dim@cbuxc.UUCP (Dennis McKiernan) (05/18/85)
___________________________________________________
Steve:
I just this morning finished _To Reign In Hell_ and
I had one of those *good* feelings when I put the book down.
I mean, I really liked what I had just finished.
I re-read Zelazny's foreword, and I totally agree
with everything he said, and more.
It truly is an engaging tale...
(And it has delicious word/thought/sayings play sprinkled throughout.)
But, Lord! I sure did want Satan and Yaweh to have a
let's-sit-down-and-talk-before-things-get-out-of-hand conversation.
But then, if they had gotten together early on,
the tale would have spun out differently...
And I liked it just as it came off the loom.
Steve, I'm gonna post this on the net news as well as
mail it to you.
Dennis L. McKiernan
...ihnp4!cbuxc!dim
___________________________________________________
PS: Back in the dim recesses of my mind, I seem to remember
that Milton drew upon but a single line in the Bible to
weave his original tale. You see, in the elder days,
Lucifer (light-bringer) was the name given to the
morning star. And some biblical person (a king?)
glanced up at the morning stars and espying Lucifer
says something like, "O mighty Lucifer, how far thou hast
fallen from heaven." The king(?) was simply refering
to the nearness of the dawn, but Milton took this line
and based the entire mythos of the heavenly revolt
upon it...
DLMcK
___________________________________________________brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) (05/21/85)
> > Dennis L. McKiernan > ...ihnp4!cbuxc!dim > ___________________________________________________ > > PS: Back in the dim recesses of my mind, I seem to remember > that Milton drew upon but a single line in the Bible to > weave his original tale. You see, in the elder days, > Lucifer (light-bringer) was the name given to the > morning star. And some biblical person (a king?) > glanced up at the morning stars and espying Lucifer > says something like, "O mighty Lucifer, how far thou hast > fallen from heaven." The king(?) was simply refering > to the nearness of the dawn, but Milton took this line > and based the entire mythos of the heavenly revolt > upon it... > DLMcK > ___________________________________________________ Thanks. Your information is more complete than mine. It is true that the above mentioned quote is the way that Lucifer became associated with Satan, but I didn't know that Milton was the instrument of this. I had assumed the mistake to have been made before his time. -- SKZB
jsq@im4u.UUCP (05/28/85)
>> Dennis L. McKiernan >> ...ihnp4!cbuxc!dim >> ___________________________________________________ >> >> PS: Back in the dim recesses of my mind, I seem to remember >> that Milton drew upon but a single line in the Bible to >> weave his original tale. The passage you're thinking of is Isaiah xiv, 12: How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning. or, in the Revised Standard Version: How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! The Hebrew words are Helal (Day Star) and Shahar (Dawn). These are names of Canaanite deities, and are supposedly a reference to Canaanite mythology. There's more to this passage: How you are cut down to the ground you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart, ``I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most High.'' But you are brought down to Sheol, to the depths of the Pit, From there on it reads a lot more like a human king is meant. There is also Luke x, 17, where Jesus explains why his disciples can cast out demons in his name: And he said to them, ``I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.'' As Jesus quoted or referred to Isaiah many times, this could be another such. If so, it puts the identification of Lucifer with Satan much earlier than Milton. The most explicit description of the whole thing is Revelation xii, 7ff: Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world--he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. There are a few things which could be treated as allusions in Jude and Job, but that's about it for the biblical basis of the fall of the angels (as distinct from the creation, descriptions of heaven, etc.). I looked up all this once for a paper on Paradise Lost in high school. There was so little of it that I'm pretty sure that's about all of it. Milton mixed in ideas from Greek mythology, particularly the war of the Titans and Gods, and the story of Prometheus. I liked "To Reign in Hell," though it was amusing that what everyone seemed to spend the most time doing was finding Satan (I always thought he found you...), and it was odd, considering the nature of the creation of the angels, that even the First Seven had no trouble comprehending the idea of gods, and particularly of an absolute god. It was also a bit hard to accept a Satan whose major character flaw was indecision, since that is so unlike Milton's Satan/Prometheus figure. There seemed to be a deliberate attempt to show Satan developing into something more like Milton's character, especially at the end, but it wasn't very convincing.
west@sdcsla.UUCP (Larry West) (06/02/85)
In article <202@hyper.UUCP> brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) writes: >> Dennis L. McKiernan >> ...ihnp4!cbuxc!dim >> >> PS: Back in the dim recesses of my mind, I seem to remember >> that Milton drew upon but a single line in the Bible to >> weave his original tale. You see, in the elder days, >> Lucifer (light-bringer) was the name given to the >> morning star. And some biblical person (a king?) >> glanced up at the morning stars and espying Lucifer >> says something like, "O mighty Lucifer, how far thou hast >> fallen from heaven." The king(?) was simply refering >> to the nearness of the dawn, but Milton took this line >> and based the entire mythos of the heavenly revolt >> upon it... >> DLMcK > >Thanks. Your information is more complete than >mine. It is true that the above mentioned quote >is the way that Lucifer became associated with >Satan, but I didn't know that Milton was the >instrument of this. I had assumed the mistake >to have been made before his time. > -- SKZB Actually, I think this is a simplification of the story. Lucifer does indeed mean "light-bringer", and indeed was the name given to the "morning star". However, in the specific situation that the quote is from, it is refering to a nearby monarch (one who was dominating the Jews), one of whose titles was Lucifer, in the sense mentioned here. It was, however, impolitic to insult such a powerful neighbor directly. Reference: Asimov's Guide to the Old Testament. (Sorry, I don't have it at hand -- otherwise I'd be more specific.) -- Larry West Institute for Cognitive Science (USA+619-)452-6220 UC San Diego (mailcode C-015) [x6220] ARPA: <west@nprdc.ARPA> La Jolla, CA 92093 U.S.A. UUCP: {ucbvax,sdcrdcf,decvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!sdcsla!west OR ulysses!sdcsla!west