3 ms·

The book being reviewed by TFA is not itself a review of Paradise Lost, but a study of how people have interpreted Paradise Lost since it was published in 1667.

The book being reviewed by TFA is not itself a review of Paradise Lost, but a study of how people have interpreted Paradise Lost since it was published in 1667. TFA says 'The biggest story that Reade is telling is that of slavery.' YMMV, but I don't think that this was Milton's main message - IIRC from reading PL years ago at school, the main story was Satan's rebellion against God. Satan was presented as a sort of heroic anti-hero, who has some great lines, although he eventually (of course) loses. So, I guess I'm saying please don't let this review of a book that highlights lots of peoples' reactions to PL influence your judgement of the underlying source text.

tupshin 2y ago
"the main story was Satan's rebellion against God" so Satan rebelling against being enslaved?
- KineticLensman 2y ago
  More like the rebellion of a subject against their king, which isn't quite the same as slavery used in TFA (which is mainly the slavery of the blacks under the whites).
- sigzero 2y ago
  [flagged]
cess11 2y ago
Why do you care about "Milton's main message"? Is that more important than the historical results of his writing? Marx didn't intend to invent sociology, yet he did. What do you think about that?
- KineticLensman 2y ago
  > Why do you care about "Milton's main message"? Is that more important than the historical results of his writing? Because this review of Eade's interpretative book focusses on Eade's chapters that are the most significant to the reviewer writing for The New Statesman. It's quite a few steps from Milton's source text. I'm not claiming that Milton's message (and yes, there were several) is more or less important than how people have interpreted it, just that sometimes going to the primary source (rather than a review of an interpretative review) can be rewarding in its own right. > Marx didn't intend to invent sociology, yet he did. What do you think about that? Interesting question! Perhaps I'll go for a pint at one of the venues on the Karl Marx pub crawl [0] and see what the regulars think of it. That should be valid, shouldn't it? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx_pub_crawl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx_pub_crawl

tupshin 2y ago

"the main story was Satan's rebellion against God" so Satan rebelling against being enslaved?

KineticLensman 2y ago
More like the rebellion of a subject against their king, which isn't quite the same as slavery used in TFA (which is mainly the slavery of the blacks under the whites).
sigzero 2y ago
[flagged]

cess11 2y ago

Why do you care about "Milton's main message"? Is that more important than the historical results of his writing? Marx didn't intend to invent sociology, yet he did. What do you think about that?

KineticLensman 2y ago
> Why do you care about "Milton's main message"? Is that more important than the historical results of his writing? Because this review of Eade's interpretative book focusses on Eade's chapters that are the most significant to the reviewer writing for The New Statesman. It's quite a few steps from Milton's source text. I'm not claiming that Milton's message (and yes, there were several) is more or less important than how people have interpreted it, just that sometimes going to the primary source (rather than a review of an interpretative review) can be rewarding in its own right. > Marx didn't intend to invent sociology, yet he did. What do you think about that? Interesting question! Perhaps I'll go for a pint at one of the venues on the Karl Marx pub crawl [0] and see what the regulars think of it. That should be valid, shouldn't it? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx_pub_crawl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx_pub_crawl