Paradise Lost Book 4

I can understand why so many critics have been fascinated with Satan. In Book 4, the reader can understand his motives and why he is the way he is. He hates the sun since it causes him to remember “from what state [he] fell” (lines 38-39). His pride and his ambition caused him to fall from the presence of God. He is disappointed he has lost his position, but he is unwilling to submit to the God’s will: the very thought fills him disdain and “dread of shame” (line 82). I’ve been thinking a lot about how Satan is free because he does not have to answer to anyone, yet he is unable to progress or achieve the greatness he once had. His situation reminds me of Agent Smith in the first Matrix. Smith hates his existence and continually fighting with humanity, but continues in this state of misery because there seems to be no alternative. Satan’s existence does not give him any pleasure or joy, but he continues because he feels he has no alternative—he will not submit to another’s will. Satan enjoys the freedom his existence allows him to have, but without the possibility of happiness is this a profitable existence?

Paradise Lost Books 2-3

Milton really loves his epic similes. In Book 3, Satan is compared with a scout who surveys the enemy’s camp at night (3.543-587). The scout climbs hills (line 546) and sees an amazing city (line 549). Within the scout simile, Milton uses another simile to describe the beautiful islands the scout sees in the distance. The descriptions are gorgeous and flowery and very poetic, but I find them really distracting from the work as a whole. Reading these 44 lines, I forgot what Milton was even talking about until he mentions “Fiend” and then I remember, oh yeah, Satan… (line 588). It’s a fabulous description, but a little over the top for my modern tastes; perhaps a reader from the Renaissance or one with more refined tastes would enjoy a Homeric simile like this.
This is going to read strange, but I don’t really like God. Let me clarify: I don’t really like Milton’s God. In Book 3, He knows that “Man will hearken to his [Satan’s] glozing lies And easily transgress the sole command” (lines 93-94). I don’t think this statement applies only to the transgression in the garden. I read this generalization and believe Milton’s God has little hope in humanity emerging into a moral civilization. Maybe we never did, from His point of view. Consider Sodom and Gomorrah. Even now, Darfur is certainly not the prime example of the good within humanity. But I have to live with the hope that perhaps someday, the world will be a better place. I can do my part and influence those in my part of the world to be better. Maybe then Milton’s God will not assume my behavior is because I “hearken to his glozing lies.”

Paradise Lost Book 1

Like Homer, Virgil, and Camoes, Milton employs many of the epic devices early in Paradise Lost. The "Heav'nly Muse" is called early in the work to assist Milton with his epic (Book 1, Line 6). The first book also has many epic similes scattered throughout. Similes like the meteor (587-593) and the bees (768-777) seem to grow longer and longer and become more involved (almost like Milton is acknowledging past poets influence, but showing he can do it much better). In The Lusiads, Camoes integrated the Roman gods with Christian ideology. Milton dismisses the religions of past epics and uses many references within the Old Testament like Camoes used the Roman gods.
It is refreshing to discover Christianity has shifted the responsibility of actions onto the individual. Satan acknowledges that "The mind is its own place and in itself Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven. ... Here at least We shall be free" ( 254-255, 258-259). If the opposition realizes the power of freedom, perhaps the heroes will have the same belief. Milton writes that Satan and the angels that followed him lost "the flow'r of Heav'n [that was] once yours" and their names were "blotted out and razed By their rebellion" (316, 362-3). Satan and "his industrious crew" now strive to corrupt the souls of men. It reminds me of Lewis and his Screwtape Letters.

Lusiads IX-X

In Canto IX, de Gama sees many things in the world. In de Gama’s experience, he does not see “one ruler anxious for the public good” (canto 9, stanza 27). All of those who are entrusted to serve the people are too consumed with their own self-interest and advancing their own position to be able to serve the greater good within a society. De Gama also witnesses those who are responsible “to show God’s love to the poor and charity to all” focusing upon obtaining power and money (Canto 9, stanza 28). I am confused about this observation: Camoes has been opposed to the Reformation of the Church, yet he points out the flaws within it. Lawmakers also pass laws in the interest of the king and “the rights of the people are decreasing” (canto 9, stanza 28). Camoes seems concerned by the suppression of human rights, but realizes people are “all led astray by perverse desires” (canto 9, stanza 30). It is a normal occurrence that cannot be avoided. In many of his end of canto sermons, Camoes is quick to denounce ambition and money, but he recognizes that temptation is too great. He never seems to give a more sound reason on why we should avoid money.

Lusiads Cantos XII-XIII

At the beginning of Canto XII, Camoes rips into every other European nation to show his readers their inferiority to the Portuguese. While Europe is fighting amongst itself, those who reject Christianity continue to thrive. He challenges all nations to join the Portuguese “in punishing such vile acts” and promises praise above that which they already have earned (canto 7, stanza 13). Throughout Canto XIII, Camoes further illustrates the superiority of the Portuguese nation by using God and stating the Portuguese are a chosen people. These people are guided in their destiny by God (canto 8, stanza 23, 29).
On first description, Sarama Perimal’s mighty kingdom seems unusually civilized for an Islamic nation. Before the king left for Mecca, he freed his subjects and rewarded those who were most worthy (canto 7, stanza 34). It seems like a prospering nation with industrious people. Camoes seems unable to leave this small nation in a favorable light: he reveals that they are unclothed savages that are impure like the Samaritans (canto 7, stanza 37,39).
Finally, Camoes sermon at the end of Canto XIII denounces gold and those who pursue it. I couldn’t help but be confused with the last two lines: “How this enchanter [gold] can corrupt and tarnish, But all the while preserving virtue’s varnish!” (Canto 8, stanza 99). After spending two stanzas stating how evil gold and the riches of the world are, Camoes claims that gold is necessary to create virtuous people and build Christ’s kingdom on earth. It seems like the Portuguese are able to be above the evil effects of money and the ambition it causes in some.

Lusiads Cantos IV-VI

In the Lusiads, Camoes also uses epic similes. There were several in this section which made me pause to consider their meaning. In Canto IV, the Portuguese are compared to “a fierce lioness” (stanza 36). On the surface, this does not appear to be too different: after all, Homer used many wild animals like lions, boars, and wolves in The Iliad to describe the warring factions. Yet this simile, introduces the female lion. She leaves her cubs in a safe haven to hunt for her children. The cubs “are stolen by a shepherd” (Canto 4, stanza 36). The mother’s instincts kick in; she releases a “furious roaring and rampaging” (Canto 4, stanza 37). The lioness will do everything to ensure her cubs are brought back to her safe keeping. The Portuguese are then invited to behave like the lioness to “defend your native soil” and protect their liberties and the lives of their families (canto 4, stanza 37). This is very empowering to the Portuguese until you realize that they are not on their home soil. They are traveling to take to the homes of others and spread imperialism. They are working to spread the glory of Portugal, not to guarantee life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Lusiads Cantos II-III

I was really struck de Gama’s trust of the Muslims after they betrayed him. “So easily can a trusting soul be taken in by appearances” (canto 2, stanza 16). Like many of my peers, I was wondering just how stupid the Portuguese could be. They keep allowing themselves to be burned by everyone. But then my professor mentioned how the Christian convicts sent to investigate the Muslims reminded her of UN Weapons Inspectors. This got me thinking about how Americans keep letting themselves be burned just like the Portuguese. Prior to 2001, the United States fell victim to terrorist attacks by Muslim fundamentalist. The WTC bombings, the Cole, in Africa one of the American embassies was bombed… But it didn’t sink in until 9/11 that there were people who were against America. (Now I have some wicked crazy ideas about the attack that are not popular with everyone. There's a really interesting article from a professor at BYU I think every American should be familiar with titled "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" by Steven E. Jones. Any major search engine can find it.) So I think we have to ask ourselves, do we want to live in a country that trusts people or do we want to live in a country we can be burned? I like my civil liberties, so I vote that live in a country that allows us to trust people and maybe be burned or have another attack like 9/11.
Back to the Lusiads, I really love his epic similes. They are very different from Homer or Virgil, but they are extremely poignant. In canto 2, stanza 23 features a simile about ants that really shows how the nymphs struggled to keep the Lusitanians alive. It shows how the odds were stacked up against them, but they continue to fight for their freedom.

Lusiads Canto I

Camoes’ familiarity with the great epids like Virgil’s Aeneid and Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey is apparent. He seems to reference them very quickly, but he also states that his epic will be different from others. His work references “a loftier code of honor” (stanza 3).
Camoes also employs many of the same devices as Homer and Virgil—specifically the epic simile. The debate on Mount Olympus is compared to the wind (stanza 35). The battle between the Christians and the Muslims is likened to a bullring (stanza 88).
Although Camoes is writing a Christian epic which seems to celebrate “the Son of David” as a creator who underwent “disgrace and insult…[and] descended from the heavens to earth to raise us mortals to our heavenly worth” (stanzas 71, 65), he incorporates many of the gods used in previous epics. The Portugese travelers seem to be devouted Christians, yet Camoes still utilizes the gods and the role of fate in this work. The gods argue between themselves and still seem to aid or hinder the progression of the Portugese.
The depiction of Muslims expecially intrigues me. Their portrayal is not in any way favorable. The Sheik is described as “malevolent” (stanza 69). Further degradation is revealed in the comparision between the Muslims and “dogs baring their teeth” (stanza 87). The Muslims fight by “flinging rocks and sticks and pebbles, the very weapons of desperation” (stanze 91). The Christians fight with “lead balls” (stanza 89). Camoes points out that these two groups are not on the same playing field. The Muslims fight like children on the playground, the Portugese fight like men in war. It’s been a while since I’ve read my Edward Said, but I smell the traps of Orientalism.
Though I do love how Camoes closes this canto “O the vicissitudes of life’s journey! That wherever a people place their trust, The little they rely on turns to dust” (stanza 105). Each life will have its struggles, but individuals need to place their trust upon an internal power in order to persevere. Anything else will fade into oblivion.

Aeneid Book XII

At the end of the Aeneus' rampage (perhaps aristeia is a more appropriate term), I have to wonder if Turnus really had to die. If he had not carried Pallas' belt around like a trophy, Aeneus would have shown him mercy. In Fagles' translation, we see that Turnus' pleas for mercy "began to sway him more and more" (Book XII, lines 1096-7). In Fitzgerald's translation, Turnus' words "began to bring [Aeneus] round from indecision" (Book XII, line 202-3). The sight of the belt "flaunted" by Pallas' enemy was too much, so Aeneus strikes Turnus down. But by defeating Turnus in such a manner was Aeneus putting his own interests before the interests of the Roman state? Throughout the Aeneid, we see Aeneus putting the public's interests before his own. Keeping a strong warrior like Turnus around could have been a real boon to New Troy or Rome, but would Turnus' survival have been a threat to Aeneus and Rome? I must admit it has been some time since I took Western Civilization 1; I don't really remember too much about ancient Rome, but I doubt a Caesar would have allowed an enemy to remain alive. Also, Aeneus becomes the Achilles in the Iliad completely after Turnus has been killed by his hands.

Aeneid Book XI

In the Fagles' translation, this book is titled "Camilla's Finest Hour." In Virgil's work, Camilla seems to epitomize a strong character. Other female characters are not portrayed as well. Creusa "wails with anguish" (Book 2, line 847). Sure her home is being destroyed by the Greeks, but it seems this behavior is still unacceptable. She disappears into the night--no one knows how she met her fate, but she is dead. At first, Dido seems to be a successful queen in a thriving city. Driven to by the gods to love a man she can never have, Dido kills herself. Finally, Camilla emerges. Since her infancy she has been raised to become a warrior princess. She leads a group of Amazons to fight the Trojans. She slaughters just like any other man. She is described as a falcon preying upon a dove which "hooked talons rip its insides out" (Book 11, line 853). Camilla is on fire. Yet Virgil doesn't allow women to thrive in his Roman epic. The woman must die, but unlike Creusa or Dido, Camilla dies with her dignity intact. Her final thoughts are for the Italians. In reading about her death, I thought of Patroclus in Iliad and how Hector killed him. The gods are the only ones able to kill her. In both texts, Apollo aids Hector and Chloreus in killing these two. Without the meddling of the gods, both might have survived. But Virgil could not have a strong female actually survive through his entire work.