From: Derek Wood [dwood@stfx.ca] Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 4:53 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query Roy, All the Powell children were baptised in the parish church in Forest Hill. His sons went to Christchurch College, Oxford. He himself came from Stafford, and I don't think details of his own baptism are known but he was a Justice of the Peace, so he doesn't seem to have been a Catholic when John Milton married his first wife. Best wishes, Derek. From: Patricia J. Nebrida [pnebrida@corecomm.net] Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 1:20 AM To: 'milton-l@richmond.edu' Subject: RE: Query--Mary Powell Milton Roy, I don't know where you may have gotten the idea that Mary Powell Milton's family was Roman Catholic, but Milton did see his first wife as "a-less-than-ideal" Christian (Church of England v. his Puritanism). In The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, Milton argues that an "Idolatresse,"...one who could use her "enticing sorcery" to "pervert him to superstition" or "dinsinable him in the whole service of God through the disturbance and unfit society, and so drive at last through murmuring and despair to thoughts of Atheism..." (CPW II: 260). Since Mrs. Milton had left him in 1642, it is hard not to see a parallel between Mary Milton and the "evil" images of women Milton develops in this particular tract. Throughout The Doctrine, Milton also argues that the Church of England's policies and marriage customs were actually Papist (ex., sacramental supremacy, indissolubility in CPW II: 237) and therefore in direct conflict with the kind of Puritan marriage (and true Christian society) that Milton envisioned. Milton still thinks about his marital mistakes in The Second Defense, but this tract covers the political differences btw. the Powells and Milton that you noted. On a fictional note, Robert Graves writes somewhere in Wife to Mr. Milton that Mary (Mary) Powell had been named after Henrietta Maria. As far as his relationships with his in-laws, if you refer to Parker's biography, you'll remember that the Powells had to move in with John and Mary after Charles loses Oxford in 1646. That meant a lot of crowding, since Mary Powell delivered her first child Anne that year. Milton may have resented his "dead-beat" father-in-law and his mother-in-law. He was pressured to deliver Mrs. Powell's "widow's thirds" to her after Mr. Powell dies in 1647. There were enough familial and economic problems to make Milton confused and resentful. Hope these help. Patricia J. Nebrida Dissertator English Loyola University, Chicago, IL -----Original Message----- From: Roy Flannagan [SMTP:flannaga@oak.cats.ohiou.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 9:03 AM To: owner-milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Query Where did the idea come from that Mary Powell Milton's family was Roman Catholic? I have read that somewhere, but so far as I know it is unsubstantiated rumor. Richard Powell was undoubtedly on the King's side, and he was undoubtedly a deadbeat debtor, and Mrs. Powell was undoubtedly a crabby lady who did not like her son-in-law one bit, but was the family Papist as well? Roy Flannagan From: bonnie.clyde@sympatico.ca Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 12:44 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Milton & Aristotle I am looking for proof that Milton may have read Aristotle's On Rhetoric. Can anyone suggest where I might look? Best, Jennifer Fritz From: Roy Flannagan [flannaga@oak.cats.ohiou.edu] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 7:42 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query At 05:53 PM 7/8/00 -0300, you wrote: >Roy, > All the Powell children were baptised in the parish church in Forest >Hill. That's a powerful argument that the Powells were not practicing RC. > His sons went to Christchurch College, Oxford. He himself came from >Stafford, and I don't think details of his own baptism are known but he was a >Justice of the Peace, so he doesn't seem to have been a Catholic when John >Milton married his first wife. So he couldn't have subscribed Roman Catholic and hold that public office? Would his associations with the court and the king's forces at Oxford have driven him closer to Roman Catholicism, do you think? Was Christchurch the college closest to Catholicism (now where did I hear THAT rumor?)? There are no records of the marriage of Milton and Mary Powell, so that we have to reconstruct the event only from the fact that the party seems to have carried over to Milton's house in London. We also have the contemporary testimony that Mary's mother is the one who encouraged or incited her to leave Milton, not long after the marriage. But can we tell at all if religion had more to do with this than politics (or just personal animosity between Mrs. Powell and her son-in-law)? Best, Roy From: J W Creaser [creaser@holl.u-net.com] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 1:44 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query A tiny correction to this useful note: for `Christchurch College' read 'Christ Church' (two words, and no `College'). Christ Church prides itself on traditional quirks of this kind: its permanent teaching staff, for example, are called Students. John Creaser At 17:53 08/07/00 -0300, you wrote: >Roy, > All the Powell children were baptised in the parish church in Forest >Hill. His sons went to Christchurch College, Oxford. He himself came from >Stafford, and I don't think details of his own baptism are known but he was a >Justice of the Peace, so he doesn't seem to have been a Catholic when John >Milton married his first wife. > Best wishes, > Derek. > > > From: Roy Flannagan [flannaga@oak.cats.ohiou.edu] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 7:32 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: RE: Query--Mary Powell Milton At 12:19 AM 7/8/00 -0500, you wrote: >Roy, > >I don't know where you may have gotten the idea that Mary Powell Milton's >family was Roman Catholic, but Milton did see his first wife as >"a-less-than-ideal" Christian (Church of England v. his Puritanism). It's very hard to see a one-to-one relationship between the bad wives pictured in the DDD and Mary Powell, since Milton seems to avoid the issue of desertion as a major ground for divorce. He doesn't avoid the issue of idolatry, though, as you say below. > In >The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, Milton argues that an >"Idolatresse,"...one who could use her "enticing sorcery" to "pervert him >to superstition" or "dinsinable him in the whole service of God through the >disturbance and unfit society, and so drive at last through murmuring and >despair to thoughts of Atheism..." (CPW II: 260). Since Mrs. Milton had >left him in 1642, it is hard not to see a parallel between Mary Milton and >the "evil" images of women Milton develops in this particular tract. But we don't know when Milton started making notes on divorce as a topic he wanted to write on. >Throughout The Doctrine, Milton also argues that the Church of England's >policies and marriage customs were actually Papist (ex., sacramental >supremacy, indissolubility in CPW II: 237) and therefore in direct conflict >with the kind of Puritan marriage (and true Christian society) that Milton >envisioned. "Puritan" is an enormous term here. Can we really reconstruct what M thought the ideal religious marriage might be (this is a challenge) from the various divorce tracts? >Milton still thinks about his marital mistakes in The Second Defense, but >this tract covers the political differences btw. the Powells and Milton >that you noted. Better be specific about that, and watch out for the biographical fallacy. >On a fictional note, Robert Graves writes somewhere in Wife to Mr. Milton >that Mary (Mary) Powell had been named after Henrietta Maria. Cute speculation, but Graves is often perversely wrong or fanciful. Wife to Mr. Milton is a deliberate smear of Milton's reputation, and it makes him into a silly, domestically tyrannical, superstitious poetaster. >As far as his relationships with his in-laws, if you refer to Parker's >biography, you'll remember that the Powells had to move in with John and >Mary after Charles loses Oxford in 1646. That meant a lot of crowding, >since Mary Powell delivered her first child Anne that year. The Barbican house was tall and narrow, from the pictures of the structure extant in the 19th century. And M wrote the letter to Dati complaining of being in an uncongenial household. >Milton may >have resented his "dead-beat" father-in-law and his mother-in-law. He was >pressured to deliver Mrs. Powell's "widow's thirds" to her after Mr. >Powell dies in 1647. Parker puts the kindest of interpretations on the legal events. Mrs. Powell is probably the one who labeled Milton "harsh and choleric" in court, at a time when Mary was pregnant (if I am remembering my dates correctly). Mrs. P petitioned the court to be paid parts of the rents of the Wheatley estate after the death of her husband. > There were enough familial and economic problems to >make Milton confused and resentful. No doubt, together with political problems, with the Powell family and Christopher Milton both on the Royalist side. I am still wondering why M emphasized idolatrous wives in the divorce tracts (and would return to the theme with the Woman of Timna and Dalila). Of course husbands might be accused of worshiping the gods of their idolatrous wives as well, and there is always Solomon as a chief example, the wisest of men following after his wife's idols. More good stuff? Roy F From: Kimberly Hill [khill@concentric.net] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 2:26 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: CFP: Int'l John Bunyan Society REFORMATION, REVOLUTION, RESTORATION: The Texts and Contexts of Bunyan's England Third Triennial Conference of the International John Bunyan Society Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, USA, October 10-14, 2001 Keynote Speakers: Sharon Achinstein, University of Maryland Margaret Ezell, Texas A and M Richard Greaves, Florida State University Thomas Luxon, Dartmouth College Nigel Smith, Princeton University Reformation, Revolution, and Restoration are three contexts in which to situate the discourse of late seventeenth-century England. How these contexts shape the ideas and textual practices of religion, culture, and politics will provide the themes of our conference. Early modern scholars from all disciplines are welcome to contribute and to participate. In addition to work on Bunyan and his contemporaries, we welcome and encourage proposals focusing on gender, race, theoretical approaches, postmodern and cultural studies, and the global impact of Puritanism. Send two copies of 500-word abstract or a completed paper (reading time 20 minutes) and CV via regular mail or e-mail to Professor Vera Camden (vcamden@kent.edu) Department of English Kent State University P.O. Box 5190 Kent, Ohio 44242-0001 (216) 791-7641 fax: (330) 672-3152 DEADLINE: March 25, 2001 From: Carol Barton [cbartonphd@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 7:53 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton Patricia, I'm afraid you've fallen prey to the same trap that waylays many dissertators, that of accepting everything that is published as gospel. If you will look at the Anonymous Life in Prof. Flannagan's _Riverside Milton_, you will see (p.9, col. 1) that [Skinner?] says that, after Mary's "obstinate" refusal to return home, Milton "therefore thought upon a Divorce, that hee might be free to marry another; concerning which he was also in treaty. The lawfulness and expedience of this, duly regulat in order to all those purposes, for which Marriage was at first instituted; had upon full consideration & reading good Authors bin formerly his opinion: And the necessity of justifying himself now concurring with the opportunity, acceptable to him, of instructing others in a point of so great concern . . ." he wrote DDD. Extrapolating Mary from *any* of the women Milton discusses in DDD is ill-advised, as is extrapolating Milton from any of the characters he created, which you will also find people doing without warrant. Best, Carol Barton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patricia J. Nebrida" To: Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 1:19 AM Subject: RE: Query--Mary Powell Milton > Roy, > > I don't know where you may have gotten the idea that Mary Powell Milton's > family was Roman Catholic, but Milton did see his first wife as > "a-less-than-ideal" Christian (Church of England v. his Puritanism). In > The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, Milton argues that an > "Idolatresse,"...one who could use her "enticing sorcery" to "pervert him > to superstition" or "dinsinable him in the whole service of God through the > disturbance and unfit society, and so drive at last through murmuring and > despair to thoughts of Atheism..." (CPW II: 260). Since Mrs. Milton had > left him in 1642, it is hard not to see a parallel between Mary Milton and > the "evil" images of women Milton develops in this particular tract. > > Throughout The Doctrine, Milton also argues that the Church of England's > policies and marriage customs were actually Papist (ex., sacramental > supremacy, indissolubility in CPW II: 237) and therefore in direct conflict > with the kind of Puritan marriage (and true Christian society) that Milton > envisioned. > > Milton still thinks about his marital mistakes in The Second Defense, but > this tract covers the political differences btw. the Powells and Milton > that you noted. > > On a fictional note, Robert Graves writes somewhere in Wife to Mr. Milton > that Mary (Mary) Powell had been named after Henrietta Maria. > > As far as his relationships with his in-laws, if you refer to Parker's > biography, you'll remember that the Powells had to move in with John and > Mary after Charles loses Oxford in 1646. That meant a lot of crowding, > since Mary Powell delivered her first child Anne that year. Milton may > have resented his "dead-beat" father-in-law and his mother-in-law. He was > pressured to deliver Mrs. Powell's "widow's thirds" to her after Mr. > Powell dies in 1647. There were enough familial and economic problems to > make Milton confused and resentful. > > Hope these help. > > Patricia J. Nebrida > Dissertator > English > Loyola University, Chicago, IL > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Roy Flannagan [SMTP:flannaga@oak.cats.ohiou.edu] > Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 9:03 AM > To: owner-milton-l@richmond.edu > Subject: Query > > > Where did the idea come from that Mary Powell Milton's family was Roman > Catholic? I have read that somewhere, but so far as I know it is > unsubstantiated rumor. Richard Powell was undoubtedly on the King's side, > and he was undoubtedly a deadbeat debtor, and Mrs. Powell was undoubtedly a > > crabby lady who did not like her son-in-law one bit, but was the family > Papist as well? > > Roy Flannagan > > From: AntiUtopia@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 8:12 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton In a message dated 7/11/00 7:53:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cbartonphd@earthlink.net writes: << Extrapolating Mary from *any* of the women Milton discusses in DDD is ill-advised, as is extrapolating Milton from any of the characters he created, which you will also find people doing without warrant. Best, Carol Barton >> I've read yours and RF's posts to this effect. They are very good, but I'm not quite sure where I stand on this myself. Milton seemed to adamantly refuse to do any writing that was directly personal -- therefore a direct reference to abandonment would have been entirely out of character for Milton. When he wrote about the death of a close friend, he mythologized it. When he wrote to his old instructor, he turned his poem into an emissary going in his place and distanced himself in that way. The problem with asserting a one-to-one correspondence between Mary Powell and any of the women described in DDD is really that we can't know precisely what Milton thought about his wife, if for no other reason than the fact that he never did directly write about her. But that seems to problematize a Denial of a one-to-one correspondence as much as it does an assertion. It seems better to say we can't know for sure than to either deny or affirm this correspondence. But if his writing isn't necessarily guided by the details of his personal life, that doesn't mean it's not motivated by the details of his personal life. DDD is some of the most intense prose Milton wrote, and putting that together with the timing of its release makes it very difficult to believe he was merely expounding general priniciples for the sake of the improvement of English society. I suspect if he had had a happy first marriage, the tract may have been written very differently, if at all. The "biographical fallacy", RF? Fallacies in literary studies are not like fallacies in logic. They're always up for argument on a case by case basis :) Jim From: Derek Wood [dwood@stfx.ca] Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 2:36 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Milton & Aristotle See Jackson Campbell, Milton's Library. N York (Garland, 1975). Item 89. Specifically, Boswell cites: AP (YP 1: 899). E (YP 2: 401, 403). LO (CM !!: 27, 43, 103, 175, 187, 465). MAR(CM 18: 300). Intro (CP 3: 108, 109). Good luck! Derek Wood. bonnie.clyde@sympatico.ca wrote: > I am looking for proof that Milton may have read Aristotle's On Rhetoric. Can > anyone suggest where I might look? > > Best, > Jennifer Fritz From: Richard Watkins [richard.watkins@st-hughs.oxford.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 9:36 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Milton & Aristotle Dear Jennifer, W.R. Parker tells a story of how a young historian called Henry de Brass tried to catch Milton out over a passage in Aristotle's Rhetoric. Though blind, he remembered it well enough to refute the young man's point and provide supporting evidence from five other ancient authors. (Milton: A Biography, 2nd ed., p. 507) In Of Education Milton suggests that Rhetoric be the last subject taught to students and recommends the works of Plato, Aristotle, Phalereus, Cicero, Hermogenes and Longinus on the subject. D.L. Clark's John Milton at St Paul's School: a study of ancient rhetoric in English Renaissance education will probably be very useful. Yours, Richard ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 5:43 PM Subject: Milton & Aristotle > I am looking for proof that Milton may have read Aristotle's On Rhetoric. Can > anyone suggest where I might look? > > Best, > Jennifer Fritz > > From: Diane McColley [mccolley@crab.rutgers.edu] Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 6:17 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query Thanks to John Creaser for his typically generous attention to detail. Milton's father is thought to have sung in the choir at Christ Church as a child. DM ---------- >From: J W Creaser >To: milton-l@richmond.edu >Subject: Re: Query >Date: Mon, Jul 10, 2000, 10:43 AM > >A tiny correction to this useful note: for `Christchurch College' read >'Christ Church' (two words, and no `College'). Christ Church prides itself >on traditional quirks of this kind: its permanent teaching staff, for >example, are called Students. > >John Creaser > >At 17:53 08/07/00 -0300, you wrote: > >Roy, > > All the Powell children were baptised in the parish church in Forest > >Hill. His sons went to Christchurch College, Oxford. He himself came from > >Stafford, and I don't think details of his own baptism are known but he was a > >Justice of the Peace, so he doesn't seem to have been a Catholic when John > >Milton married his first wife. > > Best wishes, > > Derek. > > > > > > > From: James Dougal Fleming [jdf26@columbia.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 2:23 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton AntiUtopia wrote: "Milton seemed to adamantly > refuse to do any writing that was directly personal" This assertion sits rather oddly with the long and impassioned autobiographical digressions in RCG, the Apology for Smec, Def 2 and Pro Se, with the hurt autobiographical opening of Colasterion, and with numerous other passages in Ms controversial prose. If anything, the evidence is that M is compelled to "directly personal" writing, particularly in polemical contexts. Self-exposure, to the reader and to God, constitutes his didactic credentials. See Diekhoff, _Milton on Himself_. JDF. From: James Dougal Fleming [jdf26@columbia.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 2:38 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Milton & Aristotle Sender: owner-milton-l@richmond.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: milton-l@richmond.edu See also William T. Costello, _The Scholastic Curriculum at Early Seventeenth-Century Cambridge_ (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1958). JDF. On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Richard Watkins wrote: > Dear Jennifer, > > W.R. Parker tells a story of how a young historian called Henry de Brass > tried to catch Milton out over a passage in Aristotle's Rhetoric. Though > blind, he remembered it well enough to refute the young man's point and > provide supporting evidence from five other ancient authors. (Milton: A > Biography, 2nd ed., p. 507) > > In Of Education Milton suggests that Rhetoric be the last subject taught to > students and recommends the works of Plato, Aristotle, Phalereus, Cicero, > Hermogenes and Longinus on the subject. > > D.L. Clark's John Milton at St Paul's School: a study of ancient rhetoric in > English Renaissance education will probably be very useful. > > Yours, > Richard > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 5:43 PM > Subject: Milton & Aristotle > > > > I am looking for proof that Milton may have read Aristotle's On Rhetoric. > Can > > anyone suggest where I might look? > > > > Best, > > Jennifer Fritz > > > > > From: S. M. Fallon [fallon.1@nd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2000 10:49 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton I've just dropped in after a long hiatus from the list. Carol Barton's and Roy Flannagan's responses to Patricia Nebrida's fine post fail to address adequately what Milton himself refers to the "spur of self-concernment" at work in the DDD. Jim seems much closer to the mark as he concludes his perceptive message: > >The "biographical fallacy", RF? Fallacies in literary studies are not like >fallacies in logic. They're always up for argument on a case by case basis :) > >Jim Steve Fallon From: Roy Flannagan [flannaga@oak.cats.ohiou.edu] Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 7:29 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton At 10:49 AM 7/13/00 +0800, you wrote: >I've just dropped in after a long hiatus from the list. Carol Barton's >and Roy Flannagan's responses to Patricia Nebrida's fine post fail to >address adequately what Milton himself refers to the "spur of >self-concernment" at work in the DDD. Steve: What's the "spur of self-concernment," do you think? Is Coleridge all wrong in thinking of Milton as the complete egoist? Roy F From: Chris Clark [christopher.clark@kcl.ac.uk] Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 4:09 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Milton audiobooks References: Message-Id: <3970C4CE1C2.23C5CHRISTOPHER.CLARK@mail.kcl.ac.uk> Sender: owner-milton-l@richmond.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: milton-l@richmond.edu Hi there A brief query... does anyone know if there are any Milton audiobooks available? I am looking for a recorded reading of Paradise Lost, preferably on CD, but am currently having no luck. Any ideas or recommendations? Cheers Chris Clark From: AntiUtopia@aol.com Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 8:23 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton In a message dated 7/14/00 6:25:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jdf26@columbia.edu writes: << This assertion sits rather oddly with the long and impassioned autobiographical digressions in RCG, the Apology for Smec, Def 2 and Pro Se, with the hurt autobiographical opening of Colasterion, and with numerous other passages in Ms controversial prose. If anything, the evidence is that M is compelled to "directly personal" writing, particularly in polemical contexts. Self-exposure, to the reader and to God, constitutes his didactic credentials. See Diekhoff, _Milton on Himself_. JDF. >> Thanks for the references -- I'll check them out. I haven't read Everything by Milton yet, but what I've read seemed to provide wonderful opportunities for openly autobiographical writing -- none of which he took. The DDD, Areopagitica, even Samson Agonistes about an uncompromising hero fighting a losing cause -- written after the Restoration -- all seemed ripe for autobiography. I assume that in the works you referenced above Milton actually employs the first person voice, and that the autobiographical isn't just being inferred. I think I'll enjoy reading those... :) Jim From: david.gay@ualberta.ca Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 11:43 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS REFORMATION, REVOLUTION, RESTORATION: The Texts and Contexts of Bunyan's England Third Triennial Conference of the International John Bunyan Society Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, USA, October 10-14, 2001 Keynote Speakers: Sharon Achinstein, University of Maryland Margaret Ezell, Texas A and M Richard Greaves, Florida State University Thomas Luxon, Dartmouth College Nigel Smith, Princeton University Reformation, Revolution, and Restoration are three contexts in which to situate the discourse of late seventeenth-century England. How these contexts shape the ideas and textual practices of religion, culture, and politics will provide the themes of our conference. Early modern scholars from all disciplines are welcome to contribute and to participate. In addition to work on Bunyan and his contemporaries, we welcome and encourage proposals focusing on gender, race, theoretical approaches, postmodern and cultural studies, and the global impact of Puritanism. Send two copies of 500-word abstract or a completed paper (reading time 20 minutes) and CV via regular mail or e-mail to Professor Vera Camden (vcamden@kent.edu) Department of English Kent State University P.O. Box 5190 Kent, Ohio 44242-0001 (216) 791-7641 fax: (330) 672-3152 DEADLINE: March 25, 2001 From: Henriette Stavis [stavis@hum.ku.dk] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 10:00 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Audio recording of PL Hello Chris, You asked about an audio-recording of 'Paradise Lost'. There is a NAXOS audiobook of PL on 3 CDs (NAXOS 315912). I should think that it's possible to order it from the NAXOS homepage which can be found at http://www.hnh.com/ I haven't heard the recording in question myself, so consider this as more of a reference than a recommendation. Good luck, Henriette Stavis Copenhagen, Denmark From: JBMorgaine@aol.com Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 10:49 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton In a message dated 7/17/00 6:02:10 AM Mountain Daylight Time, flannaga@oak.cats.ohiou.edu writes: What's the "spur of self-concernment," do you think? Is Coleridge all wrong in thinking of Milton as the complete egoist? Respectfully, and including myself as one of the breed, I wonder, can there be such a thing as a writer who is not an egoist? Despite other beliefs we may put forth in our writing, the fact of our writing attests to some belief in ourselves, in what we are saying, does it not? I've been warned against The Fallacies-- rightly so, rightly so-- but can I competely divorce the writing from the writer? It's a question of to what extent the external evidence supports the correlation, if I understand correctly-- to what degree the experiences shape the writing, not just the writer. Or does it only matter what the impact of the writing is upon the audiences who read it? I'm struggling with the issue of what Milton thought of the esoterica of his day. No matter how many ways I look at it, no matter how I try to avoid the question, I keep returning to, "Well, did he believe X or Y?" What is it that returns me and others eternally to the question of what Milton (and other writers) thought? How do people find their critical ways between the Scylla of egoism and biographica and the Charybdis of dissimulation and the instability of language? Julie Bruneau From: jherz [jherz@vax2.concordia.ca] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 9:04 PM To: Milton list Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS CALL FOR PAPERS SIXTEENTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE of THE JOHN DONNE SOCIETY 15 - 17 February 2001 The Gulfpark Conference Center University of Sourthern Mississippi Gulfport, Mississippi Invited Speakers: David Norbrook University of Maryland Paul Stevens Queen's University Sharon Achinstein University of Maryland Gary Stringer University of Southern Mississippi Papers are welcomed on any aspect of Donne studies Please send 4 copies of completed paper (8 - 12 pages) by SEPTEMBER 15, 2000 to: Professor Eugene Cunnar Department of English New Mexico State University Las Cruces, NM 88003 From: Carol Barton, PhD [cbartonphd@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 9:51 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton Steve Fallon writes, > I've just dropped in after a long hiatus from the list. Carol Barton's > and Roy Flannagan's responses to Patricia Nebrida's fine post fail to > address adequately what Milton himself refers to the "spur of > self-concernment" at work in the DDD. Jim seems much closer to the mark as > he concludes his perceptive message: I never denied that there was self-interest to some degree in the composition of DDD, Steve: in all of his works, Milton is one of the most consistently self-conscious artists who ever breathed. We all write about things we care about (hence I am answering this post and not some others), and by that time, Milton was thinking not only about the inalienable rights, but about marrying someone who'd be a just a tad more domestic than Anna Powell's daughter -- in his house, at least. Of course there's some of Mary, and some of every "bad wife" he had ever seen or read about -- bad husbands, too. But that doesn't mean any of the women he mentions in DDD were composites or replications of "Mary and" or "Mary" or anybody else, and that is what I cautioned Patricia -- and now caution Jim -- about reading into his work. Jim has not seen the autobiographical in Samson. I think he needs to read the tragedy again. (And I think before you can make *any* autobiographical assertions about *any* author, but particularly about one as self-revelatory as Milton is, you need to have read more than a couple of his works.) Carol Barton From: S. M. Fallon [fallon.1@nd.edu] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 2:48 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton Roy, Thanks for your post. In answer to your question I'm sending along an excerpt from an article titled "The Spur of Self-concernment: Milton in His Divorce Tracts," in the new Milton Studies. There I argue that in the famous passage from DDD, Milton begins with an acknowledgment that the suffering he writes about is one he knows by personal experience. He then characteristically transmutes what might be considered defensive self-serving into aggressive claims of singular godliness. I find it difficult to take the famous spur as anything but a thinly veiled acknowledgment that, human nature being what it is, bitter personal experience is sometimes necessary to make clear to us evils imposed not by God but by human laws. Unless one's ox is gored, one may be content to stay with custom, particularly is it comes with apparent divine warrant. I think that this is compatible with Coleridge's view of Milton's egotism. Steve "Indeed mans disposition though prone to search after vain curiosities, yet when points of difficulty are to be discusst, appertaining to the removall of unreasonable wrong and burden from the perplext life of our brother, it is incredible how cold, how dull, and farre from all fellow feeling we are, without the spurre of self-concernment. Yet if the wisdome, the justice, the purity of God be to be cleer'd from foulest imputations which are not yet avoided, if charity be not to be degraded and trodd'n down under a civil Ordinance, if Matrimony be not to be advanc't like that exalted perdition, writt'n of to the Thessalonians, above all that is called God [Milton's emphasis], or goodnesse, nay, against them both, then I dare affirm there will be found in the Contents of this Booke, that which may concern us all. You it concerns chiefly, Worthies in Parlament, on whom, as on our deliverers, all our grievances and cares, by the merit of your eminence and fortitude are devolv'd: Me it concerns next, having with much labour and faithfull diligence first found out, or at least with a fearlesse and communicative candor first publisht to the manifest good of Christendome, that which calling to witnesse every thing mortall and immortall, I beleeve unfainedly to be true. Let not other men thinke their conscience bound to search continually after truth, to pray for enlightning from above, to publish what they think they have so obtaind, & debarr me fom conceiving my self ty'd by the same duties." (YP II, p. 226; my emphasis) In the middle we hear the unmistakable cry of outraged suffering: those not spurred by self-concernment are blind and deaf to the suffering, the burden and perplexity, caused by the human prohibition of divorce. But in short order self-concernment is transmuted into disinterested service. His attackers are actually God's attackers, and they need "a little cordiall sobriety to settle their qualming zeale." How they will reach this sobriety is not specified; instead Milton adds, "this question concerns not us perhaps." But after the intervening admission of self-concernment, it turns out that punishing the scoffers will in fact concern Milton, now not as one suffering burden and perplexity but as one selflessly fighting God's (and Parliament's) battles. This is not the first or the last time that Milton takes on the role of God's defender; what is interesting here is the quick move from the hint that God's action will repay the scoffers to the conclusion that Milton will repay them. Along the way, the notion of self-concernment is transformed; if it is the concern of everyone that God's justice be vindicated, it is the special concern of Parliament, the guardians of the nation, and of Milton, the searcher after truth. Milton is self-concerned now not as a suffering husband but as a godly interpreter facing ignorant opposition and calumny. >At 10:49 AM 7/13/00 +0800, you wrote: > >I've just dropped in after a long hiatus from the list. Carol Barton's > >and Roy Flannagan's responses to Patricia Nebrida's fine post fail to > >address adequately what Milton himself refers to the "spur of > >self-concernment" at work in the DDD. > >Steve: > >What's the "spur of self-concernment," do you think? > >Is Coleridge all wrong in thinking of Milton as the complete egoist? > >Roy F From: Norman T. Burns [nburns@binghamton.edu] Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 3:53 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Audio recording of PL Thanks to Henriette Stavis, I visited the Naxos site and can report that the PL audio there offered: http://www.naxosaudiobooks.com/system/index.html is abridged to a 4-hour performance. This page allows you to hear a sample (via RealPlayer) of the reading. 3 tapes are 10 pounds, 3 CDs are 14 pounds. --Norm Burns At 03:59 PM 7/17/2000 +0200, you wrote: >Hello Chris, > >You asked about an audio-recording of 'Paradise Lost'. There is a NAXOS >audiobook of PL on 3 CDs (NAXOS 315912). I should think that it's possible >to order it from the NAXOS homepage which can be found at > >http://www.hnh.com/ > >I haven't heard the recording in question myself, so consider this as more >of a reference than a recommendation. > >Good luck, > >Henriette Stavis >Copenhagen, Denmark From: AntiUtopia@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:29 AM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: Re: Query--Mary Powell Milton In a message dated 7/18/00 7:44:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cbartonphd@earthlink.net writes: << Jim has not seen the autobiographical in Samson. I think he needs to read the tragedy again. (And I think before you can make *any* autobiographical assertions about *any* author, but particularly about one as self-revelatory as Milton is, you need to have read more than a couple of his works.) Carol Barton >> That's funny, I mentioned Samson in the next post :) I think we're pretty close to agreement here. In my posts, though, I was talking specifically about direct autobiographical writing, in which the first person voice is employed and Milton would be consciously and directly writing about himself and his experiences. He seemed to shy away from that at some pretty ripe opportunities for it. Jim From: Alan Rudrum [rudrum@sfu.ca] Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:41 PM To: milton-l@richmond.edu Subject: New anthology: announcement Please cross-post the following to other lists whose readers might be interested. Readers of Milton-L might be interested to hear of the imminent availability of the Broadview Anthology of Seventeenth Century Verse and Prose, Editor Alan Rudrum, Associate Editors Joseph Black and Holly Nelson. Vital statistics are as follows: 1333 pages isbn 1551110539 US 37.95, CDN 48.95, uk 17.95 All university bookstores in North America should have the basic order information for Broadview, but any academic experiencing difficulty may contact the Broadview Customer Service Department directly at customerservice@broadviewpress.com or 705-743-8990. The table of contents is now on the Broadview site, www.broadviewpress.com. To view it go to catalogue and to search, editors, type in Rudrum and you're there. Those who would like an email attachment of the Table of Contents may obtain it by emailing heidi.standell@broadviewpress.com. and , of course, those wishing to consider the book for posible text adoption may request a complimentary examination copy. In the UK orders should be placed with Broadview's UK agent, Turpin Distribution: Turpin Distribution Services Ltd. Blackhorse Rd. Letchworth, Hertfordshire England SG6 1HN Tel (01462) 672555 fax (01462) 480947 The best guess for delivery of bound books is August 3. It will take a couple of weeks for orders to reach people after stock reaches the Broadview warehouse. Alan Rudrum