Folta 1

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Letter of Reflection Midterm Portfolio

Dear Reader,

As the contents of the portfolio will demonstrate to you, I can examine writing critically and am trying my best to improve my weaknesses as a writer.

One of my weaknesses is that my overt awareness of my mistakes hinders me from writing good first drafts. Tending to bea perfectionist, I am wary of making mistakes in my writing. Whenever I write (especially for rough drafts), I am consciously aware of the mistakes that plague my writing even as I write themdown. Because of this, I often have trouble writing first drafts.I find it very difficult to transfer the complex, abstract and divided ideas in my head into writing that is rough but still unified. Writing about Milton’s Paradise Lost in this writing class, a subject that expert critics have spent years over and ofwhich I have merely spent days to explore, this phenomenon was amplified. But I forced myself to write concerning a subject I was a novice in. I forced myself to write rough drafts in a shortamount of time (evidenced in timed essay and diagnostic) with scattered ideas. These two cases turned out successful but in thecase of my rough draft for my Position Paper, due to a lack of time to study, I wrote a paper that had scattered ideas and that was not unified under my proposition. I was consequently forced to rewrite the whole paper with a completely different proposition but similar ideas and evidence. Still, I have tried my best to work through my weaknesses and write critically.

Another one of my weaknesses is my lack of tact in relating to my audience. Paradise Lost is a religious poem. I am a devout Christian and it was difficult for me to understand how non-Christians read this poem. But I was forced to relate to non-Christian readers as I wrote my position paper. Coming up with an

Folta 2

introduction that would not deter non-Christian readers away was very difficult since my topic deals with controversial issues. I have tried my best to gear my essays to their appropriate audience.

Despite all these weaknesses, I have one strength in writing. I have the ability to examine writing critically. Hopefully as you can see from my peer review, I tend to understand how writers think and explain their ideas. I try to give suggestions that will actually help my peer to improve her work. Moreover, I can see the weaknesses in my own writing. This strength helps me in the revision process. This strength helps meto be constantly growing in my ability to write.

Thank you,Josep Folta

Folta 3

Josep Folta

WRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Draft 2 of 2 (final)

Faith and the Unity of Milton’s Paradise Lost

Religion greatly affects the underlying assumptions one holds about the world. Because a difference in religion can causetwo people to have vastly different presuppositions about the nature of the universe, people with different religious views often find it difficult to agree upon or even understand each other’s point of view. Since Paradise Lost is a poem inexplicably intertwined with religious matters, critics with differing religious views can likewise find it difficult to agree upon or even understand each other’s interpretation of the poem. A topic of controversy in Paradise Lost in which critics exhibit incapacity to understand each other is the poem’s unity. Some critics regardthe poem as a unified masterpiece. Some critics regard that the poem is marred from being a good work of literature because of its considerable lack of unity. Both find it difficult to understand each other’s interpretation. Critics claiming the poem’s disunity often do not comprehend how other critics claim that the poem is unified. This paper will prove that readers of Paradise Lost who accept fundamental Christian beliefs are able to read the poem as a unified whole.

Belief in the divine authority of the Bible removes the apparent moral disunity of Paradise Lost. The reader finds that voices of moral authority in the poem (such as God, the epic voice and angels) often force uncomfortable moral ‘truths’ on thereader that conflict with the reader’s moral evaluation of eventsin the poem. For example, God declares “So will fall/ He [Adam] and his faithless progeny. Whose fault?/ Whose but his own? Ingrate!...I made him…[s]ufficient to have stood though free to fall” (Milton 59). At first, the reader is likely to be confused at how God, who is sovereign, can foreknow Adam’s fall but still give Adam complete free will and also flustered at how God

Folta 4

condemns all mankind, including the reader himself, even before Eve sins. The reader is internally conflicted, finding it extremely difficult to reconcile his own evaluation of the situation with God’s declarations. But a reader who believes in the complete authority of the Bible will find, once he thinks about the issue in an attempt to resolve this moral clash, that these demanding declarations are in accordance with the Bible. The Christian reader can acknowledge that the human mind is unable to fully comprehend mysterious paradoxes concerning God and in faith accept God’s declarations. As Stanley Fish argues inSurprised by Sin, similar instances in which the reader evaluates a situation ‘falsely’ and is then corrected by an authoritative voice occur throughout the poem. Because these voices of moral authority typically speak in direct harmony with the Bible, faithin the Bible’s divine authority coupled with a deep analysis of the text will lead the reader to accept most, if not all, of these authorial correctives, resolving the poem’s apparent issue with moral unity.

Belief in God’s centrality in the universe solves the apparent problem of the disunity in Satan’s identity. In the beginning of the poem, many readers are swayed by Satan’s charismatic speeches and led to admire his courage in demanding liberty from “the tyranny of heaven” (Milton 1.124) and his indomitable optimism as he claims in Hell that “the mind is its own place, and in itself/ Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven” (Milton 1.254-255). Readers are conflicted as they then hear the authoritative epic voice declaring that Satan is merely a deceiver and are disappointed as they later find out that this charismatic ‘hero’, turns into a wretched snake. They find disunity between Satan’s character in the first and last pages ofthe book. But if one approaches the book from a Christian perspective, there is no such disunity. For Christians, Satan’s rebellion has a fatal flaw. It is the fact that in a theocentric world like that of Paradise Lost, one can have no meaning apart fromGod. Liberty from God is equivalent to Hell. That is what Satan wanted and that is, in fact, what Satan got. From the Christian perspective, Satan was never a hero. Although Satan seemed glorious at first, his deceptive glory inevitably fades away as he moves further away from God.

Folta 5

Some modern critics claim that it is wrong to presuppose Christian beliefs in the poem. Following William Empson’s example, these critics presuppose that “all the characters are ontrial in any civilized narrative” (Empson 94). Therefore, such critics analyze and evaluate God as they would any other character in literature. Moreover, such critics also assume that “in any work of imaginative literature at all it is the demonstration, by the very nature of the case, that has the higher validity; an allegation can possess no comparable authority” (Waldock 78). They reject the possibility that one canuse pre-existing moral beliefs as a tool to evaluate the authority of characters in the poem. They, therefore, dismiss thepoem’s authoritative moral voices, and listen to the character that seems most convincing according to their eyes.

It is presumptuous to claim that it is wrong to view the poem holding Christian presuppositions because Paradise Lost presupposes a theocentric universe. Milton wrote Paradise Lost to a predominately Christian society and to Christian readers. He presupposes a theocentric universe with a sovereign God who rulesthe entire universe (Fish 336) and does not take much effort to relate to non-Christian readers. Although Milton says he hopes the poem will “justify the ways of God to men” (1.26), Paradise Lostdoes not justify the existence of God in the manner of a philosophical or apologetic treatise. Instead, like Milton’s other works, Paradise Lost is a creative piece of literature meant to help Christian readers grow in faith and reaffirm God’s goodness and grace. In the poem’s determinedly theocentric world,Christian readers are supposed to hold onto their faith and stop themselves from doubting God’s goodness just as they should have done in the real world. In faith, readers were to believe God even if their immediate logic and emotion seemed to rebel againstHim.

In conclusion, Paradise Lost can be read as a unified work whenread from a Christian worldview. The Christian reader’s assumption of the Scripture’s authority and God’s centrality unravels many of the poem’s supposed disunities, such as the poem’s moral disunity and the disunity in Satan’s character. Since Milton predominately wrote for Christians readers and since

Folta 6

the poem is seen as a unified whole from the Christian perspective, it may now be validly questioned if then it is not most useful to read Paradise Lost from a Christian perspective.

Folta 7

Works Cited

Empson, William. Milton's God. London: Chatto & Windus, 1961.

Print.

Fish, Stanley Eugene. Surprised by Sin: the Reader in "Paradise Lost." 1st ed.

London: Macmillan, 1967. Print.

Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2001.

Print.

Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Ed. Gordon Teskey. New York: W.W.

Norton, 2005. Print.

Waldock, A. J. A. Paradise Lost and Its Critics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,

1947. Print.

Folta 8

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Rhetorical Outline, Position Paper Title, Draft 2 of 2 (final)

PROPOSITION: John Milton’s Paradise Lost can be regarded as a poem with holistic unity for Christian readers.

PLAN: Speak about two fundamental Christian beliefs and how thesetwo beliefs each resolve a major assumed source of disunity in the work.

GOAL: Help readers to be able to understand how Christian readers read Paradise Lost and show how from a Christian perspective, the poem can be seen as a unified whole.

AUDIENCE: Primarily for non-Christian readers of Paradise Lost who find it hard to understand how Paradise Lost can be seen as a unified work when they seem to detect disunity in the poem.

PARAGRAPH 1 SAYS: Since people with conflicting religions often view the world in a very different way, at times it is extremely difficult for people who don’t agree on religion to agree upon oreven understand the other person’s opinion. Paradise Lost deals withreligion and so many critics with different religious views disagree on how to interpret the poem. Critics are especially divided on the point of the poem’s unity.

PARAGRAPH 1 DOES: Starts with a premise most everyone would agreeabout. Slowly extends upon this premise to explain how critics have differing views on the poem and how they find it hard to understand each other. All throughout I emphasize the idea presuppositions---a prominent aspect of my proposition. I carefully give both sides of the argument and then give my proposition (this last transition can be worked on more.)

PARAGRAPH 2 SAYS: In the poem, the reader finds that his own moral assessments of the poem’s events often conflict with the declarations of the narrator or that of characters with definite

Folta 9

moral authority. One instance of this is when God says it is Adam’s fault that he and all mankind will fall because God made Adam with free will. The reader naturally feels opposed to accepting God’s declaration, finding it difficult to understand how God is sovereign. However, from a Christian perspective, oneshould accept this declaration because it follows the Bible. Situations like this constantly occur and a Christian is made to submit to authority figures because he believes in the Bible’s authority.

PARAGRAPH 2 DOES: First explains the dilemma (apparent moral disunity)—essential context--the reader finds while reading the poem. I use an example to make this dilemma more concrete in the reader’s mind. The example is greatly developed in order to show how this dilemma is also solved for Christians by one’s belief inthe Bible and this supports my reason in the context of the example (the problem with using an example too long is that my analysis can only relate to the example not the whole book, but Itried to expand the example’s analysis to the whole book, but it could be better). The example is then expanded to the whole book and this expansion is supported by using the authority Fish, a prominent critic. (A risk I took with this is that Fish is talking about general readers but I thought it was applicable to apply to Christian readers, who will react to the book most according to Milton’s purposes). Concludes by emphasizing that this supports the proposition---a problem of unity is resolved. Paragraph 2 in a sense sets the stage for Paragraph 3 because my structure in paragraph 3 is similar and also the process of the reader being conflicted and the Christian reader being relieved of that conflict happens in both paragraphs.

PARAGRAPH 3 SAYS: A majority of readers find Satan compelling andregard him as a hero for his courage and hopefulness, but are unable to keep on regarding Satan as a hero since the epic voice condemns Satan and later Satan degrades into a dismal being. Theyagain find apparent disunity. But from a Christian perspective, Satan is never a hero because Satan is trying to rebel from God. God is the source of all the universe and without him, Satan is nothing. Therefore, the Christian reader finds no problem when Satan’s fake glory is slowly stripped away.

Folta 10

PARAGRAPH 3 DOES: I start by explaining what the dilemma is this time again---essential context necessary to talk about the reason. This time I don’t use an example because this reason is much less broad. I instead give quotes to give evidence and help the reader understand how the reader is put in a dilemma concerning Satan. After all the context is given, I speak of howthe Christian reader responds, which directly supports P3’s reason. I give some context about the belief and tie the belief with how the problem is resolved. I explain the resolution of theproblem and end.

(*Note: I debated explaining the Christian belief in the Bible first—like I did in the first draft-- but it seemed unnecessary to explain this belief in too much detail and it seemed more important to speak about the much more confusing apparent issues with of disunity)

PARAGRAPH 4 SAYS: There are critics who oppose reading the poem merely following one’s Christian beliefs and using those beliefs to interpret the poem. They claim that every character, even God,needs to be evaluated like a normal character. They say that in literature, demonstration is always much more highly regarded than mere declarations and so dismiss the authority of the voicesof authority. They regard that it is invalid to use moral presuppositions to interpret the poem and evaluate what characters are trustworthy.

PARAGRAPH 4 DOES: I explain a reason against my proposition in this paragraph. The reason is directly opposed against my proposition because it says that it is wrong to use inherent Christian presuppositions to interpret instead of interpreting the poem according to established rules of literature. Empson’s quote is used to use these critic’s own words to show what they claim (helps show reader that this is actually what they claim not what I make up—evidence for P4’s reason). Then, I show the implications of their idea by using a concrete example of God (this relates to P2’s topic). Another quote is used to develop what standards the critics use to evaluate—establishes context. Then, I analyze how this attacks my proposition. A problem with my paragraph is that I could do a better job in analyzing and explicitly connecting all my sentences and evidence to the

Folta 11

proposition, thought they are implicitly connected. I end implying that these critics inevitably use their own moral standards to evaluate characters in the poem also.

PARAGRAPH 5 SAYS: The critics are wrong to say that one cannot use Christian presuppositions to read the poem because Milton writes of a universe set according to Christian doctrine. Milton wrote to Christians. He is not trying to prove God’s existence tonon-Christians, but is trying to help Christians grow in their faith through their reading experience. Christians were in faith not to doubt God as they read the poem, just as in real life.

PARAGRAPH 5 DOES: I first support my reason by giving the essential context that Milton lived in a Christian society (most everyone would agree to this). Then I use a quote to back up my initial reason and also analyze the context I had given to come up with the point that the poem doesn’t cater to non-Christians. Expecting counter-arguments to this point, I concur that there can be counter-arguments (trying to show the opposition in a correct way) and then show how this counter-argument is invalid since it is clear that the poem doesn’t try to prove God with reason but instead presupposes God. This in turn backs up my point—my evidence—which in turns supports my reason. Context (Milton’s other books) is also used to show how the counter-argument is weak. I then go on in the last 2 sentences by furtherdeveloping how God shouldn’t be doubted but presupposed in this poem---backing up P5’s reason.

PARAGRAPH 6 SAYS: For Christians, the poem can be viewed as a unified poem. By presupposing Christian beliefs, many apparent sources of disunity disappear. Now, because reading from a Christian perspective makes the work more unified and also because Milton wrote for Christians; it might be worthy to ask whether or not if reading from a Christian perspective is better than other perspectives.

PARAGRAPH 6 DOES: Summarizes the piece, specifically referring tothe reasons of P2 and P3. Then I speak of a possible implication of the poem, leaving the reader to think about the question I raised.

Folta 12

Folta 13

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Draft 1 of 2

Position Paper Rough Draft: Submitting to the Poem’s Authority

Paradise Lost was written more than 300 years ago. Despite Milton’s archaic diction, modern readers can easily forget this and read the poem solely from their own modern outlook on life. Milton did not purposefully write for modern readers, instead he wrote for the readers of his time. In order to properly read and analyze this epic poem, a reader must first give thought to the common beliefs of the society Milton lived in, amongst which Christianity was certainly the most widespread and important. An awareness of Christian beliefs is context crucial for the reader to properly understand Paradise Lost. Furthermore, it is essential that the reader reads the poem from a Christian worldview in order for the reader to attain a proper understanding of the poem.

Christians believe in the mysteriousness of God, that since God is infinitely above man, it is beyond the capacity of the human mind to fully understand Him. In his poem, Milton emphasizes this incomprehensibility of a perfect God and perfect paradise to sinful man. As Fish says, throughout the poem, Miltonprovokes the reader to read flaws into flawless entities (i.e Godand paradise) and then makes him aware that these supposed flaws really arise from his flawed perception of these perfect entitiesnot from the perfect entities themselves. Unlike many modern readers, Milton’s intended Christian readers would have held ontotheir belief in God’s incomprehensibility and goodness and so readily accepted that they read Paradise Lost from a flawed perspective. An understanding of free will is necessary also. Although God knew all things beforehand, God gave Adam and Eve the free will to decide whether to obey God or not. The paradoxical details of free will cannot be fully comprehended by humans, but a basic understanding of it is necessary for the

Folta 14

reader to understand why God is good. Another important belief tounderstand is that God is the Creator of all things. God created all things and gave the universe the purpose of glorifying Him. Since God created the concept of fairness and justice in us, how is it possible for us to say that he is not good?

Finally, a reader’s understanding of the Christian concept of God’s absolute goodness helps him understand the poem more fully. Milton wrote to an audience of readers who believed that God is absolutely good. Although in the poem Milton does make theforces of evil deceptively convincing with their rhetoric, he must have thought that the readers would have clung to the authoritative words of the epic voice, which reassured the readers of the goodness of God. Those holding onto the doctrine of God’s goodness would have been quick to turn aside from demons’ deceptions and any other temptation possibly induced by the poem to blame God. Even in Satan’s seemingly just longing forfreedom, Christians see the goodness of God, for God is the source of all good and ‘liberation’ from Him is in fact equivalent to Hell. But readers unmindful of the centrality of God’s goodness in Christianity will not think about how God is the source of all good and will be quick to condemn Milton’s God.Before the reader analyzes the poem from his own point of view, it is imperative for him to understand the Christian context of the poem and the beliefs that Milton would have expected for his readers to have.

However, many modern critics do not submit to the Christian authority of the poem long enough before they analyze Paradise Lost from a secular worldview. As Paradise Lost is a long, dense and seemingly vague poem, it is very easy to fall into the trap of analyzing the poem from an experiential perspective and casting off the poem’s authority. Many critics simply look at what they feel from the poem and fail to cling to the poem’s authority and are blinded to the unity of the poem’s events with the moral assumptions of the author.

Before a modern reader analyzes the poem from his own perspective, he ought to read the poem from within the context itwas written. It is not permissible to throw aside the authority of the author and the narrator to read it from one’s own point of

Folta 15

view. Perhaps it is permissible to analyze the religious ideas like that but to read the story like that is ridiculous, for thisupsets the whole reading experience. A reader first needs to submit to the authority of the poem (shown by God, the narrator) and read the story from its own context and attempt to understandthe ideas presented according to the context before one tries to counter (or perhaps even refute) the ideas presented. A reader needs to carefully read the poem from a Christian worldview lens so that he can identify and understand the poem’s subtleties. After that—that is after he has sufficiently understood the poem from the perspective it was written, the reader may analyze the poem without submitting to the poem’s authority. The reading of the poem from its context and a secular critical analysis of the poem do not necessarily have to be separated by time, but in accordance with logic, a reader surely ought to thoroughly understand what Milton is trying to say through his poem before he refutes or condemn Milton’s ideas.

In conclusion, a proper reading of Paradise Lost requires the reader to temporarily submit to the poem’s authority and read thebook from according to the Christian worldview it holds. A readerneeds to read the book as if he believes (or actually believe) inthe beliefs Milton holds, such as the incomprehensibility of God,God’s absolute goodness. Only by doing so will the reader be ableto fully understand the logic within Milton’s poem, as well as recognize the subtleties of the poem. Any book one reads and even any logical arguments one hears ought to be first understoodin the context it was given. Since Milton wrote Paradise Lost for Christians, it is imperative that the reader reads like one if hewants to understand the poem fully.

Folta 16

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Rhetorical Outline, Position Paper Title, Draft 1 of 2

PROPOSITION: In order for the reader to fully understand Paradise Lost, he needs to read as if he believes what Milton believes.

PLAN: Justificatory proposition with four reasons and then a slight (unfair?) look at other views and then a refutation of this other view, trying to show that reading from a (virtual or true) Christian perspective is crucial for a proper understandingof the poem.

GOAL: To convince the audience that the poem is based on Christian beliefs and that knowledge of these beliefs is absolutely necessary for a good understanding (through the first 2 body paragraphs) and then moving onto why one needs to read thepoem as if one accepts these beliefs.

AUDIENCE: Readers of Paradise Lost who wish to know how they can understand Paradise Lost more deeply, and who hopefully have read Fish.

Paragraph 1

S1-2 Says: Paradise Lost is a 350-year old book. But readers today often forget that, even when the poem is full of old words, and read it only from their perspective.

S1-2 Does: Tries to cause the reader to gauge how they read the book and think that perhaps they read the book too much from onlytheir perspective, so that they will start thinking about this idea as they read even more of this essay(Perhaps too belligerentof a hook)

S3 Says: Milton wrote to the people of his society and time, not to us!

S3 Does: Tries to give evidence and back up why it is illogical to read only from the modern perspective (S2).

Folta 17

S4 Says: It is wrong to read the book without thinking about the context of the society it was written in. The beliefs at the timeaffect the book a lot, especially Christian beliefs.

S4 Does: Solidifies and restates my main idea in S1-3, leading toS5.

S5 Says: In order for the reader to fully understand Paradise Lost, he needs to be knowledgeable about Christian beliefs.

S5 Does: Introduces ideas of my first 2 body paragraphs and leadsto S6.

S6 Says: In order for the reader to fully understand Paradise Lost, he needs to read as if he believes what Milton believes.

S6 Does: Proposition.

Paragraph 2

S1 Says: One belief Christians hold to (in Milton’s time) is thatGod is mysterious; that God is so far above man that man cannot fully comprehend Him.

S1 Does: Introduces my FIRST REASON and then briefly explains what ‘the doctrine of God’s incomprehensibility is’—which is really necessary to know before reading on. (Perhaps I need a more generic, structured first sentence?)

S2 Says: In PL, Milton stresses how God and flawless paradise is so mysterious and incomprehensible to flawed mankind.

S2 Does: Extends from Christians believe to Milton does this in the poem. From context to what the poem does.

S3 Says: Just like Fish says in his book, Milton all throughout his poem tempts the readers to think perfect things like God and paradise have problems and then makes them realize that these problems they see come from a problem with their own understanding and perception.

Folta 18

S3 Does: Raises up an example of the centrality of God’s incomprehensibility (but using Fish could alienate those who don’t agree with Fish…)

S4 Says: Milton’s expected Christian readers will hold onto theirbeliefs and easily accept that their perception is messed up, butmany modern readers won’t do that.

S4 Does: Goes directly back to REASON 1, showing how if you don’tknow about this doctrine, you will (perhaps I should directly says “modern readers who don’t know about God’s incomprehensibility”) read it differently than intended.

S5 Says: Knowing about free will is also important in understanding the poem.

S5 Does: Introduces the small REASON 2.

S6 Says: God is omniscient, but he still let Adam and Eve freely choose to obey or disobey.

S6 Does: Trying to give background, explaining what Milton thought about free will (but a little sloppy, especially the first phrase is not very clearGod knew that Adam and Eve will sin)

S7 Says: Not everything about free will can totally understood and it seems unjustifiably paradoxical, but knowing this belief helps us to understand how Milton portrays God as a good God.

S7 Does: Demonstrates the importance of knowing free willgoes back to proposition. It’s necessary.

S8 Says: Knowing that God is the Creator of everything is also important.

S8 Does: Introduces small REASON 3.

S9 Says: God made everything and made everything have its purposeand full satisfaction in glorifying Him.

S9 Does: Gives context, letting the readers know what the people thought about God as Creator.

Folta 19

S10 Says: God gave us the sense of right and wrong, so from Milton’s perspective it is totally illogical to say that God is bad.

S10 Does: Shows the necessity of knowing this belieftying it back to proposition. Also transitions a bit into Paragraph 3.

Paragraph 3

S1 Says: The second reason is that knowing about what Christian believe about God’s total goodness will help the reader understand what the poem is saying more completely.

S1 Does: Introduces the 2nd reason. (In a positive form like the proposition)

S2 Says: Milton wrote to readers who firmly thought that God is good no matter what.

S2 Does: Gives crucial context----helps us Milton’s intentions

S3 Says: Even though Milton makes the demons seem very convincingin his poem, he must have known that the readers would have stillfirmly agreed with the epic voice firm reassurance that God is good.

S3 Does: Brings up an example---that helps show where belief about God’s total goodness would affect how the reader reads.

S4 Says: People who firmly believe that God is good would swiftlyturn away from the temptations of the demons and other temptations arising from the book which might lead one to distrust God’s goodness.

S4 Does: Extends the example

S5 Says: Even when Satan seems like he is right when he wanted freedom and independence, Christians readers will see that God isgood even here, because God is where all good comes from and being liberated from Him is what Satan wants and what he gets---Hell.

S5 Does: Goes back to a more specific part of the example in S3, shows tangibly how a Christian reader’s beliefs about God’s

Folta 20

goodness work out in an instance of the poem. (Perhaps too many scattered examples? But this one example is a very strong one I think….)

S6 Says: On the other hand, readers who are not thinking about how Christians so stress that God is good will not think about how Christians believe that there is not good without God, and sowill quickly think God is unfair.

S6 Does: Sets up a comparison between those mindful of Christian doctrine and those who are not in the example of S5. (Perhaps I need to more actively show how being unmindful of Christian doctrine of God’s goodness can impair your understanding of the poem---I sort of do that indirectly in S7—S7 does it for the bigger picture not for this example….)

S7 Says: It might be acceptable for the reader to understand the poem from his own worldview, but still before he does that he needs to think about how the poem was written and think about Milton’s purpose and intentions, crucial context in the poem.

S7 Does: Gives bigger implications and has an aspect of conclusion for the first 2 body paragraphs.

PARGRAPH 4:

S1 Says: But many critics of the poem today do not really read the book first from the perspective it was written in and insteadanalyze it from their own perspective.

S1 Does: Introduces different views. (Rather a big transition from P3 to P4. P3 needs to be changed to be focused more on the new proposition…..)

S2 Says: Since the poem is so long and hard to read, it is so easy to stop relying on the authority of the poem and instead read it with one’s own thoughts.

S2 Does: Explains the reason people have a different view (but writes it in a very negative light---I shouldn’t really be doing that here…but in the next paragraph)

Folta 21

S3 Says: These critics just look at the natural feelings they getand throw away the poem’s authority and cannot perceive that there is unity between the description of the events and Milton’sreligious beliefs.

S3 Does: Explains how these critics read and derides them….. (perhaps I should include Fish’s argument?)

PARAGRAPH 5:

S1 Says: A modern reader needs to read the poem from the perspective it was written in before he thinks about the poem from his own worldview and outlook on life.

S1 Does: Outlines the position one ought to take (basically the proposition) in contrast to the wrong position taken by many modern critics.

S2-3 Says: It is wrong to ignore the poem’s authority (shown by the author and narrator) in order to read the poem from a view matching one’s own belief. It might be okay to analyze the (religious) ideas of the poem in such a way but to read the book in that way does not make any sense because there it messes up the whole reading process.

S2-3 Does: Tries to explain and give reasons for S1. However, is very not clear and kind of illogical. Need to explain “authority of the author/poem” more clearly.

S4 Says: When a reader reads the poem, he first needs to temporarily accept the authority of the author in presenting the poem (which is shown through various means such as the narrator and ‘God’), which is in essence reading and understanding the poem from the context it was written in. After that he can opposethe ideas presented if he wants to.

S4 Does: Tries to outline what is a good reading---tries to be general (but should be more---talk about how one should read books in general)

S5-6 Says: When a reader reads the poem, he first needs to read as if he accepts the Christian assumptions the poem starts with. This will enable him to properly understand all the ideas and

Folta 22

subtle parts of the poem. After reading in such a manner—after understanding what the poem is really talking about in the context it was written in, a reader can then properly analyze thepoem and its ideas in his own mind, with his own original beliefs.

S5-6Does: Tries to get more specific—about beliefs, not only authority. But ends up being very repetitive.

S7 Says: When a reader reads the poem like this, the reader’s reading of the poem according to the poem’s authority and the reader’s critique of the poem and its ideas can be almost simultaneous, but since logically one needs to understand an ideabefore one rebukes it, one really should understand the poem within the Christian worldview and assumptions before one criticizes the poem from an outside perspective.

S7 Does: Tries to wrap up a loose end. I made it sound like one needs to finish reading the book with a Christian perspective, and then start being critical, but this can be happening as one reads the book, but there still has to be the right sequence.---(I need to be more clear …it’s quite confusing)

PARGRAPH 6

S1 Says: So the point is that in order for a reader to read the poem best, he needs to accept the poem’s authority and read the poem from a Christian perspective.

S1 Does: Proposition, but adds in more emphasis on “poem’s authority”

S2 Says: A reader ought to read Paradise Lost as if he really believes in Milton’s central religious beliefs, i.e. God’s incomprehensibility and God’s absolute goodness.

S2 Does: Explains S1, what it exactly means.

S3 Says: This is the only way a reader can possibly understand all the ideas in the poem, recognizing even subtle ideas.

S3 Does: Vaguely explains reason why one should read as stated inS2. (since it’s a conclusion it might be okay…but not really)

Folta 23

S4-5 Says: Whenever one reads any book or even when one hears a logical argument, one needs to first understand what the person is saying in the context it was given. Because Milton wrote to Christians, one needs to read the poem as if one is a Christian.

S4-5 Does: Gives a bigger picture about reading books and logic in general, but at the same time uses this general rule to support my proposition (a bit circular….) Ends quite nicely, but needs more connection between S4&S5.

Folta 24

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Peer Review of Author’s WorkMidterm Portfolio

Peer Reviewer: Kathyrn Brossa

Rhetorical Outline:Proposition: The reader of PL must read it from a Christian worldview in order to understand the poem properly.Plan: To address incorrect manners in which readers approach the poem and present the ideal way in which the reader ought to approach the poem.Goal: To convince the audience that PL must be read, in part, from a Christian perspective in order to be understood in any other perspective.Audience: Peers who may or may not hold to Christian ideas of Godetc. or to Fish’s interpretation of Milton’s intent in writing the poem.

P1 says: Although PL was written three hundred years ago, modern readers fail to take into account the influences of that time period on the poem’s creation and subject. They disregard the fact that it was written in a Christian context from a Christian point of view, which confers certain inexorable characteristics upon the writing and the plot. In order to fully understand the poem as it was intended by Milton, the reader must adopt a Christian worldview.does: Introduces the dilemma of inconsistencies between the poem’s time period and the reader’s time period. It argues that interpretation can be flawed due to this inconsistency and statesthe proposition that a reader must adopt a certain point of view in order to properly understand the poem. While this is a good point, it is conveyed a bit brusquely, almost aggressively, and this makes it difficult to accept entirely at the outset.

Folta 25

P2 says: Christians believe in an omnipotent, inconceivable God. In his poem, Milton emphasizes how truly incomprehensible God andParadise are to a sinful reader. Fish supports this argument in saying that Milton intentionally leads the reader into misinterpretations of the work – i.e. incorporating flaws into flawless entities – in order to show the reader his or her own flaws. Unlike many modern readers, God’s goodness would never have come into question in Milton’s time. An understanding of free will is also necessary to understand the poem, even if God’somniscience makes this seem impossible. It does exist, and how can one say God is not good when He created fairness and goodness?does: Explains the concept of God’s omnipotence to the reader andbrings in evidence from an expert in order to bolster the reason – that God must be understood for the poem to be understood. I don’t quite see how this is a reason if it is one. The part aboutfree will also confuses me. It doesn’t seem to fit with your proposition and I think you could go more into depth with the idea in order to make it clearer to your reader.

P3 says: Understanding the Christian idea of God’s goodness helpsthe reader understand the poem. Readers of Milton’s time would have known not to listen to Satan and the other demons, but to rely on God instead. Being prepared to reject demonic ideas preserves the goodness of God in the reader’s mind rather than allowing Him to be blamed. The modern reader, in order to understand the poem, must look at it from the Christian point of view before adding his own interpretations.does: Provides a reason to support the proposition by explaining one way in which Christian doctrine informs the reading of PL. Expands on the rift between period and modern readers, though I think you could go more into depth with this. Where does the modern reader place blame on God? Does this have to do with Satan’s involvement or the absence of Christian doctrine? Be moreexplicit.

P4 says: Many modern critics do not submit to the poem’s authority and analyze it solely based on their emotions when encountering the text. This interpretation prevents modern critics from appreciating Milton’s point in writing the poem.

Folta 26

does: Seems like a refutation/concession paragraph where the counter reason is introduced followed directly by the refutation.What exactly is wrong with the critics’ views? Can you give an example of a point at which their emotions totally distort the poem? Why is it detrimental to analyze the poem from a non-Christian perspective?

P5 says: Before a modern reader analyzes the poem, he needs to understand it as Milton intended it to be understood. Reading thepoem from just the reader’s point of view without the Christian lens distorts the poem, and it is ridiculous to read the poem in such a way. In order to argue with the ideas in the poem, the reader must read it the way it was intended for Milton’s contemporary audience first.does: Gives a reason why the reader needs to understand the poem from a Christian view point first before arguing with its messageor content. I think it’s saying that taking parts of the text completely out of context make for bad arguments. Examples of this would really help clarify what you’re arguing. Can you make this more of a counter reason paragraph and illustrate a passage that is misinterpreted because it’s not read through a Christian lens? Having read P5, P4 makes much more sense. They might be stronger if you combined them into one paragraph.

P6 says: In order to read PL through a different lens, the readermust first understand it through a Christian lens. If he does note, he will miss the subtleties in the text. All books should be understood through their intended lenses before reading them through another lens. Since Milton wrote for a Christian audience, the modern reader has to understand the Christian worldview in order to understand PL.does: Restates the proposition and broadens the conclusion to include other works of literature.

Commentary:The paper does a good job of denoting the Christian concepts that, I think, are most difficult to grapple with – God’s unfathomable power, for instance. It sets up a foundation to basethe rest of the paper on and gives your reader a reference point.I’m a little unsure of what you’re trying to argue in your paper.

Folta 27

You seem to be saying that a Christian lens needs to be kept in mind when reading PL even as the reader is applying his or her own ideas to the poem. This makes sense, but I don’t see how it’sjustificatory. Not appreciating the context of the poem, even if it is just a platform for arguing against it, seems inherently remiss and non-intellectual. Is there another depth you’re tryingto explore? Are you proposing that interpretations which fall outside the Christian worldview, i.e. saying God is evil, are wrong because they aren’t what Milton intended? I think you couldbe clearer, and I think that adding textual examples or just paraphrasing scenarios would really help to clarify your points as well. Is there a particular passage where the lack of Christian interpretation has a really huge effect on the meaning?Overall, you set up context very well by explaining the doctrine you’re discussing the merits of including; this does a great job of accounting for people who may not be familiar with the concepts.

Folta 28

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Peer Review of Another Student’s WorkMidterm Portfolio

Peer Review of Kathryn Brossa Exercise/Essay: Position Paper Rough Draft

PROPOSITION: Satan is more easily seen as a hero of Paradise Lost than Adam.

PLAN: To justify that Satan is more of a hero than Adam using three reasons. The last reason acts as a refutation.

GOAL: Prove that the reader is led to regard Satan as a hero and contradict the idea that Adam is more likely to be the hero.

AUDIENCE: One who has read Paradise Lost and presumably also Surprisedby Sin. (Since you say that free will is restricted without explaining deeply enough (this is hard to do because the topic isquite complicated), I feel like many of those who have just read Surprised by Sin will not really understand that point about free will….)

P1 SAYS: In Paradise Lost, the reader has to choose who is hero, presumably between Adam and Satan. Both are not very likely candidates to be heroes because Adam is ignorant and Satan is evil. But in the end the reader is more likely to choose Satan asthe hero.

P1 DOES: Introduces the dilemma of who is the hero (essential context), then uses this to lead up to the proposition. It is nice how the paragraph clearly admits that Satan has fault too, but it seems like there should be a smoother transition to the proposition---it seems sudden as there is no solid reason yet in the reader’s mind that Satan should be the hero. The paragraph does seem to allude to a few of your later ideas but perhaps you can directly but briefly outline your 3 main points near the

Folta 29

proposition so that the readers understand why Satan is a better hero.

P2 SAYS: The epic poem follows traditional epic poem structures in how it contains an invocation to the Muse. Since the poem is about Adam and Eve, the reader assumes that Adam will be talked about first; however, Milton actually talks about Satan first. According to epic poem structures, the first character who is presented is the hero. Although the reader probably will not wantto be on the side of Satan, his unexpected entrance at the beginning of the poem makes him a likely candidate for being a hero. On the other hand, Adam does not come out until Book iv.

P2 DOES: The way you structured your paragraph is excellent. There is one central evidence—Satan comes out first—which you lead up to very nicely with context and supplement nicely with further small points. First uses the evidence of how Milton starts with an invocation to the Muse to support the idea that the poem follows traditional epic poem structures and explains that the hero would then traditionally supposed to be introduced after the invocation (essential context)— leads to your main point. Analyzes who the reader would expect to be spoken of first. This is used to contrast with what happens and emphasizes how Satan’s unexpected introduction shocks the reader and so has force. This contrast works very well. However, some of your ideas are a bit confusing to follow. The biggest thing is your sentence about “chronological period following the Creation of the world”---Milton doesn’t really talk about the Creation until later chapter—are you trying to say that according to the Bible, the events don’t happen like Milton writes it? It is nice how youuse quotes.

P3 SAYS: Most everyone agrees that this poem is supposed to involve the reader along with the ideas of the plot. According toFish, the epic voice reveals to us that we have been fooled by Satan and have made a mistake. It is clear that the epic voice accuses Satan and the readers who has listened to Satan. The reader has a choice to submit to the epic voice or get protected from the epic voice by Satan. Even though the reader’s thoughts about Satan may change later, by originally siding with Satan, Satan is much more likely to be seen as a hero than Adam.

Folta 30

P3 DOES: Starts with an opening introducing the paragraph’s Reason. Then provides a premise that most readers will accept. Provides Fish’s analysis about how the epic voice is accusatory towards the reader. Then uses this analysis as a basis to say that Satan can provide protection from the epic voice, which supports the Reason. Wraps up the analysis by speaking of the choice between being humiliated or being protected (perhaps should be more direct in saying that people don’t like being humilitated?) and finally rebutting potential opposition about the possibility that one’s opinion on Satan later changes. A goodthing to include might be that even those who side with the epic voice, at first had thought that Satan’s reasoning made some sense—so they had at the very beginning sided with him also(?). Again very nice use of quotes. It is very hard to use an opposition’s analysis to back up your own but you did a good job---except that there are many loose ends-----many rebuttals Fish could say---like this work was written for a Christian society, Milton was a Christian, epic voice is THE authority and every one is supposed to listen to him, etc….

P4 SAYS: Adam is seen by some as the Christian hero of the poem who is obedient to God. However, since Adam is dependent to God and ignorant, he lacks free will and is more like a puppet. At first, Adam is a Christian hero, following God. But because he isignorant of what death is, he is not prepared enough and so failsto withstand temptation. Eve fails because Adam is ignorant. Also, since God has already said Man will be deceived, Adam and Eve have no free will, and a hero cannot be a hero if he has no choices.

P4 DOES: Starts with opposition’s argument (but whose argument isthis—Fish doesn’t really directly say that Adam is the hero or even a hero..)—necessary context. Then, gives a basic outline ofthe paragraph’s argument, which is divided into that Adam lacks independence (free will) and that Adam is ignorant. Then, provides good necessary context by explaining what a Christian hero and then showing that Adam does fit this description—implying that Adam has no independence (maybe should be more direct). But suddenly, there is a jump from talking about how Adam is a Christian hero, to how Adam is ignorant, which causes

Folta 31

him to fall. The transition between the two ideas needs to be stronger because you first say that Adam is obedient to God and then you say that Adam disobeys God because he lacks necessary knowledge/free will. Uses evidence of Adam’s ignorance of death to say that this led them not to prepare against Satan—there needs to be a better connection between ignorance and having no choice but to sin. The part about Eve’s failure being a result ofAdam’s ignorance is confusing—needs more clear elaboration. Then,the idea of ignorance leads to the idea of a lack of free will (this transition is clear). Finishes off by clearing showing the implications of these ideas, Adam cannot be a hero because he hasno choices. There are many loose ends here—God has not “already determined that Man falls deceived”. He knows that they will, buthe didn’t make them do it, he clearly says just because I know what will happen—they will sin----does not make it mean that I made them sin—they chose themselves to do it.

*A contradiction you make is in “lacking the independence necessary to defend against Satan’s snares”. If God made them have no free will, they actually wouldn’t fall against Satan. ButGod gave them free will so that they did have the independence and choice to sin.

P5 SAYS: Even though Adam might seem like the poem’s hero, his lack of free prevents him from being a hero. Instead, the reader is led to regard Satan as a hero because they sided with him initially and because Satan has choice, unlike Adam. Satan is nota Christian hero for he doesn’t obey God, but he is a traditionalhero because he appears first, protects, and has the ability to be strong in hard times. This provokes respect from the reader. Satan is strong, but Adam is weak and easily changes his mind.

P5 DOES: Summarizes the main points of the essay. The summary seems too long. I think it would be better if you were more clearand concise—even though that is hard to do with such complex ideas. Also, you seem to add a new point that doesn’t appear in the body---that the reader admires Satan because of his resilience and strength. It might be better to put that in the body if you can, perhaps along with P3 (?).

Folta 32

Possible Grammar Error: P2: “What Milton offers the reader, instead, as the first character after the invocation is…”—commas?

What Worked Well:

I’m sorry if I’ve been too critical, but I actually think your writing skills are really great. Your diction is very intricate (I wish I could write like that….) and moves the argument along. This topic you are dealing with is a very difficult one—who the hero of PL is---but you have done well for such a hard topic. Your use of quotes is very good.

What Still Needs Work:

P4 needs work. There are many loose ends and a few contradictions there.

Rhetorical Strategies:

I think you have used Fish’s argument for yourself very well(but you need to tie loose ends). I think that perhaps you don’t want to end with P4, because it is very controversial and it is easy to think of evidence opposing it.

Folta 33

Peer Reviewed Paper Author: Kathryn BrossaPeer Reviewer: Josep Folta

Milton’s Paradise Lost confronts the reader with the dilemma ofupon whom to confer the mantle of hero. Satan presents himself first to the reader in the text, but he is, by virtue of his title, an adversary. The other clear option is Adam, but his fallis precipitated by a lack of information and, essentially, his own ignorance. These shortcomings leave the reader with a choice between an evil, independent hero and an ignorant, arguably ineffectual one. In this dilemma, Satan serves as a preferable hero to Adam.

The structure of the poem lends itself toward the reader accepting Satan as the poem’s hero. Paradise Lost begins as a typical epic poem would, with an invocation to the Muse. In termsof poetic structure, the invocation is traditionally followed immediately by the introduction of the hero. With words like “[o]f Man’s first disobedience and the fruit / [o]f that forbidden tree,” (1.1-2), the reader expects to hear about Adam and Eve and their fall from grace by consuming the forbidden fruit. The action of the poem seems firmly situated in this immediate chronological period following the Creation of the world. What Milton offers the reader, instead, as the first character after the invocation is “[t]h’ infernal Serpent” (1.34)– Satan himself. This authorial choice jars the reader, and makesfor an odd dynamic to negotiate; the reader does not want to be part of the devil’s party, yet she is inexorably thrust into thisposition by the structure of the poem and has no other “hero” to cling to but Satan. This inversion alone adds strength to the claim that Satan, not Adam, serves as the better hero, because heis immediately presented to the reader; she does not have to huntfor him or wander the poem waiting for his appearance. Adam, in fact, does not make an appearance until Book IV.

Satan also offers the reader the protection one expects froma hero. While the text possesses numerous didactic qualities withvarying intentions depending on the scholar consulted, a general consensus exists as to the fact that the reader is meant to be involved, in some way, in the plot. Fish postulates that, in Book

Folta 34

I, the reader’s moral character comes under attack by Milton’s epic voice; the voice hones in on the reader’s weaknesses when confronted with Satan’s stunning rhetoric, “I know you have been carried away by what you have just heard; you should not have been; you have made a mistake, just as I knew you would” (Fish 9). Although the purpose of the epic voice’s critique is subject for debate, the accusatory tone and its position against Satan and against the reader, who listens to him because she has no one else to listen to, remains pronounced, and this polarizes the body of readers. Either the reader may choose to side with the voice, as Fish suggests she ought to, becoming her own criticand seeking out embarrassing moral flaws that make her sympathetic to Satan (Fish 9), or she can remain an “unfit”(Fish’s word throughout “Not so much a Teaching as an Intangling” 1-56) reader and take shelter from the epic voice’s accusations by taking Satan’s side and assuming a position against the epic voice and its inspiration, God. While the reader’s allegiance in later chapters may shift, this initial alignment, particularly if it is with Satan, makes him a strong candidate for hero, even later on when Adam enters the plot directly.

Some argue that Adam serves as the Christian hero, submissive to God’s will and guidance, and that this makes him a preferable choice for the hero of the poem. Yet he is ignorant inhis submission, lacking the independence necessary to defend against Satan’s snares, and, thus, lacking the free will associated with a hero; he more resembles a puppet on strings. Adam does, indeed, fit the definition of Fish’s Christian hero, who is characterized by the “willingness to rest easily and happily … when there are no battles … without yearning to be morethan … the gardeners of Paradise” (Fish 196); he accepts God’s will and is happy to adhere to it. Nevertheless, he does not approach the threat of Satan as prepared as necessary because, inspite of the fact that Raphael answers all his questions, certainnotions still escape him, such as death. Death is “[s]ome dreadful thing no doubt” (4.426), but the full repercussions of being condemned to death escape both Adam and Eve. They remain unaware of the risks that they are taking, and this ignorance prevents both of them from preparing themselves sufficiently to confront Satan, and Eve’s failure is a direct result of Adam’s

Folta 35

ignorance, and the prime example of his shortcoming only because Satan chooses to tempt Eve and not Adam. Additionally, this ignorance denies them alternative choices, thereby restricting their free will, particularly because God has already determined that “Man falls deceived” (3.130). There is no alternative to this outcome, so then, Adam can have another choice. And he cannot be a hero without choices to make that define him as one.

Although Adam appears, from the topic of the poem, to be theideal hero for Paradise Lost, his lack of sufficient willpower detracts from his ability to function as a hero. This coupled with Satan’s involvement with the reader impugns his status as a hero. Furthermore, Satan’s independence, demonstrated by his rebellion, counters Adam’s essential lack of choice. While Satan is not a Christian hero because he does not submit to the will ofGod, he remains a hero in traditional senses – appearing first inthe construction of the epic poem, exhibiting power to protect and defend, and, additionally, resilience in the face of adversity which, while he is the adversary, inspires admiration in the reader. Satan is strong and determined, while Adam is malleable and reliant – even to the point of being manipulated himself by proxy through Eve; her resistance to sin was his responsibility, and he was unable to instruct her sufficiently toprotect them both. Therefore, when approached by a reader who is not necessarily fit or unfit, Satan serves as the preferable heroin Paradise Lost rather than Adam.

Works Cited 

Fish, Stanley. Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost. Cambridge, MA:Harvard

University Press, 1998. Milton, John. Paradise Lost: Authoritative Text, Sources and Backgrounds, Criticism. Ed.

Gordon Teskey. New York: W.W. Norton, 2005.

Folta 36

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Custom Proofreading SheetMidterm Portfolio

Custom Proofreading SheetIncorrect Sentence Corrected Sentence The Little,

BrownEssentialHandbook

Type

Because God, in the secondcommandment , emphaticallyorders his people not to create or worships carved images or likenesses of Himself; Milton…..

Because God, in the second commandment , emphatically orders his people not to create or worships carved images or likenesses of Himself, Milton…..

Pg. 90 (24a) Semicolons—“No semicolon between a main clause and a subordinate element,such as a subordinate clause or a phrase.”

But Milton does not write the well-known story in a boring or mundane way, in fact he writes the story as an epic poem.

But Milton does not write the well-known story in a boring or mundane way; in fact,he writes the story as an epic poem.

Pg. 90 (24b) Semicolons—“Use a semicolon between main clauses that are related by two kinds of words: conjunctive adverbs,such as however, indeed, therefore, and thus; and other transitional expressions, such asafter all, for example, infact, and of course.”

..has heard of the importance of environmental conservation

…has heard of the importance of environmental

Pg. 35 (6b) Cutting empty/repetitive words—“Cutting words

Folta 37

from their birth. And consequently, many students today think that protecting the environmentis a very important issue.

conservation from their birth. Consequently, many students today think that protecting the environment is a veryimportant issue.

that contribute nothing to your meaning will make your writing move faster and work harder.”

Even the youngsters of my age (18) remember the timewhen all their work vanished in an instant when the computer they were using crashed.

Even the youngsters of my age (18) remember the time when all our work vanished in an instant when the computer they were using crashed.

Pg. 66 (17a) Pronoun-antecedent agreement—“For clarity a pronoun should agree with its antecedent in person, number, and gender”

Milton did not purposefully write for modern readers, instead he wrote for the readers of his time.

Milton did not purposefully write for modern readers; insteadhe wrote for the readers of his time.

OR

Milton did not purposefully write for modern readers. He instead wrote for the readers of his time.

Pg. 90 (24b) Semicolons—Use a semicolon between main clauses that are related by two kinds of words: conjunctive adverbs,such as however, indeed, therefore, and thus; and other transitional expressions, such asafter all, for example, infact, and of course.

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Timed Essay 1

Folta 38

Timed Essay for Writing Class: Paradise Lost

Having chosen to support Stanley Fish’s thesis, I encountered many rhetorical problems.

My first problem is that it is very difficult to find a premise that would relate to my audience since many in my audience had extremely conflicting views and beliefs with me. I am a Christian who strongly believes in the divine, perfect authority of the Bible. I primarily read Paradise Lost, thinking about how it matches up with Scriptures says and thinking about how it helps me learn more about God. But many other students in my class do not read Paradise Lost in the same way I do. They have differing beliefs and even differing values. It is hard to balance the prospects of having a premise that is general enough and also having a specific enough premise that will support my thesis. My strategy for coming up with a premise to support Fish’s thesis is to use the poem itself as a base to relate to the readers. Everyone would agree with what the poem actually says. So I will come up with a premise that is founded on the literal words of the poem, not any interpretative analysis, and then make my argument from there.

My second problem is that of creating distinct reasons and creating a good structure for my essay. I have perfectionist tendencies so I often try to start out my writing would a pretty good idea and basic outline of what I have to write, but since there are so many things I want to write in order to support Fish’s thesis, I cannot possibly group all these ideas into unified paragraphs! My head is getting chaotic and I am getting frustrated with myself. My strategy is the following. In order tocreate a good structure, first I will write a general outline with the fundamental reasons, but these will not be all worked out in my head. Using this, I will write the rough draft---and it will be rough. In my second draft, I will struggle with creating a good structure, even if that means changing how I grouped my ideas from the rough draft. Then, in my final draft I will make do the final touches and make my words sound proper andright. By doing this, I will be able to have a clear structured essay.

Folta 39

Folta 40

Josep FoltaWRIT 039-324: Milton's Paradise LostAlan NilesOctober 20, 2011Writing Diagnostic

Today’s world is filled with ecological concerns and so a trend of emphasizing the protection of the environment has emerged in the modern day. The younger generation in the world today has heard of the importance of environmental conservation from their birth. And consequently, many students today think that protecting the environment is a very important issue. However, despite the fact that many students value environmental conservation and the fact that most modern students grew up with computers, many still prefer printed matter over digital matter. I am one such student. I prefer a paper copy to a digital copy. And here are the reasons why.

Firstly, printed matter is more concrete. Often, digital communication can feel virtual and not concrete. Take for instance, reading. Even today in “the modern world”, more people like reading paper copies instead of digital copies of books. Unlike digital copies, paper books involve the sense of touch. Asthe ‘paper-book’ reader turns the many pages of a book, his reading experience is complemented by the important aspect of touch, which is something the virtual reader lacks. The culture of touching the book and turning the page is closely intertwined with the ancient history of literature. Without a physical, papercopy, many readers feel like they cannot read. Most readers prefer paper copies to virtual ones because paper copies are muchmore physically concrete than virtual copies.

Secondly, printed matter gives people a psychological sense of security. Even the youngsters of my age (18) remember the timewhen all their work vanished in an instant when the computer theywere using crashed. Although technology has greatly developed in recent years, making computer files more reliable; most people still feel more secure when they press ‘print’.

Folta 41

Even though the environment is very important and needs our protection; printed material still has many benefits over digitalmaterial. Paper hurts the environment. It is said that “the paperindustry is the single largest industrial consumer of water” and that “20% of the world’s deforestation is due to paper consumption”. Use of paper is causing many environmental problems. This fact needs to be acknowledged. Use of printed matter needs to be lessened. However, this does not mean that no one should use paper anymore. Paper has its advantages over digital material. People should utilize the advantages of paper,but take care not to exploit them.

I personally prefer paper over digital material. I love to read paper books and I feel more secure when I print, than when Ijust have a digital copy of something. However, I am also aware that it is my duty as a person to protect the environment. I personally try to print only when I need to and try to use up as much space in a sheet of paper as much as I can. People all over the world need to try to lessen their use of paper so that our paper resources are not exhausted, but I think they can still enjoy the benefits of paper, but just in a more restrained manner.