely growing and responding individuals under a benevolent God, and that Eve\u2019s submission is beneficial to both her and Adam. McColley does pose an important question, however: what is Eve\u2019s motive in the separation scene? Is it obstinacy or productivity? In other words, does one see Eve\u2019s disobedience before or after eating the fruit? Much like McColley, Kristin McColgan contends that Paradise Lost is an intricate \u201cinterplay between hierarchy and reciprocity through language and structure\u201d that reveals how both Adam and Eve \u201cexalt[s] not self but other in an idyllic, dynamic relationship\u201d (76). It would be Desma Polydorou, however, who comes closest to my opinion of Paradise Lost as a purely patriarchal masterpiece, as it were. Like Nyquist, Polydorou refers to Speght in her article and contends that Milton frequently overlooks Speght\u2019s biblical examples that depict the marriage as equal. Polydorou examines the pre and postlapsarian conditions of inequality and concludes that \u201cMilton does not share Speght\u2019s commitment\u201d to promoting woman\u2019s equality to man (30). I argue that the first marriage was depicted by Milton in Paradise Lost as a purely patriarchal construct in both pre and postlapsarian modes. As Woods emphasizes, Milton closely adheres to Pauline doctrine as it pertains to the subjugation and inferiority of women in regards to men. As Anne Ferry asserts, Milton was a man who \u201cheld with passionate conviction\u2026that the Bible is a record of divinely inspired truth [and] it is the Christian\u2019s duty to interpret and follow, not to contradict and ignore\u201d (113). As Indeed, Milton\u2019s according absolute authority to the Pauline scriptures directly influences the verse in Paradise Lost, and as I will show, Milton is expert at returning again and again to the hierarchical Pauline context of patriarchy, be it subtly or overtly. Through this analysis I will illustrate how Milton designed the epic to conform to a biblical patriarchal hierarchy.<\/p>\n
Mary Nyquist describes the last line of the following verse as \u201cstridently masculinist\u201d:<\/p>\n
\u2026though both<\/p>\n
Not equal, as their sex not equal seemed;<\/p>\n
For contemplation he and valor formed,<\/p>\n
For softness she and sweet attractive grace,<\/p>\n
He for God only, she for God in him\u2026(IV.295-299)<\/p>\n
This verse points to a hierarchical concept of Adam and Eve\u2019s paradisal marriage. Line 299 suggests Adam\u2019s superior standing with God alone, while Eve must somehow touch God through Adam. Eve is made of and for Adam; therefore she is subordinate to him. Indeed, Milton even tells us that they are not equal in line 296, and while Adam is replete with intellectual prowess and valor, Eve is for Adam\u2019s eyes a comfort. Line 298, then, refers back to Milton\u2019s Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce wherein woman is created for the needs of man, be they physical or mental. Later (in IV.490) Eve says she sees \u201cHow beauty is excelled by manly grace \/ And wisdom, which alone is truly fair.\u201d These lines not only imply the superiority of \u201cmanly grace,\u201d but that man\u2019s wisdom is good enough without the aid of woman\u2019s intellect. Nevertheless, Adam has an answer to Eve\u2019s admission of \u201cinferiority\u201d wherein he declares his knowledge of Nature\u2019s intention to make Eve \u201cth\u2019 inferior,\u201d yet he is in awe of her wisdom and beauty, \u201cAs one intended first, not after made\u2026\/ (VIII.540-555). In an answer to this evaluation by Adam, Raphael tells Adam in so many words to be wise and self-assured, thus \u201cThe more she will acknowledge thee her head\u201d (VIII.574). What we have here is Milton using a character, (Adam) to interrupt the hierarchy that Milton wishes to impose. In comes Raphael to shore up Milton\u2019s efforts. This divergence of wills can be seen frequently in Paradise Lost, especially between Raphael and Adam, and Adam and Eve. To this end, we see Milton playing with the idea of Eve\u2019s subjection between characters. Eve is amenable to the idea while Adam cannot quite grasp the idea because he finds her so perfect. It is only when Raphael admonishes Adam of his folly that Milton\u2019s own patriarchal adherence becomes clear, even though Adam dismisses Raphael\u2019s concern:<\/p>\n
So much delights me as those graceful acts,<\/p>\n
Those thousand decencies that daily flow<\/p>\n
From all her words and actions mixed with love<\/p>\n
And sweet compliance, which declare unfeigned<\/p>\n
Union of mind, or in us both one soul;<\/p>\n
Harmony to behold in wedded pair<\/p>\n
More grateful than harmonious sound to the ear. (VIII.600-606)<\/p>\n
This verse reveals Adam to be ardently besotted with Eve, and indeed can find no wrong in her person. Milton does, of course, defend his stance on patriarchy in line 603 where Eve is depicted as a loving, compliant woman. Yet he has Adam declare that he and Eve are but one soul, harmonious in marriage. This reciprocity refers to McColgan\u2019s assertion that Adam and Eve complete each other in \u201can idyllic, dynamic relationship\u201d (76). Even so, the reader can almost taste the disaster to come due to Adam\u2019s wish to be equal with Eve, while Milton adroitly, and repeatedly, tips the scales in favor of patriarchy. <\/p>\n
According to Ferry, Milton accomplishes this by taking Genesis and certain New Testament scripture, \u201cshape[s] what he c[an] not change,\u201d and makes decisions on choices that are allowed him (113). It would seem, then, that Milton competently molds his epic to follow closely those scriptures that enjoin patriarchy. A biblical verse that perhaps influenced Milton, for he \u201cwas married according to this rite in 1642\u201d (Ferry 115), is the Pauline doctrine addressed to married couples:<\/p>\n
Ye women, submit your selves unto your own husbands,<\/p>\n
as unto the Lord: for the husband is the wives head, even <\/p>\n
as Christ is the head of the Church\u2026so likewise let the <\/p>\n
wives also be in subjection unto their own husbands in<\/p>\n
all things\u2026let the wife reverence her husband\u2026ye wives,<\/p>\n
submit your selves unto your own husbands\u2026 (KJV)<\/p>\n
And the Pauline doctrine continues,<\/p>\n
For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the<\/p>\n
man.<\/p>\n
For the man was not created for the woman\u2019s sake: but<\/p>\n
the woman for the man\u2019s sake. (1 Cor. 11:10-13)<\/p>\n
Of course, this last verse correlates with the poem\u2019s most oft quoted line, according to Ferry, \u201cHe for God only, she for God in him\u201d (IV.299). As I mentioned earlier, this is a direct implication of Eve\u2019s \u201csecond in line\u201d status, and does indeed reflect back to the Corinthian scripture above. While Adam appears to accede to this doctrine, \u201cFor well I understand in the prime end \/ Of Nature her th\u2019 inferior, in the mind \/ And inward Faculties\u2026\u201d (VII.540-42), when it comes down to it, Adam does not want to believe it, <\/p>\n
yet when I approach<\/p>\n
Her loveliness, so absolute she seems <\/p>\n
And in her self compleat, so well to know<\/p>\n
Her own, that what she wills to do or say,<\/p>\n
Seems wisest, vertuousest, discreetest, best;<\/p>\n
All higher knowledge in her presence falls\u2026 (VIII. 546-551)<\/p>\n
As Ferry contends, after this verse Raphael reproofs Adam for his vagaries, and had the discussion ended with the reproof, we would not get what Ferry refers to as a reflection of Milton\u2019s \u201cdivorce tracts [which] praise the \u2018sweet and mild familiarity of love,\u2019 the \u2018fit union of their souls\u2019 between man and wife\u201d (124). This verse to which Ferry refers is Adam\u2019s answer to the angel\u2019s reproof wherein \u201cAdam rephrases his feelings for Eve to make clear that they \u2018subject not\u2019\u201d (124). Ferry contends that \u201cAdam\u2019s speech is therefore the culmination of Milton\u2019s efforts to lift Eve\u2019s unfallen nature out of the place assigned to it in the Old and New Testaments\u201d (124). It is also an effort by Milton to express his own views of marriage in the poem, according to Ferry, and while Adam and Eve\u2019s marriage is \u201cthe fulfillment of ideal human experience\u201d (125), I suggest that Milton only reveals this ideal in order to show in Book IX how damning the Fall really is. <\/p>\n
If the paradisal marriage of Adam and Eve is patriarchal, the postlapsarian one is even more so. Full of blame and self-serving verses of confession, Books IX and X bring to fruition the true status of women during Milton\u2019s time. Both blaming the other for their inadequacies, Adam and Eve quarrel as Eve asks Adam why he let down his guard,<\/p>\n
Being as I am, why didst not thou the head<\/p>\n
Command me absolutely not to go,<\/p>\n
Going into such danger as thou saidst? <\/p>\n
Too facile then thou didst not much gainsay,<\/p>\n
Nay, didst permit, approve, and fair dismiss.<\/p>\n
Had thou been firm and fixed in thy dissent,<\/p>\n
Neither had I transgressed, nor thou with me. (IX. 1155-1161)<\/p>\n
Her blame is met with certain disdain from Adam, who rues the day he trusted her to work alone,<\/p>\n
Thus it shall befall<\/p>\n
Him who to worth in women overtrustingLets her will rule; restraint she will not brook,<\/p>\n
And left to herself, if evil thence ensue,<\/p>\n
She first his weak indulgence will accuse. (IX. 1182-1186)<\/p>\n
The last verse depicts woman as irresponsible, weak, and too curious for her own good. One may also question whether Milton was familiar with Joseph Swetnam\u2019s 1615 publication of The Araignment of Lewde, idle, froward, and unconstant women which determined that women had an \u201cinherent evil nature\u201d (Polydorou, 24). Swetnam\u2019s misogynistic treatise was not lost on Rachel Speght, whose 1617 publication A Mouzell for Melastomusi directly responded to his rant. Swetnam\u2019s contention that women are inherently evil leads me full circle to address McColley\u2019s query as mentioned earlier\u2014what is Eve\u2019s real motive for separating from Adam as they worked the garden? Is it obstinacy or productivity? I would argue that it is a bit of free will combined with curiosity, for Eve knows they will be tempted, and she knows of the Tree of Knowledge. Her curiosity can only be resolved if she disobeys Adam\u2019s first command to not go and this she does. As Adam says, she is free to exercise her will, but she will be better served if she uses her God given reason, <\/p>\n
But God left free the will, for what obeys<\/p>\n
Reason, is free, and reason he made right,<\/p>\n
But bid her well beware, and still erect,<\/p>\n
Least by some fair appearing good surprised<\/p>\n
She dictate false, and misinform the will<\/p>\n
To do what God expressly hath forbid. (IX. 351-356)<\/p>\n
Thus, Eve transgresses not only God, but her husband as well. This is the first disobedience; eating the fruit is the second. <\/p>\n
In this paper I have attempted to show how Adam and Eve\u2019s relationship in Paradise Lost is not an egalitarian one, before or after the Fall. Middle ground analyses do not explain Milton\u2019s defense of the biblical Pauline doctrine of marriage, and feminist versions do little to persuade those who view Paradise Lost as a work reflecting the culture of Milton\u2019s time. To this end, I would argue that Milton artfully designed his epic to conform to biblical patriarchal hierarchy while making sure that readers of Paradise Lost acknowledged that the work could be read as a scriptural truth. <\/p>\n
Work Cited<\/p>\n
Anderson, Douglas. \u201cUnfallen Marriage and the Fallen Imagination in Paradise Lost.\u201d Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. 26.1, The English Renaissance. (Winter, 1986), pp. 125-144.<\/p>\n
Ferry, Anne. \u201cMilton\u2019s Creation of Eve.\u201d Studies in English Literature (Rice). 28.1 (Winter, 1988), p. 113, 20 p.<\/p>\n
McColgan, Kristin Pruitt. \u201cAbundant Gifts: Hierarchy and Reciprocity in Paradise Lost.\u201d South Central Review, 11.1 (Spring, 1994), pp. 75-86.<\/p>\n
McColley, Diane Kelsey. \u201cFree Will and Obedience in the Separation Scene in Paradise Lost.\u201d Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, 12.1, The English Renaissance (Winter, 1972), pp. 103-120.<\/p>\n
Milton, John. Paradise Lost. The Complete Poetry and Essential Prose of John Milton. Ed. William Kerrigan, John Rumrich, & Stephen Fallon. New York: Modern Library, 2007. Print.<\/p>\n
Nyquist, Mary. \u201cThe genesis of gendered subjectivity in the divorce tracts and inParadise Lost. Re-membering Milton: Essays on the Texts and Traditions.Ed. Mary Nyquist and Margaret W. Ferguson. New York: Methuen, 1987. 99-127. Print.<\/p>\n
Polydorou, Desma. \u201cGender and Spiritual Equality in Marriage: A Dialogic Reading of Rachel Speght and John Milton.\u201d Milton Quarterly, 35.1 (Mar. 2001), p. 22 11 p. <\/p>\n
Thickstun, Margaret O. Fictions of the Feminine. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1988. Print.<\/p>\n
Woods, Susanne. \u201cHow Free are Milton\u2019s Women?\u201d Milton and the Idea of Woman. Ed. Julia M. Walker. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1988. Print.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
No Middle Ground: The Patriarchal Environment In Milton\u2019s Paradise Lost On the relationship between Adam and Eve in Paradise Lost,<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-36136","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n