We take a break in our erratically-scheduled publishing of resource posts to bring you our regularly-scheduled weekly blog post (it's only one hour until midnight, I have a lot to talk about in this post, and I need to be sure that it gets published by the time the clock strikes 12:00).
It seems to me that Adam and Eve are often represented as complementary figures to one another. In Book 4, for instance, the poem reads, "For contemplation he [Adam] and valor formed, / For softness she [Eve] and sweet attractive grace" (4.297-298). Adam is made to be valorous and strong, whereas Eve is made to be soft and attractive--two very opposite characterizations. Adam is a thinker, and we see this through Adam's continued engagement in conversation with the angels telling Adam of creation and the heavens (in multiple places throughout Paradise Lost). Eve, conversely, is a doer, and we see this, for example, in Book 8; when the conversation between Adam and the angel turns towards "studious thoughts abstruse" (8.40), Eve excuses herself from the conversation to go tend to her plants in the garden (8.40-47). And finally, in Book 9, Adam expresses concern when Eve suggests that they tend Eden independently; he reminds her that Satan may try to tempt them, and he worries that, divided, they might be more easily assailable (9.251-256).
So here are my questions regarding this idea of Adam and Eve as complementary figures. When Satan sees Eve in Eden, he states that he is glad that Adam is not around, because he would rather avoid Adam's higher intellect (9.483) and his stronger build (9.484-485). Could we potentially assume that Satan, if he had found Adam alone instead of Eve, would have tailored his persuasions to take advantage of Adam's lack of beauty and grace or perhaps his lack of physical experience? Satan butters up Eve by referring to her beauty and pitching to her love and knowledge of plants when he tempts her. Perhaps if it had been Adam instead, Satan would have told him that the fruit from the forbidden tree would make him even more gorgeous than Eve, and/or tell him that the fruit was not any more special than the other fruits in the garden (Adam, after all, spends much less time tending to the plants than Eve does, and thus he would be less familiar with the gardens than Eve, who herself admits that she has yet to experience all the trees in the garden). Satan has shown that he is capable of great guile and persuasiveness. I think that he takes advantage of Eve's lack of Adam's knowledge, not that he finds Eve inherently weak. Thus, I think that Adam would have been just as easily tempted, since Satan would merely have changed his tactics and played to Adam's weaknesses (which are Eve's strengths).
Also, I have to wonder just how perfect Eden truly is. We are told that Adam and Eve's job is to cut back the overgrown plants in Eden, and that if they were to slack off, Eden would become overgrown. What kind of paradise is that? Heaven is described as a utopia, and it is never-changing, ever-stagnant (see Book 1; I mention this some in my earlier post on Paradise Lost). And if we think about it, wouldn't any paradise be stagnant? In a perfect world, nothing would have to be changed at all, ever. Yet in Eden, the plants grow, and they grow quickly. One or two days would be enough for the entire garden to become overgrown. What if, then, Eden is not perfect? What if Adam and Eve are not perfect? Surely a perfect creation would not have eaten from the forbidden tree, yet both Adam and Eve do. And if Adam and Eve are not perfect, can we let their decision to eat the fruit slide because they were innocent and perfect when they decided to do so? I think not, because I find them flawed. And I don't think whatever flaws they have is merely part of their perfection. Because doesn't that necessarily go against the idea of perfection?
Just some thoughts.
Another resource post on the way. Maybe. It's kind of late.
No comments:
Post a Comment