One may not expect for The Sandman to have a similar theme to the classic epic, Paradise

Transcription

1 1 Nicole Ntim-Addae Professor González WRIT135: Age of the Anti-Heros Free Will in Gaiman s Sandman: Immortals and Choice One may not expect for The Sandman to have a similar theme to the classic epic, Paradise Lost, but both share their moral philosophy from the biblical story of Adam and Eve. All these texts question the idea of free will and moral agency. In simple terms, Adam and Eve was given the choice between knowing from the Tree of Life and forfeiting their immortality, or spending eternity innocent without knowing the good and evil in her surroundings. Her plight is similar to Dream, the titular character of The Sandman, and Lucifer who makes an appearance in both texts. Critics discuss the similarities between these three texts, pointing out that all of them deal with the concept of freedom of choice. Gaiman summarized his Sandman series by saying The Lord of Dreams must change or be destroyed. He makes his choice. The author leads the audience to believe that his story has more of an agenda in agency than initially implied. The series revolves Dream, a sibling of the immortal Endless, all of whom are personifications of their idea or concept, be it Death, Delirium (who was once Delight), Desire, Despair, Destruction, Destiny or Dream himself. Dream must rebuild his empire, but due to his own missteps, he causes his own destruction by the end of the series, causing the Dreaming, his realm, to be reborn and in effect, change. In the volume Season of Mists, we meet the oldest of the Endless characters, Destiny, with whom we wander the paths of his garden. Caption boxes outline the story behind Destiny s garden, and note that Not even Destiny himself could tell you where all the paths lead. With a character so closely

2 related to fate to admit that he does not know where all of the paths of his own garden go, one immediately jumps to the conclusion that free will is irrevocable and constant. However, after Destiny calls all of his siblings together for a meeting that has been destined by the Old Grey Women, the audience s ideas of free will are thrown out the window: Destiny must call his siblings together to spur Dream to return to Hell. In this scene, Destiny implies that even he has no control of his destined part to play in pushing his brother to go back to Hell, which serves as a catalyst for his own end. Dream expresses this when he states: Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes, we have no choice at all. The Sandman is as ambiguous about the true nature of free will as it is with its view on morality; there is not distinct set in stone person or being with free will under the Creator s Grand Plan, or purely altruistic motivations for their actions. The characters or humans are subject to Destiny, the oldest of the Endless. The characters only have something that resembles [free will]. The freedom to choose at some times and the inability to choose at other times is seen primarily in Dream and Lucifer s plotlines. Of the scholars have come forward to comment and critique the moral relativity or blue, orange and grey morality that exists in the Sandman, Jahlmar and Porter deal specifically with Seasons of Mists where the idea of free will comes into play. Critical discussions of Neil Gaiman s The Sandman in the last five years analyze the concept of free will. They focus on the free agency of Lucifer, and how he compares to the Miltonic Satan. Andrew Porter, a historian from King s College in London, and Daniele Croci, of Università degli Studi di Milano (University of Milan) both comment in awe of Gaiman s 2

3 metamyth that encompasses past and present [deities]. (Jahlmar, 2015). and focus primarily on Lucifer in their commentaries. However, The Sandman s titular character, Dream, is not left out of the discussion. Joakim Jahlmar, a PhD student of English literature at University of Gothenburg, makes note of Dream s apparent crux with free will and his freedom to do so. Galen Strawson summarizes the points of the philosophical concept of free will in the context of The Sandman graphic novel series in two basic questions: (1) Are we, as humans, free agents? (2) Are we, as humans, morally responsible for what we do? On this note, perhaps most literary critics would agree on both points, pointing to humans ability to choose for themselves Hell or peace, and whether they follow the [moralities] they believe. However, would the same hold true for the main characters of The Sandman, all immortals? Literary critics claim that Dream and Lucifer have what resembles free will, and I also assert that both Dream and Lucifer have greater agency than they realize. Lucifer is trapped within his own circular reasoning, while Dream is afraid to change and admit that he is wrong. [Lucifer] wonders how much of it was planned, but also take pride in knowing that if the wisest and most beautiful of Creation could not overthrow the Creator, no one could. His crux with free will is more complicated than that of the titular character, Dream who must change or be destroyed. Within The Sandman, if deities cannot have free will, then how can mere mortals? In Season of Mists, Lucifer leaves Hell, and he guides the occupants of Hell out, or rather, he alerts them of their choice in the matter of their damnation. As he said to Breschau, [The generation] remembers [you or your sins]. Why should you continue to torture yourself for sins which have long since passed? In Sandman, we question the reasons for Hell. Surely, it is the reflection of Heaven, but its occupants are free to do as they please, without knowing that they 3

4 have this agency. In questioning Hell, Gaiman opens the floodgates for questions on Lucifer s agency and character as a result. This is an example of something resembling free will as all of the occupants of Hell, with the exception of Lucifer, are not aware of their own agency in their decision to stay in Hell, or their treatment in Hell. In Danielle Croci s translated article, "Watching the Watchmen: Resisting Drones and the protester Panopticon ", she comments on the role of religion in controlling people s behaviour. Two of the most widely represented and recognisable cultural examples of the gaze [is that of the] supernatural and/or divine eye.and [the] pervasive gaze of technological surveillance [of government]. I would not agree with Croci on all accounts as the gaze of society permeates all institutions, governmental, spiritual and religious. She would argue that because of these intrusions, free will becomes an even more convoluted subject. Croci argues that the immortal characters of The Sandman are slaves to the institutions they represent, which is why Dream cannot change at the end of the series. Porter implies that Lucifer must fall for Hell to be a domain, and if he did not fall, someone else would have fallen and maintains that Lucifer follows the Miltonic pattern almost to the letter. This contrasts with what Joakim Jahlmar states, ironically, saying that Lucifer has more free will than the Miltonic Satan, but then contradicts himself by saying he did not truly have free will during his fall from Heaven, in which he notes that the Creator s power nullify the choice he did have. However, Lucifer [got] closer to reconciling with God in a way that the Miltonic Satan never had a chance to. (Jahlmar, 2015) Jahlmar notes and bases most of his argument around the similarities between Gaiman s The Sandman and Milton s Paradise Lost. Jahlmar notes Gaiman s interaction and drawing from the Miltonic Satan and turning Satan into 4

5 Lucifer. He is no longer the adversary, he is simply the first Fallen Angel. Hell is not only his punishment, but also his terrible domain in which he has creative power, like a god, to banish its inhabitants. Jahlmar states that free will necessitates the continuous option for change which he then constructs that Lucifer has some of the time, and briefly noting that Dream and the Endless are as close to free will capable in Gaiman s Universe. I do agree with Jahlmar that Gaiman essentially called out Milton when Lucifer commented to Cain We didn t say it. Milton said that, and he was blind. However, I disagree when he then states that Milton s Satan become the yardstick against which Gaiman measures [Lucifer]. Jahlmar argues that Gaiman loosely followed the structure of a Miltonic epic with introducing the characters with subtitles, and the use of Judeo-Christian themed names ranging from Azazel and Beelzebub, to Duma silence of the tomb. Also uses the rhetoric of Milton in his grandiose speech to the occupants of Hell. I agree with Jahlmar when he notes Lucifer as an unreliable narrator of his own story as his cardinal sin was pride. He further argues that the Lucifer of Sandman is not at all like the Satan of Paradise Lost, as he can leave hell without bringing it with him. However, Gaiman himself in other text that lead to intertextuality in Murder Mysteries claims that God destroyed another angel for Lucifer to be angered and rebel. His rebellion in The Sandman had little to do with humans, as it did in Milton s Universe, but rather with the concept of justice. Like many things in life, free-will is a continuum. There is not distinct pure free-will, as a biological being or pure determinism as a moral being. However, Dream and Lucifer are not biological beings, and should have an agency closest to the pole of free will. Jahlmar s and Porter s stance as Lucifer as his own person contradicts with his own admission that he wonders 5

6 how much of [his rebellion] was planned. I enjoy the fluidity of the concept of free will in the Sandman. In Sandman, the concept of free-will in itself is a choice: you can choose to exercise it, or be a willing participant in your fate, whether you are Dream, Lucifer, or an occupant of Hell. The choice is truly in your hands. Although there are times when it seems that the Creator meddles in creation affairs, free-will is in the hands of the being who wishes to use it as the critics of the field generally agree. 6

7 Citations 1. Jahlmar, Joakim. " Give the Devil His Due : Freedom, Damnation, and Milton s Paradise Lost in Neil Gaiman s The Sandman: Season of Mists." Partial Answers: Journal of Literature and the History of Ideas Partial Answers 13.2 (2015): Web. 2. Porter, Adam. "Neil Gaiman s Lucifer: Reconsidering Milton s Satan." The Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 25.2 (2013): Web. 3. Croci, Danielle. Waghorn, Neil J. "Watching the Watchmen: Resisting Drones and the "protester Panopticon"" Geographica Helvetica Geogr. Helv (2016): Web. 4. Strawson, Galen. "The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility." Philosophical Studies (1994): Web. 5. Strawson, Galen. Free will, 1998, doi: / v Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, 7