John Milton: Postmodern Hero?
Howard, William L.
John Milton: A Hero of Our Time, by David Hawkes. Berkeley,
California: Counterpoint, 2009. 354 pp. $28.
Instead of putting John Milton in the context of his own time,
David Hawkes proposes in this study to put him in the context of ours.
He refutes the anticipated charge that such an attempt would be
anachronistic by pointing out that Milton thought of himself as a
prophet who was speaking to the future. Hawkes believes that the great
poet and political writer's life and work offer solutions to our
own predicament. A prophet not honored in his own country or time,
Milton was often considered an extremist in his political views--he not
only favored deposing the king of England but justified his
execution--and his private ones: he wrote several tracts arguing that
divorce on the basis of incompatibility was justifiable. That the
citizens of his own country failed to adopt his views he attributed to
their slavish mentality, a state of mind natural to human beings but
which the poet thought could--and should--be resisted. Hawkes agrees,
and he enlists Milton as an ally in his own iconoclasm regarding
perceived evils of the present day.
If there is a salient characteristic that organizes Milton's
life and work, Hawkes believes it is that he stood for an "ethics
of signification." By this he means that images, including those
created by words, law, religion, and customs of all kinds, should be
truthful representations of reality. If they are not, then they must be
reformed lest they enslave humanity to various falsehoods. Hawkes finds
that this principle governs Milton's views of politics, religion,
and personal conduct. For example, King Charles I, Milton felt, had
become an idol that attracted an undeserved reverence, and his true
nature and the true nature of his relationship to the English people had
been lost in the unreality of a fetish. Likewise, Milton and his fellow
Puritans thought the Church of England, which had recently re-instituted
icons in its liturgy, was fostering the worship of idols rather than of
God. Finally, Milton believed that the law, which made adultery the only
legitimate grounds of divorce, privileged the physical relationship over
the intellectual and spiritual one. Outworn custom essentially made an
idol of the physicality of marriage at the expense of more important
aspects of the relationship. To Hawkes, Milton's writing acted as
"the antidote to idolatry." He cut to the truth, and that
characteristic, Hawkes believes, makes his work even more essential to
our times than to his.
A motif related to idolatry in this study is usury. Chapter one, in
fact, is entitled "The Fruit of Usury." Hawkes is at his best
as he establishes the importance of money-lending and, more generally,
an emerging market economy in Milton's time. Milton's father
was disinherited from his family's landed estate because he became
a committed Protestant. He went to London and learned to make a living
as a scrivener and money-lender. Therefore, the poet son's welfare,
including the leisure he had for study, was entangled with the dubious
practice of usury. Hawkes explains that the "breeding of
money"--charging or paying interest--was looked upon with suspicion
and even as Satanic at that time because it gave power to something not
originally existing in nature and created an adversarial relationship
between lender and borrower. Son John himself became responsible for
some of his father's accounts, and thus was implicated in the
practice. Having a father who was emblematic of a change from landed
wealth to mercantile wealth put Milton in the middle not only of an
essential debate on the ethics of usury itself, but also on what Hawkes
sees as the larger issue of idolatry. To Milton, the source of slavery
since the Fall of Mankind was idolatry. Money, seeming to take on a life
of its own, easily mutated into an idol.
The author of this book argues that we in the modern world would do
well to share some of the seventeenth century's suspicion of usury
rather than taking the "money breeding" that is the basis of
our market economy for granted. Here Hawkes uses Milton's
opposition to idolatry as a pretext for lambasting capitalist society
which "is idolatrous to a degree surpassing the worst nightmares of
seventeenth-century iconoclasts." With its dependence on images,
the market economy has enslaved "virtually everyone in capitalist
society." Firmly believing that being ruled by images is evil,
Hawkes enlists Milton, who consistently fought against the sources of
enslavement, to his cause even though he has to admit that the
poet's attitude toward usury per se was ambivalent rather than
condemnatory.
Milton argued that the slavish mentality was one that could not go
beyond the material world, the world of appearance, and reach the
spiritual reality behind it. Hawkes believes this conviction set him
against the Cavaliers politically, biblical literalists religiously, and
his first wife domestically. That Hawkes has a political bias in this
book is indicated by this nudge in its direction: "The religious
fundamentalists of the twenty-first century would, by Milton's
standards, exhibit a slavish mentality." Who, then, would Milton
have felt most comfortable with in our time? It is quite obvious to
Hawkes that he would have hung out with Revolutionaries of the Left.
Milton's revolutionary asceticism, for example, is compared to
Robespierre, Lenin, and Che Guevara's. The interregnum, to the
author of this study, resembled Pol Pot's Cambodian revolution. One
soon realizes that the enterprise of turning Milton into a modern hero
is a more particular attempt to claim him as a Leftist hero. Hawkes does
not address the rather obvious objection that the philosophical
materialism of these modern revolutionaries would certainly have been
anathema to Milton. Nor does one recognize in the postmodern, Hawkesean
hero the Milton who had committed the Bible to memory, helped administer
a theocracy, and composed Paradise Lost (1667) and Samson Agonistes
(1671).
Indeed, part of the author's effort to make Milton relevant is
to de-emphasize, update, or distort his religious beliefs. For example,
he writes, "we do not need to believe in God to appreciate
Milton's ideas." Did Adam, Eve, Satan, and Gabriel actually
exist? Not in Milton's mind, argues Hawkes: "Milton
consistently opposed literalistic [sic] interpretations of scripture.
[His] figures are personified concepts, ideas, psychological states and
experiences. As soon as we understand Milton's religious
terminology as a network of tropes and metaphors, a mythologized mode of
expressing philosophical, political, even sexual positions, then their
implications for our own situation will become clear."
Unfortunately, this argument reduces Milton's art to just another
idol, one that twenty-first century skeptics can worship because it
hollows out anything resembling a seventeenth century Puritan's
religious beliefs. In a remarkable example of tendentiousness, Hawkes
claims that in Paradise Lost Milton "comes close" to equating
Christ with reason thus anticipating the Deism enforced by Robespierre
in the French Revolution. "Milton could never believe anything
irrational, and so he boldly advances an anti-Trinitarian
theology." Such an outlandish conclusion suggests a kind of
twenty-first century secular wishful thinking rather than scholarship
rooted in supportive evidence.
One virtue of this study is Hawkes's analysis of what are
called the pamphlet wars. He introduces and analyzes Milton's
political pamphlets with which most readers would not be familiar and
thereby emphasizes Milton's deep involvement in the English Civil
War. Several times, however, he uses Milton's inflammatory rhetoric
to paint a portrait of a warped and disgusting man to whom modern
readers can condescend. For example, in Of Reformation (1641-42), when
Milton hopes that corrupt bishops will spend eternity in hell, Hawkes
describes him as "slavering with anticipation at the prospect"
and attributes his attitude to "the tradition of perverted sadism
in Christian depictions of Hell." Moreover, Hawkes applies some
twenty-first century pop psychology, averring that Milton could not have
made such statements and maintained "a soul at ease with
itself." A similar example of simplistic psychological analysis is
the assumption that, in The Reason of Church Government (1641-42),
Milton's vehemence against churchmen who profited from
ecclesiastical practices was the result of "guilty neurosis."
The reason for that guilt, Hawkes asserts, was that he and his father
had loaned money to others in return for interest. In The Second Defence
of the English People (1654), Milton "bitchily" (Hawkes's
word) attacked Alexander More, writer of the preface to the anonymous
The Cry of the Royal Blood (1652), leading the author to imagine that
"his various personal and political travails had driven Milton
beyond the point of reason." It is true that his pamphlets were
usually bitter in tone, but beyond reason?
The final chapter of this study is devoted at least ostensibly to
Paradise Lost. However, a good quarter of it takes up the contemporary
political causes of the author of this book apparently with the hope
that Milton will give those causes standing. If there is one quality
that a postmodern cultural critic delights in discovering in a writer,
it is that he or she is "subversive." Hawkes finds Milton so.
He sees in the blind poet's epic the inspiration for multifarious
revolutionary movements, making no distinctions between the American,
French, and Russian nor the Romantic and Socialist; nor does he justify
the linking of the revolutions to particular positions that Milton
adopted, seeming to take it for granted that any revolution justifiably
can claim Milton as one of its progenitors. One doubts that Milton would
agree. The chapter also denies any Christian intentions in the poem,
making the astonishing argument that Milton's purpose in writing a
twelve-book epic about God and Satan's warfare and the fall of man
is "to explore psychological states and experiences," as if he
were a modernist. Here Hawkes is guilty of blurring essential
differences between two different ages to stretch the case that moderns
can find relevance, and validation, in Milton.
Although the author does not follow the Romantics in making Satan
the hero of the work, he does suggest that Milton's personal grudge
against God was the reason he sought to justify the ways of God to man
and, perhaps as Satan did, challenge God. Hawkes believes that the aging
poet had much to be angry about including the failure of the Puritan
cause, his blindness, and the deaths of two wives and some of his
children. However, Milton's valiant references to Paul's words
that God's strength is made perfect in weakness, his recalling the
precedents of blind seers who saw more clearly than their sighted
fellows, and his own words to an opponent that he was no longer
distracted by superficial images but focused on the truth (all cited by
Hawkes) would argue even more persuasively that he was reconciled. The
following quote, in fact, indicates serenity: "... in my blindness,
I enjoy in no inconsiderable degree the favour of the Deity; who regards
me with more tenderness and compassion in proportion as I am able to
behold nothing but himself."
The beauty of this sentiment, however, is lost in a chapter that
becomes a veritable compendium of the academic Left's causes
celebres ... and its fears. Terrified of organized religion, Hawkes
asserts it "a commonplace" that contemporary society is in a
"post-secular age" with a resurgence of religion occurring
"from Alabama to Jerusalem to Pakistan." But he associates
himself with Milton and "those of us who ... follow no organized
religion." Second, Hawkes seeks to capitalize (if the pun can be
excused) on the recent worldwide recession by discovering as the most
malevolent of evils "the particular, peculiar way in which money
behaves today ..." Through usury, money is out of control, and we
are blind to it because ours is the only society in history, save for
Milton's England, not to regard usury as sinful. Third, the author
sees in Milton a sexual liberationist. In his most contrary textual
interpretation, Hawkes claims that the passage in Book 4 of Paradise
Lost that begins "Hail wedded love" advocates "the
permissibility, even the preferentiality, of extramarital sex."
Hawkes's reasoning is that there would not have been a marriage
ceremony in Eden; Milton himself had a disastrous first marriage;
therefore, the passage implies that any couple who is compatible
intellectually qualifies as "wedded." This interpretation
suggests that establishing an older writer's relevance to our time
depends most heavily on a postmodern critic's ingenuity in
constructing perverse readings of him.
John Milton: A Hero of Our Time suffers from a serious lack of
unity, not only of intention but of method. The study seems to be two
books, one a fairly well documented account of the seventeenth-century
John Milton and another that consists of scattered assertions about his
potential role in the postmodern world. When the two intentions collide,
interpretations of Milton's life and work are frequently
tendentious, unsupported by specific documentation, and animated by
questionable assumptions. Professor Hawkes's views of the modern
world are predictable and shallowly presented, as if they do not require
the level of evidence and scholarship that his work on
seventeenth-century culture exhibits. Thus the welding of the present
and past in this study is not very sound, and Milton's poetry
suffers when it is made the servant of ideology. Furthermore, the
intensity of this book's political advocacy, not to mention the
false pretenses under which it is offered, is irritating to a reader who
picks up this study wanting to know more about a great poet.
William L. Howard
Chicago St ate University
WILLIAM L. HOWARD is Professor of English at Chicago State
University.