Milton and Dryden; views on Heroism The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell and a hell of heaven Milton “Paradise lost”
John Milton was a religious writer to understand. His work “Paradise lost” is an epic tale featuring heaven, hell and the Garden of Eden. It is confusing the way he puts the character demon in a heroic position as if he is praising the demon. My thoughts for this confusing role would be the consequence of his breakaway behavior from the original one he intended, when he was a teenager. John Dryden’s drama “The state of innocence” is the rewrite of “Paradise lost “for a Royal court performance. Both of these poets were influenced by the time of their lives. Milton’s career was orbiting around Cromwell’s rule in a protestant religion with the idea of a civil government. Dryden’s time on the other hand was towards the end of protestant religion with the rise of King Charles II.Miltons idea was a rise of traditionally demonic or underdog as a new ruler or the new powerhouse whereas Dryden’s heroic idea is the same traditional powerhouse; the Royal palace, the king and his supporters. Dryden’s idea of heroic play is an ironic play of Milton’s Paradise lost and is far from its quiet and strong individual faith in god. Dryden’s audience saw human nature as malignant, and ruled by the king.
Samuel Peep was an obvious obsessive compulsive personality. He was addicted to extramarital affairs, and partially enabled by his wealth to hide his actions from his wife Elizabeth. Unfortunately it seems he was unable to conquer it, his last diary entry about her states, 'my amours to Deb are past', meaning that he could not find her not that he had been able to get over her.
Basic Passage: On the 14th, despite having been asked repeatedly by Elizabeth his wife not to ever lay eyes on Deb again, he gathers money together for her and admits to himself, "I cannot forget the girl."
Obsessions and addictions have a common characteristic, no matter how much of the thing a person is so vigorously pursuing, no amount of that thing can quench their desire for it. People that have fixate their passions to a thing such as drugs, shopping, or sexual promiscuity are all in the same situation emotionally and mentally. The problem is not that they cannot get enough of what they are seeking so intensely, but it is a much greater problem, in that they are missing something within their own soul. They fill there is a great void that need to be filled, but sadly, their obsessions cannot fit that hole, and ultimately will never pacify their desires. Mr. Peep was in this mess, but did not realize what he was missing. When he writes, “Who wonders to find my wife so dull and melancholy, but God knows she hath too much cause." He shows that he knows she has every right to be upset with him, and call him miserable names, but nothing she does can affect him enough to cut through to the root of his addiction.
"All human things are subject to decay, And when fate summons, monarchs must obey." -From MacFlecknoe by John Dryden.
What is the true definition of a hero? What do other people think about it? Do they think of it as a big joke. John Dryden certaintly made a mockery out of the whole idea of a hero. In his story, MacFlecknoe, which was a mock heroic satire, was full of satire and criticism. John Dryden wrote this as a full direct attack on a poet that he despised at the time, Thomas Shadwell. This book was written after many disagreements between the two. The main reason the two seemed to bicker so much was the presence of comedy in their stories. They had conflicting views about it so Dryden decided to write a story where he was mainly bashing Shadwell and his views on Comedy. The poem begins in the tone of an epic story. It presents Shadwell's defining characteristic as very dull, just as every epic hero has a special trait that defines them as a hero. John Milton was also a writer with different views on heroism. In what is regarded as Milton's most famous poem, Paradise Lost, Milton explains the fall of man. It also talks about the temptation of Adam and Eve by Satan. In the story, Satan seems idealised but, seems to have many flaws. Satan seems to be a hero but, shouldn't be. It would seem that in any story Satan would be the villain. However, Milton categorizes Satan as the hero in Paradise Lost. In my opinion of Milton and Dryden's views of Heroism, it seems that the two have very similar beliefs. Dryden seems to make a joke of the whole idea of a hero. It seems that in most of his work he is laughing in the face of it. It is very sarcastic with bits of comedy. Milton seems the exact same way. Putting Satan as the hero may seem very odd to most but, to Milton, it is a sign of mockery of a Hero. This is dead on to Dryden's views of heroism. The two are almost completely identical.
“All is not lost; the unconquerable will, And study of revenge, immortal hate, And courage never to submit or yield: And what is else not to be overcome?”
In Milton’s book Paradise Lost, he depicts Satan as a hero type. He tells how he fights through all these evil creatures to get back to earth and that he promises his followers that he will help them get revenge for what had happened to them. People tend think of this as weird since the bad guy is made out as a good guy, but when you think about it this happens all the time nowadays. In certain movies the main character is bad and commits wrongs but they are still considered the good guy because someone has done wrong to them or someone close to them. In the move the Italian Job, Mark Wahlberg is a thief who gets double crossed by one of his partners, Edward Norton. Through out the movie Wahlberg and his team try to rob Norton of what he stole from them. Even though Wahlberg is a thief and is stealing he is still considered a good guy and is everyone’s favorite because he is getting revenge on someone who did wrong to him. In the movie Green Street Hooligans, Charlie Hunnam is the leader of a firm that fights other firms for bragging rights. He is still considered good though because you are shown his life and what he goes through. An evil character depicted as a good character happens all the time. The only reason Paradise lost brings up controversy is because it is Satan that is being shown as good.
Milton's and Dryden's view of heroism, through the passage of Paradise Lost....
in the beginning of the Passage, Paradise Lost, Dryden asks for God's help to tell the story of Satan's tale. Which today many question if questioning God is ok; ok to speak for God or even basically rewrite the Bible? In Paradise Lost, Satan is supposed to be evil but in the passage, Dryden thinks he is not evil at all and has heroic traits. It all began when a battle was lost and Satan an his father wer bound for hell. Dryden makes Satan to sort of seem like a hero because he lost everything and now is in hell. But Satan didnt give up. At the same time Milton paints Satan as the one that gets other fallen depressed angels to get up and convince them not to give up. He explains that the angels plan to travel to Earth; Satan knows it may seem almost impossible to get there but says he will fight ever step of the way since he is the leader. And he does succeed. So now the question....what should be beleve, Satan sure seems like a hero in to them but Satan is no hero.....
Milton and Dryden: views of Heroism through the passage of Paradise Lost...
In the beginning of Paradise Lost, Dryden has asked God to help him state the story of Satan. In today's society, some are asking the question if it is ok to speak for God. In Paradise Lost, Satan is suppose to be evil and Dryden thinks he is not evil at all and claims that Satan has heroic traits. He tells how Satan fights through all of these evil creatures to get back to earth. Dryden also claims that Satan promises his followers that he will help them get revenge for what had happened to them. The reason that Paradise Lost brings up controversy is because Satan is the one that is being shown as the hero. John Milton was also a writer with different views on heroism. What is understood from Milton's most famous poem, Paradise Lost,is the fall of man. The two views from both Milton and Dryden are almost the exact same. They both view Satan as a hero.
Passage: “.. Affirming that she saw me hug and kiss the girl; the latter I denied, and truly; the other I confessed and no more. And upon her pressuring me, did offer to give her under my hand that I would never see Mrs. Pierce more, not Knepp….”-The Deb Willet Affair
Samuel Pepys was most certainly an entertaining writer. His diary produces witty and perverse accounts of the daily goings on of London life. While he must be awarded the recognition of being an intelligent, witty, and notorious womanizer, there seems to be a lack of depth portrayed in his daily entries. While he walks around the burning streets of London, he seems to simply be surveying an uncomfortable sight. He does not seem very affected by the tragedy that is going on around him. He seems to spend too much time describing the personal appearance of his acquaintances then he should during such a time. He shows his shallow nature again in [The Deb Willet Affair]. Here, Pepys acknowledges that he has an affair with the household maid. Not only this, but it is alluded that he has had episodes with at least two other women. Meanwhile, he sees the distress this causes his wife, but he seems to feel no guilt about it. He does admit that he deserves his wife’s wrath, but that is the extent to his conscience.
Main Passage: Heroism Portrayed by Milton and Dryden
In his masterpiece "Paradise Lost", John Milton portrays Satan in what may seem to be a shocking manner...as a hero. The typical stereotype of Satan that most people picture today is the Bright red demon with horns and a pitchfork. But Milton depicts him as a heroic figure of sorts. He is described as the brightest of all the angels and is introduced in a way that we almost sympathize and like the character. But, of course, Satan is definitely not a hero. Satan's character corrodes throughout the book...he never really acts out what he believes (which is ironically what Christians are called to do), and like politicians he causes others to swoon over his words, but doesn't fulfill his promises. He's also described as a rebellious hero...which to me is in no way a hero at all. Dryden's poems are often filled with people being hailed as heroes. These heroes usually have a duty or service to England. A threat is usually presented at the beginning of the poem, the hero ultimately overcomes the threat, and a wonderful future for England is often predicted. This sort of hero is absolutely missing to me from Dryden's "Annus Mirabilis," which is about The Great Fire.
Passage:"Upon the death of Judas, the story offers no immorality for him other than the remembrance of his deeds"
Response: The idea of a hero in our society is someone who will go to any length to win a prize or fight for what ever they think is right. In Christian heroism, Judas is made out to be a hero. As most of us know, Judas was the one who betrayed Jesus by turning Him over to the roman soldiers for thirty peices of silver. That doesn't sound much like a hero to me. A real hero is a man who does things for people without getting the recognition. Like a man who feeds the poor or opens the door for an elderly lady or giving a word of encouragement to someone that is down. Thats a real Hero!!! Dont get me wrong, I believe firefighters and police officers are also heroes. They put their lives on the line on a daily basis, but that is their job and they are paid for it. In the Maccabees, Judas could of been seen as a hero because he knew by turning over the Son of God that it was going to cost him certain death. Still I don't see how he could be seen as a hero! Giving over the Son of God to death was his will in life. Was this the will of God? We will save that for another day!! There are many ways to be considered a hero. Heroism to me is the act of giveng and not receiving. There should be no reward for a hero. Judas did give, he gave Jesus up for death!!!!!!!!!
Reality TV and Gonzo Reporting Circa 1666 Basic Passage: “Having stayed, and in an hour’s time seen the fire rage every way, and nobody to my sight endeavoring to quench it, but to remove their goods and leave all to the fire;”
The Diary of Samuel Pepys provides a first hand primary source of life in London during the 17th century and is most famous for its description of the great fire of 1666. This diary is essentially nothing more than an unprofessional amateur account of one man’s experience during the blaze, however the entire diary reads almost like a reality TV show. The actions that Pepys participates in both during the fire and within his accounts of his various affairs are quite irrational. As I absorbed each sentence of the prose, I could almost envision a person from a show like “I Love Money” doing the same things if they were alive during the time. Pepys’ behavior becomes so outrageous that it is unmistakably comical. It is important to note, however, that like some of the moments on various reality shows, there exists within the text material which has real substance. The Diary provides an immediate account of the fire and offers a glimpse into the exact way people were reacting to the nightmare they were faced with. It’s like a clip of a show survived through the years, true first hand reporting gold. The works of Hunter S. Thompson and his famous “Gonzo Reporting” are also called to mind by Pepys. Thompson basically reported his excessively obscene and unrestrained, uncontrolled life through his prose. Both writers also share a quality of being so uncontrolled that they never even have any inkling of their abnormalities.
Basic Passage “the unconquerable will, And study of revenge, immortal hate,”
What is a hero? Is it the guy that saves everyone for all the fame or one that leads his army and protects them no matter what? In John Milton’s Paradise Lost the devil is depicted as a hero. On the other had was he meant to be that way or was Milton just trying to show how people can be deceitful and you may think that they could be a hero when in all essence it is really the bad guy. Who is to say who the bad guy is though? Is he the one that is falling in love with someone else’s wife you the guy going around killing all the bad guys off? In this story, the devil has to kill all these different creatures just to get up to the earth to make Adam and Eve eats an apple to make the world a sinful place. While he is making his journey everyone wants him to make it and to kill off all of the “good guys.” The good guys are trying to protect the earth, but they are out there killing and not being so good. So I think that a hero cannot be defined as someone going out of their way to be kind to others and fight a battle. A hero is someone who truly believes that his/her army, or whatever they are fighting for, is the best and pushes them to strive at whatever they do and achieve what they went there to do.
Samuel Pepys’ fascinating diary is quite humorous even though he may have not intended it to be that way. His diary is full of obsessive compulsive behavior and leads me to wonder if he has a conscience or does has his money made it so that he does not have to have one? Basic Passage: “I wrapped 40’s in a paper, thinking to give her…I cannot forget the girl” Peppys’ diary entries are fascinating, his thoughts that he candidly writes thinking no one will read remind me of thoughts that many other people have. Peppys wants to see if the grass is greener on the other side and he has the money to do it. He gives his wife money to do great things to the house; meanwhile he is seeing just how green that grass is with Deb the housekeeper. Even after he is caught he still wants to be sneaky. He still wants to be a part of Deb and making everything ok for her, for some reason his wife catching him did nothing to his conscience and he figured he would just keep up the affair and in order to do this he would just keep the money flowing to his wife. Peppy loves his wife but maybe he just does not love the intimacy between the two of them and that is where Deb comes in. Not to make excuses for a cheating man, but really in his day divorce may not have been an option but getting a little pleasure from the house keeper was.
“So I could not be commanded by my reason, but I must go this very night; and so by coach, it being now dark, I to her, close by my tailor’s; and there she came into the coach to me……” – The Diary by Samuel Pepys
Although this was written in 1968 it applies very much to today’s society. Marriage is no longer considered the sacrament that it was originally intended to be. Men and women make light of the commitment that they stand before a holy God and make on their wedding day. Pepys is very aware of the fact that his thoughts and actions are inappropriate and wrong yet he continues to pursue other women. Many men today still behave the same way. My cousin on countless occasions has professed his love for his fiancé yet he continues to have secret rendezvous with other women. He constantly talks about how he knows that he is wrong in his actions but he makes no attempt to restrain himself. However, he is not alone in his sinful actions. Many people today openly have extramarital relationships as though there are no restrictions within the institution of marriage. Marriage has become more like signing a contract for a roommate. People want to know that they have someone to come home to at the end of the day but they do not want to commit to the person on an exclusive level. Spouses are sometimes treated like the roommate that you only keep peace with in order to prevent having to find a new one. We tell each other what we think each other wants to hear yet we have little regard for standing behind our promises to one another. When I first read Pepys diary I was disgusted but the sad truth is it sounded all too familiar.
People Just don't write aobut everything anymore....
Samuel Pepys is an incredibly odd man. He wrote about everything in his life…Literally! It’s amazing because no one ever writes this much anymore. People don’t write about their affairs or every last little detail in their life anymore. Sure there are those music artists who write their biographies but they don’t go into the amount of detail or the trivialities of the ordinary parts of life. Pepys writes about his day’s work, squabbles with his wife, and even the affairs he takes part in. It’s a bit of a blessing that Pepys wrote like he did because he gives a wonderful picture of how he lived and what life was like in the 1660’s. Pepys’ journal entries help us to know exactly how society worked, the marriages worked, and even how people really haven’t changed in the centuries that have separated from today and Pepys’ time. I think that it’s really crazy that people haven’t changed almost at all. Society, style, social status, and government are all things that have change but how people interact on the intimate level hasn’t. We can all relate to Pepys’ entry about the night that his wife wakes him up to talk about their problems in the middle of the night. It is very insightful to know that the nature of people hasn’t changed since 1660.
Title: Plagiarism Vs. Adaptation (and the morality of it) Basic Passage: pg 2083 “His [John Dryden] one Great tragedy, All for Love (1677), in blank verse, adapts Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra to the unities of the time, place, and action. Correlation: “Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some media (such as a book or a computer file).” This statement is from the handout I received on Tuesday night at the Writing Outreach lecture on plagiarism and it blows my mind. How on earth is it possible not to plagiarize if even the simplest idea once published onto a blog or in some file on your old floppy disk is yours and no one else can have it?? I can almost certainly say that someone else, somewhere, has already had this exact idea I’m speaking on. How would I find the first person to have this idea and cite them? During the lecture the speaker said you can avoid plagiarism by summarizing an idea in your own words, but then stated that even paraphrasing is plagiarism. That makes no sense to me and is completely contradictory. What is the difference in summarizing and paraphrasing. If I can express an idea in my own words, it’s mine right? No! Even using an idea is plagiarism. Isn’t that what we do each week, right here in this very blog? We use ideas and correlate them. Plagiarism is a very serious act of fraud, so are we all breaking the law. It states in our textbook, in black and white, that Dryden “adapted” Shakespeare’s overall plot of Antony and Cleopatra. As long as he puts a little footnote at the end, he gets all the credit and isn’t doing anything wrong. How many songs have been remade, papers written on the same ideas? Some people say no ideas are new ideas. The speaker also said that many people believe morality, or how we define what is right and wrong, all depends on who, where, and when. So who decides where we draw the line and when?
"His first important poem, 'Heroic Stanzas' was written to commemorate the death of Cromwell...Within a year Dryden and his two sons converted to Catholicism".
As beautiful a writer Dryden may seem to be, a beautiful person he is not. In 1653 Oliver Cromwell and his New Model Army took control of England, Scotland, and Ireland after winning the British Civil War. He created what is known today as a military dictatorship, dissolving the previous parliament and ruling with a clenched fist. Believing his successful arrival to power was given to him by God, Cromwell created the Barebones Parliament which appointed men based upon their religious credentials. In London, Dryden was raised as a supporter of Cromwell and commemorated the ruler’s death in “Heroic Stanzas”. But when things got tough and Charles II took back the throne, Dryden was faced with a difficult decision. The King was willing to take back all of England’s citizens except for those parliament labeled as traitors. So as not to be put into the rotten basket, Dryden swore his allegiance to the throne and converted to Catholicism like a whipped dog. Just as he was a great womanizer, Dryden was also a great bitch. He rolled over for the other side and was criticized by many loyal to Charles II. He was also labeled an opportunist by his enemies. But in the end he won over the crown and was named poet laureate after giving a good ass-kissing to the King in his poetry celebrating the Restoration. What a great man.
BrittanyBryant Spiderman, Superman, and even Satan?
Hero 1 a: a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b: an illustrious warrior c: a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d: one that shows great courage2 a: the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b: the central figure in an event, period, or movement
Everyone has their own definition of a hero. What exactly makes a hero a hero? Is it one who has great strength, or one who has perseverance? Well sometimes perseverance doesn’t always have to do with only the good guys. In Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” the devil is portrayed as a hero. In most religions, isn’t the devil depicted not as a hero? A hero to me is someone who never gives up, who will do what they have to to fulfill what they have promised. Superman and Spiderman are ideals of today’s heroes. They both save people from evil and harm. They have great strength and never give up. Well the devil, although not to me, is a hero. He never gave up when he had to fight his way through all the creatures of the underworld to get to Earth. He told his followers what he was going to do and he did it. So, therefore, a hero can be a good guy or a bad guy; depending on who you are. As long as a person is willing to sacrifice himself for his followers, I would put them under the definition of hero. Today we have labeled people with the title Hero without thinking. Some say the President, others their parents, and friends. Next time you label someone a Hero, ask yourself, ‘Did/Would they risk their lives to save yours if need be?’ If you can say yes to this question then they deserve the title/label Hero.
Title: Reflections on Marriage after Reading Samuel Pepys' Diary
Passage 1: Oh! 'tis pleasant to be free, The sweetest miss is liberty. - Charles Cotton "They Joys of Marriage"
Passage 2: "...[my wife] declaring herself jealous of mmy going out, for fear of my going to Deb; which I do deny - for which God forgive me, for I was no sooner out about noon but I did go by coach directly to Somerset House and there...yo did besar her and tocar her thing..."
Passage 3: Why should a foolish marriage vow, which long ago was made, Oblige us to each other now, When passion has decayed? ... Tis a madness that he should be jealous of me, or that I should bar him of another: For all we can gain is to give ourselves pain, when neither can hinder the other. - pg.2087
Pepys' diary is just another testament to what I have always believed: monogamy, fidelity, and marriage simply is NOT meant for everyone. Seriously, why on earth do people like Pepys get married in the first place? And why do people like his wife stay with him? I'll grant you that in his time marriage was expected and he'd be quite the anomaly to stay a bachelor, but then why his position still so common today? If a marriage is made for the sake of passion, isn't it only logical to absolve it when the "passion is decayed?" What sense does it make for people like the wife to try and "bar him of another?" The truth is, people are going to do what they want, and if it is a person's nature to by polyamorous the people who love them just need to be the same way or move on. Yes, I feel bad for Pepys' wife because I doubt divorce was a viable prospect in her time, but I can see no excuse for people today. And that whole "love is blind" crap just shouldn't cut it anymore. The red flags are obvious. Recognize them and let go. Life is to long to spend it with that kind of misery, betrayal and disrespect. Who knows, maybe if the wife (or husband as the case may be) got up enough self-respect and backbone to leave that relationship they'd also find that "'tis pleasant to be free" and "the sweetest miss is liberty."
Both Milton and Dryden make the main object of their writings seem heroic. Whether that object is a person, place or thing did not matter. In Milton’s Paradise Lost, Milton makes Satin sound like a hero instead of evil. Milton makes Satin likeable, that Satin is willing to stand up for his followers. After the great fire of London, Dryden makes London to be this superior town and that the king is good. He is basically saying that London will rise again out of the ash to be the best again and that the king is going to lead them in this. In both Milton and Dryden’s writing they are trying to make something good out of something bad. If you really read what they have written, it can still be applied your everyday day lives. Both are making the best out of a bad situation; trying to take it from being bad to being something good. If you take what they wrote in the literal sense you may not agree with them. If you take their writings in context, look at the situation and what they are trying to make of it, you can see where they are trying to turn things around. That might not be what their intentions were when writing but they were trying to persuade someone to believe in what they believed. People still do this in today’s society. Whether a lawyer is pleading a case or a political figure trying to persuade voters, the writing or speech can be presented in the same fashion as Milton and Dryden’s writings.
Nearly every work of fiction in history could be boiled down to the same three words: Good vs. Evil. The plot makes very clear who takes which side, unless the mystery of the story is that very question. However, a reader would be hard pressed to find any character, short of an actual demon, to verbatim claim “I am evil.” Darth Vader himself would only admit to being a “Dark Lord.” This brings to mind a question about the reality of good versus evil: Is there really any side that can be definitively labeled “evil?” John Milton effectively portrayed Satan, an actual demon, as a hero leading his people against the injustice of their fall from grace for the humans. In modern times, both in fact and fiction, sometimes the alignment of good and evil are blurred, or even irrelevant. In the game Destroy all Humans!, the protagonist is an alien trying to recover DNA for his own species’ gene pool to keep his race from going extinct. This objective can clearly be defined as good. However, he recovers these genetics from the brainstems of humans, mostly civilians, which we, being humans, would consider evil. This brings me to my final point: good and evil are only a matter of perspective. Any historian can tell you that the only difference between a “traitor” and a “revolutionary” is whether or not he succeeds. Our own American Revolution is likely still described as a “Great Temper Tantrum” in Great Britain. There is no good and evil in the real world, only a great series of opinions that frequently come into conflict.
Milton and Dryden; views on Heroism
ReplyDeleteThe mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell and a hell of heaven
Milton “Paradise lost”
John Milton was a religious writer to understand. His work “Paradise lost” is an epic tale featuring heaven, hell and the Garden of Eden. It is confusing the way he puts the character demon in a heroic position as if he is praising the demon. My thoughts for this confusing role would be the consequence of his breakaway behavior from the original one he intended, when he was a teenager. John Dryden’s drama “The state of innocence” is the rewrite of “Paradise lost “for a Royal court performance. Both of these poets were influenced by the time of their lives. Milton’s career was orbiting around Cromwell’s rule in a protestant religion with the idea of a civil government. Dryden’s time on the other hand was towards the end of protestant religion with the rise of King Charles II.Miltons idea was a rise of traditionally demonic or underdog as a new ruler or the new powerhouse whereas Dryden’s heroic idea is the same traditional powerhouse; the Royal palace, the king and his supporters. Dryden’s idea of heroic play is an ironic play of Milton’s Paradise lost and is far from its quiet and strong individual faith in god. Dryden’s audience saw human nature as malignant, and ruled by the king.
By:Faith Hall
ReplyDelete“The Unquenchable Void of Addictions”
Samuel Peep was an obvious obsessive compulsive personality. He was addicted to extramarital affairs, and partially enabled by his wealth to hide his actions from his wife Elizabeth. Unfortunately it seems he was unable to conquer it, his last diary entry about her states, 'my amours to Deb are past', meaning that he could not find her not that he had been able to get over her.
Basic Passage: On the 14th, despite having been asked repeatedly by Elizabeth his wife not to ever lay eyes on Deb again, he gathers money together for her and admits to himself, "I cannot forget the girl."
Obsessions and addictions have a common characteristic, no matter how much of the thing a person is so vigorously pursuing, no amount of that thing can quench their desire for it. People that have fixate their passions to a thing such as drugs, shopping, or sexual promiscuity are all in the same situation emotionally and mentally. The problem is not that they cannot get enough of what they are seeking so intensely, but it is a much greater problem, in that they are missing something within their own soul. They fill there is a great void that need to be filled, but sadly, their obsessions cannot fit that hole, and ultimately will never pacify their desires. Mr. Peep was in this mess, but did not realize what he was missing. When he writes, “Who wonders to find my wife so dull and melancholy, but God knows she hath too much cause." He shows that he knows she has every right to be upset with him, and call him miserable names, but nothing she does can affect him enough to cut through to the root of his addiction.
John Milton and John Dryden's opinion of a Hero
ReplyDelete"All human things are subject to decay, And when fate summons, monarchs must obey." -From MacFlecknoe by John Dryden.
What is the true definition of a hero? What do other people think about it? Do they think of it as a big joke. John Dryden certaintly made a mockery out of the whole idea of a hero. In his story, MacFlecknoe, which was a mock heroic satire, was full of satire and criticism. John Dryden wrote this as a full direct attack on a poet that he despised at the time, Thomas Shadwell. This book was written after many disagreements between the two. The main reason the two seemed to bicker so much was the presence of comedy in their stories. They had conflicting views about it so Dryden decided to write a story where he was mainly bashing Shadwell and his views on Comedy. The poem begins in the tone of an epic story. It presents Shadwell's defining characteristic as very dull, just as every epic hero has a special trait that defines them as a hero. John Milton was also a writer with different views on heroism. In what is regarded as Milton's most famous poem, Paradise Lost, Milton explains the fall of man. It also talks about the temptation of Adam and Eve by Satan. In the story, Satan seems idealised but, seems to have many flaws. Satan seems to be a hero but, shouldn't be. It would seem that in any story Satan would be the villain. However, Milton categorizes Satan as the hero in Paradise Lost. In my opinion of Milton and Dryden's views of Heroism, it seems that the two have very similar beliefs. Dryden seems to make a joke of the whole idea of a hero. It seems that in most of his work he is laughing in the face of it. It is very sarcastic with bits of comedy. Milton seems the exact same way. Putting Satan as the hero may seem very odd to most but, to Milton, it is a sign of mockery of a Hero. This is dead on to Dryden's views of heroism. The two are almost completely identical.
Evil Depicted as Good
ReplyDelete“All is not lost; the unconquerable will, And study of revenge, immortal hate, And courage never to submit or yield: And what is else not to be overcome?”
In Milton’s book Paradise Lost, he depicts Satan as a hero type. He tells how he fights through all these evil creatures to get back to earth and that he promises his followers that he will help them get revenge for what had happened to them. People tend think of this as weird since the bad guy is made out as a good guy, but when you think about it this happens all the time nowadays. In certain movies the main character is bad and commits wrongs but they are still considered the good guy because someone has done wrong to them or someone close to them. In the move the Italian Job, Mark Wahlberg is a thief who gets double crossed by one of his partners, Edward Norton. Through out the movie Wahlberg and his team try to rob Norton of what he stole from them. Even though Wahlberg is a thief and is stealing he is still considered a good guy and is everyone’s favorite because he is getting revenge on someone who did wrong to him. In the movie Green Street Hooligans, Charlie Hunnam is the leader of a firm that fights other firms for bragging rights. He is still considered good though because you are shown his life and what he goes through. An evil character depicted as a good character happens all the time. The only reason Paradise lost brings up controversy is because it is Satan that is being shown as good.
Lindsay......
ReplyDeleteMilton's and Dryden's view of heroism, through the passage of Paradise Lost....
in the beginning of the Passage, Paradise Lost, Dryden asks for God's help to tell the story of Satan's tale. Which today many question if questioning God is ok; ok to speak for God or even basically rewrite the Bible?
In Paradise Lost, Satan is supposed to be evil but in the passage, Dryden thinks he is not evil at all and has heroic traits. It all began when a battle was lost and Satan an his father wer bound for hell. Dryden makes Satan to sort of seem like a hero because he lost everything and now is in hell. But Satan didnt give up.
At the same time Milton paints Satan as the one that gets other fallen depressed angels to get up and convince them not to give up. He explains that the angels plan to travel to Earth; Satan knows it may seem almost impossible to get there but says he will fight ever step of the way since he is the leader. And he does succeed.
So now the question....what should be beleve, Satan sure seems like a hero in to them but Satan is no hero.....
Milton and Dryden: views of Heroism through the passage of Paradise Lost...
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of Paradise Lost, Dryden has asked God to help him state the story of Satan. In today's society, some are asking the question if it is ok to speak for God. In Paradise Lost, Satan is suppose to be evil and Dryden thinks he is not evil at all and claims that Satan has heroic traits. He tells how Satan fights through all of these evil creatures to get back to earth. Dryden also claims that Satan promises his followers that he will help them get revenge for what had happened to them. The reason that Paradise Lost brings up controversy is because Satan is the one that is being shown as the hero. John Milton was also a writer with different views on heroism. What is understood from Milton's most famous poem, Paradise Lost,is the fall of man. The two views from both Milton and Dryden are almost the exact same. They both view Satan as a hero.
Pepys: The Casanova of Seething Lane
ReplyDeletePassage:
“.. Affirming that she saw me hug and kiss the girl; the latter I denied, and truly; the other I confessed and no more. And upon her pressuring me, did offer to give her under my hand that I would never see Mrs. Pierce more, not Knepp….”-The Deb Willet Affair
Samuel Pepys was most certainly an entertaining writer. His diary produces witty and perverse accounts of the daily goings on of London life. While he must be awarded the recognition of being an intelligent, witty, and notorious womanizer, there seems to be a lack of depth portrayed in his daily entries. While he walks around the burning streets of London, he seems to simply be surveying an uncomfortable sight. He does not seem very affected by the tragedy that is going on around him. He seems to spend too much time describing the personal appearance of his acquaintances then he should during such a time.
He shows his shallow nature again in [The Deb Willet Affair]. Here, Pepys acknowledges that he has an affair with the household maid. Not only this, but it is alluded that he has had episodes with at least two other women. Meanwhile, he sees the distress this causes his wife, but he seems to feel no guilt about it. He does admit that he deserves his wife’s wrath, but that is the extent to his conscience.
Satan a Hero?
ReplyDeleteMain Passage: Heroism Portrayed by Milton and Dryden
In his masterpiece "Paradise Lost", John Milton portrays Satan in what may seem to be a shocking manner...as a hero. The typical stereotype of Satan that most people picture today is the Bright red demon with horns and a pitchfork. But Milton depicts him as a heroic figure of sorts. He is described as the brightest of all the angels and is introduced in a way that we almost sympathize and like the character. But, of course, Satan is definitely not a hero. Satan's character corrodes throughout the book...he never really acts out what he believes (which is ironically what Christians are called to do), and like politicians he causes others to swoon over his words, but doesn't fulfill his promises. He's also described as a rebellious hero...which to me is in no way a hero at all. Dryden's poems are often filled with people being hailed as heroes. These heroes usually have a duty or service to England. A threat is usually presented at the beginning of the poem, the hero ultimately overcomes the threat, and a wonderful future for England is often predicted. This sort of hero is absolutely missing to me from Dryden's "Annus Mirabilis," which is about The Great Fire.
Title: Heroes
ReplyDeletePassage:"Upon the death of Judas, the story offers no immorality for him other than the remembrance of his deeds"
Response:
The idea of a hero in our society is someone who will go to any length to win a prize or fight for what ever they think is right. In Christian heroism, Judas is made out to be a hero. As most of us know, Judas was the one who betrayed Jesus by turning Him over to the roman soldiers for thirty peices of silver. That doesn't sound much like a hero to me. A real hero is a man who does things for people without getting the recognition. Like a man who feeds the poor or opens the door for an elderly lady or giving a word of encouragement to someone that is down. Thats a real Hero!!! Dont get me wrong, I believe firefighters and police officers are also heroes. They put their lives on the line on a daily basis, but that is their job and they are paid for it. In the Maccabees, Judas could of been seen as a hero because he knew by turning over the Son of God that it was going to cost him certain death. Still I don't see how he could be seen as a hero! Giving over the Son of God to death was his will in life. Was this the will of God? We will save that for another day!! There are many ways to be considered a hero. Heroism to me is the act of giveng and not receiving. There should be no reward for a hero. Judas did give, he gave Jesus up for death!!!!!!!!!
A.W. Faris
ReplyDeleteReality TV and Gonzo Reporting Circa 1666
Basic Passage:
“Having stayed, and in an hour’s time seen the fire rage every way, and nobody to my sight endeavoring to quench it, but to remove their goods and leave all to the fire;”
The Diary of Samuel Pepys provides a first hand primary source of life in London during the 17th century and is most famous for its description of the great fire of 1666. This diary is essentially nothing more than an unprofessional amateur account of one man’s experience during the blaze, however the entire diary reads almost like a reality TV show. The actions that Pepys participates in both during the fire and within his accounts of his various affairs are quite irrational. As I absorbed each sentence of the prose, I could almost envision a person from a show like “I Love Money” doing the same things if they were alive during the time. Pepys’ behavior becomes so outrageous that it is unmistakably comical. It is important to note, however, that like some of the moments on various reality shows, there exists within the text material which has real substance. The Diary provides an immediate account of the fire and offers a glimpse into the exact way people were reacting to the nightmare they were faced with. It’s like a clip of a show survived through the years, true first hand reporting gold. The works of Hunter S. Thompson and his famous “Gonzo Reporting” are also called to mind by Pepys. Thompson basically reported his excessively obscene and unrestrained, uncontrolled life through his prose. Both writers also share a quality of being so uncontrolled that they never even have any inkling of their abnormalities.
Alex Newton
ReplyDeleteBasic Passage
“the unconquerable will, And study of revenge, immortal hate,”
What is a hero? Is it the guy that saves everyone for all the fame or one that leads his army and protects them no matter what? In John Milton’s Paradise Lost the devil is depicted as a hero. On the other had was he meant to be that way or was Milton just trying to show how people can be deceitful and you may think that they could be a hero when in all essence it is really the bad guy. Who is to say who the bad guy is though? Is he the one that is falling in love with someone else’s wife you the guy going around killing all the bad guys off? In this story, the devil has to kill all these different creatures just to get up to the earth to make Adam and Eve eats an apple to make the world a sinful place. While he is making his journey everyone wants him to make it and to kill off all of the “good guys.” The good guys are trying to protect the earth, but they are out there killing and not being so good. So I think that a hero cannot be defined as someone going out of their way to be kind to others and fight a battle. A hero is someone who truly believes that his/her army, or whatever they are fighting for, is the best and pushes them to strive at whatever they do and achieve what they went there to do.
Samuel Pepys’ fascinating diary is quite humorous even though he may have not intended it to be that way. His diary is full of obsessive compulsive behavior and leads me to wonder if he has a conscience or does has his money made it so that he does not have to have one?
ReplyDeleteBasic Passage: “I wrapped 40’s in a paper, thinking to give her…I cannot forget the girl”
Peppys’ diary entries are fascinating, his thoughts that he candidly writes thinking no one will read remind me of thoughts that many other people have. Peppys wants to see if the grass is greener on the other side and he has the money to do it. He gives his wife money to do great things to the house; meanwhile he is seeing just how green that grass is with Deb the housekeeper. Even after he is caught he still wants to be sneaky. He still wants to be a part of Deb and making everything ok for her, for some reason his wife catching him did nothing to his conscience and he figured he would just keep up the affair and in order to do this he would just keep the money flowing to his wife. Peppy loves his wife but maybe he just does not love the intimacy between the two of them and that is where Deb comes in. Not to make excuses for a cheating man, but really in his day divorce may not have been an option but getting a little pleasure from the house keeper was.
Some Things Never Change…….
ReplyDelete“So I could not be commanded by my reason, but I must go this very night; and so by coach, it being now dark, I to her, close by my tailor’s; and there she came into the coach to me……” – The Diary by Samuel Pepys
Although this was written in 1968 it applies very much to today’s society. Marriage is no longer considered the sacrament that it was originally intended to be. Men and women make light of the commitment that they stand before a holy God and make on their wedding day. Pepys is very aware of the fact that his thoughts and actions are inappropriate and wrong yet he continues to pursue other women. Many men today still behave the same way. My cousin on countless occasions has professed his love for his fiancé yet he continues to have secret rendezvous with other women. He constantly talks about how he knows that he is wrong in his actions but he makes no attempt to restrain himself. However, he is not alone in his sinful actions. Many people today openly have extramarital relationships as though there are no restrictions within the institution of marriage. Marriage has become more like signing a contract for a roommate. People want to know that they have someone to come home to at the end of the day but they do not want to commit to the person on an exclusive level. Spouses are sometimes treated like the roommate that you only keep peace with in order to prevent having to find a new one. We tell each other what we think each other wants to hear yet we have little regard for standing behind our promises to one another. When I first read Pepys diary I was disgusted but the sad truth is it sounded all too familiar.
Jessica Kiser
ReplyDeletePeople Just don't write aobut everything anymore....
Samuel Pepys is an incredibly odd man. He wrote about everything in his life…Literally! It’s amazing because no one ever writes this much anymore. People don’t write about their affairs or every last little detail in their life anymore. Sure there are those music artists who write their biographies but they don’t go into the amount of detail or the trivialities of the ordinary parts of life. Pepys writes about his day’s work, squabbles with his wife, and even the affairs he takes part in.
It’s a bit of a blessing that Pepys wrote like he did because he gives a wonderful picture of how he lived and what life was like in the 1660’s. Pepys’ journal entries help us to know exactly how society worked, the marriages worked, and even how people really haven’t changed in the centuries that have separated from today and Pepys’ time.
I think that it’s really crazy that people haven’t changed almost at all. Society, style, social status, and government are all things that have change but how people interact on the intimate level hasn’t. We can all relate to Pepys’ entry about the night that his wife wakes him up to talk about their problems in the middle of the night. It is very insightful to know that the nature of people hasn’t changed since 1660.
Title: Plagiarism Vs. Adaptation (and the morality of it)
ReplyDeleteBasic Passage: pg 2083 “His [John Dryden] one Great tragedy, All for Love (1677), in blank verse, adapts Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra to the unities of the time, place, and action.
Correlation: “Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some media (such as a book or a computer file).” This statement is from the handout I received on Tuesday night at the Writing Outreach lecture on plagiarism and it blows my mind. How on earth is it possible not to plagiarize if even the simplest idea once published onto a blog or in some file on your old floppy disk is yours and no one else can have it?? I can almost certainly say that someone else, somewhere, has already had this exact idea I’m speaking on. How would I find the first person to have this idea and cite them? During the lecture the speaker said you can avoid plagiarism by summarizing an idea in your own words, but then stated that even paraphrasing is plagiarism. That makes no sense to me and is completely contradictory. What is the difference in summarizing and paraphrasing. If I can express an idea in my own words, it’s mine right? No! Even using an idea is plagiarism. Isn’t that what we do each week, right here in this very blog? We use ideas and correlate them. Plagiarism is a very serious act of fraud, so are we all breaking the law. It states in our textbook, in black and white, that Dryden “adapted” Shakespeare’s overall plot of Antony and Cleopatra. As long as he puts a little footnote at the end, he gets all the credit and isn’t doing anything wrong. How many songs have been remade, papers written on the same ideas? Some people say no ideas are new ideas. The speaker also said that many people believe morality, or how we define what is right and wrong, all depends on who, where, and when. So who decides where we draw the line and when?
Owen Bradley
ReplyDeleteDryden the Turncoat
"His first important poem, 'Heroic Stanzas' was written to commemorate the death of Cromwell...Within a year Dryden and his two sons converted to Catholicism".
As beautiful a writer Dryden may seem to be, a beautiful person he is not. In 1653 Oliver Cromwell and his New Model Army took control of England, Scotland, and Ireland after winning the British Civil War. He created what is known today as a military dictatorship, dissolving the previous parliament and ruling with a clenched fist. Believing his successful arrival to power was given to him by God, Cromwell created the Barebones Parliament which appointed men based upon their religious credentials. In London, Dryden was raised as a supporter of Cromwell and commemorated the ruler’s death in “Heroic Stanzas”. But when things got tough and Charles II took back the throne, Dryden was faced with a difficult decision. The King was willing to take back all of England’s citizens except for those parliament labeled as traitors. So as not to be put into the rotten basket, Dryden swore his allegiance to the throne and converted to Catholicism like a whipped dog. Just as he was a great womanizer, Dryden was also a great bitch. He rolled over for the other side and was criticized by many loyal to Charles II. He was also labeled an opportunist by his enemies. But in the end he won over the crown and was named poet laureate after giving a good ass-kissing to the King in his poetry celebrating the Restoration. What a great man.
BrittanyBryant
ReplyDeleteSpiderman, Superman, and even Satan?
Hero 1 a: a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b: an illustrious warrior c: a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d: one that shows great courage2 a: the principal male character in a literary or dramatic work b: the central figure in an event, period, or movement
Everyone has their own definition of a hero. What exactly makes a hero a hero? Is it one who has great strength, or one who has perseverance? Well sometimes perseverance doesn’t always have to do with only the good guys. In Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” the devil is portrayed as a hero. In most religions, isn’t the devil depicted not as a hero? A hero to me is someone who never gives up, who will do what they have to to fulfill what they have promised. Superman and Spiderman are ideals of today’s heroes. They both save people from evil and harm. They have great strength and never give up. Well the devil, although not to me, is a hero. He never gave up when he had to fight his way through all the creatures of the underworld to get to Earth. He told his followers what he was going to do and he did it. So, therefore, a hero can be a good guy or a bad guy; depending on who you are. As long as a person is willing to sacrifice himself for his followers, I would put them under the definition of hero. Today we have labeled people with the title Hero without thinking. Some say the President, others their parents, and friends. Next time you label someone a Hero, ask yourself, ‘Did/Would they risk their lives to save yours if need be?’ If you can say yes to this question then they deserve the title/label Hero.
Title: Reflections on Marriage after Reading Samuel Pepys' Diary
ReplyDeletePassage 1: Oh! 'tis pleasant to be free,
The sweetest miss is liberty. - Charles Cotton "They Joys of Marriage"
Passage 2: "...[my wife] declaring herself jealous of mmy going out, for fear of my going to Deb; which I do deny - for which God forgive me, for I was no sooner out about noon but I did go by coach directly to Somerset House and there...yo did besar her and tocar her thing..."
Passage 3: Why should a foolish marriage vow,
which long ago was made,
Oblige us to each other now,
When passion has decayed?
... Tis a madness that he should be jealous of me,
or that I should bar him of another:
For all we can gain is to give ourselves pain,
when neither can hinder the other. - pg.2087
Pepys' diary is just another testament to what I have always believed: monogamy, fidelity, and marriage simply is NOT meant for everyone. Seriously, why on earth do people like Pepys get married in the first place? And why do people like his wife stay with him? I'll grant you that in his time marriage was expected and he'd be quite the anomaly to stay a bachelor, but then why his position still so common today? If a marriage is made for the sake of passion, isn't it only logical to absolve it when the "passion is decayed?" What sense does it make for people like the wife to try and "bar him of another?" The truth is, people are going to do what they want, and if it is a person's nature to by polyamorous the people who love them just need to be the same way or move on. Yes, I feel bad for Pepys' wife because I doubt divorce was a viable prospect in her time, but I can see no excuse for people today. And that whole "love is blind" crap just shouldn't cut it anymore. The red flags are obvious. Recognize them and let go. Life is to long to spend it with that kind of misery, betrayal and disrespect. Who knows, maybe if the wife (or husband as the case may be) got up enough self-respect and backbone to leave that relationship they'd also find that "'tis pleasant to be free" and "the sweetest miss is liberty."
Connie Land
ReplyDeleteMilton and Dryden: views of Heroism
Both Milton and Dryden make the main object of their writings seem heroic. Whether that object is a person, place or thing did not matter. In Milton’s Paradise Lost, Milton makes Satin sound like a hero instead of evil. Milton makes Satin likeable, that Satin is willing to stand up for his followers. After the great fire of London, Dryden makes London to be this superior town and that the king is good. He is basically saying that London will rise again out of the ash to be the best again and that the king is going to lead them in this. In both Milton and Dryden’s writing they are trying to make something good out of something bad. If you really read what they have written, it can still be applied your everyday day lives. Both are making the best out of a bad situation; trying to take it from being bad to being something good. If you take what they wrote in the literal sense you may not agree with them. If you take their writings in context, look at the situation and what they are trying to make of it, you can see where they are trying to turn things around. That might not be what their intentions were when writing but they were trying to persuade someone to believe in what they believed. People still do this in today’s society. Whether a lawyer is pleading a case or a political figure trying to persuade voters, the writing or speech can be presented in the same fashion as Milton and Dryden’s writings.
Good vs. Evil, and Combinations Thereof
ReplyDeleteNearly every work of fiction in history could be boiled down to the same three words: Good vs. Evil. The plot makes very clear who takes which side, unless the mystery of the story is that very question. However, a reader would be hard pressed to find any character, short of an actual demon, to verbatim claim “I am evil.” Darth Vader himself would only admit to being a “Dark Lord.” This brings to mind a question about the reality of good versus evil: Is there really any side that can be definitively labeled “evil?” John Milton effectively portrayed Satan, an actual demon, as a hero leading his people against the injustice of their fall from grace for the humans. In modern times, both in fact and fiction, sometimes the alignment of good and evil are blurred, or even irrelevant. In the game Destroy all Humans!, the protagonist is an alien trying to recover DNA for his own species’ gene pool to keep his race from going extinct. This objective can clearly be defined as good. However, he recovers these genetics from the brainstems of humans, mostly civilians, which we, being humans, would consider evil. This brings me to my final point: good and evil are only a matter of perspective. Any historian can tell you that the only difference between a “traitor” and a “revolutionary” is whether or not he succeeds. Our own American Revolution is likely still described as a “Great Temper Tantrum” in Great Britain. There is no good and evil in the real world, only a great series of opinions that frequently come into conflict.