The Psychology of Temptation in Perelandra and Paradise Lost

The Reception of C. S. Lewis’sA Preface toParadise Lost in Milton Scholarship, 1990‐2015

“…The fact that Milton scholars since 1990 continue to cite Lewis at the very beginning of their essays as a well-known representative of a certain position, even if they drop him afterwards (e.g., Gregory Bredbeck [1991], Catherine Gimelli Martin [1993], John Tanner [1994], Stanley Fish [2005], and John ), implies that Lewis is still, almost a century after PPL's publication, one of the most recognizable Miltonists to hold that position. The fact that so many Milton scholars are also aware of Lewis's other writings (John Reichert [1992], Mere Christianity; John Tanner [1992], Perelandra and The Four Loves; Colin Burrow [1993], English Literature in the Sixteenth Century; William Calin [2007], The Allegory of Love; Roy Flannagan [2007], The Great Divorce; John , The Discarded Image) ensures that Lewis's ideas and style in PPL will continue to be more famous and memorable than writers known solely for their articles on Milton.…”

“…A Preface to Paradise Lost is split between the first eight chapters on the poem's form, focusing on Milton's choice of genre, style, and diction, and the final eleven chapters on its content, focusing on Milton's theology and worldview. McBride convincingly explains PPL's "dual focus on epic and theology" as Lewis's response to attacks on Milton's form on the one hand, most importantly, those of T. S. Eliot and F. R. Leavis; and, on the other, to certain opinions about Milton's theology, most importantly, those of Denis Saurat and E. M. W. Tillyard ("Justifying" [5][6]see McBride,). Lewis's place in the so-called "Milton Controversy" in the early twentieth century was quickly realized and applauded shortly after the book's publication: "Initial reviews of Lewis's text, most of which are positive, make clear that quite a few Milton scholars resented the attack on Eliot, Leavis," and others ("Milton Controversy" 319).…”

“…John Rumrich, for example, paid PPL the compliment of allusion in the title of his book, Matter of Glory: A New Preface to Paradise Lost (1987), a reference he trusts "those familiar with Milton studies will no doubt have already recognized" (5). His assumption of familiarity attests to the enduring legacy of PPL-then 45 years after its publication-even more strongly, perhaps, than his deferential praise of the book ("I wish here to disown any implication that I consider myself Lewis's equal in style, lucidity, or general literary expertise" [5]) or his choice to pattern the plan of Matter of Glory after Lewis's volume, which he explains in the Introduction (5)(6).…”

“…John Reichert (1992) detects Lewis's notion of Satan's declension in Roland Mushat Frye's 1979 entry on Satan in A Milton Encyclopedia (85). John Tanner (1992) considers Satan a compelling antihero, but also inclines to another Lewisian comment that tempers his interest: "Yet, as C. S. Lewis reminds us, great literary characterizations, such as Milton's Satan or Austen's Miss Bates or Meredith's Sir Willoughby, may be interesting to read about and at the same time boring to be" (137,. Robert Thomas Fallon (1995) agrees with Lewis that Satan is to some extent a comic figure (58).…”

“…First, it is in effect the slogan of the central issue 6 of the Milton Quarterly debate about C. S. Lewis. As such, it represents the essence of the most important event in PPL's reception from 2010-15.…”