Chaos in Paradise Lost

Author(s): Aaron Santesso and John Rumrich

Source: PMLA, Vol. 112, No. 1, Special Topic: The Teaching of Literature (Jan., 1997), pp.
121-123
Published by: Modern Language Association
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/463063
Accessed: 22-08-2019 10:53 UTC

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 support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

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

This content downloaded from 121.240.212.2 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:53:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Forum 121

original
original reads,
reads,"These
"Theseare
are
Remedies
Remedies
wished
wished
forfor against Satan's
against Satan's arrival
arrivalin
inprelapsarian
prelapsarian Eden
Edenas as
"productive
"productive
andand
the
the Brute
Bruteof ofa aHusband;
Husband;andand
good
good
Queen
Queen
Elizabeth
Elizabeth
is is dynamic"
dynamic" (1038)
(1038)or
orasasananintended
intendedtransgression:
transgression:
called
called in
in Question
Questionfor
fornot
nothaving
having
hadhad
Compassion
Compassion
enough
enough
to her
her own
ownSex
Sex["self"
["self"inin
Morrison],
Morrison],
to to
prevail
prevail
upon
upon
her her Why
Why hast
hast thou,
thou,Satan,
Satan,broke
brokethe
the
bound
bound
prescribed
prescribed
Lords and Commons." To thy
thy transgressions,
transgressions,and
anddisturbed
disturbed
the
the
charge
charge

This is only a partial litany of Morrison's tamperings Of

Of others,
others, who
whoapprove
approvenot
nottoto
transgress
transgress
with the text. There must be other researchers who now By
By thy
thy example,
example,but
buthave
havepower
powerand
and
right
right
To question
question thy
thybold
boldentrance
entranceonon
this
this
place.
place.
(4.878-82)
(4.878-82)
have reason to wonder about the reliability of Morrison
documents they have used in their work.
Indeed,
Indeed, the
the notion
notionof
ofthe
theFall,
Fall,bebe
it it
Satan's
Satan's
or or
human-
human-

KENNETH HENRIQUES ity's,

ity's, forces
forcesthe
thereader
readertotoacknowledge
acknowledge
thethe
dire
dire
conse-
conse-
Bemidji State University quences
quences of
of failing
failingtotoobserve
observeboundaries.
boundaries.
Rumrich
Rumrich assures
assuresus usthat
that"[e]ven
"[e]ven
if if
Milton
Milton
hadhad
notnot
called
called chaos
chaos aawomb,
womb,its
itsgenerative
generativecapacity
capacity
would
would
be be
Chaos in Paradise Lost apparent
apparent .. . . ."."(1042).
(1042).Yet
Yethow
howis is
chaos
chaos
generative?
generative?
Throughout
Throughout Paradise
ParadiseLost,
Lost,God
Godis is
the
thesource
sourceof of
genera-
genera-
To the Editor: tive
tive energy.
energy.In Inthis
thisinstance,
instance, God
God merely
merelyuses
uses
chaos
chaos
as as
his
his raw
raw material.
material.Noting
Notingthat
thatGod
God forms
forms"good"
"good"creation
creation
John Rumrich's "Milton's God and the Matter of from
from the
the particles
particlesfound
foundininchaos,
chaos,Rumrich
Rumrich forgets
forgets
thatthat
Chaos" (110 [1995]: 1035-46) confirms his role as God
God
the follows
follows the
thesame
samepattern
pattern ininforming
forming "goodliest"
"goodliest"
Adam
Adam from
spokesperson for the beneficence of Chaos in Paradise from particles
particlesofofdust
dust(5.516).
(5.516).AreAre
wewethen
then
meant
meant
Lost. However, Rumrich's selective use of textualtoevi-
praise
praise the
thegoodness
goodnessofofdust?
dust?
Simply
Simplybecause
becausematter
matter
dence often obscures the problems with a positivecan
can be
be used
read- used to
toconstruct
constructa agood
goodobject
object
does
does
notnot
prove
prove
thethe
ing of Chaos. matter's
matter's inherent
inherentgoodness.
goodness.InIn fact,
fact,
the
thepoint
pointof of
God's
God's
creation is that ambivalent matter is with his "vital virtue
While he protests rigid readings of Paradise Lost and
infused" (7.236). Rumrich again quotes selectively: chaos
urges readers to recognize Milton's "ironic indetermi-
nacy," Rumrich constructs his own narrow reading,is not
de-just "womb of nature" but also "perhaps her grave"
(2.911), just as dust is both alpha and omega of human-
scribing conflicting viewpoints as unjustifiable (1036).
Rumrich writes, "The most memorable edifices inkind
Mil- separated from God's generative goodness. "For
ton's works-the bridge across chaos, Pandemonium, dust and
thou art, and shalt to dust return" (10.208).
Rumrich's failure to recognize the significance of
Nimrod's tower-are monolithic and tyrannical in aspect
and at least implicitly targets of heaven's scorn"boundaries
(1040- leads to problems in other stages of his argu-
ment.
41), and to make this reading consistent, he overlooks an-Citing 7.168-73 to support his claims, Rumrich
other memorable edifice: the wall of heaven (3.503 contends
ff.). that since chaos (the place) is "infinite, eternal,
Designed to protect and demarcate heaven, this and mono-boundless," Chaos (the character) must be the "infi-
lithic edifice is surely not a target of heaven's scorn.nite material dimension of God" (1043). This one pas-
sage, however,
In turning heaven against itself, Rumrich creates a is problematized by numerous others
more serious problem: downplaying the significance(2.958-59,
of 2.1035-40, 10.366-71). More disturbing is
Rumrich's
boundaries and of transgressions, which are central to quick move from the "infinite, eternal" chaos
to "infinite, eternal" Chaos. Milton takes care to describe
Paradise Lost, as they were to Milton's world. Neverthe-
Night,
less, Rumrich uses postmodern chaos theory to argue thatnot Chaos, as "eldest of things" (2.962). If Night is
eldest,
in heaven "ordinary limits are meant to be overcome withChaos must be younger-there having been a time
ease" and that the "inspired authorial voice of Paradise when Night existed and Chaos did not. As for the idea of
Lost expresses the desire to cross boundaries." Even in Chaos, the character sees his realm shrinking from
infinite
Eden, he writes, "Milton traces the dichotomy of hisclean
"Frontiers" (2.998) and mourns "that little which is
and unclean ... to a postlapsarian point of origin, not so left
to to defend, / Encroached on" (2.1000-01) by hell
the original order" (1038). But "unclean" transgressions "beneath" and Earth "o'er my Realm" (2.1005). Further-
of boundaries occur throughout the work. Well more, before Satan voyages through the realm of Chaos to where
the Fall, Satan "in contempt / At one slight bound itshigh
"gloomy bounds / confine with heav'n" (2.976-77).
overleaped all bound" (4.180-81) to enter Eden, "as Satan whenand Chaos both recognize boundaries, frontiers,
a prowling wolf/. ... leaps o'er the fence with ease andinto
places above and below Chaos's realm. Whether or
the fold" (4.183, 4.187). Gabriel, for one, does not see not chaos (the place) is boundless is ambiguous. Chaos

This content downloaded from 121.240.212.2 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:53:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
122 Forum

(the character) is certainly finite, and he sees his realm To the extent that creation is still in the process of be-
as such. coming, it grows out of the infinite chaos that substanti-
This conflation of chaos the place and Chaos the char-ates it. Hence when Satan wants to invent gunpowder, he
acter is a serious problem in Rumrich's argument, which seeks and finds chaos under the surface of heaven itself:
"materials dark and crude, /... / These in thir dark Nativ-
begins by insisting on the need to rethink the nature of
the character but dedicates greater space to the natureitie the Deep / Shall yield us" (6.478-83). "Toucht / With
of the place. His last paragraph then makes an awkward Heav'ns ray," such materials are "temperd" and "shoot
leap back to his original concern: "In certain respects,forth" to the surface (6.479-80). My essay contends that
then, Chaos is to God as Eve is to Adam" (1044). The chaos is the infinite material dimension of God; ubiqui-
separation between the two is more significant than Rum- tous, it permeates everything. For the monistic materialist
rich allows. The geographic place chaos is not "evil," forMilton, in chaos we live and move and have our being.
chaos-stray particles scattered throughout vast empti- Santesso warns that even if we were to concede the in-
ness-is the epitome of neutrality. Chaos the character,finitude of chaos (the place), such a concession would not
however, who desires creation's ruin, curses God, and mean that Chaos (the character) is also infinite. He then
aids Satan, seems anything but neutral and must at the takes me to task for conflating the two. Santesso seems to
least be recognized as ambiguous. ignore the essay's lengthy discussion of Miltonic allegory,
Rumrich argues for indeterminacy but constructs a largely devoted to defining the relation between the char-
determinate reading. The chaos he describes is not am- acter and the realm (1041). In brief, I argue that the charac-
biguous but necessarily and insistently good. Rumrich's ter of Chaos expresses God's volitional absence from the
desire to problematize Milton and draw attention to the first matter and that the infinite realm belongs to "Eldest
complexities of Paradise Lost is to be welcomed, but Night," a talkative God's silent, negative identity.
If the evidence supplied by God, Uriel, and the epic
through selective use of evidence, he often fails to take
these complexities into account. narrator is trustworthy, the infinity of chaos is not as
problematic as Santesso says. Nor is its generative power.
AARON SANTESSO My essay does not ignore the narrator's suggestion that
Queen's University this infinite and eternal realm may in the end become the
"grave" of nature. I discuss this "singular and tentative
characterization" in a long note, which remarks that pre-
Reply: vious scholarship has focused on the mortal and threaten-
ing aspect of chaos rather than on its womblike character
Some of Aaron Santesso's criticisms misrepresent (1045n15). The essay repeatedly acknowledges the po-
what I wrote and, more important, what Milton wrote. tency for destruction and evil latent in chaos but asks
Toward the end of his letter, Santesso complains that only that readers balance that perception with recognition of
"one passage" substantiates my claim that chaos is infi- its erotic and creative potency. Santesso asks how chaos
nite. The passage in question is spoken by God, however, is generative. Evidence and arguments that address this
who is often considered an impeccable source of cosmo- question are adduced throughout my essay. Indeed, the
logical lore ("Boundless the deep because I am who fill / realm of Chaos and Night is referred to as a womb three
Infinitude" [7.168-69]). Nor is God's measure of chaos times in the epic. Like many English speakers of his
unique in the poem. The epic narrator describes it as "the time and ours, Milton recognized "place of generation"
void and formless infinite," Beelzebub as "the dark un- as a primary meaning for womb.
bottom'd infinite Abyss," and Uriel as a "vast infinitude" Santesso also rejects what my essay says on the sub-
(3.12, 2.405, 3.711). ject of boundaries, whose significance he thinks I down-
Santesso rightly notes that boundaries distinguish play or fail to appreciate. Yet I claim that boundaries
chaos from creation. Furthermore, like the other rebels "play a crucial role in Miltonic creation" because "they
and like the epic narrator, Satan passes through it. So how allow for productive and dynamic disorder within the
can chaos be considered an infinite domain? The answer, framework of an evolving, larger order" (1038). They are
I think, is that boundaries in this poem are not inflexible flexible and permeable, not adamantine. I realize that
or impermeable. The "Chrystal wall of Heav'n," for ex- this opinion is unusual among Milton scholars. But argu-
ample, mistakenly identified by Santesso as the subject ing for an uncustomary significance is not the same thing
of 3.503 ff., exhibits remarkable flexibility as it "op[ens] as a "failure to recognize . . . significance."
wide, / Ro[lls] inward" so that the rebels might be ex- In support of the traditional reading of boundaries, as
pelled through it (6.859-61). sacrosanct barriers not to be violated, Santesso quotes

This content downloaded from 121.240.212.2 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:53:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Forum 123

Gabriel's
Gabriel's oddly
oddlyworded
wordedcomplaint
complaint
that Satan
thatbreaks
Satan mastor"
mastor"
thebreaks the (217),
(217), apparently
apparentlytotohint
hintatat
a Melville-Camoes
a Melville-Camoes
bound
boundprescribed
prescribed to his
to transgression.
his transgression.What purpose
Whatispurpose connection,
is since Melville wrote, "Call me Ishmael."
served
servedbyby thethe
limits
limits
prescribed
prescribed
for Satanforand
Satan
cited and
as jus- Lipking
cited as jus- states that the translations are his own and ex-
tification
tification forfor
police
police
action
action
by Gabriel
by Gabriel
(whom Satan
(whom des-Satan presses
des- dissatisfaction with previous translators, unnamed
ignates
ignatesa "limitarie
a "limitarie Cherube"
Cherube"
[4.971])?[4.971])?
Gabriel does
Gabriel
not doesbynot him, who render "Adamastor is my name," (e.g., Wil-
keep
keepSatan
Satan in in
custody,
custody,
afterafter
all, norall,
is Satan
nor is
punished
Satan forpunishedliamforAtkinson) or "I am Adamastor" (e.g., Leonard Ba-
his
histransgression
transgression intointo
paradise.
paradise.
Presumably,
Presumably,
if God hadif God had
con). William Julius Mickle's "Great Adamastor then my
wanted
wantedtoto erect
erect
a barrier
a barrier
that Satan
that could
Satan not
could he cross,dreaded
cross,not he name" or Sir Richard Fanshawe's "I was call'd

might
mighthave have
done
done
so, instead
so, instead
of entrusting
of entrusting Sin withAdamastor"
Sin with the the are better guides to the verb tense. "Chamei-
keys
keystotohell,
hell,
forfor
example.
example.
Certainly
Certainly
Satan's determined
Satan's determined
me Adamastor" contains the preterit first-person singular
progress
progress past
past
every
every
obstacle
obstacle
expresses
expresses
the extent
theofextent
his ofofhis
the reflexive verb chamar-se, often used idiomati-
ill
ill will.
will.OnOn
thethe
other
other
hand,hand,
boundary
boundary
crossingscrossings cally like French s'appeler, Spanish llamar-se, or Italian
by good by good
creatures
creatures measure
measure the intensity
the intensity
of theirofbenevolence.
their benevolence.
chiamarsi where English uses the noun name with a pos-
Eventually
Eventually thethe
son son
of God
of as
Godrepresented
as represented
by Miltonby Miltonsessive
will will and the copula. Therefore, chamei-me corre-
cross
crossprofound
profoundmetaphysical
metaphysical
boundaries
boundaries
to compete
to compete
sponds to the literal "I called myself" (equivalent to a
against
againstSatan
Satan
forfor
fallen
fallen
humanity.
humanity. passive, "I was called by myself") or the idiomatic "My
As
As aalongtime
longtime
reader
reader
of Paradise
of Paradise
Lost, I do
Lost,
not Ifeel
do notname
feel was." One can object to translations in the present
compelled
compelled to to
"acknowledge
"acknowledge
the dire
theconsequences
dire consequences
of fail- oftense,
fail- since the preterit past tense is emphasized by the
ing
ingtotoobserve
observe boundaries."
boundaries."
Such unwarranted
Such unwarranted
acknowl- acknowl-
verb's being second in a series of three preterits: "fui" 'I
edgments,
edgments, often
often
urged
urged
in recent
in recent
decades decades
by many by
of many ofor 'I am no longer,' "chamei," and again "fui," which
was'
Milton's
Milton's professionally
professionally
responsive
responsive
readers,readers,
strike mestrike
as, contrast
me as, with the two imperfect past forms following-
well,
well,"limitarie."
"limitarie." "andava" 'was going' and "buscava" 'was seeking.' Ada-
mastor, then, was not his "real" or "former" name; it had
JOHN RUMRICH been his name in a remote past. By the time of the en-
University of Texas, Austincounter, at the end of the fifteenth century, he no longer
existed but had changed into the Cabo Torment6rio 'Cape
of Storms' and was soon to be the Cape of Good Hope.
Camoes's Os Lusiadas But there is no basis whatever for the translation "Call
me Adamastor."
To the Editor: Fourth, there is provided no reference to support the
claim that hubris is present in Camoes's insistence that
I was delighted to see Lawrence Lipking's article deal-
the difference between Os Lusiadas and all the other
ing in part with a Portuguese subject and accompanied epics is that his alone tells the truth (215). One can only
by handsomely reproduced maps, for the field of Luso- guess what the evidence might be. I suspect that Lipking
Brazilian studies has been too rarely represented in PMLA
had in mind the dedication to the king (1.6-18) and that
("The Genius of the Shore: Lycidas, Adamastor, and thehe meant Camoes was guilty of hubris in claiming to be
Poetics of Nationalism," 111 [1996]: 205-21). But after
superior to other epic poets. Here Camoes suggests that
reading the article, I wonder if PMLA is ready for Lusi-
his heroes are real, and Portuguese, whereas the heroes
tanian literature. The essay has disconcerting flaws, de-
of Boiardo's and Ariosto's epics are fabulous or, like Or-
spite the broad scope and wide learning it displays. lando (i.e., Roland), performers of imaginary deeds. I see
First, an unsightly misspelling: "nunco" for "nunca" no reason to object to this claim, any more than to the
in the sixth line of an octave quoted from Cam6es's Os
common assertion that the Cantar de mio (fid is superior
Lusiadas (215). in historicity to the Chanson de Roland. To admit this
Second, "Tormentoto" (220nl6), which appears in thefact does not necessarily make the Spanish epic greater
first edition of Moby-Dick; or, The Whale as a name for
than the French one or Os Lusfadas superior as an epic
the Cape of Storms, is used without indication of the poem to the Orlando innamorato and the Orlando furi-
correct "Tormentoso," found in modern, standard edi- oso. It is also possible that Lipking had in mind the com-
tions like that of Harrison Hayford, Hershel Parker, and
ments by Vasco da Gama at the end of his narrative in
G. Thomas Tanselle ([Evanston: Northwestern UP; Chi- the fifth canto (verses 86-89). But here the words are
cago: Newberry Lib., 1988] 234, 801, 914). those of the poem's hero, and they refer to the events he
Third and more serious is the mistranslation of has narrated: "A verdade que eu conto, nua e pura / Vence
"Chamei-me Adamastor" as an imperative, "Call me toda
Ada-grandilocua escritura!" 'The truth that I tell, naked

This content downloaded from 121.240.212.2 on Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:53:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms