There is a small ambiguity in this title, which needs to be clarified for the purposes of this essay. The emphasis on the impression that the characters change as more of the poem is read may indicate the effect on the reader's initial interpretation of the narrative. Initial readings of the Iliad and Paradise Lost are unlikely to reveal the subtleties of the characters' development, the motivations behind their actions, and the contexts in which the poets created their characters. A judgment based on the superficial content of these two poems would evidently not do justice to two of the most interesting characters in epic literature. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Likewise, the first-time reader will probably not feel able to define his or her own opinions on Achilles and Satan after reading such meaningful poems just once. In the case of Satan the issue is more complicated because most readers would bring into the text a set of preconceived ideas regarding Satan and the image of him as simply the embodiment of all evil, as expounded in the Christian faith. Therefore I assume that the title refers to the analysis of character progression in the narrative rather than the effect on an initial reading of the poems. The Iliad and Paradise Lost, it has been argued by C.S. Lewis, occupy two ends of the epic spectrum. Although the Iliad is set at the end of the Trojan War (an undeniably monumental event), its immediate subject is the action and effects of one man's action. Achilles' wrath spurs war to the point that the fall of Troy becomes inevitable after Hector's death, but in the process many heroic warriors are killed and the balance of power is shifted so that mediations over the values ​​and ethics of the human conduct are highlighted.Paradise Lost, alternatively, addresses the human condition and its relationship with the divine on the largest possible scale. Satan's quest against God forms the central focus of the poem, and it is his actions that drive events in Paradise Lost and cause his role to adopt the heroic quality of Achilles in the Iliad. Thus, these two characters are central at both ends of the great European epic tradition and their significance for Western literary values ​​becomes fundamental. The insinuation in the title is that the reader will begin by viewing Achilles as morally wrong because of his refusal to fight. after Agamemnon orders Briseis to be taken away from him. Agamemnon is the leader of the conglomerate of Greek forces and is universally accepted as such. It can be argued that coming from the House of Atreus and enjoying the favor of Zeus, his position should not be insubordinately challenged by Achilles. On a simple level, this position is quite clear; Achilles should recognize Agamemnon's authority and acquiesce to his wishes, but the political implications of Achilles' action are much greater than this. Nestor, who can be considered an impartial and wise judge, emphasizes the importance of remaining faithful to his leader at the beginning of book 1; "Nor, son of Peleus, think of equalizing your strength with that of the king, since the share of honor of the sceptered king to whom Zeus gives magnificence is never equal to the others. Even if you are the strongest man, and the mother who gave birth to you were immortal, but greater is this man who is lord more than you rule." This is a plea from Nestor for the two great men to resolve their differences, as earlier in his speech he had commented on how Priam and the sons of Troy would be happy to see them quarrel. The unit in time ofWar is essential even if it involves the sacrifice of personal gain, a maxim that is as true today as it was on the battlefield of Troy. However, if Achilles had continued to fight for the Achaean cause, the heroic code would have been broken by Agamemnon, because Briseis was awarded to Achilles for her bravery in battle, so Agamemnon should not take her away from Achilles because of his mistake in incur the wrath of Apollo. This affront to Achilles' honor is so great that simply accepting it would upset the status quo by denigrating his own stature as a hero. Agamemnon's ignorance of the heroic code and his rudeness towards Chryses cause the problem as he has a symbiotic relationship with Achilles whereby his political status must be combined with Achilles' martial skill for the Achaean effort to succeed . Nestor's censure was not limited to Achilles, as he also begged Agamemnon "not to take the girl away but to leave her alone, a reward such as the sons of the Achaeans first gave her". The paradox of Agamemnon's rule is such that his authority must be respected although his orders in the Iliad are often self-centered and imprudent; for example, the suggestion to retreat in Book 2 and the test of his troops' morale in Book 4. This situation cannot be directly compared to a modern ethical dilemma because the structure of a modern army is such that insubordination is not tolerated under no circumstances. fashion, that is, the self must engage in joint effort (this applies to both Agamemnon and Achilles). Furthermore, a modern war would not be fought for the reasons of the Trojan War, i.e. Paris' seduction of Helen. Achilles' participation in the war is partly due to his pursuit of honor and fame and partly to help restore the honor of Agamemnon and his brother Menelaus (Helen's husband before Paris). He was not bound by Tyndareus' oath and as he points out, he has no desire for revenge against the Trojans, because they did nothing against him, so Agamemnon's disrespect degrades his honor on two levels. For Achilles the problem of loss of honor is more urgent than many others since he is aware that his death is imminent. He doesn't expect to see his father again and so the Trojan War is his last opportunity to gain the only immortality available to him: that of fame. With this knowledge the reader should consider what Achilles' responsibilities are to the ranks of the Greek army. Agamemnon's lack of respect makes it difficult for him to gain honor and fame, leaving his responsibility to a conglomerate army of Greek states as an ethical question. problem for Achilles to face. It is this ethical dilemma that leads modern readers to see Achilles as a stubborn being, capable of sacrificing the lives of many warriors for his wounded pride. Nestor is decidedly abusive towards Achilles when he recounts the battle in Book XI to Patroclus; "Achilles, brave as he is, does not worry about the Danaans or pity them...Achilles will enjoy his valor in solitude." But this statement was made after Agamemnon's appeal to Achilles in Book 9. If the reader were to feel sympathy for Achilles' dilemma in Book 1, then opinion regarding Achilles probably reaches its lowest point after the rejection of the ambassadors by Achilles. the beginning of book 9 is an extraordinary Homeric image; "Agamemnon stood up before them, shedding tears, like a darkly flowing spring that drips its dark water from the face of an impassable rock." Agamemnon's acceptance that Achilles should be honored represents a notable change from his ownstubbornness of Book 1 and would indicate that with the restoration of Achilles' honor he will return to battle. The group of ambassadors that is sent to Achilles' tent is prestigious and includes Odysseus, Ajax and Phoenix and the gifts that Agamemnon offers are truly great, including riches and lands, the marriage of his daughters, the honor of the kings and above all Briseis. with whom Agamemnon swears he did not lie. Achilles greets the ambassadors with great hospitality, following the code which means that he must guarantee his postulants hospitality and safety under his roof. He is sincerely happy to receive his friends, but despite their pleas he refuses Agamemnon's gifts; "all that you have said seems to have been said according to my mind. Yet the heart within me swells with anger when I remember the disgrace which he wrought upon me before the Argives." He assures them that he will kill Hector once the fighting reaches the Greek ships, leaving the reader with the presumption that Achilles' ego is enjoying the plea, knowing that his return to battle at any moment will bring him what he seeks; fame and honor. He seems quite willing to sacrifice the lives of his comrades for his own gains. This lack of mercy is commented on by Aias who notes that the proper conduct of a true hero would be to honor those who honor him and accept gifts as equivalent reward. for his honor lost in the same custom that demands "blood money" for a slain man; "Achilles has made wild the proud-hearted spirit that was in his body. He is hard and does not remember that affection of friends with which we honored him on ships, far beyond all others." Up until the time of the embassy, ​​Achilles' abstention from battle can be reconciled with Agamemnon's conduct, and the natural progression of the narrative would indicate that Achilles would accept the gifts heroically and return to battle to save the world. Achaeans from destruction. However, Homer prolongs the dispute, making Achilles' eventual return all the more poignant in the wake of Patroclus' death and a low point for Achilles' behavior whereby his reintroduction to the heroic world involves more than simply the restoration of his honor. Achilles' selfish behavior is also found in the character of Satan. He too has fallen out of favor with his ruler (though more dramatically with a three-day celestial battle and a nine-day descent from heaven into hell) and embarks on a campaign of revenge, although his is a of action rather than abstention. should be initially attracted to Satan's character is not surprising. That someone could defy God's will is an extraordinary prospect that evokes a sense of mischievous curiosity, the equivalent attraction of watching a modern horror film that thrills us to suggest that evil and the grotesque can triumph. The magnificence with which Milton presents Satan is most evident in his speeches to the legions of fallen angels in books 1 and 2. The magnificence of Satan's rhetoric is combined with a sense of injustice shared among his followers. Satan's ability to raise the morale of his followers, to see glory where there was failure ("that conflict / was not inglorious, though the event was terrible"), and his commitment to building Pandemonium and researching against God are expressed in truly heroic language; “For no depth in its abyss can hold / Immortal vigour, though oppressed and fallen, / I do not give Paradise for lost…now we return / To reclaim our righteous inheritance of yore.” Like Achilles, Satan desires a restoration of lost honor, although he and his rebels have an actual belief that God is morally wrong and therefore submit to hisgovernment would be cowardly and an injustice. Whether or not God's rule is unquestionable by any being beneath him (i.e. all beings) is the crucial question determining the moral justification for Satan's pursuit, but as William Empson commented: "If i rebels deserve blame for their initial doubt about God's credentials", before God provided false evidence to encourage doubt, it is difficult for us to say; but once they have come to a conviction they are not to be blamed for having had the courage to act upon it." Empson compares the rebel's renunciation of God's divine right to the same radical choice that Milton made in renouncing that of Charles I It is impossible to evaluate the justice of the pre-creation paradise from which Satan was expelled. Without human affairs to preside, the ethics and values ​​of heaven at this time are even more difficult to compare to modern human conduct than those of war. Troy.It could be argued that we are in no position to question Satan's right to rebel and his reasons for doing so; however, the conclusions of the hellish debate in Book 2 shed no favorable light on the intentions of the rebels since the desire to justice of the rebels in fact emerges in the desire for self-promotion and in the establishment of a substitute paradise in which divine values ​​are replaced by infernal ones. Satan emerges as monarchical in Book 1; “Better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven,” and the arguments that emerge from the debate in Book 2 range from Moloch's desire to demonstrate the power of the infernal forces in what would likely result in senseless destruction, to Memnon's desire to create a hellish society where the laws and values ​​of good and evil can simply be adapted to one's needs, rivaling the power of heaven. Both of these ideas are based on a selfish desire, which can be translated into relevant human terms regarding just and fair government. The final decision, suggested by Beelzebub and endorsed by Satan, is to respect the impenetrability of heaven and to attack God's will so that "some advantageous act may be accomplished / With sudden attack, or with the fire of Hell / For devastate all his creation." Thus the search for Satan has become pure destruction, the discourses of freedom and justice disappear to be replaced by mere revenge for "an offended sense of merit". This analysis of Satan's motivations, however, is only seen through the magnificence of Milton's poetry. , designed to give Satan all the grandeur that a quest against God must have. When no one volunteers to seek this new world of Man, Satan volunteers. Milton's language and sense of proportion elevate this event above basic motivation into a truly heroic act; “Satan, whom transcendent glory now hath raised / Above his fellows, with monarchical pride / Conscious of the highest worth, impassive thus have I spoken... I abroad / Through all the shores of dark destruction seek / Liberation for all of us." On a purely superficial level, the reader would not want Satan's mission to progress, but such an extraordinary scene as this invites the reader to dare to consider what the effects of this mission will be. When Satan encounters Sin at the gates of Hell, the reader wants Satan released to seek Man. While his particularly gruesome heroic quest may be repulsive, it's also fascinating. Once Satan acts exclusively, the reader's view of his quest inevitably changes. In Book 4 we begin to understand that his goals are cowardly, in the sense that theHis true purpose of attacking God is one he fails to realize, so the attack on Man is the vengeful act of a flawed hero, a hero incapable of carrying out his true goals of overthrowing the supposed tyranny of an omnipotent ruler . The absence of his presence in books 6, 7, and 8 allows the reader to understand his character through the (probably partial) eyes of Raphael. While describing to Adam the war in heaven, Raphael recounts one of Satan's speeches in which he rallies his armies and reveals the purpose behind their rebellion; “Found not worthy of liberty alone, / Too mean a fiction, but that which concerns us most, / Honor, dominion, glory and fame.” Although this statement cannot be taken literally, because Satan is a master of propaganda and the story was told by a heavenly angel, Milton reveals to the reader the essential motivation of Satan that had previously been suspected. Additionally, the reader got to know the pre-Fall Man. Adam's conduct and his mediations on God and the universe present a very favorable picture of God's creation. When Satan is reintroduced in Book 9, the reader's opinion of his quest is changed as the deception of his attack against pure beings like Adam and Eve become scary without the mask of his first magnificent speeches (a selfish person like Satan needs an audience to speak for). execute a). The destruction of human innocence is (of course) very relevant today, in the 17th century and at any time before. Eden. With Satan's mission complete, the reader's curiosity has been satisfied, and God's demonstration of his power to transform the vainglorious Satan into a hissing serpent is more than welcome. C. M. Bowra recognized the change in Satan's heroic status and Milton's ideas about theology that changed with it when he said: The Puritan in him condemned Satan and all his ways, but the artist wanted a fearful antagonist of God and endowed Satan with heroic qualities of courage and endurance. It is true that in the last books of Paradise Lost Satan becomes less heroic, but the first impression of sublime greatness is indelible and completely foreign to the theology preached elsewhere. If it is Satan's actions that cause him to lose the reader's favor, then it is Achilles' return to the battlefield that redeems his excessive pride demonstrated by the refusal of the embassy in Book IX of the Iliad. The two most emotionally charged events of the Iliad are Achilles' mourning for Patroclus and Priam's plea to Achilles for the return of Hector's body. Achilles' conduct in both cases evokes the reader's sympathy as he realigns his ethical viewpoint and reassimilates into the Achaean army. His reasons for allowing Patroklos to enter battle in his armor are pluralistic. He appreciates Patroklos' desire to help the Achaean effort, but realizes that Patroklos can earn the honor; “But obey to the end this word which I bring to your attention so that you may bring me great honor and glory.” In warning Patroklos not to advance too far, he rightly warns him to revere Apollo, but he also does not want Patroklos to diminish his own honor by diminishing the importance of his abstention from war. After the death of Patroklos, Achilles' desire for revenge on the part of his friend presides over his constant referral to himself. Patroclus' mourning is contextualized by comparing it to his lament for his father, who he knows he will never see again and who will die in old age. The mourning for Patroclus is particularly poignant, as they are not related by blood (compared to Agamemnon's premature grief for Menelaus in book 3, as they are brothers). The death of his friend awakens emotions in Achilles that go beyond his search, 1997.