The Fall- A Necessary Screw-Up?

Reading through the final six chapters of Paradise Lost, as well as considering Dr. Schuler's proposition regarding politics in the book, I couldn't help but start to wrap my blog post around a few different questions or hypotheticals. Simply going off of Milton's preferred political themes (liberty of thought, free press, rational self-government, etc), I started to see Adam and Eve as a representation of the Puritans. Through the last two chapters of the book, Adam does seem crushed by the results of his and Eve's sin, but he also seems incredibly hopeful for the future. He looks forward to the work he will put in as a result of his sin because he prefers it to laziness or sitting idly. I feel like there's a huge underlying theme in this last chunk of the book that mirrors what came of the Puritan government: Things were good before sin, and sin made the world bad. But, great things came out of those trials and evils. It's like Adam and Eve (and all mankind) had to struggle and toil after ruining paradise, but it was all worth it in the end (in theory). I'm not quite sold on this myself because it then begs the question of whether perfection is actually perfect and enjoyable, but, like I said, I couldn't ignore this theory.

Edit: I commented on Osten and Stephen's posts.

Comments

I'm glad that you brought this back to the political allegory! To be honest, the whole concept of this being allegorical has seemed pretty far-fetched to me thus far, but your perspective makes a lot of sense to me and helped me to view this epic in a new light. Even if this isn't what Milton intended for this epic, we can still hold on to the truth that is echoed throughout Paradise Lost and the history it mirrors: trials and suffering lead to ultimate perfection in Christ.
Caroline Tucker said…
I agree! Adam and Eve do look similar to the Puritans. I also agree that there are some problems with this theory. I believe that Milton wanted readers to ponder and really concentrate on the book so that they could make our own decision on who represented who. He believed in thinking for oneself. He probably did not want to just give away the representation of his political allegory. He wanted his readers to come to their own conclusion. I think that this makes the book more fun to read. It makes it like a treasure or scavenger hunt.