It’s ten “books” (i.e. chapters) of poetry (don’t worry, it doesn’t rhyme, so you can just read it normally) about the fall of Satan and his minions from heaven, and the fall of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden: two paradises lost.
I don’t believe in any of that.
You don’t have to, in the same way that you don’t have to believe anything to appreciate the architecture of a cathedral. Milton was a fervent believer, and that’s all you need to know.
Wait. I’m only 200 lines in, but I think I’m on Satan’s side…
Yeah, about that…
Milton uses such powerful language, and is so good at exploring the motivations of Satan, that he accidentally makes Satan relatable, while also comparing him to all sorts of wonderful and huge things. To modern readers, Satan can come across as kind of awesome.
Although, if you’ve read Game Of Thrones and you still think the bad guys are written too elaborately, you should probably present yourself to the relevant authorities at first light.
What should I say to make people think I’ve read it?
“It really is better to reign in hell than serve in heaven, isn’t it?”
What should I avoid saying when trying to convince people I’ve read it?
“What’s the point? I know how it ends.”
Should I actually read it?
I’d only bother with Book I, which has all the wonderful lines about how Satan is the cat’s pyjamas (although, as I’ve already said, that cannot possibly have been Milton’s intention).
Man having been placed in Eden, Gabriel is stationed with a heavenly guard to protect him. Uriel, having seen from afar Satan on his way to earth, comes down to put Gabriel more strictly on his guard. The artist has rendered the surroundings of the scene with striking fidelity.
“Meanwhile, Uriel comes before the Archangel Gabriel, at the gate of Eden, and tells him about the shape-changing spirit that he saw from the hilltop. They both suspect that it might be one of the fallen ones. Gabriel promises that if the spirit is in the garden, they will find it by morning. Around this time, Adam and Eve finish their day’s work. They go to their leafy bower, praising God and each other for their blissful life, and after a short prayer, they lie together—making love without sin, because lust had not yet tainted their natures.
Night falls, and Gabriel sends search parties into the Garden. Two of his angels find Satan, disguised as a toad, whispering into the ear of Eve as she sleeps. They pull him before Gabriel, who recognizes him, and demands to know what he is doing in Paradise. Satan at first feigns innocence, as they have no proof that he means harm. But Gabriel knows him to be a liar, and threatens to drag him back to Hell. Enraged by this threat, Satan prepares to fight him. The two square off for a decisive battle, but a sign from Heaven—the appearance in the sky of a pair of golden scales—stops them. Satan recognizes the sign as meaning he could not win, and flies off.”
Satan in the Garden of Eden, by Gustave Doré from John Milton’s Paradise Lost.
Satan now approaches Eden, which is surrounded by a great thicket wall. He easily leaps over it like a wolf entering a sheep’s pen. Inside he sees an idyllic world, with all varieties of animals and trees. He can see the tallest of the trees, the Tree of Life—and next to it, the forbidden Tree of Knowledge. He perches himself on the Tree of Life, disguised as a cormorant, a large sea bird. Finally, he notices two creatures walking erect among the other animals. They walk naked without shame, and work pleasantly, tending the garden. Satan’s pain and envy intensifies as he sees this new beautiful race, created after he and his legions fell. He could have loved them, but now, his damnation will be revenged through their destruction. He continues to watch them, and the man, Adam, speaks. He tells Eve not to complain of the work they have to do but to be obedient to God, since God has given them so many blessings, and only one constraint: they must not eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. Eve agrees wholeheartedly, and they embrace.
Honestly, any poetry is DA poetry if you can recite it from memory or sound intelligent while speaking of it.
• T. S. Elliot
Didn’t write much poetry, but what he did write is dense with meaning
• Wisława Szymborska
Any of her poems are instant winners, for a great collection I would recommend Map: Collected and Last Poems
• William Shakespeare
Classic, cannot go wrong with any of his works
• Anne Sexton
For bonus points, listen to the song “Mercy Street” by Peter Gabriel based on the poem “45 Mercy Street”
• John Milton
Paradise Lost is always recognizable by name
• Homer
Both The IliadandThe Odyssey are the best known works, bonus points if you are able to read them in their original Greek for the full effect
• Edgar Allen Poe
Although The Raven is his most notable work of poetry, his short stories are also enjoyable
• Robert Frost
An acquired taste compared to my other favourite poets, but my top four are definitely “The Road Not Taken”, “Mending Wall”, “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening”, and “Acquainted With the Night”
• Mark Twain
Recognizable in name and work
• Lord Byron
An older poet, much of his language is obsolete in the modern era yet conveys meanings we could not hope to comprehend without it
• Sappho
An excellent romantic, “Slender Aphrodite has overcome me with longing for a girl” Bonus points if you read it in the original Greek for the full effect
• Walt Whitman
The modern-day version of a classical poet: free verse is his specialty!
• Edgar Allan Poe
The O.G. dark academic, the literature teacher’s favourite Halloween lesson. Nothing can beat the simple and unsettling Poetry of Poe!
• Oscar Wilde
Nothing will ever be as iconic as The Picture of Dorian Gray has become in the DA aesthetic! a definite must-read.
We get enough people at book fairs, sellers included, asking us what Speculative Fiction is that we thought an explanation was merited.
Note: I have no intention of arguing the case that science fiction and fantasy are as much skilled works of art as regular literature; that argument has been covered enough times and it bores me. Time determines what is art not genre.
As the term suggests speculative fiction is fiction that involves some element of speculation. Of course, one can argue that all fiction is speculative insofar as it speculates what could happen if various elements of a story were combined. Yet we feel that this term is descriptive enough to encompass the type of literature we want to categorise. First, a word about genre
Book genre is of limited use and is often more harmful than good. If you went into a bookshop and asked for literature, you’d be taken to the fiction section. If you said that you were looking for any Darwinian literature you’d be sent to the science section. At some point it was determined that literature suggested artistic merit. Yet we also use it to cover a particular grouping of written works. The point is that classifying the written word is a little futile as common usage will usually dictate what that classification envelops, and common usage is of course open to interpretation. Genre does however allow boundaries to be set for marketing purposes; if a reader enjoyed a number of books in a certain genre then there’s a reasonable chance they’d enjoy other books in the same genre. From a critical perspective, understanding genre helps align a work of literature with one’s expectations; certain tropes and mechanisms are, to some extent, more acceptable in one genre than another.
Now, this element of speculation. The speculation in speculative fiction isn’t concerned solely with speculation over how various story elements might interact, but speculation over the fabric of those elements. A work of speculative fiction takes one or more elements of an otherwise perfectly possible story and speculates as to what would happen if that element existed outside of current understanding or experience. Essentially, it’s writing about things that aren’t currently possible. The Road by Cormac McCarthy is a father-son story of survival, nearly everything is contemporaneously possible, except one thing the setting of the story is plausible future.
When you pick up an Agatha Christie, a Jane Austen or a Graham Greene, regardless of how the story unfurls, and how perhaps unlikely the story, it’s always within the realm of possibility (poor writing and deus ex machina aside). Yet a Philip K. Dick, a Tolkien or a Stephen King will always seem impossible, given current understanding.
The word current is key, to allow inclusion of scientific speculation. A seminal work like Kim Stanley Robinson’s Red Mars has a lot of the science in place to explain how the colonisation of Mars might / could take place (I assume the science is correct; it doesn’t matter to me personally but I know a lot of readers are particular in this area). The speculation is on how plausible, but currently theoretical, scientific and technological advances might solve a problem.
There is a slight grey area where such scientific knowledge and its technical implementation exists and is currently possible and a good story has been written about it. Imagine a book about travelling to the moon written in 1969. Imagine it’s not an adventure, it explores personal relationships between the characters and their heroic journey. For someone unfamiliar with planned space travel such a book would seem like science fiction, yet it was of course entirely possible in 1969. I personally wouldn’t classify such a work as speculative fiction as it doesn’t fit the definition, but I’d certainly class it as science fiction if I were to market it as it would fit the bill for many readers. Similarly a book like Psycho, it’s a work of horror but there’s no supernatural element and it’s plausible and possible given current understanding.
For books like The Hobbit orCarriethecurrent part of the definition becomes less important; Middle-Earth neither has nor probably will exist, neither will telekinesis. Of course, as science progresses some things that are currently implausible will be come plausible, if not possible. Space travel being a great example; progress is constantly being made.
Speculative fiction is also an umbrella term so includes the majority of works in the fantasy, science fiction and horror genres, also smaller genres such as magic realism, weird fiction and more classical genres such as mythology, fairy tales and folklore. Many people break speculative fiction into two categories though: fantasy and science fiction, the former being implausible the latter being plausible (in simplistic terms). This is helpful for those interested in having some sort of technical foundation upon which to build their speculation, and those who aren’t.
When one thinks of science fiction, one thinks back to the 1930’s and the Gernsback era, perhaps earlier to Wells and Verne. One might even cite Frankenstein. When one thinks of fantasy one thinks of Tolkien, perhaps Victorian / Edwardian ghost stories, Dracula, perhaps Frankenstein. It seems comfortable to think of these things as modern endeavours. Anything earlier often falls under the general category of literature (in the non-speculative fiction sense). Take More’s Utopia,you’d find that under literature or classics, not under fantasy. Similarly Gulliver’s Travels. Again, this is just marketing; there’s no reason why Gulliver’s Travels should not be shelved next to Lord of the Rings other than to meet a reader’s expectation.
At Hyraxia Books we like to think of certain classic works not simply as works that have contributed to the literary canon, but also as works that have contributed to the speculative fiction canon. For us, Aesop’s Fables,Paradise Lost, The Divine Comedy, Otranto, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, The Iliad, The Prose Edda, Beowulf and the Epic of Gilgamesh are not simply classics, but also speculative fiction classics. We don’t like to think of the genre starting in the last two hundred years, we like to think of literature (in the non-speculative fiction sense) having branched off from the speculative rather than the other way round. We like to see how that story has played out over the millennia.
That is how we define speculative fiction for the basis of our stock. Of course, we stock other items too, many of which we are very fond of.
“ Guarda, L'eterosessuale che sì sposa è come uno che diventa prete: fa voto di castità, ma senza saperlo fino a tre, quattro, cinque anni dopo. Per l'eterosessuale virile la natura del matrimonio comunemente inteso non è meno soffocante - date le preferenze sessuali di un eterosessuale virile - di quanto lo sia per il gay o per la lesbica. Oggi, però, anche i gay si vogliono sposare. Un matrimonio in chiesa. Due, trecento testimoni. E aspetta che vedano dove va a finire il desiderio che li ha fatti diventare gay. Mi aspettavo di più da questa gente, invece salta fuori che anche in loro non c'è il minimo realismo. Anche se credo che molto dipenda dall'Aids. Il Declino e l'Ascesa del Preservativo: ecco la storia sessuale della seconda metà del ventesimo secolo. Il preservativo è tornato. E, col preservativo, il ritorno di tutto ciò che negli anni Sessanta era stato spazzato via. Quale uomo può dire di apprezzare il sesso col preservativo nello stesso modo in cui l'apprezza senza? Cosa ci trova, in realtà ? Ecco perché gli organi della digestione sono arrivati, nella nostra epoca, a competere per la supremazia come orifizio sessuale. Il bisogno urgente della mucosa. Per disfarsi del preservativo devono avere un partner fisso, e allora si sposano. I gay sono militanti: vogliono il matrimonio e vogliono arruolarsi apertamente nell'esercito ed essere accettati. Le due istituzioni che io detestavo. E per lo stesso motivo: l'irreggimentazione. L'ultima persona che prese sul serio queste cose fu John Milton, trecentocinquant'anni fa. Mai letto i suoi scritti sul divorzio? Gli procurarono molti nemici, ai suoi tempi. Sono qui, sono tra i miei libri, con i margini fittamente annotati nei lontani anni Sessanta. «Forse che il nostro Salvatore ci aprì questa porta fortuita e accidentale del matrimonio solo per chiudercela in faccia come la serranda della morte… ?» No, gli uomini non sanno niente - o agiscono deliberatamente come se non sapessero - del lato duro, tragico, della situazione in cui si mettono. Nel migliore dei casi pensano stoicamente, Sì, capisco che in questo matrimonio prima o poi dovrò rinunciare al sesso, però lo faccio per avere altre cose più preziose. Ma capiscono a che cosa rinunciano? Essere casti, vivere senza sesso, be’, come digerirai le sconfitte, i compromessi, le frustrazioni ? Guadagnando di più, guadagnando tutti i soldi che puoi ? Facendo tutti i figli che puoi ? Questo aiuta, ma è niente rispetto all'altra cosa. Perché l'altra cosa si radica nel tuo essere fisico, nella carne che nasce e nella carne che muore. Perché solo quando scopi riesci a vendicarti, anche se solo per un momento, di tutto ciò che non ami nella vita e di tutte le cose che nella vita ti hanno sconfitto. Solo allora sei più nettamente vivo e più nettamente te stesso. La corruzione non è il sesso: è il resto. Il sesso non è semplice frizione e divertimento superficiale. Il sesso è anche la vendetta sulla morte. Non dimenticartela, la morte. Non dimenticarla mai. Sì, anche il sesso ha un potere limitato. So benissimo quanto è limitato. Ma dimmi, quale potere è più grande? “
Philip Roth,L'animale morente, traduzione di Vincenzo Mantovani, Einaudi (collana Super ET), 2021֠⁹; pp. 50-52.
[ Edizione originale: The Dying Animal, Houghton Mifflin Publishing, 2001 ]
“We all have the same 24 hours that Beyoncé has” and its various iterations took the web by storm in late 2013 as the megastar became the figurehead of not only having it all, but being able to somehow do it all too.
How do creatives – composers, painters, writers, scientists, philosophers – find the time to produce their opus? Mason Currey investigated the rigid Daily Rituals that hundreds of creatives practiced in order to carve out time, every day, to work their craft. Some kept to the same disciplined regimen for decades while others locked in patterns only while working on specific works.
‘For I Do Loath The Uneducated And Rejoice Over The Prophets And Artisans’
The lore and mythology that man constructs fancies His interest as it would the mind of any human, leading me to further believe in curiosity also being a gift, not only to mankind, but to a pleothra of creatures alike. I only hope the library I have accumulated will appease Him and His queer nature.
![Der Sturz Luzifers (1894 / Engraving) - Paul Jonnard [Stecher], nach Gustave Doré](https://64.media.tumblr.com/5394758e8abf9e1c821e8cc3ec018afd/f8e396d4387f5e49-5b/s1280x1920/d30ecf44d20b129936b25c1639f76445fa3a15d4.jpg "Der Sturz Luzifers (1894 / Engraving) - Paul Jonnard [Stecher], nach Gustave Doré")
