This is an exert from a paper I'm writing. I'm working on the same topic myself. Hope it helps, let me know what you found out on the subject....
Maureen
As an intellectual, myself, I aspire to know and appreciate Milton with intimacy or at least unmask a little bit of his grandeur so he does not remain such an imposing mystery. I want to know what makes him great, what makes him so profound, what makes him a staple of English Literature ranking among the same paramounted heights as Shakespeare; but his ego stands, ten feet tall, as a great wall built between us. Shakespeare, written in plain English by Stephen Spielberg, say in modern times, would equate to a dramatic love triangle with a heart breaking ending or a feel good paltry comedy with a sentimental ending or an action movie starring Denzel Washington and Jackie Chan. Shakespeare simply entertained. Shakespeare would not be ground breaking or political or controversial, Shakespeare amused the masses and stood stepped away from society’s problems and thus, he was easy to love. Milton was the opposite; he preached politics, religion and government. He was a heroic participant to the point of endangering his life. Maybe imposing his ego was his idea of helping, and to some extent he did help.
Milton quotes Shakespeare nearly verbatim in Ill Penseroso using the descriptions of fairies from Midsummer’s Night dream. He does not merely echo the same iambic pattern as he does with Marlow; rather he duplicates the description so that the same mystic imagery dances through our minds. Was it a literary reference to call up the greatest scenes in theatre? Was it a relic of the past or a show of appreciation? Or was it so inspirational to Milton that he could not refrain from using the passage? Or did he use it in an act of conceit, in effort to pass it off as his own? Milton is a man with a brilliant mind and his work reflects this. Why plagiarize Shakespeare? Was Shakespeare a threat to Milton’s ego? Was Milton, in a sense, trying to out do Shakespeare? Was Shakespeare a partial cause to Milton’s egotism?
The critic Coleridge had an interesting theory as noted by Seamus Perry in Coleridge and the Uses of Division. Perry remarks how Coleridge determined Milton was an egotist and Shakespeare was not because in every one of Milton’s characters we see Milton, himself, mirrored directly through his prose. Satan in Paradise Lost captivates the reader so entirely that for a moment readers are tempted to switch sides. Shakespeare, on the other hand, is character-less. Shakespeare is as Hamlet’s father, a ghost among his own words. Personally, this was the most ground-breaking observation I have read yet about Shakespeare and Milton. Studying Shakespeare, when one grows to truly admire him, we look for pieces of him in his work. And we might catch a glimpse of a shadow or an inkling of Shakespeare, maybe in The Tempest when Prospero throws down his staff or perhaps in Hamlet emerging as a personal identity crisis. Milton, conversely, is an open book. Milton and identity crisis do not go in the same sentence. I read Milton and try to get beyond Milton. I read Shakespeare and I can’t find Shakespeare.
Six of Shakespeare’s original signatures exist in the world, mostly on legal documents. In each of his signatures he spells his name differently, maybe evidence of a truly horrific identity crisis. Is it a wonder that we can’t find him in his work? Is it less of an offense than a large ego? Both are masters of language, near contemporaries and epic poets; yet they seem to be such polar opposites, which is truly fascinating and a subject I plan to pursue.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.