Lysippus: Strato, thou hast some skill in poetry;
What thinkest thou of the Masque? Will it be well?
Strato: As well as Masque can be.
Lysippus: As Masque can be?
Strato: Yes.
They must commend their king, and speak in
praise
Of the assembly, - bless the bride and
bridegroom
In person of some god. They’re tyed to rules
Of flattery.
--Maid’s Tragedy
(Act I, Sc. I), Beaumont and Fletcher.
The masque as a literary form is not one that most
people hold in high esteem. Strato succinctly points out the formal limitations
that the masque as a genre is inherently restricted with and thus losing out in
terms of respectability. Warton in his History of Poetry dismisses the
masque as a mere “branch of the elder drama.” The masque as a genre draws upon
varied sources and diverse traditions including those of the Morality plays and
pastoral poetry for its sustenance in the midst of other genres that had overtaken
it in its growth in history. Enid Welsford in her work The Court Masque
however brings up one of the central deviations that Comus has in
relation to the typical court masque. For her, the typical court masque “is a
dramatised dance, [but] Comus is a dramatised debate”, since “the
hinge....on which Comus turns is not the solution of a riddle, not a
sudden metamorphosis or revelation, but an act of free choice.” It is for this
reason that she thinks Comus is closer to moral dramas like Nabbes’ Microcosmus
and Shirley’s Honoria and Mammon. In this paper I will try to focus on
the arguments of both Comus and the Lady to figure out whether the views that
they represent can be acceptable and wholly applicable to men of all times.
Moreover, I shall focus on how Milton’s masque, and the ensuing debate of the
protagonists, transcends the simple binaries of right and wrong, good and evil
that characterise the genre called the court masque.
Milton’s handling of the genre of the masque has given
rise to a plethora of interpretations and comments. Perhaps, these subtle
changes in the genre of the masque by Milton are the reason for Robert M. Adams’
comment that Milton’s Comus is
“overread” to a great extent. The traditional interpretation of the poem is
about the triumph of Virtue, represented by the Lady over Vice symbolised by
Comus in the literary work that still evokes interest in the academic circles
when other works of the period had either been relegated to the borders of
oblivion or lost because of time. A typical philosophical interpretation of the
masque examines it as war between reason and passion, as a conflict of the mind
and the flesh. The poem is viewed as the victory of the human mind and will
over the body or the inferiority of the flesh. The masque in a sense
anticipates Cartesian Mind-Body dualism. Descartes in his Meditations on
First Philosophy is of the view that the mind is superior to the body. The
body and all the external sensory perceptions are deceptive and cannot be relied
upon. Milton too engages in a similar debate of sorts, pitting the Lady and
Comus against one another in an attempt to portray the superiority of the human
mind and will over the desires of the body.
A great deal of the action of the masque takes place
in the forest. In Arthurian romances, the forest plays a two-fold role. It can
be seen as the binary opposite of civilized society, a place where hideous
creatures, sorcerers, and witches tempt the “forlorn and wandering passenger.” It
is also a place for the knight errant to test his prowess in battle. But more
importantly, the forest becomes a region of the mind where one can construct
fantasies. The setting does not need to be fantastic but merely allows for a
place where things might happen which might be considered absurd and unreal in
daily life. In Comus, therefore, the forest becomes a battleground of
sorts for the verbal duel between Comus and the Lady. It is the place where
Comus(representative of the desires of the physical body) and the Lady(
representative of the mind) can have their ideological clash to decide who
comes out as the winner. However Milton’s deviation from a traditional masque
in the poem is his emphasis on the grey area that lies between both right and
wrong, and the idea of good and evil. From the outset Milton makes us realize
that Comus and the Lady are placed at extreme and untenable positions. Milton
through his masque might also be questioning the rightness of these extreme
ideological stands that have been taken by these characters in the poem.
The transformation myth employed in the poem is an
old one and can be found in literature of all ages. Homer’s Odyssey is
the primary source for the Circe motif that Milton employs. The transformation
theme particularly pertinent to the text is that of the transformation of the
head of a man with that of an animal and can also be found in works like
Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream and more recently in Thomas
Mann’s Transposed Heads and Girish Karnad’s play Hayavadana. The
Circe motif of transformation however is essential to the masque. The Mind-Body
debate is presented through this motif. Comus in the masque is the son of Bacchus
and Circe. Milton, through the character of Comus, is presenting to the reader
the representative of the Body in the ideological battle with the mind.
Milton’s Comus embodies a view that can be found in Thomas Mann’s Transposed
Heads. Mann retells the story from an ancient collection of short stories
in Sanskrit called Kathasaritasagara in which he ridicules the
mechanical conception of life which differentiates between the body and the
mind. He mocks the philosophy which holds the head superior to the body. The
human body, Mann argues, is a fit instrument for the fulfilment of human
destiny. In a sense, Comus’ argument can be seen to be a precursor of Mann’s. Comus’ “orient liquor in a Crystal Glasse”
offers the weary mortal a chance to experience the actual pleasures of Nature
that he believes is superior to “lean and sallow Abstinence” that is preached
by the Lady.
However, unlike his mother Circe, Comus only
transforms the head of his victim into an animal rather than the whole body. He
does so because it is the mind of his victim that he wants to conquer. While
the transformation is a physical one, it is also figurative, done in an attempt
to neutralise the superior metaphysical connection the mind has with the
universe, a connection which is denied to the body:
“Can any mortal mixture of Earths mould
Breath such
Divine inchanting ravishment?”
Comus’ modus operandi reflects what in the 20th
century would be referred to as possessing fascist tendencies. Comus’
transformation of his victims’ heads usurps their ability to reason so they
remain subservient to his will as a ruler. While living in the forest he is
supreme ruler, but the Lady’s arrival anticipates a type of opposition to his
fascist rule which he is unable to accept. An opposition party in a fascist
rule is unheard of, and Comus must crush her opinion either by “well plac’t
words.....Baited with reasons not unplausible” or by the power of sheer force.
To do so he must employ all the weapons he has at his arsenal. Apart from the
magic potion at Comus’ disposal which changes the head of a person into an
animal, Comus also has the gift of rhetoric which functions in a similar way to
the propaganda arguments of the Fascists. Comus’ argument, like Satan’s in Paradise
Lost when he is about to tempt Eve, is attractive and alluring not because
they are lies and fabrications but because they have at their core certain half
truths:
“Wherefore did Nature pour her bounties forth,
With such a
full and unwithdrawing hand,
Covering the
earth with odours, fruits and flocks,
Thronging the
seas with spawn innumerable....?”
Comus exploits what A. S. P. Woodhouse calls the
“two complementary aspects of Nature”- Nature that causes perpetual fecundity
and growth, and Nature that is an ordered whole, a rationally graduated scale.
His argument is that the natural world with its variety of gifts is an invitation
for man to take part in ribald revelry and unrestricted enjoyment, a return to
sensual bestiality as opposed to the principles preached by “Strict Age, and
sowre Severity.” A refusal to partake in this “carnal sensualty” in a “pet of
temperance” is to disregard natural processes of growth and regeneration. Comus
posits the argument that Nature herself knows nothing of chastity and that true
existence “consists in mutual and partaken bliss.” The Lady however refuses to
believe him:
“Imposter, do not charge most innocent Nature,
As if she would her children should be riotous
With her abundance she good cateress
Means her provision only to good
That live according to her sober laws,
And holy dictates of spare temperance.”
She calls Comus’ arguments “false rules pranked in
reason’s garb.” Comus attempts to mimic the essence of the Mind, reason and
logic, but is bound to fail because that is the privilege only of the Lady. The
Lady does not contradict his picture of Nature but merely points out its incompleteness.
For her, true existence is not the prostitution of Nature’s gift for sensual
pleasures but rather a life of temperance and moderation. Comus has the “power
to cheat the eye with blear illusion\ And give it false presentments” but
cannot cheat the mind. Milton’s Comus therefore can be read as a text
about the deceptive nature of external sensory perceptions. The Lady is cheated
by Comus’ external appearance of a shepherd, but the fallacies of his arguments
are clearly perceived by her mind.
The lady misappropriates her ability to defend
herself from Comus to her Chastity. While the elder brother is right in
declaring that “she has a hidden strength”, it is not her Chastity but rather
“the unpolluted temple of the Mind” that saves her from the “rash hand of bold
Incontinence.” While Comus can chain up her body to the chair, he “canst not
touch the freedom” of her mind. “The mind is its own place”, Satan had said in Paradise
Lost, and the Lady knows that all of Comus’ enchantments cannot breach the barriers
of her reason and logic.
Milton’s superiority as a poet lies in his ability
to take a particular genre and modify it, giving it his own characteristic
signature. In the masque too Milton does not make it a simple battle of Good
against Evil. The Lady resists Comus’ enchantments, but cannot free herself of
her own volition. Surprisingly, she needs saving not once but twice. Firstly it
is the help offered by the Brothers and the Haemony given by the Attendant
Spirit that drives Comus away. She is however still stuck to the chair. She
requires the help of Sabrina, the water nymph to be saved completely. For Clara Stevens, “Virtue’s resistance of
Vice, while vitally important, failed to solve the problem, and that had not
Sabrina’s aid been secured, the so called “triumph” would have been a
distressing and unsatisfactory situation. The Nymph’s pre-eminence thus becomes
striking.” Stevens argues that human agency alone is not enough to save the
Lady from the grip of Comus. This is Milton’s point of departure from the
superiority of the Mind over the Body. Stevens’ argument falls in line with the
argument of Woodhouse where he asserts that despite the Lady’s dismissal of
Comus’ seduction she nonetheless requires divine grace to save her from her
plight.
Divine
grace is a theological concept that recurs in Milton’s poems, in Samson Agonistes, in Paradise Lost and also Paradise Regained. Divine grace is
beyond human comprehension and therefore beyond the grasp of the Mind or the
Body. It is a factor that plays an important and irreplaceable role in the
redemption of a human soul. Reason alone cannot lead to salvation. What is
needed is divine grace, the essence of which cannot be subsumed by any
ontological considerations. This divine grace is bestowed upon the Lady through
the agency of Sabrina, a nymph and therefore a supernatural being. In a sense
Milton’s Comus attempts to open up
the possibility of a solution to the world’s problems from outside the natural
world itself.
FUZAIL ASAR SIDDIQI
PG-II
ROLL NO: 16
No comments:
Post a Comment