Meagan Malesic

English 465.01

Dr. Whitworth

December 14, 2016

THE DECONSTRUCTION OF HEAVEN AND HELL

Miltons Paradise Lost, certainly one of the most brilliantly written pieces of epic poetry

in existence, establishes its antagonist of Satan as a helpless character, banished by God and

eternally doomed to endure a personal hell defined by overdetermined binary oppositions and the

fundamental failure of language. It is Satans disregard and blatant refusal to acknowledge the

false system of binaries within which he is trapped which prevents him from recognizing his own

prominent role within Gods plan of creation and redemption. In fact, throughout the poem,

Milton presents Satans very existence as evidence for the omnipotence of God, and suggests

that it is through the only apparent evil of Satan that God is able to create an ultimate greater

good. This paradoxical cycle in which Satan is inherently confined negates and eradicates evil

by its very definition, and condemns Satan to an eternal hell, defined by his failure to

comprehend his position as an inadvertent pawn in Gods plan, as well as his inability to rely

upon any system of language as a means of acquiring truth.

From the very start of the epic, it is evident that Satan unknowingly lacks a clear

understanding of how language operates on even the simplest and most fundamental of levels.

Upon close analysis, his use of language, though brilliant and grandiose in sound, is revealed to

be completely devoid of meaning. In actuality, the very first sentence uttered by Satan within
 2

Paradise Lost does not even meet the requirements of a complete sentence; it is a run-on thought

which never reaches its intended purpose, despite its deceptively intelligent sounding use of

language (1.83-93). This disorganized first sentence foreshadows Satans eventual punishment

within his personal hell, as it is the first implication of his failure to correctly understand and

utilize a language system. The narrator of the epic even directly states this within the text,

acknowledging that Satans speech bore / Semblance of worth, not substance: (1.527-8). Just as

his speech is empty of meaning, he too lacks any true significance or ability. Despite his clever

and deceptive speech, Satan is foolishly unaware of his own shortcomings and absence of power

within his hell.

Another fault within Satans logic his decision to view and understand the world solely

through binary oppositions is also apparent from the very start of the epic. Satan constantly

contrasts that which he perceives as good against that which he perceives as evil, and therefore

only understands concepts when they are mirrored against their apparent oppositions. However,

despite Satans belief that all binary oppositions are exact and equal inverses of each other, it is

actually true that one concept within a binary relationship will always fall short in its comparison

to its supposed opposite. This lesser term the term of alterity can only exist as such through

its relationship to the greater, radical term. As Jacques Derrida explains in his book Positions,

In a classical philosophical opposition we are not dealing with the peaceful co-existence of a

vis--vis, but rather with a violent hierarchy. One of the two terms governs the other

(axiologically, logically, etc.), or has the upper hand (41). By this reasoning, Satans own

flawed logic defines him as the term of alterity, and God as the radical term, in complete control.

Satan who himself was created by God only can exist and comprehend the world through

Gods omnipotence. Everything that Satan knows or thinks that he knows is also based upon
 3

that which God created; therefore, his decision to form his hell as the mirrored image of Heaven

is nothing more than a lesser copy of the superior, root concept. Despite that which Satan

believes, Hell will always be lacking when in comparison to Gods created Heaven, and his

inability to recognize this truth is in itself an aspect of his eternal punishment and despair.

This deconstruction of Satans knowledge of the world through binaries critiques the

abilities of his mind while simultaneously revealing just how oblivious he is to this failure of his

own mental process. Satan affirms, The mind is its own place, and in it self / Can make a

Heavn of Hell, a Hell of Heavn (1.254-5). However, when this belief is observed under the

perspective of deconstruction, it is clear that Heaven and Hell are not equal inverses at all; rather,

Hell is simply a facet of Heaven. In agreement, Derrida states, To deconstruct the opposition,

first of all, is to overturn the hierarchyNot to synthesize the terms in opposition, but to mark

their difference and eternal interplay (41). By this logic, Hell is no longer an opposition of

Heaven at all, nor was it ever present as such; instead, Hell contributes submissively to the

singular, dominant concept of Heaven.

However, though Satan remains ignorant about his subordinate position to God, his

fellow fallen angel and comrade Beelzebub recognizes the essential, paradoxical deficit in

Satans reasoning. Beelzebub questions, What if he our ConquerorHave left us this our spirit

and strength intire / Strongly to suffer and support our pains / That we may so suffice his

vengeful ire / Or do him mightier service as his thralls (1.57-60). Beelzebub realizes that of

which Satan is oblivious if God is the radical, powerful term within the deconstructed binary

relationship, He is capable of transforming all of Satans evil-intended actions into the creation

of good. This theory which suggests that evil is nothing more than misinterpreted good is

argued by St. Augustine in his essay Evil is Privation of Good, where he states, The
 4

omnipotent God, whom even the heathen acknowledge as the Supreme Power over all, would not

allow any evil in His works, unless in His omnipotence and goodness, as the Supreme God, He is

able to bring forth good out of evil. What, after all, is anything we call evil except the privation

of good? (253). God, who is simultaneously all-knowing and all-powerful, allows for Satans

perceived evil works to exist only so that through them, he may create the ultimate good

concept of free will. As God is the all-good creator of all things, all things that he has created

must therefore also be inherently good. Even Satan, a direct creation of God, though he is self-

perceived as evil, is actually a channel through which God can implement more good into His

creation a plan which operates naturally, unnoticed by Satan himself.

If Augustines argument is regarded as true, it can be safely accepted that only God, via

His omnipotence and position as the radical term, is capable of creating, and, additionally, it can

be assumed that all of His creation must be intrinsically good. However, in Book 2 of Miltons

masterpiece, Satans partner, Sin, is given credit for giving birth to Death. Upon first glance, it

would appear as though an evil force has procreated, but this is only an allusion. Death, by its

very definition, is not the presence of anything; rather, death is absence, and is completely void

of substance. Augustine explains, It was made clear to me that all things are good, even if they

are corruptedSo long as they are, therefore, they are good. Therefore, whatever is, is good.

Evil, thenhas no substance at all; for if it were a substance, it would be good (251). All of

creation, which is good, must consist of substance; conversely, evil is the complete lack of

created substance. Again, as Satan himself is a created substance, it is theologically impossible

for him to be wholly evil.

As the description of Sin progresses, this point becomes further defined. Remembering

her creation, Sin describes, Amazement seizes / All th Host of Heavn; back they recoiled
 5

affraid / At first, and calld me Sin, and for a Sign / Portentous held me (2.758-761). Sin, by

associating herself with the term sign, also associates signs with the absence of substance as

well. This association of signs with the absence of substance and, therefore, with the absence

of good, which is evil raises doubts about the reliability of language, which is entirely rooted in

the use of signs. In order to understand this monumental flaw within language, one must first

recognize and accept that all signs are completely arbitrary in meaning. In other words, signs

can only be sensibly interpreted within the context of the language system to which they belong.

The meanings behind signs are therefore a product of the language system itself, not experiences

or intrinsic traits. Within language, the signifier the physical representation of a sign and the

signified that which is being represented have no innate association to one another, aside

from that which language has created. As Ferdinand de Saussure states within Course in

General Linguistics, The bond between the signifier and signified is arbitrary [the signifier]

has no natural connection to the signified Their combination produces a form, not a substance

(854). It is through this very property of arbitrariness that language fails, and becomes what

Jacques Lacan refers to as a banishing summons an endless, doomed chain through which

language never truly represents the concepts to which it wishes to refer. Language, a tripartite

system consisting of the signifier, the signified, and the sign itself, fails to accurately depict the

very Thing it strives to describe, and will always alienate the speaker from the very concepts

of which they are speaking. In Seminar III, Lacan further explains, The signifier may extend

over many of the elements within the domain of the sign, but the signifier is a sign that doesnt

refer to any object, not even to one in the form of a trace, even though the trace nevertheless

heralds the signifiers essential feature. It, too, is the sign of an absence (167). Therefore,

language, as it too is nothing but absence, is inherently associated with death and evil. Satan, by
 6

choosing to rely upon language and the formation of false binaries within it in order to interpret

his world, fails to recognize that he is dependent on a fundamentally flawed system which will

cause his world to be eternally lacking.

Conversely, God, as the omniscient superior being, transcends language and the

brokenness of signs, while Satan relies upon them. God understands and interprets the world

which He created through intuition, the highest level of reasoning and communication. To God

who is aware of all creation language, which is the absence of both knowledge and

substance, is both pointless and deeply imperfect. Dante Alighieri, in his essay De vulgari

eloquentia, claims, Of all creatures that exist, only human beings were given the power of

speech, because only to them was it necessary. It was not necessary that either angels or lower

animals should be able to speak; rather, this power would have been wasted on them (II.I).

Satan, by associating himself with language and its absence, draws himself even further away

from God and his perfection. Additionally, Satan, who was once an angel himself, was not

intended to rely upon language for understanding; therefore, his misinterpretation of language

and inability to comprehend complex metaphors and the deconstruction of binary oppositions is

an inherent part of his nature, and his personal hell. Satans distance from God and his lack of

perception again make it impossible for him to comprehend his place within Gods ultimate plan.

Even once Satan manages to trick Adam and Eve into sin via none other than his

eloquent yet fundamentally flawed use of language he still fails to comprehend the greater

good that God has planned through him. Although God directly explains to Satan the

punishment which he must endure, Satan is incapable of understanding the metaphor through

which God speaks to him. Satan exclaims foolishly, I am to bruise his heel; / His Seed, when is

not set, shall bruise my head: / A World who would not purchase with a bruise, / Or much more
 7

grievous pain? (10.498-501). This lack of perception is largely attributed to Satans reliance

upon binaries and his inability to comprehend noumenons, or the spiritual events that God

explains which are inexpressible through human language. Satan, who relies solely upon human

language as a means of acquiring truth, can never possibly understand or interpret Gods ultimate

plan, and his role in the formation of free will. As Lacan states in Seminar I, In the end signs

are totally impotent, because we ourselves cannot recognize their value and signs, and we come

to know that they are words only when we know what they signify in the language as concretely

spoken[Augustine] admits that the very subject who is telling us something very often does

not know what he is telling us, and tells us more or less than he means to (260). Satans

language system and the binary oppositions it depends upon are utterly useless. It is Satans very

own flawed speech and continued dependence upon language which demonstrates to the reader

that he is still entirely ignorant of his position as Gods pawn. God, of course, recognizes this,

and demonstrates so in his decision to punish the fallen angels of Satans army by relinquishing

their ability to praise their leader through language rather, they can only communicate by

hissing (10.508-9). The loss of language thereby strips Satan of any remaining power he

believed himself to hold; if he is unable to communicate with his own followers and relish in his

own perceived victory, his faith in language truly is proven to be an irrational one.

Finally, as the epic draws to a close, God addresses Sin and Death and acknowledges

their roles within his plan for creation as well. He declares, [They] know not that I calld and

drew them thither / My Hell-hounds, to lick up the draff and filth / Which mans polluting Sin

with the taint hath shed / On what was pure, till crammd and gorgd (10.629-631), and

continues still, saying, Both Sin and Death, and yawning Grave, at last / Through Chaos hurld,

obstruct the mouth of Hell / For ever, and seal up his ravenous Jawes (10.635-8). God explains
 8

that Sin and Death, though they believe they are corrupting the world, are actually aiding God in

purifying His earth and eliminating all of the filth caused by original sin. As previously

established, it is true that Sin are Death are both absence; however, whatever substance or form

they do possess however miniscule must be used for good, by the very definition of

substance itself. In the terms of Augustine, The good in created things can be augmented and

diminished. For good to be diminished, something must remain of its original nature as long as

it exists at all. For no matter what kind or how insignificant a thing may be, the good which is its

nature cannot be destroyed without the thing itself being destroyedCorruption cannot consume

the good without also consuming the thing itself (254). If Sin and Death were truly wholly evil,

they would not exist at all; therefore, their very existence is evidence that God is utilizing them

to implement good, and their inability to recognize this is in itself an aspect of their personal hell

to which they are eternally doomed.

Paradise Lost provokes some of the most theologically profound and linguistically

challenging questions across all of poetic history. The epic, from its very opening moments,

defines Satan by his misguided and flawed perception of the world through his imaginary binary

oppositions, as well as establishes his personal experience of hell as his mental inability to

comprehend the fundamentally flawed aspects of human language and its relationship to signs.

Simultaneously, the poem utilizes Satan to demonstrate the Augustinian teaching that evil is

simply misrecognized virtue, and that Satan, by definition, cannot exist as pure evil, and

therefore must operate as an involuntary pawn in Gods plan to create an ultimate good. It is

Satans obliviousness to his role in the formation of free will and the purifying of the world from

evil that traps him within his hell of overdetermined binaries and misunderstood metaphors,
 9

forever incapable of reaching any semblance of truth, and forever unaware that he will always be

inherently lacking.
 10

Works Cited

Alighieri, Dante. De Vulgari Eloquentia. Ed. Aristide Marigo. Firenze: F. Le Monnier, 1957.

Augustine. "Evil is Privation of Good." The Enchiridion. By Epictetus. Trans. Thomas

Wentworth Higginson. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Pub., 1955. N. pag.

Derrida, Jacques. Positions. Ed. Alan Bass and Henri Ronse. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1981. Print.

Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. S.l.: S.n., 2002. Print.

Milton, John. "Paradise Lost." The Riverside Milton. Ed. Roy Flannagan. Boston: n.p., 1998.

353-710. Print.

Saussure, Ferdinand De. Course in General Linguistics. Ed. Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye.

N.p.: Philosophical Library, 1916. Print