What do you think?
Rate this book
Areopagitica
This Elibron Classics book is a facsimile reprint of a 1868 edition by Alex. Murray & Son, London.
85 pages, Paperback
First published November 23, 1644
130 people are currently reading
3707 people want to read
About the author
John Milton
3,257 books2,191 followersPeople best know John Milton, English scholar, for
Paradise Lost
, the epic poem of 1667 and an account of fall of humanity from grace.
Beelzebub, one fallen angel in Paradise Lost, of John Milton, lay in power next to Satan.
Belial, one fallen angel, rebelled against God in Paradise Lost of John Milton.
John Milton, polemicist, man of letters, served the civil Commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell. He wrote in blank verse at a time of religious flux and political upheaval.
Prose of John Milton reflects deep personal convictions, a passion for freedom and self-determination, and the urgent issues and political turbulence of his day. He wrote in Latin, Greek, and Italian and achieved international renown within his lifetime, and his celebrated Areopagitica (1644) in condemnation of censorship before publication among most influential and impassioned defenses of free speech and the press of history.
William Hayley in biography of 1796 called and generally regarded John Milton, the "greatest ... author," "as one of the preeminent writers in the ... language," though since his death, critical reception oscillated often on his republicanism in the centuries. Samuel Johnson praised, "with respect to design may claim the first place, and with respect to performance, the second, among the productions of the ... mind," though he, a Tory and recipient of royal patronage, described politics of Milton, an "acrimonious and surly republican."
Because of his republicanism, centuries of British partisanship subjected John Milton.
Beelzebub, one fallen angel in Paradise Lost, of John Milton, lay in power next to Satan.
Belial, one fallen angel, rebelled against God in Paradise Lost of John Milton.
John Milton, polemicist, man of letters, served the civil Commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell. He wrote in blank verse at a time of religious flux and political upheaval.
Prose of John Milton reflects deep personal convictions, a passion for freedom and self-determination, and the urgent issues and political turbulence of his day. He wrote in Latin, Greek, and Italian and achieved international renown within his lifetime, and his celebrated Areopagitica (1644) in condemnation of censorship before publication among most influential and impassioned defenses of free speech and the press of history.
William Hayley in biography of 1796 called and generally regarded John Milton, the "greatest ... author," "as one of the preeminent writers in the ... language," though since his death, critical reception oscillated often on his republicanism in the centuries. Samuel Johnson praised, "with respect to design may claim the first place, and with respect to performance, the second, among the productions of the ... mind," though he, a Tory and recipient of royal patronage, described politics of Milton, an "acrimonious and surly republican."
Because of his republicanism, centuries of British partisanship subjected John Milton.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 213 reviews
June 7, 2016
As a book lover, it’s difficult not to have a warm regard for Milton after reading this. His defense of free speech is both eloquent and persuasive. Drawing on history, philosophy, and religion, he puts forward multiple arguments for the free printing of books, all of which build upon one another, and almost all of which are still relevant today.
And, in addition to Milton’s compelling argument, we get his masterful prose. To many modern readers, I suspect this will be dense and hard to follow at first. Nonetheless, Milton’s writing style is more accessible than some of his contemporaries—like Defoe, Swift, Bunyan, Hobbes, and Locke—and far more lyrical. He uses his towering poetic abilities to good effect here, and many quotes are worth committing to memory.
To all lovers of books and the free circulation of knowledge and opinion, let us take our hats off to John Milton.
And, in addition to Milton’s compelling argument, we get his masterful prose. To many modern readers, I suspect this will be dense and hard to follow at first. Nonetheless, Milton’s writing style is more accessible than some of his contemporaries—like Defoe, Swift, Bunyan, Hobbes, and Locke—and far more lyrical. He uses his towering poetic abilities to good effect here, and many quotes are worth committing to memory.
To all lovers of books and the free circulation of knowledge and opinion, let us take our hats off to John Milton.
Read
May 16, 2019“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
February 9, 2022
En este panfleto dirigido al Parlamento, John Milton realiza una fuerte defensa de la libertad de prensa, más específicamente la libertad de imprimir y publicar libros sin censura previa. Publicado en 1644, ataca el sistema de licencias vigentes entonces en Inglaterra: para publicar, un escritor debía contar con una licencia y todos sus manuscritos eran revisados previamente por una Comisión para decidir si eran aptos para publicación o no. Milton desarma aquí uno de los argumentos más comunes -y paternalistas-de la censura: que el Estado debe practicarla para proteger a las mentes maleables o inocentes de influencias perniciosas. Lo que Milton resalta, con argumentos religiosos, es que el ser humano no es un bebé inocente que necesita que el Estado sea su papá y su mamá: es un ser pensante con capacidad de discernimiento. Ningún libro bueno va a reformar a una persona fundamentalmente mala, y ningún libro malo puede corromper a una persona fundamentalmente buena.
Se lleva tres estrellas principalmente por la clase de redacción, rebuscada y compleja para un lector de la actualidad.
Se lleva tres estrellas principalmente por la clase de redacción, rebuscada y compleja para un lector de la actualidad.
November 26, 2022
105 sayfa ama günlerdir elimde. Yudum yudum okudum desem, okuduğum metinden nasıl keyif aldığım ancak anlaşılır sanırım. Böyle ustalıklı bir düzyazı, nefis, muhteşem. Milton’a hayran kaldım. Metni takip etmek o kadar keyifli ki, özellikle kolay anlaşılır olması ise böyle bir metin için paha biçilemez. Bu tarz metinler genelde karışık ve öyle olduğu için de dikkat ister, sonra da ya yarım bırakılır ya da okuyanın canına okur. Burada ise tam tersi, dönsem baştan başlasam hissi ile kapadım son sayfayı.
Fikir özgürlüğü üzerine okuduğum en iyi metinlerden biri. Milton’un her fikri sağlam bir argümana dayanıyor. Sansürün soyağacını çıkartıyor; ne zaman, nerede doğdu, nelere dayandırıldı, devletler ve toplumlar için sonuçları nasıl oldu gibi.
Her kitaplıkta hatta başucunda bulundurulmalı.
***
Ayrıca kitaptaki en büyük sıkıntı, dipnotta olması gereken açıklamaların kitabın sonunda olması. Baskıda bunun tercih edilmesini hiç anlayamayacağım. Eziyet yani.
Fikir özgürlüğü üzerine okuduğum en iyi metinlerden biri. Milton’un her fikri sağlam bir argümana dayanıyor. Sansürün soyağacını çıkartıyor; ne zaman, nerede doğdu, nelere dayandırıldı, devletler ve toplumlar için sonuçları nasıl oldu gibi.
Her kitaplıkta hatta başucunda bulundurulmalı.
***
Ayrıca kitaptaki en büyük sıkıntı, dipnotta olması gereken açıklamaların kitabın sonunda olması. Baskıda bunun tercih edilmesini hiç anlayamayacağım. Eziyet yani.
Read
June 1, 2023Mr. Milton turns his expressive talent to the subject of freedom of speech with this pamphlet issued in 1644, which I listened to as an audiobook. Through his persuasive prose, he seeks parliamentary support to relax the restrictions imposed on book publishing, to ease the pursuit of truth and progress of enlightenment. As with Paradise Lost, I enjoyed his writing style.
Authors of this era had to tread carefully with public arguments lest they stir the wrath of church or state. While he remains polite, Mr. Milton does levy punches. “Henceforth let no man care to learn, or care to be more than worldly-wise; for certainly in higher matters to be ignorant and slothful, to be a common steadfast dunce, will be the only pleasant life, and only in request.” What would this author have to say, though, about the social media energy that affects our society today, where mental engagement is decided by degree of volume or outrage rather than by logical strength? What would he say of the neo-dezinformatsiya that appears to meet with ever greater acceptance across our land? Our world is changing so quickly now. What can be done to promote the greater good in light of accelerating change? Is there a Milton among us to rise to this challenge? Questions.
Authors of this era had to tread carefully with public arguments lest they stir the wrath of church or state. While he remains polite, Mr. Milton does levy punches. “Henceforth let no man care to learn, or care to be more than worldly-wise; for certainly in higher matters to be ignorant and slothful, to be a common steadfast dunce, will be the only pleasant life, and only in request.” What would this author have to say, though, about the social media energy that affects our society today, where mental engagement is decided by degree of volume or outrage rather than by logical strength? What would he say of the neo-dezinformatsiya that appears to meet with ever greater acceptance across our land? Our world is changing so quickly now. What can be done to promote the greater good in light of accelerating change? Is there a Milton among us to rise to this challenge? Questions.
October 28, 2024
I listened to this on Audible read by Martin Oldfield.
I definitely should read this with my eyes, too, but I really appreciated his arguments and showing how the free interchange of ideas affects everything from dress to math to architecture to science. How our liberties are degraded by censoring speech. How the enforcer is injured by the act of enforcing the licensing injunctions.
I was shocked by how many similarities to 1984's society are displayed in his warnings. It seems like Orwell took Milton's descriptions to their logical endings and showed us what that society would look like.
I appreciated getting the whole argument and intend to return for the parts more carefully.
I definitely should read this with my eyes, too, but I really appreciated his arguments and showing how the free interchange of ideas affects everything from dress to math to architecture to science. How our liberties are degraded by censoring speech. How the enforcer is injured by the act of enforcing the licensing injunctions.
I was shocked by how many similarities to 1984's society are displayed in his warnings. It seems like Orwell took Milton's descriptions to their logical endings and showed us what that society would look like.
I appreciated getting the whole argument and intend to return for the parts more carefully.
April 22, 2020
This isn’t as simple as “freedom of the press” or “free speech.” Parliament originally said “you can’t publish anything without our approval.” That is going too far, and Milton was correct to protest it. Of course, Milton’s protest goes far beyond a legitimate critique of Parliament. He argues, however, for absolute freedom of the press.
Milton begins his argument saying censorship won’t stop scandalous books. That’s true.
Reasoning by analogy, Milton says killing a book is akin to murder because books have “the potency of life.” As man the image-bearer has reason, and such a killing is murder, so whoever kills a book, kills reason. Here is where that argument fails: while I have never read 50 Shades of Grey, I have seen excerpts. The author cannot write a coherent sentence; therefore, that book lacks reason. Therefore, burning that book doesn’t harm reason.
Milton begins a historical survey where he shows that in ancient times, Christian authors used heathen works. That’s true, but Milton has shifted his argument when no one was watching: what are we censoring and why would that be bad? When Plato speaks of the objectivity of truth, he is not causing a public scandal (well, at least not to us). When de Sade speaks of torturing women, he is.
And while some of what Milton writes in this treatise is wrong, he does give us a few wonderful lines: “Our English, the language of men, ever famous and foremost in the achievements of liberty.”
I suppose we need to make a distinction. Milton is opposing the type of censorship which must approve of every book before it sees the light of day. That is obviously impossible in today’s world. However, that is not the same thing as a censor removing and censoring a scandalous work after it has seen the light of day.
Milton’s strongest argument is his survey of church history and how the fathers used heathen works. Further, Milton has no problem with private citizens burning scandalous works, such as the magic texts in Ephesus.
Milton’s argument again shifts gears. He “cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue” that is never exercised. While modern libertines might use Milton’s arguments today, they reject his worldview. Milton wanted free speech in the context of disciplined virtue. I can certainly approve of that. He illustrates with an appeal to Spenser, whom he thinks “a better teacher than Scotus or Aquinas.”
He now moves to dangerous waters: God is bounteous to us to further the trial of virtue and the exercise of truth.
He says, “Let Truth and Falsehood grapple,” the implication’s being truth will win. What is unsaid is Milton’s premise that this only applies to a virtuous people, and that is not necessarily a given.
Milton begins his argument saying censorship won’t stop scandalous books. That’s true.
Reasoning by analogy, Milton says killing a book is akin to murder because books have “the potency of life.” As man the image-bearer has reason, and such a killing is murder, so whoever kills a book, kills reason. Here is where that argument fails: while I have never read 50 Shades of Grey, I have seen excerpts. The author cannot write a coherent sentence; therefore, that book lacks reason. Therefore, burning that book doesn’t harm reason.
Milton begins a historical survey where he shows that in ancient times, Christian authors used heathen works. That’s true, but Milton has shifted his argument when no one was watching: what are we censoring and why would that be bad? When Plato speaks of the objectivity of truth, he is not causing a public scandal (well, at least not to us). When de Sade speaks of torturing women, he is.
And while some of what Milton writes in this treatise is wrong, he does give us a few wonderful lines: “Our English, the language of men, ever famous and foremost in the achievements of liberty.”
I suppose we need to make a distinction. Milton is opposing the type of censorship which must approve of every book before it sees the light of day. That is obviously impossible in today’s world. However, that is not the same thing as a censor removing and censoring a scandalous work after it has seen the light of day.
Milton’s strongest argument is his survey of church history and how the fathers used heathen works. Further, Milton has no problem with private citizens burning scandalous works, such as the magic texts in Ephesus.
Milton’s argument again shifts gears. He “cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue” that is never exercised. While modern libertines might use Milton’s arguments today, they reject his worldview. Milton wanted free speech in the context of disciplined virtue. I can certainly approve of that. He illustrates with an appeal to Spenser, whom he thinks “a better teacher than Scotus or Aquinas.”
He now moves to dangerous waters: God is bounteous to us to further the trial of virtue and the exercise of truth.
He says, “Let Truth and Falsehood grapple,” the implication’s being truth will win. What is unsaid is Milton’s premise that this only applies to a virtuous people, and that is not necessarily a given.
December 14, 2017
I read this back in my senior year of high school. Going back and reading it now, I actually got the classical allusions. I also didn't remember how very Christian it is. Milton bases almost all of his argumentation on the Bible, which is something I don't remember focusing on when I read it in high school.
Given the current cultural climate, this is something that everyone should read.
Given the current cultural climate, this is something that everyone should read.
April 15, 2016
The title comes from Areopagus, the ancient Greek tribunal. It is a defense against printing licensing by the English parliament in 1643. It can be read as a defense for freedom of speech but there are great and grave important differences vis-a-vis what we think about such freedom in modern times.
Firstly, this is not about censorship. As Yale Professor John Rogers pointed out in his Open Yale class “Milton” that there is no defense for censorship at all. In fact, Milton advocated censorship in several instances. Licensing and censoring differs in the timeline of publishing, the ex-ante and ex-post. In between, the public can make up its mind. It is the ex-ante control of printing press that Milton decried.
Secondly, Milton’s anchoring point is Christian Protestantism, which is vastly different from the secular humanism’s argument from “Rights”. We are familiar with the check-and-balance argument to foster the freedom of speech through the Enlightenment. But the modern emphasis on such Rights for Expression has an implicit or explicit rejection of religious restrictions. Religious faith has often been casted as the natural nemesis of such freedoms. How did Milton manage to argue from the seemingly antipodal position? I will elaborate this point shortly.
Lastly, in my opinion, the enduring power of this essay lies less in its political view but its poetic imageries. One may incline to assign his theological argument to the narrower category of his time, but one can hardly resist the potency of his language. The galvanizing quality of his argument comes from a swirling array of images from ancient Greek myth and Bible, forming in a riotous yet organized assault to the mimsy cowardice of the licensing ordinance. This is not a decorous, highly-polished, air-tight treatise. It has a gushing, slashing, rough-hewed, galloping quality, of which
I am enthralled if not always persuaded.
In summary, even one shares no religious belief, one can still find much to enjoy in the sheer power of English language in the hand of the fiery poetic Vulcan.
—
Now, return to my second point about the actual argument. Milton did not take on our contemporary equalitarian view of everyone has the rights to be heard, instead, he argued from the Christian God, Freewill and Sin, the obscurity of human knowledge of Truth, and the presumptuous ability of selected bodies to control what is considered Truth.
Milton’s starting point is startlingly alien to most secular moderns, given how much we are taught about the unfortunate apple-eating incidence in the Garden. The disgruntle against being casted out of Paradise for such an innocent offense may be the source of much of our rejection to a God who punish disobedience with such disproportional penalty. (Just imagine a child reaching for a forbidden slice of pizza and finding out that he is sent to the street with nothing but his undershirt and a blankie). Yet here Milton acclaimed such views as “foolish tongues! When God gave him [Adam] reason, he gave him freedom to choose, for reason is but choosing; he had been else a mere artificial Adam, such an Adam as he is in the motions [automaton].” The gift of the world is to offer a dizzyingly abundance of choices, and the proper attitude and response to God’s gift is through the exercise of his intelligence. In fact, Milton showed his Protestantism openly by declaring the intermediating one’s faith from one’s own reasoning is a heresy “.. if he believe things only because his pastor says so, or the Assembly so determines, without knowing other reasons, though his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy”. He inveigled against the “excremental” whiteness of “blank virtue”.
According to Milton, human can only know Good through Evil, and this knowledge is not easy and never complete. Milton described the Truth through a particularly bloody tale of Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris. The broken form of Osiris was torn to thousands of piece, while Isis searched all places to gather him up. Such is the Truth in the world of men; it is through that struggle of choosing and piecing together that we can make sense of our existence. Even though Milton clearly indicates that only the second coming of Christ would put all things in its original perfection, but prior to that, the existential conditions of human is to allow the choices to flower freely, trusting both the strength of Truth and human’s own discerning intelligence to approach the ultimate Truth.
Milton’s image of Truth as sunlight has echoed through the ages. The blinding light of Truth may make us “stark blind” if we “look not wisely on the sun itself”, which may have informed the canonical position of mainline Protestantism against any human acclaim for ultimate authority. This human imperfectiblity may have come from St. Augustine, maybe related to the Negative Capacity, the impossibility for human intelligence to arrive at the perfect Truth.(It is a perpetual noise band around the “signal” in statistical term, cross-sectionally, so to speak). Here Milton developed into a principle of humility and tolerance, as well as explicit hostility to the Truth monopolizing “popery”. Emily Dickinson echoed as in
Tell all the truth but tell it slant —
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise
As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind —
In the end, according to Milton, we all fumble in the half-light, “in dust and heat”. No one should monopolize the shafts of light of which we seek our own paths. Hence let all flowers and weeds compete for our public opinion and private persuasion, but rejecting the administering officials’ attempt to “bring a famine upon our minds” through “the tonnaging and poundaging” of the custom-house of certain republicans.
Firstly, this is not about censorship. As Yale Professor John Rogers pointed out in his Open Yale class “Milton” that there is no defense for censorship at all. In fact, Milton advocated censorship in several instances. Licensing and censoring differs in the timeline of publishing, the ex-ante and ex-post. In between, the public can make up its mind. It is the ex-ante control of printing press that Milton decried.
Secondly, Milton’s anchoring point is Christian Protestantism, which is vastly different from the secular humanism’s argument from “Rights”. We are familiar with the check-and-balance argument to foster the freedom of speech through the Enlightenment. But the modern emphasis on such Rights for Expression has an implicit or explicit rejection of religious restrictions. Religious faith has often been casted as the natural nemesis of such freedoms. How did Milton manage to argue from the seemingly antipodal position? I will elaborate this point shortly.
Lastly, in my opinion, the enduring power of this essay lies less in its political view but its poetic imageries. One may incline to assign his theological argument to the narrower category of his time, but one can hardly resist the potency of his language. The galvanizing quality of his argument comes from a swirling array of images from ancient Greek myth and Bible, forming in a riotous yet organized assault to the mimsy cowardice of the licensing ordinance. This is not a decorous, highly-polished, air-tight treatise. It has a gushing, slashing, rough-hewed, galloping quality, of which
I am enthralled if not always persuaded.
In summary, even one shares no religious belief, one can still find much to enjoy in the sheer power of English language in the hand of the fiery poetic Vulcan.
—
Now, return to my second point about the actual argument. Milton did not take on our contemporary equalitarian view of everyone has the rights to be heard, instead, he argued from the Christian God, Freewill and Sin, the obscurity of human knowledge of Truth, and the presumptuous ability of selected bodies to control what is considered Truth.
Milton’s starting point is startlingly alien to most secular moderns, given how much we are taught about the unfortunate apple-eating incidence in the Garden. The disgruntle against being casted out of Paradise for such an innocent offense may be the source of much of our rejection to a God who punish disobedience with such disproportional penalty. (Just imagine a child reaching for a forbidden slice of pizza and finding out that he is sent to the street with nothing but his undershirt and a blankie). Yet here Milton acclaimed such views as “foolish tongues! When God gave him [Adam] reason, he gave him freedom to choose, for reason is but choosing; he had been else a mere artificial Adam, such an Adam as he is in the motions [automaton].” The gift of the world is to offer a dizzyingly abundance of choices, and the proper attitude and response to God’s gift is through the exercise of his intelligence. In fact, Milton showed his Protestantism openly by declaring the intermediating one’s faith from one’s own reasoning is a heresy “.. if he believe things only because his pastor says so, or the Assembly so determines, without knowing other reasons, though his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy”. He inveigled against the “excremental” whiteness of “blank virtue”.
According to Milton, human can only know Good through Evil, and this knowledge is not easy and never complete. Milton described the Truth through a particularly bloody tale of Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris. The broken form of Osiris was torn to thousands of piece, while Isis searched all places to gather him up. Such is the Truth in the world of men; it is through that struggle of choosing and piecing together that we can make sense of our existence. Even though Milton clearly indicates that only the second coming of Christ would put all things in its original perfection, but prior to that, the existential conditions of human is to allow the choices to flower freely, trusting both the strength of Truth and human’s own discerning intelligence to approach the ultimate Truth.
Milton’s image of Truth as sunlight has echoed through the ages. The blinding light of Truth may make us “stark blind” if we “look not wisely on the sun itself”, which may have informed the canonical position of mainline Protestantism against any human acclaim for ultimate authority. This human imperfectiblity may have come from St. Augustine, maybe related to the Negative Capacity, the impossibility for human intelligence to arrive at the perfect Truth.(It is a perpetual noise band around the “signal” in statistical term, cross-sectionally, so to speak). Here Milton developed into a principle of humility and tolerance, as well as explicit hostility to the Truth monopolizing “popery”. Emily Dickinson echoed as in
Tell all the truth but tell it slant —
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise
As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind —
In the end, according to Milton, we all fumble in the half-light, “in dust and heat”. No one should monopolize the shafts of light of which we seek our own paths. Hence let all flowers and weeds compete for our public opinion and private persuasion, but rejecting the administering officials’ attempt to “bring a famine upon our minds” through “the tonnaging and poundaging” of the custom-house of certain republicans.
December 9, 2020
"Give me the liberty to know, to utter and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties"
John Milton visited Galileo Galilei in 1638 when the latter was under house arrest by the Inquisition for daring to say something that the Church deemed contradictory to the truth. Galileo was forced to recant his theories. Galileo died in 1642 and Milton gave a speech, aka Areopagitica in 1644 in response to an order seeking to ban books deemed to be blasphemous or libelous. Milton recalls his visit to Galileo and uses it as an example of why books should not be banned.
"There it was that I found and visited the famous Galileo, grown old a prisoner to the Inquisition, for thinking in astronomy otherwise than the Franciscan and Dominican licensers thought"
Milton's argument was exceptional and unprecedented in those times. He passionately argues for a society in which free speech is valued above all else.
"Truth and understanding are not such wares as to be monopolised and traded in by tickets and statutes and standards. We must not think to make a staple commodity of all the knowledge in the land, to mark and licence it like our broadcloth and our woolpacks"
This is more relevant today, as there more and more instances of religious intolerance and state suppression. Areopagitica should be considered as a rallying cry for tolerance. It should be abridged and made suitable for a more modern audience. I hope that it is also included in school syllabuses.
"Where there is much desire to learn, there of necessity will be much arguing, much writing, many opinions: for opinions in good men is but knowledge in the making"
John Milton visited Galileo Galilei in 1638 when the latter was under house arrest by the Inquisition for daring to say something that the Church deemed contradictory to the truth. Galileo was forced to recant his theories. Galileo died in 1642 and Milton gave a speech, aka Areopagitica in 1644 in response to an order seeking to ban books deemed to be blasphemous or libelous. Milton recalls his visit to Galileo and uses it as an example of why books should not be banned.
"There it was that I found and visited the famous Galileo, grown old a prisoner to the Inquisition, for thinking in astronomy otherwise than the Franciscan and Dominican licensers thought"
Milton's argument was exceptional and unprecedented in those times. He passionately argues for a society in which free speech is valued above all else.
"Truth and understanding are not such wares as to be monopolised and traded in by tickets and statutes and standards. We must not think to make a staple commodity of all the knowledge in the land, to mark and licence it like our broadcloth and our woolpacks"
This is more relevant today, as there more and more instances of religious intolerance and state suppression. Areopagitica should be considered as a rallying cry for tolerance. It should be abridged and made suitable for a more modern audience. I hope that it is also included in school syllabuses.
"Where there is much desire to learn, there of necessity will be much arguing, much writing, many opinions: for opinions in good men is but knowledge in the making"
March 22, 2025
John Milton lived from 1608 until 1674 and is famous for his poetry. However, he wrote many prose works including Areopagitica written in 1644 to defend the liberty of the press against the 1643 licensing order that asserted the government's right of pre-censorship of printed books. This freedom though should only be enjoyed by Protestants and not Catholics and Milton does not question post-publication censorship.
This piece also registers Milton's move away from the Presbyterians (who had assumed power) to the Independents who assumed power (e.g. Oliver Cromwell) after the trial and execution of Charles I in January 1649. They were only able to do this after Pride's Purge of the Presbyterians in late 1648. The King would not have been executed if The Presbyterians had been allowed to vote.
This piece also registers Milton's move away from the Presbyterians (who had assumed power) to the Independents who assumed power (e.g. Oliver Cromwell) after the trial and execution of Charles I in January 1649. They were only able to do this after Pride's Purge of the Presbyterians in late 1648. The King would not have been executed if The Presbyterians had been allowed to vote.
October 24, 2023
ასე თანმიმდევრულად, ლაკონურად და არგუმენტირებულად, ისე რომ ყველა სფეროს და ასპექტს მოიცავდეს & განიხილავდეს, მგონი მილტონის გარდა, სხვა არავის გაუკენწვლია წერითი შეზღუდვების მომხრე პოლიტიკოსები. პოლიტიკოსები კი არა, საერთოდ ინგლისის პარლამენტს დაანახა რა ქაქსაც შეჭამდნენ მაგ წინასწარვე კრახისთვის განწირული კანონის რატიფიკაციით.
მოკლედ ძალიან მომეწონა. არც ერთი წინადადება და სიტყვა არ ყოფილა ზედმეტი, მთელი წიგნი მიხაზულ-მოხაზული და ანოტირებული მაქვს.
ნეტა სტალინს მაკიაველის მაგივრად, მილტონის წიგნები ჰქონოდა კაბინეტში, ნამუსი მაინც შეაწუხებდა (¿)
ეს წიგნიც ბ-ნი დავითის წყალობით აღმოვაჩინე და კიდევ მადლობა.
მოკლედ ძალიან მომეწონა. არც ერთი წინადადება და სიტყვა არ ყოფილა ზედმეტი, მთელი წიგნი მიხაზულ-მოხაზული და ანოტირებული მაქვს.
ნეტა სტალინს მაკიაველის მაგივრად, მილტონის წიგნები ჰქონოდა კაბინეტში, ნამუსი მაინც შეაწუხებდა (¿)
ეს წიგნიც ბ-ნი დავითის წყალობით აღმოვაჩინე და კიდევ მადლობა.
October 23, 2015
Very interesting historical speech, made by John Milton in 1644, on the freedom of speech and the freedom of press. Some favorite bits:
"For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was whose progeny they are.."
"Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; be he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye."
"In Athens, where books and wits were ever busier than in any other part of Greece, I find but only two sorts of writings which the magistrate cared to take notice of; those either blasphemous and atheistical, or libellous. Thus the books of Protagoras were by the judges of Areopagus commanded to be burnt, and himself banished the territory for a discourse begun with his confessing not to know WHETHER THERE WERE GODS, OR WHETHER NOT."
"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates and hearing all manner of reason? And this is the benefit which may be had of books promiscuously read."
"For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was whose progeny they are.."
"Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; be he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye."
"In Athens, where books and wits were ever busier than in any other part of Greece, I find but only two sorts of writings which the magistrate cared to take notice of; those either blasphemous and atheistical, or libellous. Thus the books of Protagoras were by the judges of Areopagus commanded to be burnt, and himself banished the territory for a discourse begun with his confessing not to know WHETHER THERE WERE GODS, OR WHETHER NOT."
"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates and hearing all manner of reason? And this is the benefit which may be had of books promiscuously read."
November 6, 2018
Simply stunning. Quite possibly, the best defense of freedom of thought, in the English language.
March 14, 2024
Some great arguments and great quotes (although he seems to take it for granted that “blasphemous” books should still be banned, without saying who gets to define blasphemy). Well worth the read—and the mental exercise. They were smarter back in 1644.
Some of my favorite quotes:
“When complaints are freely heard, deeply considered, and speedily reformed, then is the utmost bound of civil liberty attained that wise men look for.”
“When God gave [Adam] reason, he gave him freedom to choose, for reason is but choosing; he had been else a mere artificial Adam, such an Adam as he is in the motions. We ourselves esteem not of that obedience, or love, or gift, which is of force: God therefore left him free, set before him a provoking object, ever almost in his eyes; herein consisted his merit, herein the right of his reward, the praise of his abstinence. Wherefore did he create passions within us, pleasures round about us, but that these rightly tempered are the very ingredients of virtue?”
“He that can apprehend and consider vice with all her baits and seeming pleasures, and yet abstain, and yet distinguish, and yet prefer that which is truly better, he is the true warfaring Christian.”
“Let [Truth] and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?”
“Truth is compared in Scripture to a streaming fountain; if her waters flow not in a perpetual progression, they sicken into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition. A man may be a heretic in the truth; and if he believe things only because his pastor says so, or the Assembly so determines, without knowing other reason, though his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy.”
“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
Some of my favorite quotes:
“When complaints are freely heard, deeply considered, and speedily reformed, then is the utmost bound of civil liberty attained that wise men look for.”
“When God gave [Adam] reason, he gave him freedom to choose, for reason is but choosing; he had been else a mere artificial Adam, such an Adam as he is in the motions. We ourselves esteem not of that obedience, or love, or gift, which is of force: God therefore left him free, set before him a provoking object, ever almost in his eyes; herein consisted his merit, herein the right of his reward, the praise of his abstinence. Wherefore did he create passions within us, pleasures round about us, but that these rightly tempered are the very ingredients of virtue?”
“He that can apprehend and consider vice with all her baits and seeming pleasures, and yet abstain, and yet distinguish, and yet prefer that which is truly better, he is the true warfaring Christian.”
“Let [Truth] and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?”
“Truth is compared in Scripture to a streaming fountain; if her waters flow not in a perpetual progression, they sicken into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition. A man may be a heretic in the truth; and if he believe things only because his pastor says so, or the Assembly so determines, without knowing other reason, though his belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy.”
“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
July 26, 2023
As this is my first Milton work, and not a work of his poetry, I'd like to say that this man's argumentation is as top-shelf as his prose. He can make some of the best reductio-ad-absurdum arguments I've ever heard, appeal to Pathos in a way that doesn't compromise his logic, and makes honest pleas to the freedom of the press. I will definitely check out some of his other works!
March 29, 2023
Move over Shakespeare: I have a new favorite early-Modern English writer! jk, but this was a really interesting speech. I love when things written over 350 years ago are still super relevant. Really good ideas in only 40 pages, definitely worth the read.
May 5, 2008
Brilliant pamphlet in defense of free speech. Some of my favorite quotes include:
"I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary, but slinks out of the race, where that immortal garland is to be run for, not without dust and heat."
"For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul whose progeny they are; nay, they do preserve as in a vial the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them."
"As good almost kill a man as kill a good book: who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were, in the eye."
"And though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play on the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?"
"I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary, but slinks out of the race, where that immortal garland is to be run for, not without dust and heat."
"For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul whose progeny they are; nay, they do preserve as in a vial the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them."
"As good almost kill a man as kill a good book: who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were, in the eye."
"And though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play on the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing and prohibiting misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?"
January 1, 2013
Notable lines from the speech:
He that can apprehend and consider vice with all her baits and seeming pleasures, and yet abstain, and yet distinguish, and yet prefer that which is truly better, he is the true warfaring Christian.
. . . here the great art lies to discern in what the law is to bid restraint and punishment, and in what things persuasion only is to work.
They are not skilful considerers of human things, who imagine to remove sin by removing the matter of sin.
A man may be a heretic in the truth; and if he believes things only because his pastor says so . . . without knowing other reason, yet the very belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy.
We boast wisely our light; but if we look not at the sun itself, it smites us into darkness.
And though all the winds of the doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously, by licensing and prohibiting, to misdoubt her strength.
He that can apprehend and consider vice with all her baits and seeming pleasures, and yet abstain, and yet distinguish, and yet prefer that which is truly better, he is the true warfaring Christian.
. . . here the great art lies to discern in what the law is to bid restraint and punishment, and in what things persuasion only is to work.
They are not skilful considerers of human things, who imagine to remove sin by removing the matter of sin.
A man may be a heretic in the truth; and if he believes things only because his pastor says so . . . without knowing other reason, yet the very belief be true, yet the very truth he holds becomes his heresy.
We boast wisely our light; but if we look not at the sun itself, it smites us into darkness.
And though all the winds of the doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously, by licensing and prohibiting, to misdoubt her strength.
April 23, 2018
People who have never read a word of John Milton's poetry or prose are influenced by him every day. It is his view of heaven, hell, Satan, and Eden that almost everyone imagines when they conjure them up. But this short essay--the first serious argument in English on press freedom —is built into the fabric of our Constitution. We still use his arguments on the self-righting principle, the notion that given equal access to the public, good ideas chase the bad ones out of the marketplace, to defend libertarian views. Everyone from John Stuart Mill to Benjamin Franklin has echoed him.
Read
September 16, 2021An long-form essay/speech written against English censorship in 1644; also the source which most heavily inspired the founding fathers in the writing of the First Amendment. Milton's argument for the necessity of reading many differing voices and opinions is a) deeply and unshakably Christian and b) a necessary look at freedom of speech today, particularly for more fundamentalist circles (homeschool community, I'm looking at you).
August 30, 2024
"For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was whose progeny they are; nay, they do preserve as in a vial the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them. I know they are as lively, and as vigorously productive, as those fabulous dragon's teeth; and being sown up and down, may chance to spring up armed men. And yet, on the other hand, unless wariness be used, as good almost kill a man as kill a good book. Who kills a man kills God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye. Many a man lives a burden to the earth; but a good book is the precious life-blood of a master spirit, embalmed and treasured up on purpose to a life beyond life."
A stirring and rhetorically glorious defence of the free press, rivalling even Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill.
A stirring and rhetorically glorious defence of the free press, rivalling even Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill.
April 21, 2021
John Milton's defense of free speech is the oldest defense of free speech I am aware of. That doesn't mean it's the first, since my knowledge about the history of this subject is not that deep; I'm more concerned with the basic principles of free speech and how they should be applied. While Areopagitica may not be the most comprehensive defense of this fundamental right, it is laudable for its precision and its prose and its solid logic which stands the test of time, prevailing against centuries of fickle moral and intellectual fashions.
Milton introduces some of the pillars of freedom of thought in these pages, explaining the importance of protecting not only an author's right to produce offensive, challenging, ideologically divergent, and even heretical material, but the publisher's right to publish it, and the public's right to have access to it and to read it. Many of the arguments he puts forward are arguments we are readily familiar with in the 21st century, and they continue to stand as some of the most flawless and reasonable arguments in support of one of the most critical human rights in a civilized world.
Despite the long list of anti-free speech governments and movements that have come into and out of being since Milton's delivery of this speech, including Nazis and communists and religious zealots and politically correct zealots, the importance of free speech has never waned or been overstated. Even now, in an era in which every individual in a first world country believes that free speech protects *their* thoughts and *their* speech, the general principle of free speech as protection for all is not as highly regarded as one might expect. We see it frequently in campuses all over the United States, with dogmatic devotees of the current moral trends using whatever means they can muster to prevent heretics from being heard. We see it in a US leader who remarks, maybe jokingly or maybe seriously, that journalists should be silenced if they can't report the right things. And we even see it in journalists themselves, as they take up the torch of activism and political zealotry to use their own free speech protections to call for the removal of free speech protections from those who speak heresies against their beliefs.
While the specifics of many of Milton's statements may be dated and are certainly unfashionable now (constant appeals to God and religious power), the principles and truth of what he says are not dated. Whether it's fashionable today is of no consequence, since truth is always unfashionable.
Contrary to what one might expect of someone arguing from the vantage point of religious belief, Milton says that even "evil" and heretical and "wrong" things must be published and read, for one's virtue is not admirable if it has not been tested and challenged by exposure to difficult ideas, and one who has not learned about evil and dangerous things cannot be well prepared to resist them when the time comes. Remove the religious aspect from this reasoning and you are left with absolutely sound, applicable logic and undefeated truth that remains the most poignant defense of freedom of thought and expression ever written:
If you are not familiar with the counterpoints to your ideas, or knowledgeable about views that diverge from your own, you will not be equipped to defend your ideas against others, you will not be capable of a debate or dialogue with anyone who does not hold your very same assumptions, and you cannot claim that your views are valid if you can do none of these.
Freedom of speech removes the obstacles that might prevent you from gaining this familiarity and knowledge, paves a way for information to be freely and fairly shared, and ultimately will allow anyone to sharpen their understanding of complex issues. Censorship is the dismantling of this vital system of idea exchange. If an idea strikes you as so abominable that you find censorship seducing, it should occur to you that you're likely ill-prepared to refute that idea on level ground, and so you want this ground tilted in your favor. Like a weakling destined to face a muscular opponent in the ring, the weakling has two choices: train and devote himself to bettering his abilities so that he can face off against the opponent and have a chance of winning, or get on his knees and pray that someone rigs the fight against his opponent by bounding his hands behind his back and putting a blindfold on him. The former option is free speech, the latter is censorship.
Although these indestructible principles were laid down at least 3 and a half centuries ago, and have never been successfully refuted in speech or in writing, there are continuously born legions of individuals so dim and dull that they grow into adults who rally against this truth and fight for the spectre of authoritarianism and control, always under the guise of some ever-changing trendy moral purpose.
Milton's prose is poetic, though sometimes a bit burdensome to wade through given the seriousness of the subject. He stays focused on the subject well enough, but every now and then seems to trail off into some high-minded thought and whimsical branch that sometimes is enlightening, sometimes is distracting, sometimes is confusing, and sometimes manages to return us full circle back to the topic with renewed zest and clarity. Although this is a short read, it is one that demands constant attention (as all reading does, but ...) with possibly a lot of re-reading and slowing down.
Milton introduces some of the pillars of freedom of thought in these pages, explaining the importance of protecting not only an author's right to produce offensive, challenging, ideologically divergent, and even heretical material, but the publisher's right to publish it, and the public's right to have access to it and to read it. Many of the arguments he puts forward are arguments we are readily familiar with in the 21st century, and they continue to stand as some of the most flawless and reasonable arguments in support of one of the most critical human rights in a civilized world.
Despite the long list of anti-free speech governments and movements that have come into and out of being since Milton's delivery of this speech, including Nazis and communists and religious zealots and politically correct zealots, the importance of free speech has never waned or been overstated. Even now, in an era in which every individual in a first world country believes that free speech protects *their* thoughts and *their* speech, the general principle of free speech as protection for all is not as highly regarded as one might expect. We see it frequently in campuses all over the United States, with dogmatic devotees of the current moral trends using whatever means they can muster to prevent heretics from being heard. We see it in a US leader who remarks, maybe jokingly or maybe seriously, that journalists should be silenced if they can't report the right things. And we even see it in journalists themselves, as they take up the torch of activism and political zealotry to use their own free speech protections to call for the removal of free speech protections from those who speak heresies against their beliefs.
While the specifics of many of Milton's statements may be dated and are certainly unfashionable now (constant appeals to God and religious power), the principles and truth of what he says are not dated. Whether it's fashionable today is of no consequence, since truth is always unfashionable.
Contrary to what one might expect of someone arguing from the vantage point of religious belief, Milton says that even "evil" and heretical and "wrong" things must be published and read, for one's virtue is not admirable if it has not been tested and challenged by exposure to difficult ideas, and one who has not learned about evil and dangerous things cannot be well prepared to resist them when the time comes. Remove the religious aspect from this reasoning and you are left with absolutely sound, applicable logic and undefeated truth that remains the most poignant defense of freedom of thought and expression ever written:
If you are not familiar with the counterpoints to your ideas, or knowledgeable about views that diverge from your own, you will not be equipped to defend your ideas against others, you will not be capable of a debate or dialogue with anyone who does not hold your very same assumptions, and you cannot claim that your views are valid if you can do none of these.
Freedom of speech removes the obstacles that might prevent you from gaining this familiarity and knowledge, paves a way for information to be freely and fairly shared, and ultimately will allow anyone to sharpen their understanding of complex issues. Censorship is the dismantling of this vital system of idea exchange. If an idea strikes you as so abominable that you find censorship seducing, it should occur to you that you're likely ill-prepared to refute that idea on level ground, and so you want this ground tilted in your favor. Like a weakling destined to face a muscular opponent in the ring, the weakling has two choices: train and devote himself to bettering his abilities so that he can face off against the opponent and have a chance of winning, or get on his knees and pray that someone rigs the fight against his opponent by bounding his hands behind his back and putting a blindfold on him. The former option is free speech, the latter is censorship.
Although these indestructible principles were laid down at least 3 and a half centuries ago, and have never been successfully refuted in speech or in writing, there are continuously born legions of individuals so dim and dull that they grow into adults who rally against this truth and fight for the spectre of authoritarianism and control, always under the guise of some ever-changing trendy moral purpose.
Milton's prose is poetic, though sometimes a bit burdensome to wade through given the seriousness of the subject. He stays focused on the subject well enough, but every now and then seems to trail off into some high-minded thought and whimsical branch that sometimes is enlightening, sometimes is distracting, sometimes is confusing, and sometimes manages to return us full circle back to the topic with renewed zest and clarity. Although this is a short read, it is one that demands constant attention (as all reading does, but ...) with possibly a lot of re-reading and slowing down.
March 7, 2023
it was fine but there's only so much love I can give to a 50+ page long political treatise from the 1600s, ya know?
June 21, 2009
In Areopagitica, John Milton delivers a finely-honed argument in opposition to the Licensing Order of 1643, which restored strict censorship laws to England. Milton relies primarily on classical references; indeed, the title is an allusion to the Areopagus, a hill in Athens and the name of a council who sat in judgement on that hill. In a single word, Milton links the crux of his argument to the zeitgeist of Hellenic antiquity, which held a great fascination for learned individuals of the seventeenth century.
Milton's main argument concerns the fact that other societies, particularly Greece and Rome, did not employ censorship laws yet flourished nonetheless. In fact, Milton maintains that censorship represses society by stifling innovation and discourse and debate. He goes on to demonstrate that even if one could find incorruptible, pure jurors to study potential works for publication, it would still be a very daunting and unfeasible task.
In addition to his classical references, Milton draws heavily on supporting evidence in the Bible. This method of attack also underscores an important difference between Milton's perspective on "free speech" and what we con temporarily associate with "free speech." Milton's primary concern is the search for knowledge; he's interested in the Truth as an expression of divine purity. As a result, Milton isn't opposed to censorship outright--he remarks, for instance, that books may be burned after publication should they be deemed unfit for public consumption. Rather, Milton merely advocates against pre-judging a work before the public has a chance to judge.
Almost four hundred years old now, Areopagitica is nonetheless still a very relevant document today. Its name, and Milton's very academic tone, may deter some people from trying to read it. However, it's pertinent to several issues in modern culture--freedom of speech is one, as noted above, and it also pertains to the ongoing debate over the role of copyright in digital media. While copyright and censorship are distinct devices, both share in common the need to have control over a work; both, as Milton points out with regards to the latter, have the potential to harm a society even as they supposedly work to protect it. By understanding historical attitudes toward censorship, I have a better respect for the nuances of the issues we face today.
As an argument, Areopagitica is intriguing and valuable. As a composition, it's masterful. Milton employs a very stable structure with a clear introduction, in which he outlines the shape of his argument. In addition to his use of allusion, he goes out of his way to compliment his audience--i.e., the Parliament of England--always punctuating his arguments with, "And surely esteemed men such as yourselves" and so on. This is not a loud-mouthed soapbox rant but a very rational work of art, and that's what makes it so powerful.
Although I enjoyed almost all of Areopagitica, there is one part where I must disagree with Mr. Milton--that is, I would argue that one of his points is flawed. As he approaches the end of his speech, Milton opines for freedom of religion--save popery and superstition, obviously, or any such practices as may be deemed harmful to society--those religions should be "extirpated". He never gives any indication of who may determine what types of religious practice society may tolerate. Since Catholicism is only recently overthrown in England (a few decades is brief compared to its long reign before Henry VIII's intercession), England is no stranger to religious upheaval. It's almost a betrayal of one of Milton's earlier points, where he argues that even the best-intentioned of men may not be able to adequately judge the suitability of a work for print--here he seems content in young Protestantism's ability to judge if a religion is acceptable or not.
It's very interesting reading rational works by religious authors from previous ages, now that we're in an increasingly secular era. Biblical allusions can be a powerful ally, but religions have also been overused for justification of a myriad of Very Bad Ideas. It's a fine line these authors walk; Milton walks it with great skill.
Areopagitica is an excellent piece of rhetoric--a well-reasoned argument can be a pleasure to read, or to listen to, as the case may be.
Milton's main argument concerns the fact that other societies, particularly Greece and Rome, did not employ censorship laws yet flourished nonetheless. In fact, Milton maintains that censorship represses society by stifling innovation and discourse and debate. He goes on to demonstrate that even if one could find incorruptible, pure jurors to study potential works for publication, it would still be a very daunting and unfeasible task.
In addition to his classical references, Milton draws heavily on supporting evidence in the Bible. This method of attack also underscores an important difference between Milton's perspective on "free speech" and what we con temporarily associate with "free speech." Milton's primary concern is the search for knowledge; he's interested in the Truth as an expression of divine purity. As a result, Milton isn't opposed to censorship outright--he remarks, for instance, that books may be burned after publication should they be deemed unfit for public consumption. Rather, Milton merely advocates against pre-judging a work before the public has a chance to judge.
Almost four hundred years old now, Areopagitica is nonetheless still a very relevant document today. Its name, and Milton's very academic tone, may deter some people from trying to read it. However, it's pertinent to several issues in modern culture--freedom of speech is one, as noted above, and it also pertains to the ongoing debate over the role of copyright in digital media. While copyright and censorship are distinct devices, both share in common the need to have control over a work; both, as Milton points out with regards to the latter, have the potential to harm a society even as they supposedly work to protect it. By understanding historical attitudes toward censorship, I have a better respect for the nuances of the issues we face today.
As an argument, Areopagitica is intriguing and valuable. As a composition, it's masterful. Milton employs a very stable structure with a clear introduction, in which he outlines the shape of his argument. In addition to his use of allusion, he goes out of his way to compliment his audience--i.e., the Parliament of England--always punctuating his arguments with, "And surely esteemed men such as yourselves" and so on. This is not a loud-mouthed soapbox rant but a very rational work of art, and that's what makes it so powerful.
Although I enjoyed almost all of Areopagitica, there is one part where I must disagree with Mr. Milton--that is, I would argue that one of his points is flawed. As he approaches the end of his speech, Milton opines for freedom of religion--save popery and superstition, obviously, or any such practices as may be deemed harmful to society--those religions should be "extirpated". He never gives any indication of who may determine what types of religious practice society may tolerate. Since Catholicism is only recently overthrown in England (a few decades is brief compared to its long reign before Henry VIII's intercession), England is no stranger to religious upheaval. It's almost a betrayal of one of Milton's earlier points, where he argues that even the best-intentioned of men may not be able to adequately judge the suitability of a work for print--here he seems content in young Protestantism's ability to judge if a religion is acceptable or not.
It's very interesting reading rational works by religious authors from previous ages, now that we're in an increasingly secular era. Biblical allusions can be a powerful ally, but religions have also been overused for justification of a myriad of Very Bad Ideas. It's a fine line these authors walk; Milton walks it with great skill.
Areopagitica is an excellent piece of rhetoric--a well-reasoned argument can be a pleasure to read, or to listen to, as the case may be.
March 6, 2017
Truth is compared in scripture to a streaming fountain; if her waters flow not in a perpetual progression, they sicken into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition.
"I wrote my Areopagitica in order to deliver the press from the restraints with which it was encumbered," said John Milton of this work against censorship and in defense of a free press, which was published against the background of the English Civil War. Milton, whose earlier work, Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce was condemned and censored had a personal stake in this issue, and like that earlier work (in defense of divorce), here too Milton illustrates his points with references to ancient history, philosophy and Scripture. Though written as a speech, Milton had no intention of delivering it orally and this work was distributed as a pamphlet.
While revolutionary in his defense of free speech, as he was in his defense of divorce (and for that matter his depiction of a sympathetic Satan in Paradise Lost), it is as difficult to overlook his class biases and elitism here as it is to forgive his treatment of women in works like DDD, Samson Agonistes and Paradise Lost. Like many classic writers, Milton felt that the privileges of government should be awarded to men only of a certain social class background. This is in contradiction in some ways to works like Tenure of Kings and Magistrates, where Milton demonstrates that all men were born free and equal, but shows (not unlike Rousseau some years later in A Discourse on Inequality) that class distinctions arose through the establishment of social contracts and through the creation of laws and privileges for (and by) the ruling class. For the modern reader it is not without difficulty that one should try to separate the main thesis from the flaws of the writer as a product of his times. His arguments against censorship are undoubtedly strong, but I found myself having to grit my teeth at times as I read along.
"I wrote my Areopagitica in order to deliver the press from the restraints with which it was encumbered," said John Milton of this work against censorship and in defense of a free press, which was published against the background of the English Civil War. Milton, whose earlier work, Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce was condemned and censored had a personal stake in this issue, and like that earlier work (in defense of divorce), here too Milton illustrates his points with references to ancient history, philosophy and Scripture. Though written as a speech, Milton had no intention of delivering it orally and this work was distributed as a pamphlet.
While revolutionary in his defense of free speech, as he was in his defense of divorce (and for that matter his depiction of a sympathetic Satan in Paradise Lost), it is as difficult to overlook his class biases and elitism here as it is to forgive his treatment of women in works like DDD, Samson Agonistes and Paradise Lost. Like many classic writers, Milton felt that the privileges of government should be awarded to men only of a certain social class background. This is in contradiction in some ways to works like Tenure of Kings and Magistrates, where Milton demonstrates that all men were born free and equal, but shows (not unlike Rousseau some years later in A Discourse on Inequality) that class distinctions arose through the establishment of social contracts and through the creation of laws and privileges for (and by) the ruling class. For the modern reader it is not without difficulty that one should try to separate the main thesis from the flaws of the writer as a product of his times. His arguments against censorship are undoubtedly strong, but I found myself having to grit my teeth at times as I read along.
May 3, 2021
Not a fully general defence of free speech and publication. Milton writes here specifically against pre-publication licensing of books by official censors, and parts of his argument do not apply to other forms of censorship, and indeed he at points seems even to approve of post-publication book-burnings; or else persecution of individuals for their writing. You can read this as a careful staking-out of the grounds of debate -- Milton fighting the specific and not the general case -- but it is thereby less full-throated than it might have been.
While certainly in agreement with him that sending your books to licensors for imprimatur is a detestable throttle on the free exchange of ideas and opinion (nowadays, of course, they would be called sensitivity readers, though their objections no less theological or prudish in origin), this polemical failed to grab me. Milton spends too long on preliminaries, writes not boldly enough, fails to give the rhetorical punch I expected. Positive for values, and a few good lines, but ultimately skippable.
While certainly in agreement with him that sending your books to licensors for imprimatur is a detestable throttle on the free exchange of ideas and opinion (nowadays, of course, they would be called sensitivity readers, though their objections no less theological or prudish in origin), this polemical failed to grab me. Milton spends too long on preliminaries, writes not boldly enough, fails to give the rhetorical punch I expected. Positive for values, and a few good lines, but ultimately skippable.
February 5, 2017
"Where there is much desire to learn, there of necessity will be much arguing, much writing, many opinions."
It cannot be emphasized enough that the rejection of an idea should involve examination and refutation rather than its outright exile.
While we are fortunate to enjoy freedom of the press, our modern day takeaway should be to caution against self-selection bias.
We know that we tend to search for ideas we already agree with; this is further exacerbated by today's excellent user recommendation algorithms.
Why not take a pre-mortem approach, and failproof against our own biases? I would be interested in a functionality that studies my existing views and curates quality material from the very opposite spectrum, actively playing the devil's advocate.
It cannot be emphasized enough that the rejection of an idea should involve examination and refutation rather than its outright exile.
While we are fortunate to enjoy freedom of the press, our modern day takeaway should be to caution against self-selection bias.
We know that we tend to search for ideas we already agree with; this is further exacerbated by today's excellent user recommendation algorithms.
Why not take a pre-mortem approach, and failproof against our own biases? I would be interested in a functionality that studies my existing views and curates quality material from the very opposite spectrum, actively playing the devil's advocate.
September 20, 2016
Why is this not mandatory reading material in secondary institutions? Everything Milton writes is applicable to the here and now, but his Areopagitica hits home in a way that is unparalleled.
"As therefore the state of man now is, what wisdom can there be to chooses what continence to forbear without the knowledge of evil? [...] I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary, but slinks out of the race where that immoral garland is to be run for, not without dust and heat."
"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties."
"As therefore the state of man now is, what wisdom can there be to chooses what continence to forbear without the knowledge of evil? [...] I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary, but slinks out of the race where that immoral garland is to be run for, not without dust and heat."
"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties."
February 18, 2018
In the current climate, a work on the freedom of publishing books without getting approval from the government is particularly pertinent. Much easier to read than other Milton words, it approaches the issue from multiple angles, among which the historical, the positive, the normative, the sociological etc.
My only issue is that occasionally, it wanders. I think the writing could have been significantly improved by being more succinct.
Highly recommended.
My only issue is that occasionally, it wanders. I think the writing could have been significantly improved by being more succinct.
Highly recommended.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 213 reviews