Talk:Paradise Lost

"Paradife loft. A POEM Written in TEN BOOKS by JOHN MILTON" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Paradife loft. A POEM Written in TEN BOOKS by JOHN MILTON. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 17 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Seventyfiveyears (talk) 22:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

In the article, it mentions Milton's origins and the construction of his poem. However, I think it would be really great to hear more information and sources on Milton's origns. Additionally, how the many tragedies that are witnessed throughout his lifetime had impacted his final version of his poem. --Mbbahen (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

[resolved] Milton's purpose
I have given the article a skimread and I dislike much. But chiefly thou, O purpose in the lead: "Milton's purpose, as stated in Book I, is to "justify the ways of God to men."" This seems to suggest that Milton states in Book I that his purpose is to justify the ways of God to men. But Milton does not say any such thing. Milton invokes assistance "That to the highth of this great Argument I may assert Eternal Providence, And justifie the wayes of God to men." Now we all know that this is no place for original research. But this seems a lot to me like a fairly traditional invocation asking for assistance in relating what follows. Since Milton has just alluded to Hesiod, who himself relates that the muses told him to sing of them first and last, etc.. It is painful to me that Wikipedia says that Milton's purpose is etc. and stinking a lot like Wikipedia's usual distortion of what its sources actually say.

Find me a source that says that such is Milton's purpose and that Milton said that such was his purpose. For Milton does not in those lines say that his purpose with Paradise Lost is to justify the ways of God to men. Milton says in those lines that with some help he might do his poem. His poem pertains to Eternal Providence etc. Therefore he may assert it with the help etc..

For nine days I will leave things as they are. I will return with blotting. I will blot out that purpose from the book of Milton. Untitled50reg (talk) 21:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * It seems to have turned up here, unreferenced of course. Accordingly I will not accept any sources which succeed this date. Untitled50reg (talk) 12:18, 30 January 2021 (UTC)


 * "[[s:Page:Paradise_lost_by_Milton,_John.djvu/349|See with what heat these dogs of Hell advance

To waste and havoc yonder World.]]" Yea verily "I am as poor as Job, my lord, but not so patient: your lordship may minister the potion." For "[[s:Paradise_Lost_(1674)/Book_II|whom should I obey But thee? whom follow? Thou wilt bring me soon To that new world of light and bliss,]]" where such fallacious purpose is forgot. I am going to cut it and not bother waiting for sources to not turn up. Untitled50reg (talk) 21:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Way to many images
MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE and MOS:SANDWICH seems to have been way to ignored here. This article is not a William Blake gallery. One image of Satan, one of Adam and Eve etc is more reasonable. "A gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. Just as we seek to ensure that the prose of an article is clear, precise and engaging, galleries should be similarly well-crafted." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


 * @Gråbergs Gråa Sång And here I am nearly a year later thinking "why is this article a William Blake gallery"? Phew. I don't want to go see what it looked like before you got to it. I'll go take out some more. -- asilvering (talk) 06:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * We'll get there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:01, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Illustration for Book 3, Creation of Man
I would correct this if I could, but it is complicated. The illustration shown as the Creation of Man is not actually by John Baptist Medina, but is an engraving by Michael Burgesse based Medina's work. Since this was how artistic works were reproduced by necessity, perhaps it is correct to attribute it to Medina, but I suspect it should be done as something like, "Engraving by Michael Burgesse, based on John Baptist Medina".

Also, I have no source, but it seems doubtful that the illustration was actually called Creation of Man, since it shows Satan, apparently debating with God. It is definitely not Adam or any human. The mistake originates, I believe, from the illustration being used as a plate prefacing Book 3, which is entitled Creation of Man. So our caption, I think, should be something like, "Plate prefacing Book 3, Creation of Man, engraving by Michael Burgesse based on John Baptist Medina". I will make this change based on the preceding justification. Taquito1 (talk) 14:20, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Looking for a mention of translations
I would expect Paradise Lost has been translated into other languages, & glancing at the German & French versions of this article it has been. It would enrich this article if an account of translations -- & which have proven to be more influential or successful than others -- were included. -- llywrch (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)