Milton Chaos and paradise lost.pdf

7/27/2019 Milton Chaos and paradise lost.pdf

1/13

0LOWRQV*RGDQGWKH0DWWHURI&KDRV$XWKRUV-RKQ5XPULFK6RXUFH30/$9RO1R2FWSS3XEOLVKHGE\Modern Language Association6WDEOH85/http://www.jstor.org/stable/463028 .

$FFHVVHG

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PMLA.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mlahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/463028?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/463028?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mla


2/13

JohnRumrich

Milton's God and the Matterof Chaos

JOHN RUMRICH, associateprofessorof Englishat the Uni-versity of Texas,Austin,teachesShakespeare and Milton andserves as associate editor ofTexasStudiesin LiteratureandLanguage. A version of thisessay forms part of a book-length study,Milton Unbound,forthcoming from CambridgeUniversityPress.

Therewere to befive greatproofs of the existenceof chaos,of whichthe irstwasthe absence of God.The other our could surelybe located. The workof defini-tion and explicationcould, if done nicely enough, occupythe angels forever,asthe contraryworkhas occupied humantheologians. But there is not much en-thusiasmor chaos amongtheangels. DonaldBarthelme

R EMARKABLY LITTLE has been written on Chaos in Par-adise Lost, though the epic, as Robert Adams observes, "doesmake it necessary for us to look at Chaos, or think of Chaos, again andagain" (75). The few who address the subject tend to argue that as an al-legorical character Chaos represents a condition that is neutral and pas-sive or, more extremely, ominous and evil.1 A. B. Chambers, for example,insists in a classic essay that "Chaos and Night are the enemies of God,""opposed to him only less than hell itself" (65, 69)-a charge that seemsindisputable since in book 2 Chaos expresses interest in the destructionof created order. And yet, accepting the alliance of Chaos and Satan atface value raises problems. Milton's metaphysics were monistic andmaterialist, and in Paradise Lost chaos represents "theWomb of Nature"that contains "dark materials to create more Worlds" (2.911, 2.916). Ifthe poet conceived of this matrix as intrinsically hostile to God and cre-ation, any attempt at theodicy would seem pointless.N. J. Girardot observes that historically myth and religious thoughtmake a "dualistic distinction" between "the absolutely sacred and cre-ative being of a transcendent 'kindlier' God, on the one hand, and theutterly profane nothingness and nonbeing of a passively neutral or ac-tively belligerent chaos" (214).2 Similarly, in assessing the break of post-modem chaos theory with previous attitudes toward chaos, N. KatherineHayles writes that "creation myths in the West, from the Babylonian epicEnuma elish to Milton's Paradise Lost, depict chaos as a negative state,

1035

This content downloaded from 128.250.144.144 on Tue, 16 Jul 2013 10:23:14 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


3/13

Milton'sGodandtheMatterof Chaos

a disordered void which must be conquered forcreation to occur"(Introduction2). Yet even in re-ceived traditionsof the dualisticWest,thereareal-ternatives to these depictions: "The apparentlyfundamentalcontrast between chaos and cosmosmay reveal more of a dialectical relationship...Inthe broadest ense,chaos stands or the root 'oth-erness'and 'strangeness'of existence and the ironicindeterminacyof all human constructs"(Girardot214). Contemporaryphilosophy and science areparticularly aware of such ironic indeterminacy.Whether the subject of investigation is language,light, matter,or human subjectivity, postmoderntheoristsusuallyfind thatphenomena,except whenconsidered from an artificiallynarrowperspective,are not equal to themselves, that they are consti-tutedin variousways by alterity.3Postmoderismsthus react againstthe tendency to reduce"thedif-ferent and the changing"to "the identical and thepermanent"PrigogineandStengers293).This essay arguesthat an awarenessof ironicin-determinacy s implicit throughoutParadise Lost;Milton recognized that identity and otherness arealways mixed. Scholars who note that indetermi-nacy springing romchaos is pervasivein ParadiseLost-"built into theverystructure f the cosmos"-characterizechaos as insidiously evil, as "discord,passivity,weakness ... an intimate,andultimatelyinvincible enemy" (Adams 85). My discussiondrawson twentieth-century haostheoryto suggestinstead that a profoundappreciationof chaotic in-determinacy distinguishes Milton's idiosyncratictheology,politicaltheory,and aesthetics.I compareMilton's representationof creationwith the one inthe Enumaelish because the ancient epic has be-come a telling point of reference for Milton schol-ars,as Hayles's generalizationconfirms,as well asfor feminist critics of patriarchy (Daly; Keller).Those who describe Milton's chaos and its influ-ence in creation as passively ominous or activelyevil not only acquiesce in a narrativeimpressionleft earlyin the epic; they also unjustifiably ssumeMilton'sendorsementof traditionalWesternphilo-sophicalandreligious attitudes owardmatter.The occidental bias against matterreflects thetheology andpolitical environmentof early Chris-tianity. The church fathers dammed up some ofChristianity's deepest Hellenistic tributaries by

concluding hat matterwas not intrinsically vil. Tohave followed Neoplatonic philosophiesby desig-nating matter nnately evil would have meantes-tablishing a dualistic religion. Dualist doctrineplaces matteroutside God's dominion,precludingbelief in a single omnipotentdeity andundermin-ing faith in any order,cosmic or civil, for thosewho live in a material world. Hence, accordingtothe Augustinianontology that dominatedChristianethics from the fourth century through Milton'stime, evil is not substantialbutvolitional,a willfulestrangementfrom the divine source of all being.Decay into nothingnesslooms as the ultimate out-come of thatestrangement.The early churchthusdeemed matteracceptable,as passive stuff createdby God from nothingand then ordered nto shape.Insteadof inherentmalignancy, t was proximity onothingnessthatexplained matter's sinful tenden-cies. As Dennis Danielson demonstrates, seven-teenth-century religious writing on the creationfairly crackles with the ominous moral charge of"nothing"33-43).The preoccupation with nothing went beyondtheology to pervadeRenaissanceculture.Spenser'sdescription of humanity's original clay as "base,vile, and next to nought"assumes there are ethicaldangersin the vicinity of nonexistence (Hymne ofHeavenly Love [Minor Poems 106]). Indeed, inRenaissance English naught and naughty have aremarkablypejorative force, and texts of the pe-riod engage obsessively in sexual wordplay onnothing.The wordaccumulatesapocalypticsignif-icance in King Lear, where the threat of nothingfinds its most profoundexpression.While Christianorthodoxy may have acknowl-edgedthisNeoplatonic hingof darknessas its own,therefore, t also reckonedontologicallyprecariousmatterandthe virtuesassociated with it to be mar-ginal and inferior-Sancho Panzas or Spenseriandwarvesamong possiblegoods4 Furthermore,mat-ter in the form of human flesh was thought torequire discipline and direction before it couldachieve even these lowly virtues. For Plato "themother and receptacle," or "mother substance,"must be forcefully persuaded o acceptform, inso-far as it can (Timaeus51a-b). His widely influentialapology for material creations also portraysstub-bornoriginal matter as ugly and malignant:"God

1036



4/13

JohnRumrich

made them as far as possible the fairest and best,out of thingswhich were not fair andgood"(53b).Eschewingdualism n theory,AugustinianChris-tianity sponsored in practice an ethical dualismsuited to the imperial government of church andstate(Pagels 98-126). The rulingprincipleof spiritor mind was associated with the masculine, andmatter was, as in Plato, identified as a feminineandmaternalprinciple hatrequired ormal,hierar-chical control.Analogously,the boisterous masseswere believed naturally o need correctionand di-rection before they could aspireto the appropriateminor virtues. Such doctrine and discipline re-

mained a commonplaceof politicaltheorythrough-out the EnglishRenaissance.5A corresponding ias against he firstmatterrunsthroughmainstream eventeenth-century ommen-taries on biblical creation.Typically, they deployclassical terminology and, like Milton, designatethe realm of the first matter by the pagan termchaos (Danielson 28-49). Chaos so often appearsin these commentaries to mean the same thing asthefirst matterthat the two terms cannotclearlybedifferentiated.Chaos meansprimarily he limitlessplace-a vast gulf or abyss-filled with the firstmatterand,by extension, also the utterlyconfusedcondition of that matter.Indeterminacyof extentor constitution s centralto bothmeanings.Disdainfor the unsightlyandobstinatematterofchaos is evident both in seventeenth-centuryreli-gious writing and among Milton's literaryprecur-sors.JoshuaSylvester's influential1605translationof du Bartas'sLa semaine depicts"Chaosmost di-forme"as "anugly medly"and"profoundAbisse, /Full of Disorder and fell mutinies" 9-11). Writingin 1621, the prelate-poetJohnAndrewesdescribesthe chaotic first matter as "an empty, rude, un-shapen, and indigested lump" (43). Cromwell'schaplain,PeterSterry,observes thatman is consti-tutedby formandmatter,which correspond o "thelight of God, and his own properdarkness,""thedarkness or nothingness, which is the Creaturesown, is the proper groundof sin"(Danielson 38).In TheFaerie Queene, Spenser,Milton's most ac-knowledged poetic influence, portrays chaos as"thewide wombe of the world" hat ies "in hatefuldarknesse and in deepe horrore" 3.6.36).6 Spen-ser'sHymne nHonourof Love statesthattheworld

"out of great Chaos ugly prison crept" (MinorPoems 58). Joseph Beaumont, an exponent of theSpenserianpoetic line, imagines the original mat-ter-"one single step / Fromsimple nothing"-aswallowing "in the gulf of its own monstrousDark-ness"(Kirkconnell116).The darkdeformityof chaos was also a standardtenet of naturalphilosophy from the thirteenthtotheeighteenthcentury,as theencyclopedictraditionsurveyed by Kester Svendsen confirms (52-53).Divine love set the warringelements of natureatpeace in an order defining beauty: "Ayrehatedearth,and waterhatedfyre,"writes Spenser,"TillLove relented heir rebelliousyre"(Hymne n Hon-our of Love [Minor Poems 83-84]). A unifyingprinciple of English Renaissanceculturewas thatthe violence of chaos returnswhen love is absent.Thus Romeo invokes a scientific-theologicalpara-dox to express the dissonanceof his experienceoflove in the midstof civil strife:

Why hen,Obrawlingove!Olovinghate!Oany hing,of nothingirst create]!Oheavy ightness,erious anity,Misshapenhaosof well -seeming]orms ..(1.1.176-79; racketsnorig.)

Similarly, n a privateobservation hatforetells thedomestic and societal discord to follow, Othelloattributescosmogonic force to his bond with Des-demona: "when I love thee not, / Chaos is comeagain" 3.3.91-92).In strikingcontrast o theoften harshdisapprovalof chaos in Renaissancetheology, science, and lit-erary culture, Milton in Christian Doctrine de-scribestheconfused,disordered irstmatteras goodin itself andthe necessarybasis of a good creation:

Itis, I say,a demonstrationf God'ssupreme owerandgoodness hathe shouldnot shutupthishetero-geneousandsubstantial irtuewithinhimself,butshoulddisperse, ropagatendextendtas faras,andinwhatever ay,he wills.For hisoriginalmatterwasnot anevil thing,nor o bethought f asworthless:twasgood,and tcontainedhe seedsof allsubsequentgood.It wasa substance, ndcouldonlyhave beenderived rom hesourceof all substance.twas in aconfusedanddisorderedtateatfirst,butafterwardsGodmadet orderedndbeautiful. (308)

1037



5/13

Milton'sGodand theMatterof Chaos

In Milton's heretical theology a benevolent Godtakes the place of ominousnothingnessas matter'ssource. Paradise Lost is not always consistentwithin itself, much less with Christian Doctrine,andits perspectiveson chaos vary.Yet as the realmof the good firstmatter,chaos should not appear obe God'senemy,not if Milton'stheology of matterhas any bearing on Paradise Lost.The dualistic case against chaos in ParadiseLost is nonetheless strong.Indeterminateby defi-nition,chaos has no boundaries,no circumscribingform, and in Milton's narrative,creationoccurs atthe moment when the creator institutes determi-nate boundaries:

Thus arr xtend,hus arr hybounds,Thisbethy ustCircumference,World.ThusGod heHeav'n reated,hus heEarth....(7.230-32)It seems inevitable that chaos should appearsym-bolically, if not theologically, as anticreation aswell as antecreation.One way to negotiate this apparent mpasse be-tween Milton'spoetryandhis religiousdoctrine s todiscount hepertinenceof his theologyto "therealmof symbols" (Schwartz 33). Locating in ancientMesopotamian traditions symbolic precedent forscriptural rohibitionsagainsttransgressing reatedorder,ReginaSchwartzarguesthat these values in-form Paradise Lost at a more basic and symboli-cally meaningful level than Milton's theologicalprinciples do (24, 26). It is possible, however, totakeaccount of the allegoricalcharacterChaos andnarrative acts concerningchaos withoutresortingto the claim that Milton in his poetry contradictsfundamentalprinciplesof his monistictheology.In Schwartz's reading, failure to observe theboundariesestablished at creation affrontsthe cre-ator andpartakesof the indeterminacyof chaos, "agreaterthreat in Milton's moral universe than theSatanic one of a definite willed disobedience" 18).But scrupulous observance of limits and bound-aries, as scriptureenjoins throughthe ceremonialand dietary law, is in Paradise Lost linked not tothe sanctityof unfallencreation but to loss, fallen-ness, andmakeshiftsafeguards againstfurtheren-croachment by sin. The categories of sacred andprofaneaffect discussion of the forbidden ruitonly

when the nearlyfallen Adam advancesa pharisaicjustification or his projectedsin:[P]erhapsheFactIs notso hainous ow, oretastedruit,Profan'dirstbytheSerpent, yhim irstMade ommon ndunhallowdreour aste....

(9.928-31)The holiness of the garden, destined "haunt ofSeales andOrcs,"has little bearingon the decisionto evict Adam and Eve. As Michael insists, "Godattributes to place / No sanctitie,"at least not toplace in and of itself (11.835-37). Similarly,Miltontraces the dichotomyof clean and uncleanderivingfrom shame andthe recognition of nakedness to apostlapsarian point of origin, not to the originalorder(9.1091-98).In the unfallen world remembranceof creationandpraiseof the creatordo not evoke whatMichaelcalls the "servil fear"of trespass osteredby "strictLaws"(12.304-05). Synestheticconfusionaboundsin Milton'sheaven,whereordinaryimits are meantto be overcomewith ease. Spiritscan "eitherSex as-sume,or both" 1.424);"allHeart heylive, allHead,all Eye, all Eare, All Intellect,all Sense,"withnoanatomicalrestrictionof function(6.350-51). An-gels literallysmell good news coming (3.135-37).Observance of boundaries even coincides withtransgressionwhere "full measureonely bounds/excess," and celebrations are most regular"whenmost irregular hey seem" (5.639-40, 5.624). Theangels who venturepast the gates of heaven to in-vestigate creation and to glorify God thus indulgein "noexcess / That reachesblame,but rathermer-its praise/ The more it seems excess" (3.696-98).Small wonder thatGabrielglows with angerwhenSatancalls him a "limitarieCherube" 4.971).Boundariesdo play a crucialrole in Miltonic cre-ation.As in present-day haostheory,however, heyallow for productiveanddynamicdisorder withinthe framework of an evolving, larger order (Pri-gogine andStengers287-306). Boundaries estab-lish a space "betweenorderand disorder .. wherepreviously there was only bifurcation" (Hayles,Chaos Bound 27). The inspiredauthorialvoice ofParadiseLost expresses the desire to cross bound-aries, which, though recognized as risky, consis-tently appearsnoble and godlike. In the realm of

1038



6/13

JohnRumrich

love, also risky, a comparison of human and an-gelic sex suggests that the more refined the crea-ture,the moreobviously the impulseto join recallsthe boundlesselemental mix. Angelic partnersex-perience their amorous pleasure in completelycrossing the boundarybetween them. Apocalypticlove-when "God shallbe All in All" (3.341)-un-mistakably eflects the wild energyof chaos, as theconsciousness of what was once formal "restraint"inspiresanendlessly"luxurious" rofusionof plea-sureandjoy (9.209). This sense of the apocalypseis not unique to Paradise Lost. The rewardenvi-sioned for Milton's beloved Diodati, for example,is furious with bacchanalianpleasure:"Cantusubi,choreisque furit lyra mista beatis, I Festa Sionaeobacchantur & Orgia Thyrso" 'where there is singing,where the lyre revels madly, mingled with choirsbeatific, and festal orgies run riot, in bacchantefashion,with the thyrsusof Zion' (EpitaphiumDa-monis218-19). The chronologyof the end time ex-plicitly draws on descriptionsof chaos:"beyond sall abyss, / Eternitie,whose end no eye can reach"(PL 12.555-56).Far frombeing invariablyhostile to creation, heenergy of chaos seems vitally involved with crea-tures'aspirations nderotic desires.To be sure,fromSatan's perspective in book 2, the state of chaosappearswarlike.Thisearlydescriptiondoes not in-validate the erotic associations of chaos, however.Like battle, sex requires its participantsto mix itup, so to speak, a chiastic intersection that a Ho-mericRaphael acknowledgeswhen in a single linehe uses a single verb-"meet"-for bothloving andfighting(6.93).7Yet Miltonscholarshiphas charac-teristically defined relations between the disorderof chaos and the order of God exclusively as ad-versarial:"the warin heaven is only thebeginning,not the end, of the battleagainstChaos. It is foughtagainat creation,at the fall, with CainandAbel, atBabel and the flood;all of humanhistoryis playedout on thisbattlefield"Schwartz38).This synopsisis selective, however, even as a descriptionof thefallen order.Satan's embrace of Sin precedes thewar in heaven;Adam and Eve's lustproducesCain;Cain'sdaughters educe the sons of God;the unionof these couples brings forth the warlike giants-and so on and so on:"lusthardby hate," s Milton'sbawdydiction has it (1.417).

The constructionof chaoticdisorderas belliger-ence destructive to civilization indicates that theconcept of chaos has political ramifications n ad-ditionto its religious and ethicalones.8Mythologi-cally, narratives hatfeature the violent defeat and"permanent uppression"of a hostile chaos oftenfunction to celebrate "the heroic finality of someauthoritarianorder"(Girardot216). The Enumaelish is such a myth. A Babylonian creation epicthat influenced the Genesis account, it has beencited as the ultimate mythological source of Mil-ton's martialrepresentation f chaos (Schwartz26-31). Milton's account of creation differs from theEnumaelish, however,by presentingnonviolencewhere the Babylonianstory proposesviolence.During the creationnarrative n Paradise Lost,chaos is describedas"outrageous"nd "wild,"with"furiouswinds/ And surgingwaves"that move thedivineWord o describe t as "troubl'd"7.212-16).The peace he bids it is such peace as might quietstormywaters, however, not foes at war. And thearmsthat the creatorwields againsthis chaotic seaof troubles are not the thunderand terror that heuses to blast the enemy angels but his ministeringwordand"goldenCompasses,"which are meanttocircumscribe, not defeat, the materials for a newworld(7.225).

By contrast, Marduk,the heroic creator in theEnuma elish, butchers the maternal chaos deity,Tiamat, and builds creation out of the pieces.Scholarlyexaminationof the textual recordhas re-vealedthat, ike PerseusamongtheGreeks,Mardukemerges in his heroic role duringthe periodwhena patriarchalorder of kingship established itselfthroughout the Near East (Ricoeur 176).9 TheEnuma elish thusbetraysan impulseto ground hepatriarchalorder of kingship in cosmic hierarchy,affording monarchical prerogative divine right.Admittedly,the peace-wishing creator n ParadiseLost also suppresseschaos, but his suppression stemporary,and once creation has occurred,chaosis left as boundlessand wild as thecreator oundit,always available to substantiatealternatives o theestablishedorder(2.915-16).For Milton, politicized constructions of chaoswould have been evident not only in ancient my-thologies but also in seventeenth-centuryabsolut-ist ideologies that he combated. RichardIII, who

1039



7/13


was viewed by Tudor propagandists as a livingsymbol of the evil strife quieted by their divinelyappointedmonarchs,has a body shaped"[l]ike toa chaos" in Shakespeare's depiction (Henry VI,Part 3 3.2.161). In Troilus and Cressida Ulysses fa-mously insists thatviolation of social hierarchy n-evitably produces he "mereoppugnancy" f chaosin every realm of order,from the personal to thecosmic (1.3.111).In LeviathanHobbesalso invokeschaos to deplorethe consequencesof rebellion:

WhenChristianmen, akenottheirChristian over-aign,for God'sprophet .. theymust suffer hem-selves to bee lead ... by some fellow subjects, thatcanbewitch hemby slander f thegovernment,ntorebellion . . . andby this means destroying all laws,bothdivine andhumane, educeall Order,Govern-ment,andSociety, o thefirstChaosof Violence, ndCivillWarre. (299)

For Hobbesrebellionagainstthe sovereignreturnssociety to a stateof chaotic violence. In a momentworthy of Marduk he maintains that the "naturalpunishment"or such rebellion s "slaughter"254).In Milton's epic the personwho most desires toestablish"someauthoritarianrder" nddefinitivelyto suppresschaos is Satan.Ironically,Satan'srebel-lion against God's authority s sparkedby the an-nouncementof a changethathe takesas detrimentalto his hierarchicalposition(5.659-65). Oncefallen,the rebelangels areinclined to rigidityandparodicorderliness-the correlativesof theirfixed opposi-tion to God-and theirincreasinglyobduratebod-ies, though susceptible to wounds and pain, areapparentlyno longer supple enough for them tomake love (4.509-11). Instead,they occupy them-selves with place and status, boundaryand limit,and observe the externalsof distinctionwith punc-tilious grandiosityor servility.Not surprisingly,hen,Satan'ssuccessfulmissionon earth mpairschaos. Satan'schild Death uses a"Macepetrific" o fix the once indeterminatemat-ter,now "boundwithGorgonianrigornot to move,"andsecuresthe structure"with Pinns of AdamantAnd Chains,"making "all fast, too fast" (10.294,10.297,10.318-19).The comparisonof Death strik-ing chaos to the tyrannicalXerxes whipping "th'indignantwaves"of the Hellespontunderscores he

absolutistaspectof thismassive edifice(10.306-10).Double-crossed Chaos responds with ire to themortisedrigorof Death's"Pontiface" 10.348):

[O]neither ideDisparted haosoverbuiltexclaim'd,Andwithreboundingurge hebarrs ssaild,That cornd isindignation.... (10.415-18)Chaos cannot undo the division to his realm now"disparted." he fall has imposednew orderon hisrealm: hetyrannically ppressive tructure f evil.10The Satanic suppression of chaos-in whichDeath appearsas the ultimate silencing of ironicindeterminacy-echoes in Milton'sepic versionofbiblical historywhen Nimroderects a greattower."Thoughof Rebellionothershe accuse," ettingtheexamplefollowedby tyrantsof futureages,Nimrodis himself the rebel-"Above his Brethren o him-self assuming / Autoritie usurpt"and warringon"such as refuse / Subjection to his Empiretyran-nous"(12.37, 12.65-66, 12.31-32). God respondsderisively to Nimrod by reaffirmingthe power ofchaos against the architecturalsymbol of the ty-rant'spresumption:

[G]reataughter as n Heav'nAnd ookingdown, o seethehubbubtrangeAndhear hedin; huswasthebuildingeftRidiculous,nd heworkConfusion am'd.(12.59-62)

The connection with chaos sounds distinctly in"thedin," "the hubbubstrange,"and the "confu-sion" enforcedby God on those who would ignorewhatGirardot alls the "ironic ndeterminacy f allhuman constructs"(cf. PL 2.951, 2.1040, 2.897).Raphael imagines a similar if milder response byGod to the theoretical mpositionsof Ptolemaic as-tronomerswho contrive "to save appearances" ndto protect the political ideologies that, as Galileolearned,rely on appearances 8.81). In attemptingto deny or suppress ndeterminacy, yrantsbecomevulnerable o God's derision-as well as to the in-evitablevengeanceof chaos.The most memorableedifices in Milton's works-the bridge across chaos, Pandemonium, andNimrod's tower-are monolithic and tyrannicalin aspectandat least implicitly targetsof heaven's

1040



8/13

JohnRumrich

scorn. A contraryarchitecturaleffort, envisionedin Areopagitica,is thatof the templeof truth:[W]hen verystone s laidartfullyogether,t cannotbe unitedntoacontinuity,t canbutbecontiguousnthisworld;neither aneverypieceof thebuilding eof oneform;nayratherheperfectiononsistsnthis,thatoutof manymoderate arieties ndbrotherlyis-similitudeshatarenotvastlydisproportional,risesthegoodlyandgraceful ymmetryhat ommendshewholepileand tructure. (555)

The temple cannot be built without the discord ofsects or without toleranceof them, thougha tyrantmight attempt o impose uniformity.Furthermore,the structure ncludes disorderanddisproportion,since the orderof truthgrows out of "brotherly is-similitudes."For Milton the createdorderof mate-rialbeing in time cannot advance withoutdisorder.Politicallyas well as symbolically, hen,Milton'sepic depiction of the pervasive influence of chaosseems consistent with his theology of matter.Butstrong narrative evidence of the malignancy ofchaos remains. The anarchsupportsSatan's mis-sion andmenacingly proclaims,"Havoc andspoiland ruin aremy gain" 2.1008).For this reasonWil-liamEmpsonsays that Denis Saurat's dentificationof preexistent matter with God in Paradise Lost"makesnonsense of most of [the]narrative"144).Moreover,Milton chose to represent haosthroughallegory n anincreasinglynominalistand antischo-lastic seventeenth-century ntellectual climate, inwhich allegorical narrativehad become "anidealvehicle for presentingdeficient ontology,"as Ste-phenFallon writes(182). Miltonthus seems to bol-ster formally the notion thatchaos is an enemy ofdivine creation.And yet, for the materialistMilton,deficient on-tology does not necessarily imply a loss of beingthat results from evil. The ontological deficiencyof chaos indicates instead a materialpotency thatis the preconditionof creation.WhereasAugustinehad no equivalent of chaos in his philosophy be-cause he believed in creationex nihilo, Milton, anexponentof creationex deo, believes that the realmof potentialcreationpossesses a shadowyexistenceof its own. In a realmpriorto creation, any onto-logical lack conveyed by Milton's allegory means

only that the matter has not yet undergone crea-tion. The realm or state of being that Chaosspeaksfor would profitfromthe uncreation-not the per-version-of the world, since his anarchywould beaugmented.Empson'snarrative-based bjectiontochaos ignoresthe principlethat"allegoricalagentsreveal by their actions not internal psychologiesbut the abstractions .. thatlie behind them"(Fal-lon 173).The other-speakingpolysemy of allegory,"leaningaway at variousoblique angles from sol-dierlydirectness," s GordonTeskeywrites,makesit an ideal mode for expressing the ironic indeter-minacyof chaos (398).

In Milton's allegory chaos thus represents anindeterminate materialprinciple whose complexdisorder persists dynamically in any order.Oneconsequenceof a creation hatoriginates n andin-cludes indeterminacy s thatcertainknowledge isimpossible, even amongthe angels." They can beand regularly are tricked, mistaken, or befuddledso that atcritical momentsthey standpassive, notknowingwhat to do despiteGod's announcements.At one of the most crucial points in the poem, atouchy andless thanefficacious Gabrielmisreadsor only partiallyunderstands he significance of asign displayed n the heavensby God,who is com-pared o a "carefulPlowmandoubting"what actionto take (4.983). The consequence of this most un-fathomablemoment is thatSatangoes free, his ap-prehensionby the angelic guardneutralized.The excessive appearance f Eve, whose "loveli-ness"makes her seem superior o Adam,even "ab-solute,"though she is supposedto be his inferior,richly conveys this sense thatthings are constitu-tionallyunpredictablesee 8.534-59). Eve is eroti-cally perplexingto Adam, more puzzling than thevast heavens in their apparentexcessiveness. Hisconfusion over Eve's elaborate "Ornament"dis-tinctly echoes his confusion over the "incompre-hensible ... disproportions"of celestial motions:why shoulda good creationappearexcessive at thecosmic or the human level (8.20-27)? Raphaelnever seems less adeptthan when he recommendsthatAdamflayEve's "outside" ndsee how it altersherpersonfor the worse (8.568).2 Thistactlessnessis also doctrinallysuspect, since Adam hasjust in-formed the angel that Eve is born from the wombof Adam's flesh andis shaped in the image of his

1041



9/13


heart's desire. As in Milton's theological descrip-tion of the firstmatter, he contains the seed "of allsubsequent good." The capacity of her "fruitfulWomb" o bringforth "multitudes" ndeventuallythe savior,her"Seed,"makes Eve the humancoun-terpartof chaos, vital to the defeat of Satan's tyr-anny(5.388, 4.474, 10.1031).Even if Milton had not called chaos awomb,13tsgenerative apacitywould be apparentn thepatternthatSatan ollows duringhis violent encounterwithchaos, an intensely recursivepattern hatpervadeshis activity n ParadiseLost.When he persuadeshisdaughter o open gates that should remainclosed,the"impetuous ecoile and arringsound,"he noiseof "HarshThunder,"and the "redoundingsmoakandruddy lame" hatspew into the abyssrecall thefiringof Satan'sartilleryduringthe war in heaven(2.880, 2.882, 2.889). The fabrication and use ofthatartillery,which areparadigms f Satan'smodusoperandi, anticipate the imperial construction ofPandemonium. atanmines the"originalsof Naturein thir crude Conception," ntrudingon the wombof heaven and thenperverting"withsuttleArt" henaturalprocessby which theseoriginalswould havebeen transformed nto gems andgold (6.511-13).The discharge of Satan's "deep-throatedEngins"into the air,which "allher entrails ore,"recalls thebirthof Death, who "breakingviolent way / Torethrough[Sin's] entrails" 6.586, 6.588, 2.782-83).Sin's entryintobeing follows the samepattern; heexplodes with flame from the original womb ofevil-Satan's imagination.With the cooperationof his children, hen,Satanfireshimself out of the "hollowAbyss"of hell andinto chaos, the first locale he is said to "tempt"(2.518, 2.404). He intrudeson "the secrets of thehoarie deep,"until yet anotherfiery blast propelshim, and he arrives n the vicinity of the allegoricalanarch. As in his temptationof Eve, Satan lies toachieve his ends, promising rewards of chaoticdisorderwhen in facthe will imposethe tyrannyofevil throughhis son.Continuing he patternof uter-ine intrusionand abortive, explosive birth, Satandeparts from chaos "like a Pyramid of fire"andproceedsto violate a series of enclosed spaces, in-cluding the womb of Eve's imagination,where heis comparedto gunpowderthat ignites before be-ing stored in its "Tun" 2.1013, 4.816). At last he

reachesthe "sweetrecess of Eve"andaccomplisheshis mission (9.456).Though no more inclined to wickedness thanChaos is, Eve makes a likely target for Satan be-cause of the lethal potential of her womb as aweapon against God. The tempter is lured to herjust as he was originally drawn to the womb lyingbeneath the surface of heaven for its destructive

potency. Satan's explosive invention betrays histyrannicaland envious desire to usurpcreativepo-tency and direct it to destructive ends. Althoughthe produceof Eve's womb is typically comparedto fruit, not explosive charges, Satan eventuallyaccomplishesthe fatal metamorphosisof her chil-dren into "foodfor powder," n Falstaff's ruthlessphrasing (Henry IV,Part 1 4.2.65). Satan's evileminence manifests tself preciselyin thistendencyto foul things at theirgenerativeseat, accordingtothe narrator:

[F]orwhence,But rom heAuthor f allill couldSpringSodeepamalice, o confoundheraceOf mankindn oneroot,andEarthwithhellTomingleand nvolve.... (2.380-84)MaternalEve is Milton's humansymbol of thechaoticpotencyof the firstmatter.As W.B. C. Wat-kins suggests, "[M]atteris to all intents and pur-poses the feminine aspect of God"(63). Althoughin Paradise Lostthe state of chaos is spokenforbya masculineanarch,his rule is no rule;he expressesan absenceof control.Chaos is the realmof "Eldest

Night" (2.894), even thoughlike Eve in the pres-ence of Raphael,Night never utters a wordduringthe anarch'sconference with Satan.It is the"Scep-terof oldNight"thatdivinecreationhas weakened,and it is her standard hat Satanpromises to erectin reducing the world "to her original darkness"(2.1002, 2.984). Herrelatively voluble masculinecompanion represents only the anarchiclack of aprinciple of determinativeforce and government.The consort to this absence of control, "EternalNight" is not merely "old,"she is "unessential,""uncreated," unoriginal"-that is, withoutbegin-ning (3.18, 2.1002, 2.439, 2.150, 10.477).The ety-mology of anarch, a term Milton seems to havecoined from the Greekan-arkhe,indicates that the

1042



10/13

JohnRumrich

eternalnightof chaos is withoutbeginningas wellas without rule. Milton's God calls the abyss infi-nite and boundless:"Boundlessthe Deep, becauseI am who fill / Infinitude"7.168-69). By using thescripturally authoritative"I am,"as he also doeswhen he introduces himself to Adam-"Whomthou soughtst I am"(8.316)-God indicates thathe describeshimself as well as chaos. If the deep isinfinite,eternal,andboundless,how can it also beNight's realmand be feminine?I suggest that chaos is God's womb, essential tohis deity. God is the confused and darkmatter ofchaos even as he is the creative virtue of light.'4Schwartz stresses Chaos's "unstable visage" toconvey the lack of definition of his anarchy (18)but fails to note that the face is not representedasdisfiguredor discomposed-as Satan's is on "Ni-phates top" (3.742) or as Adam's and Eve's areafter the Fall. Instead, Chaos's visage is "incom-pos'd,"as God's essence is "increate" 2.989, 3.6;my italics). The anarchrepresents he infinite ma-terial dimension of God, which has not yet beenordained for creation. Without such material po-tency in God, there could not be creationex deo.'s

AloneamongMilton scholarsWalterClyde Curryseriouslyentertains he idea that chaos mightbe anessential dimension of God. Curry acknowledgesthat the antitrinitarianMilton terms chaos infinite,limitless, boundless, and eternal and that Miltonassigns these traits n poetryanddoctrinesolely toGod.YetCurrydoes notacceptthe inference:"could... matter, the substrate of all created things, [be]a 'part'or a diversificationof God's essence? If so,Milton cannot escape the charge of being a rankmaterialistand a pantheist"34-35). The argumentbegs the question:chaoscannotbe infinite andthusessential to God because "only God is infinite"(145). The adjective"rank,"moreover,neatly sumsup the contempt that materialism has historicallyelicited within orthodoxChristianityand suggestswhy chaos in Paradise Lost has been devalued.The allegorical character of Chaos speaks forthe partof the deity,arguably eminine,over whichthe eternal fatherdoes not exercise control, fromwhich, in otherwords,the father s absentas an ac-tive, governing agent.God's maternaldimension shighlighted n his self-revelationbefore creation nMilton'sepic:

BoundlessheDeep,because amwhofillInfinitude,orvacuoushespaceThough uncircumscrib'dyselfretire,Andputnotforthmygoodness,which s freeTo actornot,Necessitie ndChanceApproachotmee,andwhat will is Fate.(7.168-73)

Chaos is boundless and infinite because God fillsit. Chaos is "not vacuous"-that is, it continuestobe filled-although God refrainsfrom being thereas a governing agent. How can God both fill thespace and not be there? Perhaps the terms "myself" and"my goodness"do not refer to all of God,just as "I am who fill infinitude"or "Whomthousought'st I am" do not. Although God's self-hisactualized, volitional persona-is absent fromchaos, "theheterogeneous and substantial virtue"of his materialpotency remains,filling the infinite(Christian Doctrine 308).Milton's materialistunderstandingof the deityis implicitly paradoxical.God cannot take controlof his materialpotencywithoutsacrificinghis free-dom of will and sovereignty, as Milton insists inChristian Doctrine: "God cannot rightly be calledActusPurus,or pureactuality .. for thushe coulddo nothing except what he does do, and he woulddo that of necessity, although n fact he is omnipo-tent and utterly free in his actions" (145-46). IfGod's potential rests latent in unformed matter,chaos shouldbe recognized as the realmthat sub-stantiates his sovereignty.16Furthermore,wherethere is potential for good, there is also potentialfor evil. "Evil into the mind of God or Man / Maycome andgo,"Adam insists, and the narrator on-firms that chaos supplies the material for the cre-ation of hell, "by curse / Created evil" (5.117-18,2.622-23). Without he indeterminacy,hepotentialfor otherness, that chaos constitutes, Satancouldnot tempthumankindor even conceive of success.Indeed,the psychological correlativeof the poten-tial for otherness that underlies created order isfreedom of will, the foundationof Milton's ethicalbeliefs at least since the compositionof Areopagit-ica (Danielson49).Milton'sallegoricalpersonification f chaos sig-nifies an absence of God that is always alreadypresent-the vital, feminine core of his omnip-otence. If he cannot live with her, except in the

1043



11/13


shadowy allegorical guise of the stuttering anarchwith a crumbling face, he also cannot live withouther. In certain respects, then, Chaos is to God asEve is to Adam. If God has no separate femaleother external to him, he nevertheless acquiescesin his own feminine otherness-a kind of gender-specific negative identity-and can only exercisesovereignty and creative power by virtue of her.17For the poesis of divine creation to occur, the cre-ator must fundamentally be, as Keats writes, "themost unpoetical of anything in existence, becausehe has no identity: he is continually in for, and fill-ing, some other body" (Milnes 134). How else couldMilton's materialist, monist deity make distinctcreatures, volitionally independent of him, who arenevertheless continually and utterly dependent onhim for the substance and sustenance of their be-ing? For Milton nothing can exist without indeter-minacy, certainly not a sovereign deity who createsbeings with free will. Milton's epic, if anything,goes farther than his theology in requiring a goodfirst matter for the constitution of the cosmos andindeed in presupposing a hermaphroditic deity.18

NotesII write "Chaos"when referring o the characterand "chaos"whenreferring o theplaceor condition.2Milton scholarship conforms to this dualistic theological

tendency. In Mephistopheles and the AndrogyneEliade dis-cusses the ironic cultural unctions of chaos (78-122).3Onpostmodernismandchaos see Hayles,ChaosBound,andtheessays collected in Hayles,ChaosandOrder.For anillustra-tive rangeof postmodern heoreticalapproaches o culture,seeFoster. The ramificationsof chaos science have achieved suchwide culturalcurrency hat scientists no longerfind chaos a use-ful term: it is "markedby scientific denotations as well as his-torical andmythical interpretations;t serves as a crossroads,ajuncturewhere various strataand trendswithin the culturecometogether" Hayles, Introduction ). The conceptof chaos has it-self become a chaotic postmodernphenomenon,eschewed bythe scientifically rigorous for the otherness that it comprises.Haylesdescribesthe mutuallysustainingdynamicsbetween thebranchesof chaos science anddivergentotherpostmoderncul-turalsites, includingdeconstruction,new historicism, eminism,and informationtheory (Chaos Bound; Introduction).Lacan'sdefinitionof the unconscious as "theOtherthateven my lie in-vokes as a guarantor f the truth n which it subsists"reflectstheironicindeterminacy ttendant n the self-othercomplexwithin

ego psychology.Existentially,he other s "the ocus from whichthequestionof [thesubject'sown]existencemaybe presented ohim"(Lacan172, 194).Onpostmodern eminism as a discourseof otherness,see Irigaray;Owens. On ethics and ironic indeter-minacy n narrative, ee Handwerk.Theessays collected in Con-way andSeery address the compatibilityof postmodern ronyandpoliticalcommitment,a question Rortyalso deals with.

4Thoughconcerned to distinguish Augustine from the Pla-tonic influenceson him,Clarkadmits hat"Augustine's oncep-tion of human naturewas hauntedby Platonic dualism"(56).See also Armstrong,who considers the spectrumof dualismswithin the Platonic tradition,tracingthem from pre-PlatonicPythagoreanism, n which "the light, male, limiting, orderingprincipleis qualifiedas 'good' and the dark, female, indefiniteprincipleas 'evil'" (34).5Brownsurveys earlyChristianattitudes oward hebody,itsmeanings, and its place in society. Anticarnal bias notwith-standing, Augustiniandoctrine n its time was a moderationofthe dualistictenets of the thrivingascetic cults. The writingsofearlyChristianascetics are often concernedwith men's behav-ior toward women and with government of the appetiteswomen arouse. On the evolving cosmological justificationsinRenaissancepolitical philosophy for the disciplinarypowerofthe sovereign over his subjects, see Collins. One constant inthesejustificationsis the premise that chaos inevitablyreturnswhen,as RichardHookerwrites,"a multitudeof equalsdealeth"(Collins 95); hence the necessity for a sovereign head to keepthe body politic in hierarchicalorder,just as God maintainsorderamongthe fourelements,of which matters thebasest.6Blind Milton, visited nightly by his muse and inspired indarkness,departedsignificantlyfrom Spenser'sfrequentlyex-pressedantipathyo darknessandnight.7Homer's verb for battleandlovemaking is mignumi(Iliad9.275, 15.510).8Modern iterary heorists have used chaos theoryto exposetheideologicalbasisof traditional deasof order Hayles,ChaosBound22-23).9As Ricoeurnotes, the evolution of a kingshiporder,with itssupportingcastes of priests and elite warriors,influenced thedepictionof evil in Mesopotamianmythology.Feminist criticsfurtherarguethat the rough,revisionist treatmentof maternaldeities,such asTiamat, n this mythologyreflectsthe victors' at-titudes in "phallocraticwars"that establishedpatriarchyn theancientNearEast and overthrew hecult of the goddess (Keller69-78; Daly 355). Evidencesuggeststhatat leastpartof the Per-seus myth (the rescue of Andromeda from a sea monster) de-rives fromthe storyof Marduk'sbattle with Tiamat Keller71).Schwartz'scomparisonof Marduk o Milton's Son overlooksRicoeur's observation hat "thecreative act whichdistinguishes,separates,measures,andputs in order is inseparablefrom thecriminalact thatputsanendto the life of the oldestgods"(180).Schwartz also ignoresTiamat'sdivinityandgender, describingthe deity instead as the "chaos monster"and the "fiercemon-ster" 28, 31), even thoughTiamat s "motherof themall" in theEnumaelish-including the younger gods who rise up againsther (62-64). The Hebrew word for tiamat is the grammatically

1044



12/13

JohnRumrich

feminine tehom,which English translationsof Genesis renderas "thedeep."l?In contrast to other Milton scholars who have written onchaos, Adamscommentson the relevanceof this passage (74),as does Fallon(191).lA premise of contemporarychaos science is that withoutexact knowledge of initial conditions (impossible to achieve,

given the uncertaintyprinciple),outcomescannotbe predicted(Hayles, Introduction11). While not refutingdeterminism, hisargumentmeans that no one will ever be able to confirm thattheuniverse s deterministic Dupr6186).

12Adam's dilemma over the reliabilityof appearances simi-lar to the problem posed by Swift's mad narrator n A Taleofa Tub:either remain a fool deluded by the deceptive beautyand intoxicating touch of nature'scharming superficies or ripthrough he misleadingshow with reason(145).

'3Accordingto Girardot,the association of chaos with "anembryoniccondition or womblikeform"allows for an advanta-geous conceptionof the primalcondition(214). The generativecast of Milton's descriptionsof creationhas long been recog-nized. As Drabble writes, Milton "sees the world as a livingbeing, conceived, gestated, born,passing throughunadornedchildhood to the springing endergrassof puberty" 129).14Ifthegenderof chaos seems problematic, o too is the gen-der of light, which is identifiedwith God as the "brightefflu-ence of brightessence increate"(3.6). "God is Light," yet thelight emitted by the sun, despite having masculine-soundingabilities to "pierce"and "plant,"is representedas female inRaphael's reportof its presolar existence: "shee in a cloudieTabernacle Sojourd the while"(3.3, 7.248-49; my italics).InChristianDoctrineMilton insists thatthough"we cannot mag-ine light withoutsome source of light, . . . we do not thereforethink that a source of light is the samethingas light, or equalinexcellence" (312). The radiant ight informing the masculinesun may thus not be essentially a masculine force. Althoughlodged in a masculine orb, light's creativeenergymay be con-sidered feminine and more excellent than thebody from whichit shines. The evidence concerning the relationof light to thepaternaldeity in Milton'sepic does not yield conclusions,but itis clear at least that Milton's God is essentially affiliated withfeminine as well as masculine creativepower.

15Although Sauratrecognizes thatpreexistentmatter s "partof the substance of God" in Milton's poetry and theology, hedoes not link this matterand chaos:"Since in [Milton's]philos-ophy everything comes from God by his 'retraction,' whichproduced first that divine matter from which the universe isevolved naturally,t is difficult to explainthe anterior xistenceof chaos"(235-36). Chaos cannot be the first matter n Saurat'sview because matter s partof God before creation.The unspo-ken assumption is that chaos cannot be identified with God.Saurat thus ignores repeated descriptionsof chaos as a wombandconcentrates nstead on the singularandtentativecharacter-ization of it as a "grave" 2.911), which he glosses with an ac-count from the Zohar: "God, before creating this world, hadcreatedseveral othersand,notbeing pleasedwiththem,had de-stroyedthem.... It seems evident that, in Milton's mind, un-less the Earth ulfil the aims for which God created t, it will be

destroyed also and become partof this chaos of lost worlds"(236). The Zohar may partly "explain"Milton's chaos as agrave for botched worlds that preceded the present one, butSaurat ails to see chaos as a primordialwomb.

Empson follows Saurat'sanalysis to its properconclusionandrecognizesin chaos the first matterof Milton'stheology.Inturn,however,Empsonrejectsthe identificationof Godand thefirst matter n ParadiseLost so as to preservethe logic of Mil-ton's narrative.16InReesing's theologicalanalysisMilton's hereticalpositionthat God possesses the attributeof potentialityis inconsistentwith Milton's insistence on God's immutabilityand hence withthe poet's fundamental assent to the Aristotelian definitionofGod as actus purus (Reesing 171-72). This inconsistency canseem less troublesome,however,if what God createsout of hisinfinite materialpotencybecomes essentiallydistinctfromhim.

Since God alwayscontains nfinite materialpotency,he maybesaid to remain immutable even when partof his potency be-comes actualizedand distinct fromhim. Drawingon Aristotle'sMetaphysics, elsewhereassess the relationof materialpotencyto God's essence and discuss in more detailMilton scholars'ar-guments on the subject (53-69). That God's materialpotencycan be actualized n the form of "black artareous old infernaldregs Adverseto life" does notmeanthatevil is latent n chaos,anymorethanevil is latent n the deity who establisheshell as

A Universeof death .. by curseCreatedevil, for evil onely good,Where all life dies, death ives, and Naturebreeds,Perverse,all monstrous,all prodigious hings....(2.622-25)

Like Dante, Milton describes hell as a work of divine justice;andif justice is good, God's materialpotencymust includethepossibilityof matterwith which to createsucha placeas hell.

'7Earlybiblical commentariesobserve thatbeforethebirthofEve, Adam was both male and female and thathumanity s thusoriginally established in the image of a hermaphroditicGod(Eliade and O'Flaherty). The hermaphrodite s an importantimage of the divine in various religious traditions(Campbell103-08). In the seventeenthcenturyJakobBoehme is notablefor stressingthe creator'shermaphroditic otalityof being andAdam'soriginalreflectionof and fall from it (Erb276).18In1991 Brian Opie, of Victoria University, Wellington,New Zealand, discussed the ideas behind this essay with meandbroughtBarthelme'sstory "OnAngels" to my attention.Iam muchobligedto him and to StephenDobranski,of the Uni-versityof Texas,Austin,who readearlydraftsof this essay andoffereduseful advice for its revision.

WorksCitedAdams,RobertM. "A Little Look into Chaos."Illustrious Evi-dence:ApproachesoEnglishLiterature f theEarlySeven-teenthCentury.Ed. Earl Miner.Berkeley:U of CaliforniaP, 1975. 71-89.

1045



13/13


Andrewes,John. TheBrazenSerpent.London,1621.Armstrong,A. H. "Dualism:Platonic, Gnostic, and Christian."

Neoplatonismand Gnosticism.Ed. RichardT. Wallis. Al-bany:StateU of New YorkP, 1992. 33-54.Barthelme,Donald. "OnAngels."SixtyStories.New York:Put-nam, 1981. 135-38.Brown, Peter. The Body and Society. New York: ColumbiaUP, 1988.Campbell, Joseph. The Masks of God: Primitive Mythology.1959. London:Souvenir,1973.Chambers,A. B. "Chaos n ParadiseLost."Journalof theHis-

toryof Ideas 24 (1963): 55-84.Clark,MaryT. "Augustine he ChristianThinker."FromAugus-tine to Erugena: Essays in Neoplatonismand Christianity.Ed. F. X. MartinandJ.A. Richmond.Washington:Catholic

U of AmericaP, 1991. 56-65.Collins, Stephen.FromDivine Cosmosto SovereignState.Ox-ford: OxfordUP, 1989.Conway,Daniel W., andJohnSeery,eds. The Politics of Irony:

Essays in Self-Betrayal.New York:St. Martin's,1992.Curry,WalterClyde.Milton'sOntology,Cosmogony,andPhys-ics. Lexington:U of KentuckyP, 1957.Daly, Mary.Gyn/Ecology.Boston:Beacon, 1978.Danielson, Dennis. Milton's Good God. Cambridge: Cam-

bridgeUP, 1982.Drabble,Margaret.A Writer'sBritain:Landscape n Literature.New York:Knopf, 1979.Dupre, John. The Disorder of Things. Cambridge: Harvard

UP, 1993.Eliade,Mircea,ed. TheEncyclopediaof Religion. 16 vols. NewYork:Macmillan,1987.- . Mephistophelesand theAndrogyne.Trans.J. M. Cohen.New York:Sheed, 1965.Eliade,Mircea,andWendy Doniger O'Flaherty."Androgynes."Eliade,Encyclopedia1:276-81.Empson,William.Milton'sGod. 1961, 1965.Cambridge:Cam-

bridgeUP, 1983.Enuma elish. Ancient Near Eastern TextsRelating to the OldTestament.Ed. James B. Pritchard.Princeton:PrincetonUP, 1955. 60-72.

Erb,PeterC."Boehme,Jakob."Eliade,Encyclopedia2: 275-76.Fallon, Stephen M. Milton among the Philosophers. Ithaca:CornellUP, 1991.Foster,Hal,ed. PostmodernCulture.London:Pluto, 1983.Girardot,N. J. "Chaos."Eliade,Encyclopedia3: 213-18.Handwerk,GaryJ. Ironyand Ethics in Narrative.New Haven:YaleUP, 1985.Hayles, N. Katherine, ed. Chaos and Order. Chicago: U of

ChicagoP, 1991.. ChaosBound. Ithaca:CornellUP, 1990..Introduction."Complex Dynamics in Literature andScience."Hayles, Chaos and Order1-33.Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Ed. Richard Tuck. Cambridge:CambridgeUP, 1991.Homer. Iliad. Trans. A. T. Murray.2 vols. London: Heine-man, 1988.

Irigaray,Luce. Speculumof the OtherWoman.Trans.GillianC.Gill. Ithaca:CornellUP, 1985.Keller,Catherine.Froma BrokenWeb.Boston:Beacon, 1986.Kirkconnell, Watson. The Celestial Cycle. New York: Gor-dian,1952.Lacan,Jacques.Ecrits:A Selection.Trans.Alan Sheridan.Lon-don:Tavistock,1977.Milnes, Richard M. TheLife and Lettersof John Keats. 1927.London:Dent, 1969.Milton, John. Areopagitica. Ed. Ernest Sirluck. The ProseWorks.Don M. Wolfe, gen. ed. Vol. 2. New Haven: YaleUP, 1959. 480-570. 8 vols. 1953-82.. Christian Doctrine. Ed. Maurice Kelley. Trans.John

Carey. New Haven: Yale UP, 1973. Vol. 6 of The ProseWorks. vols. 1953-82.. EpitaphiumDamonis. Milton,Poetical Works560-65,

615-20.. Paradise Lost.Milton,Poetical Works1-281.ThePoetical Works.Ed. Helen Darbishire.London:Ox-fordUP, 1958.

Owens, Craig."The Discourse of Others: Feminists and Post-modernism."Foster 57-82.Pagels, Elaine. Adam, Eve, and the Serpent.New York: Ran-dom, 1988.Plato. Timaeus.Trans.Benjamin Jowett. The Collected Dia-logues. Ed. Edith HamiltonandHuntingtonCairns.Trans.LaneCooperet al. Princeton:PrincetonUP,1961.1151-211.Prigogine, Ilya, and Isabelle Stengers. Order out of Chaos.London:Flamingo,1985.Reesing, John. "The Materialityof God in Milton's De Doc-trinaChristiana."HarvardTheologicalReview 50 (1957):159-73.Ricoeur,Paul. TheSymbolism f Evil. Trans.EmersonBuchanan.Boston:Harper, 967.Rorty,Richard.Contingency,rony,and Solidarity.Cambridge:CambridgeUP, 1989.Rumrich, John. Matter of Glory: A New Preface to ParadiseLost.Pittsburgh:U of PittsburghP, 1987.Saurat,Denis. Milton,Man and Thinker.1925, 1944. London:

Dent, 1946.Schwartz,Regina. Rememberingand Repeating:Biblical Cre-ation in ParadiseLost. Cambridge:CambridgeUP, 1988.Shakespeare, William. The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. G.

BlakemoreEvans. Boston:Houghton,1974.Spenser,Edmund.The Faerie Queene. Ed. ThomasP. Roche,Jr.New Haven: YaleUP, 1978.. Minor Poems. Ed. Ernest de Selincourt. Oxford: Ox-fordUP, 1966.Svendsen, Kester. Milton and Science. Cambridge:HarvardUP, 1956.Swift, Jonathan.A Tale of a Tub. Ed. Angus Ross and David

Wooley.Oxford:OxfordUP, 1984.Sylvester, Joshua, trans. The First Weeke.Devine WeekesandWorkes.By Guillaumede Saluste du Bartas.London,1605.Teskey, Gordon."Irony,Allegory, andMetaphysicalDecay."PMLA109 (1994): 397-408.Watkins,W.B. C. AnAnatomyof Milton's Verse.Hamden:Ar-chon, 1965.

1046

Milton Chaos and paradise lost.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Milton Chaos and paradise lost.pdf