Satan and Paradise Lost - 撒旦与失乐园
试析《失乐园》中撒旦的艺术形象

约翰・弥尔顿(1608-1674)是十七世纪英国著名的诗人、思想家、政治家和政论家。
他出身于伦敦一个公证人家庭,青少年时代起思想进步,厌恶封建思想,痛恨教会腐败。
革命爆发后他积极投身革命,参加了革命政府的工作,并撰写政论,先后发表了《论出版自由》、《论国王和官吏的权力》和《为英国人民申辩》等文章,轰动整个欧洲。
王权复辟后,弥尔顿的著作被焚毁,个人遭监禁,但他仍然坚持革命立场,在双目失明,经济拮据的困境中坚持完成了三大诗作《失乐园》(1667)、《复乐园》(1671)和《力士参孙》(1671)。
1674年诗人与世长辞。
《失乐园》是弥尔顿最伟大的作品。
它借用圣经故事,用史诗的形式表现了人类最初的演变和人类历史上反复出现的变革斗争。
全书共十二卷,描述了撒旦反抗上帝,战败后设计复仇,偷入上帝创造的伊甸园,引诱夏娃偷食禁果,以致人类始祖被逐出伊甸乐园,开始沉沦的故事。
诗篇大量运用圣经人物意象,将撒旦和亚当、夏娃刻画得栩栩如生,从而也将主题表现得淋漓尽致。
但是对于撒旦这个形象的理解历来众说纷纭,中国读者传统上大都把他看作一个反抗强权的革命英雄。
这一方面是受我国文学政治化倾向的影响,结合弥尔顿的生平和创作这部作品时的处境,很自然地得出这样的结论。
另一方面也是西方浪漫派诗人的影响所至。
浪漫主义诗人布莱克、拜伦、雪莱等对这个形象所体现的崇高的英雄气概推崇备至。
他们相信撒旦在史诗中被作者塑造成了真正的英雄。
虽然撒旦的形象错综复杂,充满矛盾,但在层层迷雾之下,我们依然可以看清弥尔顿笔下的撒旦始终是魔鬼的化身,教唆人类堕落的元凶。
作为一位虔诚的清教徒,弥尔顿始终认为上帝是公平、正义、仁爱的,他决不容许自己对上帝有不敬的言行。
同时,17世纪的英国人长期受基督教文化的耳濡目染,民族悠久的传统文化、传统道德给人们的行为规范、思维方式造成的深层的心理定势,使他们对亵渎上帝的行为难以接受的。
这自然也会无形中对诗人的创作产生影响。
Paradise lost(简介)

约翰·弥尔顿的英文诗约翰·弥尔顿(John Milton,1608~1674)英国诗人、政论家,民主斗士。
弥尔顿是清教徒文学的代表,他的一生都在为资产阶级民主运动而奋斗,代表作《失乐园》是和《荷马史诗》、《神曲》并称为西方三大诗歌。
Paradise Lost译为“失乐园”。
作品介绍《失乐园》(Paradise Lost),全文12卷,以史诗一般的磅礴气势揭示了人的原罪与堕落。
诗中叛逆天使撒旦,因为反抗上帝的权威被打入地狱,却仍不悔改,负隅反抗,为复仇寻至伊甸园。
亚当与夏娃受被撒旦附身的蛇的引诱,偷吃了上帝明令禁吃的分辨善恶的树上的果子。
最终,撒旦及其同伙遭谴全变成了蛇,亚当与夏娃被逐出了伊甸园。
该诗体现了诗人追求自由的崇高精神,是世界文学史、思想史上的一部极重要的作品。
“失乐园”的由来是从《圣经》创世纪中所诉的故事中得来的:亚当和夏娃偷食禁果以后,世界便为此颠倒。
原来温暖如春的天空中盘旋着背离上帝的寒流,凉风一阵紧似一阵地吹过来,世间的一切都开始变得紊乱而不和谐。
道分阴阳,动静相摩,高下相克。
人失去了天真烂漫、无忧无虑的童年,注定要经历酸甜苦辣的洗礼,体验喜怒哀乐的无常。
智慧是人类脱离自然界的标志,也是人类苦闷和不安的根源。
上帝在园中行走,亚当和夏娃听见他的脚步声。
此时他们的心与上帝有了罅隙,出于负罪感,他们开始在树林中躲避上帝。
上帝对人的失落发出了痛切的呼唤:“亚当,你在那里?人哪,你在哪里?”这呼唤中包涵着上帝对人犯罪堕落,失掉了赐给人原初的绝对完美的忧伤与失望,又包涵着对人认罪归来,恢复神性的期待。
然而在上帝一步紧似一步的追问面前,亚当归咎于夏娃,夏娃委罪于蛇。
这就是上帝对人类最初的失望与忧伤,这就是人类背离上帝的最初堕落与痛苦。
亚当对上帝说:“我在园中听见您的声音,就害怕,因为我赤身露体,我便藏了起来。
”“谁告诉你赤身露体的呢?莫非你吃了我吩咐你不可吃的那树上的果子么!”上帝知道他已背离了自己的意志,愤怒地质问。
浅析撒旦在弥尔顿《失乐园》中的形象

龙源期刊网 浅析撒旦在弥尔顿《失乐园》中的形象作者:何其琪来源:《资治文摘》2017年第04期Paradise Lost is an epic poem in blank verse written by British poet John Milton in the17thcentury。
John Milton first shapes a negative character Satan as a hero in the field of literature。
It subverts the conventional concept and integrates social ideals firmly。
Satan is not only an unyielding and rebellious hero but also a degenerate and cunning conspirator。
In this story,the formation of the double images of Satan makes the ideological content of the story sublimated。
Satan and his followers intend to fight against God。
They hold a meeting to discuss whether to have an adventure at the risk of life or not in order to rebuild their paradise。
Satan bravely volunteers to explore the new world race。
He insists on being against God on condition that his followers are begging for forgiveness。
《失乐园》:人性堕落与复仇的故事

失乐园:人性堕落与复仇的故事引言《失乐园》是英国诗人约翰·弥尔顿创作的一部长篇叙事诗,被誉为世界文学史上最重要、最具影响力的作品之一。
它讲述了人类原罪的故事,探索了人性的堕落和复仇的主题。
本文将对《失乐园》中所涉及的人性堕落与复仇的情节和主要角色进行详细分析和解读。
一、人性堕落在《失乐园》中,约翰·弥尔顿通过描绘亚当和夏娃在伊甸园中违背上帝禁令、吃下禁果而引发原罪的事件,展示了人性的堕落过程。
从无辜纯洁到有罪可恶,亚当和夏娃体现了人类自由意志和选择权利带来的后果。
他们失去了对美好生活、无忧无虑状态的享受,被逐出伊甸园并面临着生死挣扎。
二、复仇与报应在《失乐园》中,阴谋、背叛和复仇是故事的重要元素。
撒旦作为堕落天使,不满于上帝对他的权威,决心颠覆上帝的统治并夺取权力。
他通过利用亚当和夏娃的弱点,成功诱使他们犯罪,并导致了整个人类被罪恶所困扰。
而上帝则以公正与审判之手回应了撒旦的背叛行为,将他赶入地狱,并将对人类施加严厉的惩罚。
三、主要角色分析1. 亚当(Adam)亚当是《失乐园》中的男主角,代表着人类中善良和无辜的一面。
他最初生活在伊甸园中,与夏娃一同享受着快乐和和平。
然而,在撒旦的诱惑下,亚当背离了上帝的旨意,并吃下了禁果。
失去了伊甸园后,他感到深深的悔恨和羞愧,在世界上漫游时承担起责任,并试图寻找救赎。
2. 夏娃(Eve)夏娃是《失乐园》中的女主角,象征着人类的诱惑和脆弱性。
她受到撒旦的煽动,选择背叛上帝并吃下禁果。
夏娃的犯罪行为导致了亚当和她自己被逐出伊甸园,并面临生活中的艰难和苦楚。
然而,夏娃也展现出了坚强和勇敢的一面,在与撒旦对抗时,表现出非凡的智慧和母性的力量。
3. 撒旦(Satan)撒旦是《失乐园》中最复杂、最有影响力的角色之一。
作为堕落天使,他对上帝摇曳不定,并计划推翻上帝的统治。
通过利用亚当和夏娃的弱点,撒旦成功引诱他们违反上帝禁令,并使整个人类堕入原罪之中。
失乐园中撒旦形象

试析《失乐园》中撒旦的形象车家玲(安阳师范学院人文管理学院,河南安阳 455000)摘要:撒旦是《失乐园》中颇具有争议性的人物,他既是一位为了平等和自由敢于向最高权威进行不屈不饶抗争的反叛英雄,又是一个权欲熏心、骄矜狂妄的堕落者同时他还是祢尔顿关于自由意志与理性原则并存的思想观念的艺术载体,即人为了自由和理想而奋斗,但同时人的行为得受到真理的约束。
关键字:撒旦;双重人格;自由与理性一、引言约翰·弥尔顿(1608-1674)是十七世纪英国著名的诗人、思想家、政治家和政论家。
他出身于伦敦一个公证人家庭,青少年时代起思想进步,厌恶封建思想,痛恨教会腐败。
革命爆发后他积极投身革命,参加了革命政府的工作,并撰写政论,先后发表了《论出版自由》、《论国王和官吏的权力》等文章而轰动整个欧洲。
王朝复辟后他虽然遭监禁,著作被焚烧,但仍然坚持革命立场,在双目失明,经济拮据的情况下完成了三大史诗《失乐园》、《复乐园》、《力士参孙》。
1674年诗人与世长辞。
弥尔顿的长篇史诗《失乐园》( Paradise Lost, 1667)深邃、高贵、整饬、优美,一直被誉为“英语中最伟大的诗作”,是英国文学史上不可多得的鸿篇巨制,在世界文学史上可与《神曲》和《浮士德》相媲美。
弥尔顿的长篇史诗《失乐园》,以《圣经·旧约·创世记》第二、三章关于人类始祖亚当、夏娃在撒旦引诱下偷食禁果犯下原罪,被上帝逐出伊甸园的故事为蓝本,成功地将诗人—作为一个清教徒,所相信的人类重返上帝的乐园的回归之路极为完整、生动地展现在读者面前。
这条路发端于人类始祖的原罪,转折于耶稣基督道成肉身的救赎,作结于自由意志选择下的灵魂的忏悔和回归。
诗人满怀豪情的诗意书写,所展现的是诗人的人生理想、人生信念。
就全诗而论,从太初谈起,开天辟地,创造世界,创造人类;借《圣经》故事,虽涉及全人类原罪赎罪的悲剧,但实质上说的是人类求知求生,追求自由人权,反对盲目迷信,反对封建专制,建立人类社会理想的大同世界。
撒旦形象的意义

To answer this question one should wipe all foreknowledge and preconceptions out of the analysis. This of course leads to an inaccurate conclusion since Satan's character in Paradise Lost cannot be separated in the audiences mind nor in its reality from the socio-religious convictions about Satan. Nevertheless, this analysis will reveal the ultimate cause of the ambivalence toward Satan. To illustrate the point better by separating preconception from story, Satan's character will be referred to as Robert and God simply as the king.
Hail, holy Light, offspring of Heaven first-born!
Or of the Eternal coeternal beam
以下是它的全文:
Ambivalence toward Satan in Paradise Lost is a difficult element to define. On the one hand Satan is our socio-religious inheritance as the embodiment of all the ills of mankind. Thus the name "Satan," even if merely uttered, connotes horror and repulsion, even to the staunchest atheist. In Paradise Lost, however, at least in the first several books, a characterization of Satan is portrayed in which the audience feels sympathy and fraternity with Satan's character. In addition to an analysis of God's and Satan's characters, there are two perspectives on the content of Paradise Lost which show where the conflict in the reader's perception evolves.
西方关于撒旦的诗

西方关于撒旦的诗撒旦是西方文化中的一个典型形象,他常常被描绘成邪恶、诡计多端的存在。
在西方文学中,有许多诗歌作品探索了对撒旦这一形象的理解和诠释。
本文将从不同诗人的角度出发,介绍几首关于撒旦的诗歌,探讨西方文化中对于撒旦形象的多元观察和思考。
诗一:《失乐园》- 约翰·弥尔顿《失乐园》是英国文学史上的经典之作,也是关于撒旦形象最具标志性的诗作之一。
弥尔顿以史诗的篇幅讲述了亚当和夏娃的堕落,以及撒旦与上帝之间的纷争。
在诗中,撒旦被描述为一个英勇、狂傲、有着强烈的报复心理的形象。
他代表了人性中的反抗意志和对自由的追求。
诗二:《撒旦遭遇扑灭毁灭者》- 罗伯特·布朗宁布朗宁这首诗以讽刺的口吻探讨了撒旦与上帝之间的战争,在诗中撒旦被描绘为一个懦弱、无力的形象。
他的力量与权利与上帝相比微不足道,最终被上帝所击败。
这首诗反映了对于撒旦权力被剥夺的悲剧和无奈感。
诗三:《百合与蛇》- 查尔斯·布律斯·诺顿《百合与蛇》是一首十四行诗,探讨了撒旦对恶的诱惑力。
诗中,撒旦以蛇的形象出现,暗示了他的欺骗和诱惑的本质。
诗人通过描述百合和蛇之间的对话,揭示了人性对于邪恶的诱惑和矛盾心理。
诗四:《撒旦之书》- 克鲁维尔德《撒旦之书》是一本关于撒旦的诗歌集,由法国作家克鲁维尔德创作。
诗集中的每一首诗都以撒旦作为主题,探讨了他的复杂性和矛盾性。
诗人将撒旦描绘成一个深思熟虑的形象,他既拥有诱惑人类犯罪的邪恶一面,也有对于人性的洞察和理解。
诗五:《孤独撒旦》- 鲁道夫·斯泥尔克这首诗以第一人称的方式,描绘了一个寂寞的撒旦。
诗人通过撒旦的视角,表达了对于人们对他的误解和偏见的无奈。
他不再是邪恶和诡计的象征,而是一个被孤立的个体,渴望被理解和接纳。
通过以上几首诗歌的展示,我们可以看到西方文化中对撒旦形象的多元思考。
不同的诗人从不同的角度出发,赋予撒旦不同的象征意义,揭示了人性中的复杂性和矛盾性。
失乐园中撒旦形象

试析《失乐园》中撒旦的形象车家玲(安阳师范学院人文管理学院,河南安阳 455000)摘要:撒旦是《失乐园》中颇具有争议性的人物,他既是一位为了平等和自由敢于向最高权威进行不屈不饶抗争的反叛英雄,又是一个权欲熏心、骄矜狂妄的堕落者同时他还是祢尔顿关于自由意志与理性原则并存的思想观念的艺术载体,即人为了自由和理想而奋斗,但同时人的行为得受到真理的约束。
关键字:撒旦;双重人格;自由与理性一、引言约翰·弥尔顿(1608-1674)是十七世纪英国著名的诗人、思想家、政治家和政论家。
他出身于伦敦一个公证人家庭,青少年时代起思想进步,厌恶封建思想,痛恨教会腐败。
革命爆发后他积极投身革命,参加了革命政府的工作,并撰写政论,先后发表了《论出版自由》、《论国王和官吏的权力》等文章而轰动整个欧洲。
王朝复辟后他虽然遭监禁,著作被焚烧,但仍然坚持革命立场,在双目失明,经济拮据的情况下完成了三大史诗《失乐园》、《复乐园》、《力士参孙》。
1674年诗人与世长辞。
弥尔顿的长篇史诗《失乐园》( Paradise Lost, 1667)深邃、高贵、整饬、优美,一直被誉为“英语中最伟大的诗作”,是英国文学史上不可多得的鸿篇巨制,在世界文学史上可与《神曲》和《浮士德》相媲美。
弥尔顿的长篇史诗《失乐园》,以《圣经·旧约·创世记》第二、三章关于人类始祖亚当、夏娃在撒旦引诱下偷食禁果犯下原罪,被上帝逐出伊甸园的故事为蓝本,成功地将诗人—作为一个清教徒,所相信的人类重返上帝的乐园的回归之路极为完整、生动地展现在读者面前。
这条路发端于人类始祖的原罪,转折于耶稣基督道成肉身的救赎,作结于自由意志选择下的灵魂的忏悔和回归。
诗人满怀豪情的诗意书写,所展现的是诗人的人生理想、人生信念。
就全诗而论,从太初谈起,开天辟地,创造世界,创造人类;借《圣经》故事,虽涉及全人类原罪赎罪的悲剧,但实质上说的是人类求知求生,追求自由人权,反对盲目迷信,反对封建专制,建立人类社会理想的大同世界。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
Satan and Paradise LostA discussion of Milton's Paradise Lost and Satan'srole in it.Investigates the mixture of sympathy and horror evoked by Milton's portrayl of Satan in this workAmbivalence toward Satan in Paradise Lost is a difficult element to define.On the one hand Satan is our socio-religious inheritance as the embodiment of all the ills of mankind.Thus the name"Satan,"even if merely uttered,connotes horror and repulsion,even to the staunchest atheist.In Paradise Lost,however, at least in the first several books,a characterization of Satan is portrayed in which the audience feels sympathy and fraternity with Satan's character.In addition to an analysis of God's and Satan's characters,there are two perspectives on the content of Paradise Lost which show where the conflict in the reader's perception evolves.On the more superficial level,meaning the level determined by preconceived notions of the epic's characters,there is a conflict between Satan,pure evil, and God,pure good.Pure evil then continues to lay waste to anything God cherishes in a feeble attempt to exact revenge for his punishment.Our first father and mother,Adam and Eve,are seduced by Satan and made to suffer therefrom.The punishment,determined by God,seems just and merciful in light of mankind's transgression of his sole command,not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.This much is in the mind of any Judeo-Christian or informed reader before the epic is even begun.Thus the details of Satan's transgression,the war in heaven,God's commands and actions,and the characterization of all characters within the epic are subordinate to our foreknowledge.Without a careful analysis everything seems to be in place and to conform,at least generally,to our preconceptions.One cannot help,however, but to feel some ambivalence in the accepted religious convictions.Why?To answer this question one should wipe all foreknowledge and preconceptions out of the analysis.This of course leads to an inaccurate conclusion since Satan's character in Paradise Lost cannot be separated in the audiences mind nor in its reality from the socio-religious convictions about Satan.Nevertheless, this analysis will reveal the ultimate cause of the ambivalence toward Satan.To illustrate the point better by separating preconception from story,Satan's character will be referred to as Robert and God simply as the king.Robert lives in a kingdom,but it is a kingdom of general equality and mutual honesty and trust.One day the king,out of the blue,announces that he has decided that his son shall be his successor.Robert feels uneasy about this and calls a third of the kingdom to a conference.In this conference Robert argues that if this kingdom truly rests on equality,honesty,and trust,shouldn't all thesubjects at least have been asked what they thought before the king made such a ponderous decision?After debating the question the entirety of the conference except one single subject agree that the king has violated their trust and should no longer hold his position.Having thus determined,they march on the capitol,are met with resistance,and a war ensues.Over a period of two days,Robert's side makes an amazing come back from near defeat through Robert's ingenuity.They seem to be doing well when,on the third day,the king uses his unique ability to imprison Robert and the rebels,banishing them from his kingdom forever.Robert then goes on to lead the rebels even in their despair. Having determined that the king is too powerful to confront on the battlefield, but even more assured of their rebellion now that they are imprisoned,Robert resorts to guerrilla tactics,indirect violence to the king.Perhaps this is bad judgment or immoral,but it is so human to make mistakes.This story at least partially parallels every democratic revolution since the Bastille.Without a doubt,the most universal sentiment on earth today is a respect for democracy,especially in the west,whose inheritance includes the socio-religious preconceptions of Satan.So,although Satan is by default evil and unjust,Robert seems to be a great leader fighting for human dignity and popular freedom.This is the initial catalyst for a sympathy with Satan.Satan rebels for the most popular and sentimental cause,a cause which twentieth century citizens of the world share,the cause of democracy.This sentiment is strongly accentuated by Milton's characterization of Satan versus ton's initial and probably greatest difficulty seems to be putting God,the infinite and good,into the range of human ton's references to God distance the audience from Him in addresses,descriptions,actions,and speeches. Hail,holy Light,offspring of Heaven first-born!Or of the Eternal coeternal beamMay I express thee unblamed?since God is light,And never but in unapproached lightDwelt from eternity,dwelt then in thee,Bright effluence of bright essence increate!Or hearest thou rather pure ethereal stream,...(Milton III.1-7)This is the most complete description of God in Paradise Lost.God is described as"light,""the Eternal coeternal beam,""bright essence increate,"and"pure ethereal stream."Nothing can serve to distance a character further from the audience than refusing to give him some sort of physical,corporeal entity.Even in the abstract,Milton does not lend the audience the conceivability of light as a description,but rather,in accordance with religious doctrine,makes God's description ambivalent to reinforce His infinite nature and man's fallen and limited existence.This all sits well religiously,but in human terms,the terms ofthe audience,limits God's ability to evoke the audience's sympathy.Through further description,and further development of divine justice and human inability to judge God,God begins to take on the character of a tyrant."[Satan] towards the new-created World//...with purpose to assay//...or worse,// By some false guile pervert--and shall pervert;//For Man will hearken to his glozing lies,//And easily transgress...Sole pledge of his obedience:"(III.89-95).God reinforces man's own fault by stressing his free will(III.95-119),and in so doing creates an atmosphere of guilt by his necessity to justify.This is one of the many paradoxes Milton struggles with in Paradise Lost. Either God says nothing and seems like a heartless tyrant(XII.90-96)or God justifies(III.89-95)and in the very act of justification effects a sense of guilt. So the very existence of God creates his own inhumanity,religiously acceptable but irreconcilable with the audience's sympathy.The audience,however,does find someplace to invest its sympathy,and that place is in the character of Satan.The audience first sees Satan waking in Hell where he and the other fallen angels despair.Through his despair,however, Satan claims,"All is not lost--the unconquerable will,//And study of revenge, immortal hate,//And courage never to submit or yield--...That glory never shall his wrath or might//Extort from me"(I.104-111).Initially this is perhaps a questionable statement but later qualified by God's seeming injustice."At first I[Satan]thought that Liberty and Heaven//To heavenly souls had been all one, but...most through sloth had rather serve,"(VI.164-166).Satan now seems to have a cause,the cause of democracy,which he is willing to go through great personal danger to support."I[Satan]come no enemy,but to set free// From out this dark and dismal house of pain//...all the heavenly host//Of spirits...Fell...from on high.From them I go//This uncouth errand sole, and one for all//Myself expose,"(II.822-828).Again and again in his speeches and actions Satan seems to be a noble,resourceful,intelligent,brave,andself-sacrificing leader.The audience's sympathy is accentuated by Satan's human emotions,his demagogic character,his desire for revenge,his hostility towards injustice,and his latent desire for glory.The greatest arguments against Satan are the argument of his pride and his violence toward Adam and Eve.Both of these arguments,however,are flawed. Satan's pride acts only as a human aspect for his character,attracting the ton presents Satan's pride in a moderate light as well.Satan is not so arrogant as to believe in his superiority to God,but he does desire at various points to democratize Heaven and later to coexist in a separate kingdom.This moderation of Satan's vice introduces a more human and less despicable characterization of him in the story,although religious preconception tends to override this moderation into seeming excess.Satan's violence toward Adam and Eve is not an applicable argument for several reasons.First,his actions toward our first ancestors are after the fact.The war in Heaven and God'sseeming injustice have already occurred,and God has already exacted violence upon Satan and the Fallen Host by means of Hell.Secondly,the use of violence or"guerrilla warfare"as a means of accomplishing an end is a human moral judgment.Philosophies differ in this respect from universal violence condemnation to justifiable violence.The audience's ambivalence towards the character of Satan resides largely in the struggle between religious preconception and democratic principle.The human involvement of Satan versus the cold and detached outlook of God highlights this incongruity.So everything seems to boil down to an opposition of religious myth versus secular politics and philosophy.The ambivalence is understandable,but what is interesting is how powerful the religious preconceptions really are,in most cases completely overriding the secular sympathies and justifying the actions of God in secular terms,something Milton avoids doing because of its inherent faults.In other words,Satan,by contemporary standards,truly seems justified,but religion is so powerful,yet abstract,that people tend to assign nonexistent or non relevant injustice or guilt to Satan rather than admitting the inherent and indisputable justice of divinity.。