A Third Choice: Adam, Eve, and Abdiel
Gerald Richman
Suffolk University
grichman@suffolk.edu
Richman, Gerald. "A Third Choice: Adam, Eve, and Abdiel." Early
Modern Literary Studies 9.2 (September, 2003): 6.1-5 <URL: http://purl.oclc.org/emls/09-2/richthir.html>.
Cease then this impious rage,
And tempt not these; but hasten to appease
Th' incensèd Father and th' incensèd Son,
While pardon may be found in time besought. (V.845-8)
Although William Empson asserts, "The poem somehow does not encourage us to think of an alternative plan" (189; qted in Leonard 221) for Adam, in fact, through verbal and narrative parallels, Milton makes the reader aware of this third choice. For example, as Raphael calls Satan's blasphemy "bold discourse" (V.803), Adam labels Eve's eating of the fruit "Bold deed" (IX.921). Whereas Abdiel uses the verb "uncreate" in V.894 to indicate the consequence of Satan's disobedience, Adam uses it in IX.943 as an argument ad absurdum to justify ignoring the threatened penalty of death. As a result, Abdiel chooses to "fly / These wicked tents devoted, lest the wrath / Impendent, raging into sudden flame / Distinguish not"(V.889-92), while Adam in sharp verbal contrast announces, "I have fixed my lot"(IX.952) to die with Eve (emphasis added). The verbal echoes begin by aligning Adam's and Abdiel's understanding of the significance of the two situations, but end by contrasting their spiritual and physical responses.
Narrative parallels also make readers aware of Adam's third choice. When
Eve tries to persuade Adam to eat the fruit, she is in the same position
as Satan when he tries to persuade Abdiel (and others) to join his rebellion
against God. And Adam is in the same position as Abdiel. Both Adam ("How
art thou lost, how on a sudden lost, / Defaced, deflow'red, and now to
death devote?" IX.900-901) and Abdiel ("O argument blasphémous,
false and proud!" V.809) immediately perceive the evil in the words
and actions. But Satan is not yet completely lost; he is still savable
Milton implies when he has Abdiel warn Satan,
Cease then this impious rage,
And tempt not these; but hasten to appease
Th' incensèd Father and th' incensèd
Son,
While pardon may be found in time besought.
(V.845-8)
Only after Satan persists does Abdiel accept that it's too late for Satan:
O alienate from God, O Spirit accurst,
Forsaken of all good; I see thy fall
Determined . . . (V.877-9)
Satan both seals and reveals his fate by reiterating his crime and persisting
in sin, fulfilling God's criteria for damnation (III.198-202). [2]
Milton implies through Abdiel's words and actions that if Eve had repented
and Adam had refused to join her in sin, Eve would have found pardon.
Indeed Abdiel invents the whole process of repentance in V.845-8 that
God (III.173-97, echoing Abdiel in 186-7) and Adam elaborate,
What better can we do, than . . .
. . . prostrate fall
Before him reverent, and there confess
Humbly our faults, and pardon beg, with tears
Watering the ground, and with our sighs the air
Frequenting, sent from hearts contrite, in sign
Of sorrow unfeigned, and humiliation meek.
Undoubtedly he will relent and turn
From his displeasure . . . (X.1086-94)
Rather than being replaced by a second woman, as she and Adam fear (IX.827-9, 911-12), Eve herself would have become a new Eve.
Notes
I am indebted to Steven Berkowitz for helping to tighten and strengthen my argument and to the annonymous reviewer for EMLS for suggesting the reference to Origen (n. 2).
1. All citations are from Scott Elledge's edition of Paradise Lost and are indicated by book and line numbers.
2. Milton's suggestion here--that in the interlude between initiating sin and completing it, Satan had an opportunity for redemption (see Book IX.1003-1004, "completing of the the mortal sin / Original," which indicates the end of a parallel interlude between Eve's eating of the fruit and Adam's)--differs from Origen's argument that because of the infinite mercy of Christ even Satan has hope of future grace (De Principiis Book I.6.3 and Book III.6.5).
Works Cited
- Burden, Dennis H. The Logical Epic: A Study of the Argument of Paradise Lost. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1967.
- Danielson, Dennis. "Through the Telescope of Typology: What Adam Should Have Done." Milton Quarterly 23 (1989): 121-27.
- Empson, William. Milton's God. Rev. Ed. London: Chatto & Windus, 1965.
- Fallon, Stephen M. "The Spur of Self-Government." Milton Studies 38 (2000): 220-42.
- Fish, Stanley. Surprised by Sin. 1967. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: U of California P, 1971.
- Leonard, John. Naming in Paradise: Milton and the Language of Adam and Eve. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1990.
- Lewis, C.S. A Preface to Paradise Lost. 1942. New York: Galaxy, 1961.
- Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Ed. Scott Elledge. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 1993.
- Origen. De Principiis. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Ed. and Trans. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Rev. ed. A. Cleveland Cox. Vol. IV. Edinburgh and Grand Rapids, MI: NA. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. 16 Jul 2003 <http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-44.htm>.
- Samuel, Irene. "The Dialogue in Heaven: A Reconsideration of Paradise Lost, III, 1-417." PMLA 72 (1957): 601-11.
Responses to this piece intended for the Readers' Forum may be sent to the Editor at L.M.Hopkins@shu.ac.uk.
© 2003-, Lisa Hopkins (Editor, EMLS).