INTERROGATING ETERNITY


 Because Eternity has groaned twice prior to the entrance of the "Eternal
Saviour" into the narrative, his appearance at this point might seem to be a
response to Eternity's (and the Man's) discomfort. When, in the very next
lines, however, the scene shifts to Eternity itself, the narrator invokes the
temporal and narratological conjuction "Then" (21:1), which initially
gives the impression that the events that are about to transpire in Eternity
are a response, most immediately, to the dislocating cluster of images
which have just congregated around the sinking down of the Man and
which were introduced by the conjunction "Now" (18:11). The
"Saviour's" actions here can thus in no simple sense constitute a response to
Eternity's awareness of a crisis existing (ostensibly) beyond the scope of its
"harmonious" world, but rather constitute the narratively proximate cause
of Eternity convening as "One Man." This causal relation is, however,
virtually repressed as the Eternity bracket unfolds.
 Though the lines that shift focus directly to "those in Great Eternity"
embody a voice, technique, and tone at variance with the immediately
preceding narrative, this "Eternal" language is reminiscent of the
pseudo-propositional definitions of Eden and Beulah that functioned as
transitions between phases of perspective analysis in earlier sections of
Night I.
 Then those in Great Eternity met in the Council of God
 As one Man for contracting their Exalted Senses
 They behold Multitude or Expanding they behold as one
 As One Man all the Universal family & that one Man
 They call Jesus the Christ & they in him & he in them
 Live in Perfect harmony in Eden the land of life
 Consulting as One Man above the Mountain of Snowdon Sublime
 (21:1-7)
 Although in each case the definitions are conceptually problematic and
even paradoxical, the language the narrator uses to define "Eden," "Beu-
lah," or "Eternity" is couched in abstract pseudo-propositional syntax,
relatively free from the overlapping ambiguity that has dominated the
narrative up to this point. The information defining the "Council of God"
brings together prior narrative details in a new way: the "One Man" has
already appeared implicated with Luvah in the "robes of blood" passage
(though the robes are conspicuously absent from the Eternity bracket);
and "Jesus" has been mentioned only once-by Urizen -as the "soft delu-
sion of Eternity." It is therefore neither accidental nor unpredictable that
the central confrontation in this section is enacted between Luvah and
Urizen, for the "Council of God" is itself composed of images previously
associated with these two characters.
 Because references to "Eternity" have characteristically disrupted the
perspective of the Tharmas/Enion bracket before the reader has had any
context in terms of which tojudge its actions, Blake introduces the actions
of Eternity before he reveals to what extent those in Eternity are in posses-
sion of sufficient knowledge and power to make accurate providential


This temporal reading
presupposes Erdman's
reordering of the man-
uscript pages (generally
accepted) so that page 21
immediately follows
page 18.













"Eden the land of life":
only from the male
perspective dominating
the Eternity bracket
since, from the perspec-
tive of the Tharmas/
Enion bracket, in Eden
male immortality
depends on the seasonal
death of females (5:1-3).

Cf. Enion's lamentation
which differed from
both pseudo-
propositional and over-
lapping synax






The "Council of God"
covertly embodies fea-
tures of Urizen and
Luvah.