Editing Prometheus (section)

====Percy Bysshe Shelley====
[[Percy Shelley]] published his four-act lyrical drama titled ''[[Prometheus Unbound (Shelley)|Prometheus Unbound]]'' in 1820. His version was written in response to the version of myth as presented by Aeschylus and is orientated to the high British Idealism and high British Romanticism prevailing in Shelley's own time. Shelley, as the author himself discusses, admits the debt of his version of the myth to [[Aeschylus]] and the Greek poetic tradition which he assumes is familiar to readers of his own lyrical drama. For example, it is necessary to understand and have knowledge of the reason for Prometheus' punishment if the reader is to form an understanding of whether the exoneration portrayed by Shelley in his version of the Prometheus myth is justified or unjustified. The quote of Shelley's own words describing the extent of his indebtedness to Aeschylus has been published in numerous sources publicly available.

The literary critic [[Harold Bloom]] in his book ''Shelley's Mythmaking'' expresses his high expectation of Shelley in the tradition of mythopoeic poetry. For Bloom, Percy Shelley's relationship to the tradition of mythology in poetry "culminates in 'Prometheus'. The poem provides a complete statement of Shelley's vision."<ref>Bloom, Harold (1959). ''Shelley's Mythmaking,'' Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, p. 9.</ref> Bloom devotes two full chapters in this 1959 book to Shelley's lyrical drama ''Prometheus Unbound''.<ref>Bloom (1959), Chapter 3.</ref> Following his 1959 book, Bloom edited an anthology of critical opinions on Shelley for Chelsea House Publishers where he concisely stated his opinion as, "Shelley is the unacknowledged ancestor of [[Wallace Stevens]]' conception of poetry as the [[Wallace Stevens#Supreme Fiction|Supreme Fiction]], and ''Prometheus Unbound'' is the most capable imagining, outside of [[William Blake|Blake]] and [[Wordsworth]], that the Romantic quest for a Supreme Fiction has achieved."<ref>Bloom, Harold (1985). ''Percy Bysshe Shelley''. Modern Critical Editions, p. 8. Chelsea House Publishers, New York.</ref>

Within the pages of his Introduction to the Chelsea House edition on Percy Shelley, Bloom also identifies the six major schools of criticism opposing Shelley's idealised mythologising version of the Prometheus myth. In sequence, the opposing schools to Shelley are given as: (i) The school of "common sense", (ii) The Christian orthodox, (iii) The school of "wit", (iv) Moralists, of most varieties, (v) The school of "classic" form, and (vi) The Precisionists, or concretists.<ref>Bloom, Harold (1985). ''Percy Bysshe Shelley''. Modern Critical Editions, p. 27. Chelsea House Publishers, New York.</ref> Although Bloom is least interested in the first two schools, the second one on the Christian orthodox has special bearing on the reception of the Prometheus myth during late Roman antiquity and the synthesis of the New Testament canon. The Greek origins of the Prometheus myth have already discussed the ''Titanomachia'' as placing the cosmic struggle of Olympus at some point in time preceding the creation of humanity, while in the New Testament synthesis there was a strong assimilation of the prophetic tradition of the Hebrew prophets and their strongly eschatological orientation. This contrast placed a strong emphasis within the ancient Greek consciousness as to the moral and ontological acceptance of the mythology of the ''Titanomachia'' as an accomplished mythological history, whereas for the synthesis of the New Testament narratives this placed religious consciousness within the community at the level of an anticipated ''eschaton'' not yet accomplished. Neither of these would guide Percy Shelley in his poetic retelling and re-integration of the Prometheus myth.<ref>Bloom, Harold (1959). ''Shelley's Mythmaking,'' Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, p. 29.</ref>

To the Socratic Greeks, one important aspect of the discussion of religion would correspond to the philosophical discussion of 'becoming' with respect to the New Testament [[syncretism]] rather than the [[ontological]] discussion of 'being' which was more prominent in the ancient Greek experience of mythologically oriented cult and religion.<ref>Heidegger, Martin. ''Being and Time.''</ref> For Shelley, both of these reading were to be substantially discounted in preference to his own concerns for promoting his own version of an idealised consciousness of a society guided by the precepts of [[High British Romanticism]] and [[High British Idealism]].<ref>Bloom, Harold (1985). ''Percy Bysshe Shelley''. Modern Critical Editions, p. 28. Chelsea House Publishers, New York.</ref>