Saturday, October 31, 2009

Where's the Danger?

The controversy that surrounded Tartuffe in the 17th century, and the reason behind its being forbidden, made me begin to think...

I understand that Louis XIV, as an absolute ruler, did not want any form of entertainment that would allow his subjects to interpret things for themselves. It is an easy way to undermine everything Louis' regime stood for and fought to install in French society. So although he like Moliere and was entertained by his plays, I understand why Louis XIV banned the play. Louis needed absolute control over every aspect of his people's lives.

In defense of his play, Moliere asks the question:

"That by putting it onstage I make it dangerous?"

I think Moliere meant that the challenge to a doctrine, people questioning a specific Church truth, is dangerous anywhere. Just by publicly proclaiming it onstage does not make the idea troublesome - it already exists and is a problem! As a writer, Moliere is just drawing attention to this specific social/religious threat.

I would argue that Moliere is correct - he is not creating the questions themselves...but he is making them more publicized. He is making these problems more real by bringing them out in the open.

Friday, October 30, 2009

The Life and Some Works of Joseph Priestly

Joseph Priestley (1733-1804) was an English Unitarian minister and chemist. He was both ordained a minister and married to Mary Wilkinson in 1762. Priestley was on of the founders of Unitarianism, a theology based on the belief in God as one entity, contrary to the popular belief at the time in the trinity. Learned in Latin, Greek, physics, philosophy, algebra and mathematics, Priestley is considered one of the 18th century's most outstanding experimental scientists. He is credited with discovering 9 different gases (only 3 had been previously identified), including oxygen or "dephlogisticated air" in 1774. He also invented soda water ("mephitic julep") as an attempt to prevent scurvy. His experiments in electricity earned him admission into the Royal Society in 1766. Priestley believed that writing the history of science was important because it could show how humans interact with the natural world, as well as the progress of mankind. He wrote over 150 works in his lifetime. To him, science was integral to theology. He repeatedly tried to fuse Enlightenment rationalism with Christian theism. Priestley also believed in civil and religious liberty, consistently advocating toleration and equal rights for Dissenters (since he was one). For these beliefs, Priestley was suffered persecution and hostility from his countrymen. He was often considered an atheist, despite his many writings on spirituality and religion. His house and laboratory were burnt down in 1791. He fled to Pennsylvania to find the religious freedom that was so lacking in Britain. He died in Northumberland, PA in 1804.

Unitarianism (p. 155-160)

This selection from one of Priestley's Letters to Dr. Horsley of 1783 is the Unitarianism creed, referred to as Socinian. He begins by describing his accepting of "the Socinian hypothesis." Priestley explains that he was born a fervent Calvinist, and then later converted to Arianism before he turned to Unitarianism. He goes on to explain his belief in Christ as fully human, and how the early Christian Church must have then began with a Unitarian mindset. Priestley stresses the fact that someone cannot be expected to be converted by arguments, but by the internal reading and processing of Scripture. He defends himself against religious persecutors, saying that he has always been open to listen to new ideas, and has been willing to accept them if they make sense. Priestley mentions the persecution he has received for the publication of The History of the Corruptions of Christianity, although he later thanks God for this opportunity to expose so many people to his beliefs. He ends positively proclaiming the benevolence of God and expressing his utmost trust in God's plan. Although he does not believe that God is inspiring him to write each word, he does believe that every action engaged in "theological controversy" is "promoting his own excellent purposes."

The Organization of Scientific Research (p. 69-73)

This excerpt, taken from Priestley's History and Present State of Electricity (1767), describes his ideas on how to systematically conduct scientific research. Priestley believes that science has become to large of a discipline: "at present retarded...by its own weight." He suggests subdividing it into smaller, more manageable disciplines. Before this, however, Priestley wants to write one large history of science as a whole. He explains that Natural Philosophy requires more wealth than other disciplines, because "Nature will not be put out of her way" just so man can discover her secrets. As it turns out, he continues, most aristocrats are willing to become patrons, as science is what often makes their lives more comfortable and sophisticated. Priestley proclaims that the sciences are what advances man above barbarianism and brutality; not only do they make it easier for man to live longer, but improves mankinds's very nature. The study of nature allows man to understand better, and therefore, in Priestley's mind, allows his to take more joy in the happenings of the world.

Discussion Questions

- Priestley ends his Organization of Scientific Research by saying that by further examining nature, even the bad things in life could be understood to be working towards a greater good. Do you think that is true? Do we perceive evil and pain simply because we are ignorant?

-Priestley believes that science is inevitably linked to religion. The more you know about science, the more you know about God and His plan for us. Thoughts?

- Why would Priestley's belief in Unitarianism be so controversial at the time? Why was he so persecuted for his beliefs?

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Connections

In light of the recent midterm, I was thinking of various themes we've covered this semester.

It struck me that the idea of the journey has not only been a linking theme this semester. It has been a prominent theme since we started our own journey as a class in the medieval times that has carried us through the Enlightenment. Remember Sir Gawain and the Green Knight? Or Saint Benedict's spiritual journey? Petrarch's search of the self? Chaucer's portrayal of pilgrims traveling to pay homage to a saint's relic? Dante's depiction of a journey through hell?

I think this says a lot about human nature as a whole. We are constantly searching, never satisfied with what we have. We have this irresistible urge to discover. There is something enchantingly romantic about the noble quest: spiritual, mental, emotional or physical.

I'm sure this idea will keep returning into the Spring. I just thought it was interesting that one idea could carry through time, literature and history in such an absolute and dramatic way.

Friday, October 9, 2009

Other Devil-ish Works

More than once in our discussions about Paradise Lost I was reminded of a book I've read by C.S. Lewis called The Screwtape Letters.

There's a website explaining and analyzing the text, which is interesting: Look Here

Basically, the novel is a collection of letters written by a demon named Screwtape to his young novice, Woodworm, on how to win a soul for Satan. In this complex, mind-messing novel, Lewis creates an intricate hierarchial web in the underworld, which reminded me a lot of Pandemonium.

The thing that mostly reminded me of Paradise Lost, I think, is how real the demon seemed. Conniving and clever, Screwtape is completely committed to his evil cause. However, his arguments make sense and his summation of human nature (though, of course, cynical) is pretty dead on. I think the epistle format of the books also add an element of relatability. Milton also is able to portray Satan (the Arch-Enemy, the Fallen Angel, Lucifer) as a captivating and dynamic figure. There's just something about the fact that Milton chose Satan to be the epic hero in his poem that challenges norms.

In both The Screwtape Letters and Paradise Lost the demons are eerily believable. They also both chose to use the hell to make comparisons to humans, rather than setting a scene in heaven. Milton, a notorious anti-Royalist, portrays heaven as a sort of monarch and hell as having a council as its form of government. Perhaps he did this as a way of saying that only God could be a completely righteous and just monarch, so all of those who are fallen should be ruled by councils. In the same way, I feel like C.S. Lewis believed that it was easier, and more believable, to depict a demon than an angel. How much easier is it to portray human's evil tendencies, after all?

Again, I have to appreciate the guts it takes for any author to take on the challenge of getting into the mind of and personify demons. How do you even begin to get in the mind of a demon? What makes a believeable devil?

Friday, October 2, 2009

Why Light?

http://www.leeds.ac.uk/library/adopt-a-book/pics/milton.jpg

I just thought this was cool, especially since we saw the original cover of Anne Bradstreet's "The Tenth Muse." It really has nothing to do with the rest of this blog.

I love Milton's rhetoric. Sometimes I'll find myself re-reading passages just because it sounds so darn good. I've always known words could be powerful, but I feel like this just took it to a whole other level for me.

What especially interested in was Milton's emphasis on LIGHT and DARK. There are so many allusions to this theme, whether he's talking about the underworld being a "dark descent" or God shining bright though covered by a cloud, or the Holy Spirit illuminating what is normally invisible to mortals. Why the consistent return to this language of sight?

- It's just a natural way to describe the indescribable? It is something that is always present, although it's intangible - so it makes the perfect analogy to God?

- It's simply human nature to focus on that which we do not have. So is Milton emphasizing the visual in his poetry because that is what he lacks? Is he perhaps trying to create a world which he can "see" in his mind's eye?

- When you close your eyes, you can still recognize the difference between light and dark, sun and shade. Maybe Milton's emphasis on light comes from the fact that it is still a part of the visual world that he can relate to and sense despite his lack of sight?

- Quite frankly, words of light, illumination and sunshine are beautiful. You just feel happy inside thinking about those things. Words associated with darkness have a very negative connotation. Maybe Milton is trying to play off of these natural human feelings to evoke emotion in his work?

- Along those lines: this stark contrast, the very opposite-ness of the natures of light and dark, make a perfect dichotomy for God and Satan?

The Last Enemy To Be Destroyed Is Death

While by thee rais'd I ruin all my Foes,
Death last

Milton writes these words into Jesus' mouth as part of his acceptance speech to take on the role of Sacrificial Lamb for all of Mankind.

Reading this, I couldn't help but think of another quote...

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." - 1 Corinthians 15:26*

I was instantly struck with this parallel, the almost word-for-word rephrasing of Scripture. Surely people of Milton's time would have recognized this passage, and many others that he invokes in Paradise Lost, as borrowed from the Bible. This may give his work more credibility, with a more reliable and true tone. Or maybe Milton just thought it natural for God to voice these passages, since if Scripture was divinely inspired then God would have said these things before anyway.

This parallel also made me realize just how much of a humanistic work this is. This is combining the classical epic poetry with religion and history and science. The calculated mixture of imagination and learning is difficult to achieve. Well done, Milton, well done.

*Is it bad that I recognized the passage in Paradise Lost as being from the Bible because it was written on James and Lily Potter's graves in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? Harry Potter: bridging the gap between Milton and the Bible. I love it.

Free Will and Forgiveness

The first sort by their own suggestion fell,
self-tempted, self-deprav'd: Man falls deceiv'd
By the other first: Man therefore shall find grace,
The other none

Here is the choice of free will cropping up again, although in a very different sense than how we normally think about it. The fallen angels (now demons) chose their fate. They, out of their own greed and weakness, decided to fall out of God's favor. Man, however, was deceived by these creatures. Although Man had a choice to chose evil over good, he still was not motivated out of his own wickedness to turn away from God.

And therein lies the difference, and the reason why Satan cannot repent, right? If he was self-tempted in Heaven, eternal Paradise, then why would he satisfied anywhere else, on Earth or elsewhere, if he wasn't The Authority?