Summary
This sonnet compares the speaker’s lover to a number of
other beauties—and never in the lover’s favor. Her eyes are “nothing like the
sun,” her lips are less red than coral; compared to white snow, her breasts are
dun-colored, and her hairs are like black wires on her head. In the second
quatrain, the speaker says he has seen roses separated by color (“damasked”)
into red and white, but he sees no such roses in his mistress’s cheeks; and he
says the breath that “reeks” from his mistress is less delightful than perfume.
In the third quatrain, he admits that, though he loves her voice, music “hath a
far more pleasing sound,” and that, though he has never seen a goddess, his
mistress—unlike goddesses—walks on the ground. In the couplet, however, the
speaker declares that, “by heav’n,” he thinks his love as rare and valuable “As
any she belied with false compare”—that is, any love in which false comparisons
were invoked to describe the loved one’s beauty.
Commentary
This sonnet, one of Shakespeare’s most famous, plays an
elaborate joke on the conventions of love poetry common to Shakespeare’s day,
and it is so well-conceived that the joke remains funny today. Most sonnet
sequences in Elizabethan England were modeled after that of Petrarch.
Petrarch’s famous sonnet sequence was written as a series of love poems to an
idealized and idolized mistress named Laura. In the sonnets, Petrarch praises
her beauty, her worth, and her perfection using an extraordinary variety of
metaphors based largely on natural beauties. In Shakespeare’s day, these
metaphors had already become cliche (as, indeed, they still are today), but
they were still the accepted technique for writing love poetry. The result was
that poems tended to make highly idealizing comparisons between nature and the
poets’ lover that were, if taken literally, completely ridiculous. My mistress’
eyes are like the sun; her lips are red as coral; her cheeks are like roses,
her breasts are white as snow, her voice is like music, she is a goddess.
In many ways, Shakespeare’s sonnets subvert and reverse
the conventions of the Petrarchan love sequence: the idealizing love poems, for
instance, are written not to a perfect woman but to an admittedly imperfect
man, and the love poems to the dark lady are anything but idealizing (“My love
is as a fever, longing still / For that which longer nurseth the disease” is
hardly a Petrarchan conceit.) Sonnet 130 mocks the typical Petrarchan metaphors
by presenting a speaker who seems to take them at face value, and somewhat
bemusedly, decides to tell the truth. Your mistress’ eyes are like the sun?
That’s strange—my mistress’ eyes aren’t at all like the sun. Your mistress’
breath smells like perfume? My mistress’ breath reeks compared to perfume. In
the couplet, then, the speaker shows his full intent, which is to insist that
love does not need these conceits in order to be real; and women do not need to
look like flowers or the sun in order to be beautiful.
The rhetorical structure of Sonnet 130 is important to
its effect. In the first quatrain, the speaker spends one line on each
comparison between his mistress and something else (the sun, coral, snow, and
wires—the one positive thing in the whole poem some part of his mistress is
like. In the second and third quatrains, he expands the descriptions to occupy
two lines each, so that roses/cheeks, perfume/breath, music/voice, and
goddess/mistress each receive a pair of unrhymed lines. This creates the effect
of an expanding and developing argument, and neatly prevents the poem—which
does, after all, rely on a single kind of joke for its first twelve lines—from
becoming stagnant.
D.N. Aloysius
No comments:
Post a Comment