Mercifully, the semester is coming to a close, and in my Milton class we have finished our study of Paradise Lost. I must admit that I enjoyed it more and more each week, but I am also thrilled to have completed it. It was by no means a long book, but I was forced to pour over each word and sentence, noting minute details. Needless to say, that is not the most relaxing way to read a poem.
We are finishing the semester by reading one of the two works that were coupled together after the release of Paradise Lost. Paradise Regained and Samson Agonistes were published together, but due to time constraints we were forced to choose one to study. We chose Samson, because most of us had not read it, and those who had would benefit from a closer reading. We spent nearly 2 hours out of the 3 last night talking about the form of the poem, and not specifically the content. Milton's writing is fascinating in many ways, but part of his genius is in the fact that he plays so well in the realm of ambiguity.
Samson, though written as a play, is called a closet-play, because it was never meant to see the stage. This seems a bit strange, but it makes sense when one understands the nature of the theatre. Every time a play is presented on stage interpretation is required. One must assign defnite meaning to the lines, characters must be visualized...etc. This would mar Milton's vision, because what allows for the depth of his writing is in the fact that it works on many levels. Were it to be acted out the mysteries would necessarily be solved, whether solved rightly or wrongly.
The most interesting thing from last night, though, which brought me back to the book of Judges this morning, was dealing with the main thrust of the Miltonic interpretation of the story. The very title, Agonistes, refers to 'struggle' or 'toil', and the play is filled with Samson's inward and outward struggle while in captivity in Gaza. Just as in Paradise Lost, Milton navigates through dangerous waters by filling in the gaps where the Biblical account is vague. Samson's struggle is in accepting the blame for what has happened to him, and trying to understand the concept of 'God's will', to put it in common language.
I won't give every detail, but throughout the play several implied questions are raised, one of them dealing with the origin of his strength. Did he know where his strength came from? From the time we are children we are told of Samson's hair being a source of strength, but this does not seem clear from the Biblical account. And it certainly is questionable as to whether or not Samson would have thought so. He tells Delilah, but this is after more than a few lies to that end. When the Philistines come upon him, even after his head is shaved, he does not realize that his strength is gone. He attempts to fight as he did before, but to no avail.
God's command to Manoa and his wife concerning Samson was to raise him as a Nazarite, which included several things along with the long hair, but that was not a key point. So one might assume that God's presence left him because the cutting of his hair was symbolic of breaking his Nazarite covenant with God, but he had already done so on several occasions. He had eaten honey out of an unclean carcass, married a foreigner, fornicated with prostitutes, and engaged in a serious relationship with another foreigner (not to mention the hubristic-cruelty to his enemies). So what is the cause of God's deserting of him?
Samson and others in the play debate this question, whose answer is tougher than children's (or adult's) Sunday school makes it out to be. What was so different about his sin with Delilah that caused God's favor to leave him? It's an interesting debate to say the least.
0 Responses to “Samson Agonistes”
Post a Comment