Sympathy For the Devil: a Look at Miltons Portrayals of Satan in Paradise Lost

Written by Laura Conrad

When John Milton began writing Paradise Lost, he believed that he was penning
a holy text, and that the mouth of God Himself was speaking through him. However, as
many of Miltons later critics pointed out, Miltons epic poem feels less like a defense of
the almighty, as the poet claims in the text, and more like an epic in praise of the fallen
angel, Satan. Throughout the poem, Milton spends a great amount of time on Satan,
fleshing him out fully and showing the reader his faults and his merits, his strengths and
weaknesses. Additionally, Milton uses the paradoxes he creates in Satan to voice his own
beliefs about his world, and these paradoxes help to create him in the readers eye as a
fully self-contradicting human being. Because of this, the reader is allowed to identify
more with Satan than he or she can with any other character in the poem. At first glance,
it is this quality of the writing which makes us believe, as William Blake said, that Milton
was of the devils camp and didnt know it. It does feel like Milton is allowing the
reader to cheer for Satan. Which is exactly the point.
Wait, what? Isnt Milton supposed to be defending God, and damning Satan to
hell where he belongs? Yes, but he is also trying to teach his readers a lesson about the
sins of Adam and Eve and their subsequent fall. He does this through his characterization

of Satan. By making his character so accessible to the reader, and allowing us to feel
sympathy for the devil, Milton draws the reader into his literary trap, allowing everyone
who reads Paradise Lost to experience firsthand just how dangerously easy it is to be
seduced by Satan and fall.
We should not be surprised though, that a paradox such as Satans likeability
exists in Paradise Lost. After all, the work is rife with paradoxes of all kinds, most
notably the dualistic and likeable nature of Satans character that runs in conflict with
everything the reader is supposed to know of him, his callous presentation of God, and
the conflicting praise and denouncement which Milton offers to Eve. Milton uses these
paradoxes to his advantage, not only as a writer, but as a teacher. Milton wanted his
readers to learn something from his epic poem, not just come away with a renewed love
for God. By offering up these paradoxes, Milton challenges his readers to catch them, to
stop and say, Hey, why is this here? What is this trying to show me? Likewise, when
confronted with Satans likeability in the face of his undeniably wicked deeds, we must
pause, and proceed with caution, wary of what the poet really wanted his readers to
believe.
Milton wastes no time in bringing his reader close to the tempting fallen angel;
when Book I begins we are immediately thrust amidst Satan and his companions as they
get their wits about them in hell. Even Satans first words in the poem, If thou beest
he, belie exactly how confused and lost he iseverything, and everyone, has changed so
much that he doesnt even know who his own friends are anymore. According to Jack
Foley, the primary trait of Miltons Satan is not tragic heroism, as many critics believe,
but simple confusion (40). I believe that this is particularly true of Book I of Paradise

Lost. The Satan we first meet is much akin to a lost child, and his confusion at his new
circumstances is something with which everyone can identify.
In Books I and II, we see Satan gather himself back up and proclaim himself
leader of the fallen angels for the first time. We expect him to do this because we already
know that Satan is the lord of hell. However, the way that he goes about becoming the
sole leader and hero of his fallen companions is tricky, and foreshadows future trickery
on the part of the devil. Nonetheless, we as the readers are made to fall for his
charismatic speeches in the same way his compatriots do, and we are with him all the
way as he takes the throne and escapes from hell in Book II.
But then In Book VI, Milton plays against the idea he originally set up that Satan
won his kingship of hell through underhanded methods. Instead, we learn that Satan,
through merit of his birthright, deserved to be the leader of the fallen angels because he
was the highest among them. He is, as Dennis Berthold puts it, merely taking the proper
position for which his God-given natural merit has qualified him (Berthold, 155).
However, Milton immediately follows this affirmation of Satans natural leadership
worth with more insidious methods of gaining said leadership. With glozing flattery and
praise of their abilities, and especially through appeals to vanity made with honorific
titles, Lucifer in heaven incites his fellow rebels to follow him in revolt against God
(Steadman, Magnific Titles). This stark, unapologetic paradox in Miltons own
portrayal of Satan is enough to make the reader take a step back from the work and
wonder what Milton is trying to show us using the character of Satan.
Among the things Milton does show us using his well-painted devil are his
personal opinions about aspects of his own culture. For example, in many ways, Satan

behaves as a Machiavellian prince (Riebling). He will, as discussed in the paragraph

above, stop at nothing to get what he wants, and will not let little things like qualms get in
the way of his use of out and out deceit, as when he appears to Eve in serpentine form. In
these aspects he is the perfect Machiavellian prince. However, in other ways, he is the
worst possible Machiavellian prince (Riebling). He spends most of Book IV lamenting
his former sins and second-guessing his own decisions, something no proper prince
should have the time or the inclination to do. After all, the ends justify the means. Even
so, after he causes mankinds fall from paradise, he second-guesses himself again,
lamenting the beauty and perfection he has destroyed. I think that in this fashion, Milton
was not only showing the reader the flighty, indecisive nature of the devil, but also his
own opinions of the typical Machiavellian prince. That is to say, Satans doubt in
himself made him human in the eyes of the reader, but no prince should second-guess
himself the way that Satan does. Therefore, Milton seems to be telling us that in order to
be a Machiavellian prince, one must be inhuman. At the same time though, Satan can be
a good Machiavellian prince, insinuating that he is simultaneously human and inhuman.
But, though Milton uses Satan to denounce aspects of his world which he dislikes, he also
seems to use Satan in a positive way to support his real-world ideas.
The most obvious example of this is Satans role as the glorious rebel. David
Loewenstein analyzes Satans rebellious nature in his article An Ambiguous Monster:
Representing Rebellion in Miltons Polemics and Paradise Lost. According to
Loewenstein, Satan first appears to us as a brilliant rebel thrusting a fierce spear of
freedom through Gods tyranny. His mask is flawless; as Loewenstein himself puts it:

Satansespecially compelling because, capable of assuming new shapes and

transforming rebellion into an art, he easily appropriates the language and
gestures of seventeenth-century political revolutionSatan presents himself not
as a vengeful tyrantbut as an active and bold Patron of Liberty whose hatred
of submission, oppression, and idolatrous adoration prompts him to conspire with
his compatriots to free themselves from the servitude of heavenbondage of
hellhis rhetoricat times resembles in startling waysMiltons own political
writings (304).
This flawless mask of the selfless liberator is what first attracts the reader to Satan in
Paradise Lost. By the time we hear the other side of the story in Book IV, we are already
smitten with Satans character.
But what about Milton? He was a rebel as well; he supported Oliver Cromwell
and spurned the kings of England, believing not in the divine right of kings. In Books I
and II he exalts this capacity for rebelliousness in Satan. Could it be that he truly was of
Satans camp? It seems so, in the beginning. But when we get to Book VI and Satans
rebellion is shown to us in the light of God, when we are first forced to view it as
inglorious and ignoble, we are forced to question Milton himself. Did he change his
mind on rebellion? If so, why keep Books I and II? If not, why keep Book VI?
According to Joan Bennet, Miltons conception of Lucifers fall from heaven in
Paradise has always been viewed as a political allegory. But Bennet suggests that it was
not the tyranny of God as a monarch, but the tyranny of Satan to which Milton would
compare King Charles II of England (441). If this is the case, it not only solves the
paradox of Miltons view on rebellion and allows him to keep all three of the above

books called into question, but provides new insight into Satans declarations that he is
monarchal and worthy of leadership. If Milton did not approve of monarchs, but allows
Satan the use of monarchal terms to describe himself, he is insulting Satan while allowing
Satan to flatter and puff himself up. This is a beautiful, subtle way to build up Satans
character to the reader while viciously cutting him down in the eyes of anyone who is
keeping an eye on Milton and his literary tricks.
Going hand in hand with Miltons (and Satans) ideas about revolution is the idea
of merit, and the many ways in which it is portrayed throughout the poem. As briefly
mentioned earlier, Satan has the merit of birthright that allows him to become the leader
of the fallen angels, but merit has many different instances and uses in the poem. For
example, God refers to Christ as by merit more than birthright son of God (3.309) and
Satan threatens Abdiel with thy merited reward, the first assay of this right hand
provokd (6.153). So how are we, the reader, to define merit? The Oxford English
Dictionary defines it as the condition of deserving reward or punishment, but this
seems too vague and inadequate for Miltons purposes.
In his article The Humanist Tradition and Miltons Satan: The Conservative as
Revolutionary, Wayne Rebhorn argues that while the idea of merit that is represented in
Paradise Lost is compatible with Miltons idea of merit, which was developed out of
Christian Humanism, it is also incompatible with the idea of merit Satan displays in the
poem. Therefore, Rebhorn argues that Satan is in the wrong. But what is Satans idea of
merit, and what is Miltons? According to Rebhorn, even before Satans fall the titles of
his vaunted birthright and nobility were always on his lips, and he gleaned his idea of
merit from the idea of power they conferred, even though he no longer upholds the ideas

for which he was born. As Dennis Berthold aptly puts it, paraphrasing an argument made
by John Steadman:
Satans appeals to merit are inevitably specious rhetorical frauds, for he has
abandoned his birthright and strives to achieve Hellish deeds only, which are by
definition non-meritoriousthe Messiahs appeals to meritare valid because he
has maintained his birthright and achieved deeds ethically superior to Satans
(154).
Milton, as Berthold touches upon here, believed that merit was something earned, such as
when Christ was raised to the position of Son of God because of the heroism he
exemplifies in suffering debasement and humiliation out of love for man (Rebhorn, 86).
Rebhorn also argues that Satans heroism is false and presented as parody by Milton
(86), and I think that these charlatan heroics are what allows Milton to teach his readers a
lesson. He must at least have a faade of grandeur, after all; if Milton blatantly cut him
down at every turn, who would be able to understand why Eve fell to his sinister
temptation?
The temptation of Eve begins in Book IX of Paradise Lost, line 531. Milton does
not even attempt to endear Satan to the reader throughout this scene; he is continually
referred to as the tempter, or as wily, guileful, or sly. Not once is he referred to
as Satan. This is what Milton has been building towards; here, we must forget that we
know Satan, whether we have fallen for Miltons tricks or not, in order to understand
Eves transgression.
In Book X, which is the last we see of Satan in Paradise Lost, we are introduced
to the idea of merit yet again, when, prior to Satans return to hell, Death says to Sin,

Satan now prevails, a monument of merit high to all thinfernal host (10.258). A casual
reader might take him at his word, but by this point in the poem no reader should be
casual. This is Death speaking. A spawn of incest who rapes his own mother. Despite
his words, it is impossible to believe that Milton would have us trust his idea of merit.
But then, Milton gives us one last chance to sympathize with Satan, when he tells us what
Satan did upon seeing what his temptation wrought:
He, after Eve seducd, unminded slunk
Into the wood fast by, and changing shape
To observe the sequel, saw his guileful act
By Eve, though all unweeting, seconded
Upon her husband, saw their shame that sought
Vain covertures; but when he saw descend
The Son of God to judge them, terrified
He fled, not hoping to escape, but shun
The present, fearing, guilty, what his wrath
Might suddenly inflict; (10.332-10.341)
Here, it is easy to feel an initial sympathy for Satan because we are told that he does at
least feel some guilt for his crimes. This feeling doesnt last very long, however, as
Milton is done with his feigned sympathy for Satan. After a moment, this scene feels
more like the departure of a guilty but unremorseful child looking to delay his
punishment, which is precisely what Satan is here. Hes not avoiding his own feelings of
inner guilt so much as any punishment which may be forthcoming from Christ or God,
and it is hard to sympathize with him any longer. After his departure from Eden, Satan

returns to hell, where he boasts first to Sin and Death and then to his fellows before he is
subjected to the punishment from which he could not truly escape, which, if I may say, is
justly merited by this point in the poem.
So what is a reader to think? With all of his conflicting presentations of Satan,
its sometimes difficult for the reader to understand what Milton is thinking. But his
portrayal more often than not does cause the reader to feel sympathy for the devil,
especially in this poems earlier books when he is less bound to follow biblical canon. So
how do we know for certain that Milton was not a Satanic sympathizer after all? There
are hundreds of different interpretations of this poem, and it is just as easy to argue that
Satan is Oliver Cromwell as it is that Satan is Charles I. It is also quite easy to argue that
he wanted to teach his readers, but what supports that notion?
I believe that the readers are warned before we even meet Satan in Paradise Lost.
This is important, because in order to pay attention to a lesson, one must know what is
being taught, and this warning pre-empts any sympathy we could have. By the time we
join the fallen in hell, the Epic Voice, the narrative voice of the poem, has already told us
what Satan will soon become. In the beginning of Book I, Satan is referred to for the
very first time in the poem, and he is called thinfernal serpent (1.34). But he is not a
serpent when we first meet him. Here is the very first red flag in Miltons apparently
sympathetic portrayal of Satan; he tells us, flat out, who Satan is and what he will become
(Foley, 42) In the following chapters, if we are won over by the devil and his glamorous
lies, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Though the presentation of this warning is quite subtle, it bears shocking
resemblance to Book V, and the warning God sends to Adam and Eve about how they

will be soon tempted to fall by Satan. Because of this warning, God is absolved of any
blame for mankinds fall from Paradise. They were given fair warning, and they chose to
fall. The readers predicament is much the same. We are warned by Milton when we
first begin to read but, like Eve, we are so taken in by Satans charms that we choose to
fall with him. Therefore, Milton has done his job, and if his readers fall then it is on our
own heads the blame must fall.

10

Works Cited
1. Bennet, Joan S. God, Satan, and King Charles: Miltons Royal Portraits.
PMLA 92.3 (1977): 441-457.
2. Berthold, Dennis. The Concept of Merit in Paradise Lost. Studies in English
Literature, 1500-1900 15.1 (1975): 153-167.
3. Foley, Jack. Sin, not Time: Satans First Speech in Paradise Lost. ELH 37.1
(1970): 37-56.
4. Loewenstein, David. An Ambiguous Monster: Representing Rebellion in
Miltons Polemics and Paradise Lost. The Huntington Library Quarterly 55.2
(1992): 295-315.
5. Rebhorn, Wayne A. The Humanist Tradition and Miltons Satan: The
Conservative as Revolutionary. Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 13.1
(1973): 81-93.
6. Riebling, Barbara. Milton on Machiavelli: Representations of the State in
Paradise Lost. Renaissance Quarterly 49.3 (1996): 573-597.
7. Steadman, John M. Magnific Titles: Satans Rhetoric and the Argument of
Nobility. The Modern Language Review 61.4 (1966): 561-571.

11