Preface to Paradise Lost

Rating:
Summary: Not the last word, but much the best so far
Review: Although a work of extraordinary brilliance and charm, this is not the critical last word on Milton. Lewis is brilliant almost to the point of being overwhelming on everything which is story and narrative and character; his comparison of Adam with Satan, his account of the diabolical cabinet meeting in book two, his description of what eating the apple did to Adam and Eve - the father of all bright epigrammatic wastrels meeting the mother of all [evil], selfish sentimentalists - his observation on Eve's sin, which could have been written by Chesterton, all are outstanding and hit the nail on the head so hard that it rings. And his immense learning is certainly up to the task of disentangling the intellectual background to the story - his account of the correspondence between Augustine's view of the Fall and Milton's, and his observation that both Satan and Abdiel "are good Aristotelians", show his easy, almost careless handling of vast stores of knowledge and understanding.
The problem with this otherwise superlative and certainly indispensable essay is that Lewis, taken with his vision of a common "mere Christianity" embracing Protestants, Anglicans, Catholics and Orthodox, simply misses the extent and significance of Milton's sectarian and heretical opinions. Sure, he knows that Milton was a sort of modified follower of Arius, who denied the divinity of Jesus - that is, that he stood at the outer edges of what is permissible for a Christian to believe - but he does not seem to understand that the consistently materializing imagination of Milton, that almost transforms the Trinity and the Angels into Greek Gods, was a typically Protestant and sectarian reaction against Catholic theology and especially against Thomism, with its wholly spiritual view of Angels. Nor does he give sufficient space to the most sectarian feature of Milton's spirit, the bitterness, amounting almost to bigotry, with which he denounced opposing viewpoints; in spite of the famous passage in the AEROPAGITICUS, he is a bad friend of liberty. Listen to the pointed observations of the historian Eric Voegelin:
"[Milton writes in Of True Religion , 1673:] Catholic worship cannot be tolerated "without grievous and unsufferable scandal giv'n to all consciencious Beholders." And he leaves it to the civil magistrate to consider whether Catholics in England can be tolerated at all, even without public worship. If Catholics should complain that their conscience is violated if the celebration of the mass is not permitted to them, he replies that "we have not warrant to regard Conscience which is not founded on Scripture." . . . . Radical scripturalism has become, in the field of social technique, the instrument through which the conscience of man can be kept within the limits of national jurisdiction.
"Milton goes even further in his scripturalism: he expects everybody to do his duty and to use the opportunity offered by the English Bible translation for becoming thoroughly acquainted with Scripture. "Neither let the Countryman, the Tradesman, the Lawyer, the Physician, the Statesman, excuse himself by his much business from the studious reading thereof. . . ."
Using a modern category, we might say that Milton was a totalitarian National Scripturalist. . . . "
Lewis is possibly too much in love with Milton's masterpiece; certain it is that at the end of this marvellous little tome we may find ourselves wondering why, if Milton is really so wonderful as Lewis makes him, we feel so little need to go and revisit his work; why, indeed, we would much rather re-read Lewis' own PREFACE than Milton himself.

Rating:
Summary: Not the last word, but much the best so far
Review: Although a work of extraordinary brilliance and charm, this is not the critical last word on Milton. Lewis is brilliant almost to the point of being overwhelming on everything which is story and narrative and character; his comparison of Adam with Satan, his account of the diabolical cabinet meeting in book two, his description of what eating the apple did to Adam and Eve - the father of all bright epigrammatic wastrels meeting the mother of all [evil], selfish sentimentalists - his observation on Eve's sin, which could have been written by Chesterton, all are outstanding and hit the nail on the head so hard that it rings. And his immense learning is certainly up to the task of disentangling the intellectual background to the story - his account of the correspondence between Augustine's view of the Fall and Milton's, and his observation that both Satan and Abdiel "are good Aristotelians", show his easy, almost careless handling of vast stores of knowledge and understanding.
The problem with this otherwise superlative and certainly indispensable essay is that Lewis, taken with his vision of a common "mere Christianity" embracing Protestants, Anglicans, Catholics and Orthodox, simply misses the extent and significance of Milton's sectarian and heretical opinions. Sure, he knows that Milton was a sort of modified follower of Arius, who denied the divinity of Jesus - that is, that he stood at the outer edges of what is permissible for a Christian to believe - but he does not seem to understand that the consistently materializing imagination of Milton, that almost transforms the Trinity and the Angels into Greek Gods, was a typically Protestant and sectarian reaction against Catholic theology and especially against Thomism, with its wholly spiritual view of Angels. Nor does he give sufficient space to the most sectarian feature of Milton's spirit, the bitterness, amounting almost to bigotry, with which he denounced opposing viewpoints; in spite of the famous passage in the AEROPAGITICUS, he is a bad friend of liberty. Listen to the pointed observations of the historian Eric Voegelin:
"[Milton writes in Of True Religion , 1673:] Catholic worship cannot be tolerated "without grievous and unsufferable scandal giv'n to all consciencious Beholders." And he leaves it to the civil magistrate to consider whether Catholics in England can be tolerated at all, even without public worship. If Catholics should complain that their conscience is violated if the celebration of the mass is not permitted to them, he replies that "we have not warrant to regard Conscience which is not founded on Scripture." . . . . Radical scripturalism has become, in the field of social technique, the instrument through which the conscience of man can be kept within the limits of national jurisdiction.
"Milton goes even further in his scripturalism: he expects everybody to do his duty and to use the opportunity offered by the English Bible translation for becoming thoroughly acquainted with Scripture. "Neither let the Countryman, the Tradesman, the Lawyer, the Physician, the Statesman, excuse himself by his much business from the studious reading thereof. . . ."
Using a modern category, we might say that Milton was a totalitarian National Scripturalist. . . . "
Lewis is possibly too much in love with Milton's masterpiece; certain it is that at the end of this marvellous little tome we may find ourselves wondering why, if Milton is really so wonderful as Lewis makes him, we feel so little need to go and revisit his work; why, indeed, we would much rather re-read Lewis' own PREFACE than Milton himself.

Rating:
Summary: Debating Milton
Review: John Milton's Paradise Lost is perhaps the most debated work in western literature. On one side you have those who say that Milton was secretly on the Devil's side. (Due to the realistic portrayal of Satan and the seemingly far off and tyrannical portrayal of God) On the other side you have those who say that Milton's sympathies were with God and the angels. (Due to the loving portrayal of the angels and mankind) C.S. Lewis was of the later camp. In 1942, he stood up against those who said otherwise.

I have a hard time labeling this as a 'preface'; Lewis was obviously writing to the learned elite at Cambridge, not to new readers of Milton. But Lewis does an excellent job of explaining Milton's worldview and how it works in Paradise Lost. His chapters on Primary and Secondary Epics, Miton and St. Augustine, and Hierarchy are EXTREMELY helpful. (Particularly the helpful to American readers is the Hierarchy chapter; we just don't understand what it means to live under and totally submit to a king or emperor.)

I highly recommend this to readers of Lewis or fans of Medieval and Renaissance literature.

Rating:
Summary: A shallow, erroneous reading by a fundamentalist
Review: Lewis' interpretation of Satan makes absolutely no sense to anyone who knows the poem - until, that is, you realize that Lewis really believes in the devil and can't stomach the idea of a book that makes him into a hero.

Rating:
Summary: Good Sense Does Not Grow Old
Review: Lewis's lectures, though half a century old, speak today with the same clarity, simplicity, and depth of learning as when they were first delivered. His presentation of background information sets the great English epic in its contemporary context--literary, historical, and theological--with a minimum of fuss and footnotes. Some of his negative judgments, such as calling the last two books "an undigested lump of futurity," deserve reconsideration, but on the whole his judgments encourage critical reading rather than bardolatry.

Rating:
Summary: Good Sense Does Not Grow Old
Review: Lewis's lectures, though half a century old, speak today with the same clarity, simplicity, and depth of learning as when they were first delivered. His presentation of background information sets the great English epic in its contemporary context--literary, historical, and theological--with a minimum of fuss and footnotes. Some of his negative judgments, such as calling the last two books "an undigested lump of futurity," deserve reconsideration, but on the whole his judgments encourage critical reading rather than bardolatry.

Rating:
Summary: A deep, insightful analysis by a brilliant apologeticist.
Review: Read this before reading Paradise Lost for a much easier time comprehending the work. Lewis is recognized by most literary scholars for his ability to interpret the language and literature from the Milton's period in literary history. It is clear, easy to read, yet profound in insight. Any reader who is honestly interested in comprehending the depth of Milton's work will appreciate Lewis' analysis; unless, of course, that reader is such a defensive unbeliever that he cannot stomach the idea that the devil might be real, even in literature.

Rating:
Summary: Introduction to Milton's epic poem
Review: This book was a pleasure to read both before and after reading PARADISE LOST. In fact, one can make a nice trilogy out of PREFACE TO PARADISE LOST, PARADISE LOST, and Lewis's PERELANDRA. Lewis's PREFACE should interest both the general reader and the specialist. Lewis gives a roadmap for working through Milton's epic poem, discussing what an epic is and why Milton chose it, for example, or why Milton used a certain style for writing; he also comments on Milton's theology, medieval hierarchy, and a number of other pertinent subjects with which the reader will probably not be overly familiar. The writing is clear, the discussion lucid and enlightening, and the subjects are interesting. This is certainly worth purchasing.

Rating:
Summary: Introduction to Milton's epic poem
Review: This book was a pleasure to read both before and after reading PARADISE LOST. In fact, one can make a nice trilogy out of PREFACE TO PARADISE LOST, PARADISE LOST, and Lewis's PERELANDRA. Lewis's PREFACE should interest both the general reader and the specialist. Lewis gives a roadmap for working through Milton's epic poem, discussing what an epic is and why Milton chose it, for example, or why Milton used a certain style for writing; he also comments on Milton's theology, medieval hierarchy, and a number of other pertinent subjects with which the reader will probably not be overly familiar. The writing is clear, the discussion lucid and enlightening, and the subjects are interesting. This is certainly worth purchasing.

Rating:
Summary: The only commentary you need.
Review: This is the only comemntary you need about Paradise list