L'allegro and Il Penseroso

For next time, we will be looking at the companion poems, "L'allegro" and "Il Penseroso."

What is Milton's strategy in the writing companion poems? What is the relationship between the "Mirth" celebrated in "L'Allegro" and the "Melancholy" represented in "Il Penseroso." With what does Milton associate mirth? with what melancholy? One famous critic writes that "the competing visions of the two poem represent equally viable conceptions of life." Do you agree?

In what ways do the poems announce their relationship? Are there particular passages in the poems - you may want to compile a list - which show clearly the relationship between them? That is, are there explicit echoes of the former poem in the latter? Are there notable differences?

When Milton - or any seventeenth century figure for that matter - refers to 'melancholy,' what does he mean? Is the "loathed melancholy" which "L'allegro" rejects the same as the perspective of melancholy developed in "Il Penseroso"? You may want to check out Durer's Melancholy to get a sense of early modern understandings of the term.

Is there some way in which Milton - in the two poems - is meditating on poetry and poetic style? How do the twin poems show Milton in relationship to antecedent literary styles and literary figures? (see his poem "On Shakespeare" copied below) Is there some way in which Milton is commenting on literary history? showing a path towards a new kind of poetry?

For those of you who are interested in Milton's 1645 Poems (frontispiece above), the full text of the original edition is available on our documents site.

On Shakespeare

WHat needs my Shakespear for his honour'd Bones,
The labour of an age in piled Stones,
Or that his hallow'd reliques should be hid
Under a Star-ypointing Pyramid?
Dear son of memory, great heir of Fame, [ 5 ]
What need'st thou such weak witnes of thy name?
Thou in our wonder and astonishment
Hast built thy self a live-long Monument.
For whilst to th' shame of slow-endeavouring art,
Thy easie numbers flow, and that each heart [ 10 ]
Hath from the leaves of thy unvalu'd Book,
Those Delphick lines with deep impression took,
Then thou our fancy of it self bereaving,
Dost make us Marble with too much conceaving;
And so Sepulcher'd in such pomp dost lie, [ 15 ]
That Kings for such a Tomb would wish to die.

So as an addendum: I will mention that on the Milton List Server - a discussion list for Milton scholars (can you believe it?), someone just posted the following:

"Hey, i am just a high school student writing about John Milton's poem's "L'Allegro" and "Il Penseroso." My prompt i made for my senior project was, If the two poems above were considered a debate, an argument, or two sides of an issue or debate, or two people, which side or person would Milton most prefer or like? My answer was "Il Penseroso." Would any of you agree with me?"

Here is a response that he got from some college professor somewhere:

I don't think Milton (the speaker? the author? the man?) prefers one of them over the other, since a very strong case may be made for either or both. I believe his "intention," if we need to attribute it, was to present two aspects of the same personality, or twinned avatars who are opposites. What good is a life full of melancholy (especially as the Renaissance understood this humour) without mirth? Or mirth without seriousness? Each is shown as lacking (needing) the balance of the other for good health. Since each of these figures is presented as very appealing, I would argue that Milton would "prefer" to have both.By the way, the inability to resolve a theoretical conflict was what drove the 18th century to conjure up "Il Moderato" for the Handel setting as a new text appended to adaptations of Milton's two originals. Tertium quid (a precursor of Hegelian dialectic) works well to settle such arguments as you propose.Therefore, whichever personification of mood you choose, you will be correct (and wrong!).

Do you agree?