Surprised by Syntax: Reading the Latinity of Paradise Lost

Stanley Fish in his monumental study argued that the reader of Paradise Lost is “surprised by sin” as he or she in the course of engaging with the text falls, like Adam and Eve, into sin and error and is brought up short. Through a “programme of reader harassment” the experience of the fall is re-enacted in the process of reading, wherein lies the poem’s meaning. And reader response criticism was born. But if for Fish the twentieth-century reader is “surprised by sin,” might not the twenty-first century reader, an all too frequently Latinless reader, be surprised by syntax, a syntax which despite of (or maybe because of) its inherent Latinity and associated linguistic alterity functions as a seductively attractive other? The reader, like Eve, is indeed surprised: enchanted, bemused, seduced by the abundant classicism, by the formal Latinate rhetoric achieved by a Miltonic unison of “Voice and Verse” and also by the language of a Satanic tempter who is—in the pejorative sense of the Latin adjective bilinguis—“double-tongued, deceitful, treacherous.” It is hardly an accident that this adjective (with which Milton qualifies hellish betrayal in his Latin gunpowder epic) was typically applied to the forked tongue of a serpent. This study argues that key to the success of the double-tongued Miltonic serpens bilinguis, is his use and abuse of Latinate language and rhetoric. It posits the possible case that this is mirrored in the linguistic methodology of the poeta bilinguis, the geminus Miltonus? For if, like Eve, the twenty-first century reader of Paradise Lost is surprised by syntax, by the Miltonic use and the Satanic abuse of a Latinate voice, might not he or she also be surprised by the text’s bilingual speaking voice?

Andrew Marvell's Latin Poetry: From Text to Context (356pp.)

David Norbrook, Review of English Studies 56 (Sept. 2005), 675-6.
‘We have waited a long time for a study of Marvell’s Latin poetry; fortunately, Estelle Haan’s monograph generously makes good the loss ... One of her most intriguing suggestions … is that Marvell may have presented paired poems like ‘Ros’ and ‘On a Drop of Dew’, and the poems to the obligingly named Dr Witty, to his student Maria Fairfax as his own patterns for the pedagogical practice of double translation. Perhaps the most original parts of the book, however, move beyond the familiar canon to cover the generic range of the Latin verse. Haan offers a very full contextualization of the early Horatian Ode to Charles I in seventeenth-century exercises in parodia. In a rewarding reading of the poem to Dr Ingelo she shows how Marvell deploys the language of Ovid’s Tristia to present Sweden as a place of shivering exile, only to subvert this model with a neo-Virgilian celebration of Christina as a virtuous, city-building Dido. She draws extensively on historical as well as literary sources to offer very detailed contextualizations of the poem to Maniban and ‘Scaevola Scotto-Britannus’... This monograph opens up many new ways into the Latin verse, not least because it is rounded off with new texts and prose translations of the Latin poems. These make a substantial contribution in their own right. They are the best and most accurate translations to date (those in Smith’s edition having some lapses); they avoid poeticisms but bring out the structure of the poems' wordplay very clearly. This book brings us a lot closer to seeing Marvell whole.'