The Sonnets—What are they?
We’re not sure.
Oh we know that Shakespeare’s 154 sonnets are, with two exceptions, fourteen-line poems following a rhyming scheme of ABAB CDCD EFEF GG, that most of them are about love, that Shakespeare’s collection form something of a whole in three main parts. But we also have many questions about them that will never be answered to our full satisfaction.
Who is the youth to whom most of the sonnets are addressed? Is he a fictional character or is he a friend of Shakespeare’s? Who is the Dark Lady at the center of the sonnets in the second part of the collection? Is she fictional? Is she Shakespeare’s lover? Is she a courtesan? Is she the lover of a friend? Do the male references to love speak of friendship or of homosexual attraction? Does it matter? These questions are continually debated.
One of the things I love about Shakespeare’s sonnets is that they require no knowledge of the ancient classics. There are no direct references to Greek or Roman mythology, no direct references to other works of literature. To Shakespeare’s contemporaries, most of them could be immediately understood on a first reading.
Two things do make the sonnets difficult. First, English isn’t spoken quite the same way today as it was then. The good news though is that once you are used to Shakespeare’s idiom, this difficulty vanishes. The second problem is more interesting: the ideas he expresses are convoluted and subtle. A first reading, especially if read out loud to yourself, convinces you the poems are not nonsense, but it’s easy to lose track of what the poet means.
For instance in sonnet 129, what could “made in pursuit and in possession so” possibly mean? The difficulty in understanding this particular line has convinced some professional scholars to correct, without evidence from any source I should add, that it ought to read “mad in pursuit, and in possession so” which is easier to understand, but adds nothing to the sonnet. Consequently, many editions of the sonnet since the late 18th century have changed the line. To my mind, this reduces the poem; it is less economical, it repeats or reinforces an idea instead of expressing a new one as does the original.
The sonnets challenge you to understand them, but they challenge you on your own terms. With them, Shakespeare expects only that you understand English; he doesn’t expect you to know history or legends from the past. Read them, and try to understand them both individually and as a collection. Play with the images they evoke and change your mind as to what these are. Get together with friends, choose a single sonnet, and read it out loud. Each of you taking turns and reading them differently. Above all, have fun with them!
Sonnet 129—The fury of sex
The expense of spirit in a waste of shame
Is lust in action; and till action, lust
Is perjured, murderous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust,
Enjoy'd no sooner but despised straight,
Past reason hunted, and no sooner had
Past reason hated, as a swallow'd bait
On purpose laid to make the taker mad;
Made in pursuit and in possession so;
Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme;
A bliss in proof, and proved, a very woe;
Before, a joy proposed; behind, a dream.
All this the world well knows; yet none knows well
To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.
No one has ever written in English a better sonnet than this one and no one ever will. It’s perfect. It’s surprising that even Shakespeare was able to craft this. Its energy, insight and economy top everything else ever written in the language.
I prefer the original version of this sonnet. The only real difference between the version above and the version found in many editions is the first word of the third quatrain. It often reads “Mad in pursuit and in possession so;” instead of “Made”. Certainly “Mad” is easier to understand, but it also diminishes the poem. Why repeat such an important word and idea?
It’s much better to say that the madness is a thing made rather than repeat the fact that one is mad (in pursuit) and repeat it again (in possession). Let the reader work out what this means. Shakespeare moves his readers to puzzlement and leaves them perplexed, annoyed even, but thinking deeply. The meaning is both opaque and clear.
Sonnet 43—Blinded by love
When most I wink, then do mine eyes best see,
For all the day they view things unrespected;
But when I sleep, in dreams they look on thee,
And darkly bright are bright in dark directed.
Then thou, whose shadow shadows doth make bright,
How would thy shadow's form form happy show
To the clear day with thy much clearer light,
When to unseeing eyes thy shade shines so!
How would, I say, mine eyes be blessed made
By looking on thee in the living day,
When in dead night thy fair imperfect shade
Through heavy sleep on sightless eyes doth stay!
All days are nights to see till I see thee,
And nights bright days when dreams do show thee me.
For personal reasons, this sonnet is closest to my heart. I first read the sonnets in 1999 when I was in love and obsessed with a woman and thought about her constantly. When I closed my eyes (“When most I wink”) I saw not darkness but an idealized image of her (“my eyes best see”). When I went to bed, before falling asleep, I thought of her and hoped to dream of her. Anything before me paled when I compared what I saw to her.
Needless to say, she would have nothing to do with my puppy love. My heart broke and I’ve said enough! But surely my story is common. Most people have suffered heartbreak. Shakespeare expresses what any of us might feel but dare not say for fear of appearing weak.
Reading this sonnet comforts us. We are not alone in our shame, quite the contrary. We know we have someone with whom to share our darkest secrets and yet we are safe.
Sonnet 135—Oh, Austin, behave!
Whoever hath her wish, thou hast thy 'Will,'
And 'Will' to boot, and 'Will' in overplus;
More than enough am I that vex thee still,
To thy sweet will making addition thus.
Wilt thou, whose will is large and spacious,
Not once vouchsafe to hide my will in thine?
Shall will in others seem right gracious,
And in my will no fair acceptance shine?
The sea all water, yet receives rain still
And in abundance addeth to his store;
So thou, being rich in 'Will,' add to thy 'Will'
One will of mine, to make thy large 'Will' more.
Let no unkind, no fair beseechers kill;
Think all but one, and me in that one 'Will.'
This is doggerel; it’s more like a limerick than like a serious poem. It’s lively, witty, full of puns and double-entendres. It’s exactly like the jokes in Mike Myers’s Austin Powers movies: it’s meant to get some really dirty stuff passed the censors and it’s clever in an overly obvious way.
Saying “thou hast thy 'Will,'” is saying “You’ve got me”, and following it later with “More than enough am I that vex thee still” is boasting: “Babe, I should be more than man enough to satisfy you, but you keep complaining anyway.”
‘Will’ is William Shakespeare of course, but it’s also his sexual organ, his cock. When Shakespeare writes that his ‘will’ is hers, he’s saying his cock is hers, and then he flips it around. His ‘will’ is his sexual organ, and it’s hers, so it’s her ‘will’, and so her sexual organ too. But since it’s her sexual organ, he’s also implying her ‘will’ is her cunt. So it’s pretty clear he wants to fuck when he says “Wilt thou, whose will is large and spacious,/Not once vouchsafe to hide my will in thine?”
So why not
simply say “Let’s fuck!”? Because that would be crude of course. A wink and a witty word would better seduce a woman wise in the ways of the world.
“The sea all water, yet receives rain still” implies this woman is more than a bit of a social butterfly. She sleeps with other men, and William is upset that these “others seem right gracious”, or better lovers, than he is.
Of course the whole thing is very tongue-in-cheek. That’s what makes it doggerel. I am not putting down this sonnet. It takes just as much work to create comic effect as it does to create sadness or fear in one’s audience. And what’s life without a few bawdy jokes?
Tragedies and Romances
Tragedies show us what happens to people who willfully do what they aren’t supposed to do or fail to do what they must do. Their choice inevitably leads to a downfall of their own making. But sometimes Shakespeare wants to teach a moral that involves a setback rather than a full downfall, or he wants to warn us against dangers that are not within us. This is what we will find in his Romances. They are less terrifying than tragedies, but more moralizing than comedies.
Pericles—Read it to understand how good Shakespeare’s other plays are
This is a bad play, and for good reasons many people want to dismiss it from the Shakespeare canon. Paradoxically, this is also what makes it an interesting play to read. Once you are used to Shakespeare, once you understand his language more easily, once you get a good feel for how he manages action and characters, this play screams out to you that something is wrong.
Pericles is a prince who decides to win a bride by attempting to solve a riddle. If he solves it, he wins the princess. If he
Filling the Cheap Seats Page 10