Thunder says...

The fifth section was the most difficult to understand. The notes indicate that there are three themes employed that consist of a journey, an approach to a deserted chapel, and the decay of eastern Europe. The first section shows the waste land of cities. Eliot mentions great civilizations such as "Jerusalem Athens Alexandria/Vienna London"(375-376) and how they were destroyed then reformed then destroyed again. It seems that no urban life can ever exist in harmony with the rest of the world. It must either flourish at the expense of nature or "crack" or "burst" (373). The journey aspect of the first section consists of a thirsty speaker. He speaks confusingly of rocks, mountains, and water--the repetition of the words blurring their meaning. The journey culminates in the "hooded hordes swarming/Over endless plains" (369-370) after some loud noise is heard. The noise is not admired or stopped and recognized respectfully, it is simply sounded unceremoniously. The second section depicts a chapel that has been abandoned. Chapels are a symbol of sanctity but the decay indicates that society no longer acknowledges such sanctity. The third section speaks of the degeneration of Europe through 3 speakers. The first mentions that modern civilization never gives, it only takes. The only thing we give is the "awful daring of a moment's surrender", a hint at sex. The second speaker also touches on selfishness when he says that each person thinks only of the key that will let him out of his prison. No one pays attention to the lives of others and the "aethereal rumours" (416). The final speaker offers a sense of hope. There may be a way for society to redeem itself if it surrenders to "controlling hands". Eliot uses the theme of regeneration throughout The Waste Land so it is only fitting that he end the poem in this manner. The final scene of the poem comes back to the fisher king. He is unsure of how to manage his lands and the London Bridge lyrics signal a sense of resignation. The non-western words concluding the poem indicate that perhaps regeneration should be sought from new sources. We should not be recreating the same twisted civilizations after they fall.    

The Gates of Hell

    What intrigues me most about the Gates of Hell is the name. The bronze sculpture in Philadelphia could not be opened or shut. There was no way to pass through it. Aside from the entryway form of the bronze, the Gates of Hell did not resemble gates at all. The bottom section of the gates seems a solid barrier. It has an even surface and seems most like a door. But above the gateway is divided into two halves that might open up like doors but for the mysterious appearance of the ocean-like surface. It is interesting that Rodin did not make it clear whether the gates were a barrier or just a frame through which one could see the darkness of Hell. I've always envisioned Hell as having gates but that Rodin did not make the gates functional makes sense in its own way. Rodin's gates serve more as a glimpse into Hell than as gates that would keep people out of Hell. My reasoning for this is that Hell is not a place one can enter and exit when the gatekeeper is on duty. Hell is a place sinners are sucked into and never allowed to leave. It does not require gates. Thus the gates are a symbolic piece of art that reveals Rodin's idea of what Hell is like. Hell is represented as an endlessly confusing abyss where darkness overwhelms the sinners like an ocean. There  are tiny people and enormous people, people in contorted positions, babies isolated on the outer rims of the gates, and no one seems aware of anyone else. Only those forced to be intertwined are aware of each other's presence. The suffering and pain is so vast that it cannot be taken in looking at the gates from either extremely close up or from only far away. The use of non-functional gates as a means of expression conveys the hopelessness of escaping Hell.

Athena

One of the obstacles facing Satan's exit of Hell is a female guardian that he seems to have known in better days. When Satan comes to blows with an amorphous dark creature the gate keeper intervenes saying, "O father, what intends thy hand... Against thy only Son?" (727-728). As she continues speaking it becomes clear that the key holder is Satan's daughter, as well as a former lover. She expresses her distress at Satan's failure to recognize her, "do I seem/Now in thine eye so foul, once deem'd so fair" (747-748). A change in appearance during the fall from Heaven is a theme Milton employs with several of the angels. It is considered an allusion to Virgil's Aeneid in which Hector's ghost is not at all indicative of his face and body as it was in life. The classical references are continued in Paradise Lost as the gate keeper recalls her birth. She explains how she "sprung" (758) out of the left side of Satan's head "a Goddess arm'd" (757). Although she reveals she is called "Sin", she is clearly a representation of the Pagan goddess Athena who likewise sprung out of Zeus' head in full battle gear as the goddess of war and wisdom. Why did Milton choose to place Athena in Hell? Milton chose to call her Sin. Milton elected for her to be the daughter of Satan and give birth to a son of incest. Why would Milton give such positions of honor (Satan's daughter and lover, and the key holder of Hell) to Athena? Surely she is of Pagan nature which would deem her unworthy of Heaven, but any Pagan god would do. Athena being the goddess of war and wisdom, perhaps showing her in Hell stripped of her primary traits is meant to depict the nature of Hell: one has no identity. Satan did not recognize her or his own son. Her son is a dark mass without recognizable features or even limbs. To have her strength and wisdom taken away is the worst punishment for the independent minded goddess.
    The Athena-like character is said to have been raped repeatedly by her own son. She suffers with no doubt but perhaps it is the recollection of past happiness that magnifies and ensures her suffering. Satan speaks of the "dalliance had with thee in Heav'n" (819) and how it was "Then sweet, now sad to mention" (820). As we talked about in class, the sorrow of Hell is capitalized on with memories of happiness. Satan himself acknowledges this.

Paradise Lost: Book II

The Social Hierarchy of Hell

Satan begins the consultation asking the fallen angels whether or not they want to wage war against Heaven. He claims that there will be no power struggles in Hell as there were in Heaven when he says, "for none sure will claim in Hell/Precedence, none, whose portion is so small/Of present pain, that with ambitious mind/Will covet more." (32-35) However, this runs contrary to the structure that is already established in Hell. Satan is the ruler of the angels in Hell, just as he was in Heaven. When Beelzebub begins to Speak, Milton introduces him, "Which when Beelzebub perceiv'd, then whom,/Satan except, none higher sat," (299-300). The other angels recognize Satan’s dominance even though he claims that everyone is equal in Hell. The characterization of Beelzebub as Satan's second in command is foreboding considering that Satan was God's second and tried to unseat Him. 

Should there be war? 

Opinions of the fallen angels 

Moloc advocates for war right of bat when he tells the angels that nothing could be worse than their current situation, "if there be in Hell/Fear to be worse destroy'd: what can be worse/Then to dwell here," (84-86). In essence, Moloc says, Why not? We might as well give it a shot. It can't get any worse! Further in his speech Moloc introduces the idea of revenge. Moloc acknowledges the difficulty they will face if they try to unseat God altogether, so he sets the bar a little lower. If they can just annoy God, vex Him, they will fulfill their revenge. Moloc says, "we feel/Our power sufficient to disturb his Heav'n,/And with perpetual inrodes to Allarme,/Though inaccessible, his fatal Throne:/Which if not Victory is yet Revenge." (101-105). Moloc desires war to uphold his pride for he believes God was unjust and desires to seek revenge. He gives the angels his reasons why he wants war and the angels 

Belial's opinion is somewhat ambivalent. At first he seems to want war, but he considers God's wrath and ultimately decides against war. Belial is characterized as having a "perswasive accent" (118) and a "graceful and humane" (109) demeanor. He expresses his desire for war when he says, "we must exasperate/Th' Almighty Victor to spend all his rage," (143-44). Belial agrees with Moloc's theory of vengeance by means of irritation. Soon, however, Belial begins to worry about how God might react to the fallen angels and reveals his fear, "What if the breath that kindl'd those grim fires/Awak'd should blow them into sevenfold rage/And plunge us in the flames? " (170-172) Belial concludes his speech by expressing a wish for peace. However, his desire to abstain from war is attributed to his slothful nature. Simply because peace is less effort, Belial prefers it,  "Thus Belial with words cloath'd in reasons garb/Counsell'd ignoble ease, and peaceful sloath," (226-227). While his arguments concerning God's mighty wrath were valid, Belial advocates peace for the sake of comfort.

Mammon thinks along the lines of the age old George Herbert quote, "Living well is the best revenge." The fallen angel realizes any attempt to thwart God will not only be a failure but anticipated by Heaven's guards. Mammon says, "Let us not then pursue/By force impossible," (249-250) "but rather seek/Our own good from our selves, and from our own/Live to our selves," (252-254). He wants to make the best of a bad situation and prevent the angels from meeting further harm and misery. Mammon even suggests making Hell the image of Heaven, "As he our darkness, cannot we his Light/Imitate when we please?" (269-270). Mammon is applauded and it seems the angels all agree with his argument but from the summary preceding the text of Book II the reader knows war follows the consultation. How does Satan convince the angels? 

Malacoda's Malice

When Virgil presents himself boldly to the devils of canto 21 Malacoda, ringleader of the devils, exhibits deference to Virgil that verges on fear. Virgil justifies his presence, "Do you think...you would see me here...still safe, without propitioius fate and God's permission?" (263) and Malacoda's "arrogance collapsed" (263). Malacoda shows submission and tells the other devils to beware of Virgil. However for all of Malacoda's drama his actions do not reveal fear of Virgil. Malacoda is simply putting on a charade. Malacoda tells Virgil that the arch is destroyed and six devils will be sent to lead Virgil and Dante to an intact arch. However, Malacoda is lying to Virgil unhesitatingly and convincingly. Malacoda "set the trap for the overly confident, trusting Virgil". A Virgil who does not, for a second, doubt the devil's honesty. Malacoda's apparent wariness of Virgil is questionable. Was he truly scared of Virgil? Were the warnings to not "touch this man" (263) sincere? Dante doubts Virgil's decision to trust the devils when he says to Virgil, "If you're observant, as you usually are, why is it you don't see them grind their teeth...we're in danger!" (264) Perhaps when Virgil "forced himself to look as bold as possible" (262) to the devils he acted too boldly, as well. What is Dante trying to say about reason by Malacoda's thwarting of Virgil? These are the punishers of the simonists of the state and they are the ones to trick Reason. At an earlier point Virgil could not pass through the gates without an angel sent by God. His failure then was one that could not be avoided because Virgil's birth in pagan times prevents him from knowing the true God. The failure in canto 21 is a failure of wit. Virgil is outsmarted by inhabitants of Hell. Why would Dante designate the most comically vulgar creatures the reader has met so far to be the ones to successfully trick Virgil?

Brunetto

In Canto XV Dante does not express pity, but "admiration and affection" (210) for one of the damned. Brunetto is in Hell for acts of sodomy but the canto does not make reference to the sin directly. Musa's comments explain that the imagery in Brunetto's speech is "explicit" (210) but Dante does not show any sign of noticing the nature of Brunetto's inappropriate language. I found it odd that neither Virgil nor Dante pointed out Dante's admiration of Brunetto as improper behavior. Brunetto is a sinner and when Dante showed pity for sinners in higher levels of Hell he was reprimanded. But now when he praises Brunetto no mention is made of the impropriety of Dante's actions. Is personal relationship and emotional attachment capable of excusing Dante from reproach? Furthermore, Dante looked up to Brunetto as a mentor and a teacher. Why would he place Brunetto in Hell and reveal to the world that he was a sodomite?

Lofty Endeavors

Canto II explains how Virgil has come to guide the Pilgrim through the underworld. Three women, to counter the 3 sins (embodied by the lion, she-wolf, and leopard), have passed along a message to Virgil to help Dante. The Virgin Mary makes a request to Lucia who asks Beatrice to help the Pilgrim, Beatrice in turn goes to Virgil who recounts the chain of events to Dante. In her explanation to Virgil, Beatrice says, "I am Beatrice, who urges you to go; I come from the place I am longing to return to; love moved me, as it moves me now to speak" (Canto II, lines 70-27). These lines are a testament to Dante's philosophy on love. The introduction made a point of mentioning that throughout all of Dante's studies and changing understandings his perception of love remained constant. Dante considered love "the most important force behind noble actions and lofty endeavors." (28) Beatrice's journey to find Virgil led her away from where she was "longing to return to" expressing a great devotion Dante. Her love for him overrode selfish desires to stay in Heaven for love itself moved her. Dante, as the Poet, has characterized Beatrice as such. The introduction mentions that Beatrice "was offended by the attention Dante paid other women" (19) but never asserts that she loved him as he loved her. Dante idealized Beatrice and believed she would lead him to "inner perfection" (20). Dante is known for "the lover's glorification of his own feelings, and his glorification of the beloved" (25). In Canto II less is said about Beatrice's love for Dante and their relationship than about Dante's understanding of love and the virtue Beatrice represented. Dante's belief that love is the primary motivational force behind "lofty endeavors" is explored in lines 70-72 in terms of love as a whole rather than in Beatrice and Dante's relationship specifically.