Shakespeare’s 116 th sonnet is all about true love, in the sense that true love must be considered pure, universal and unwavering in order for it to be considered true love. Shakespeare romanticizes and structuralizes true love in the sense of creating a formula for it: This is how it must be in order for it to occur. It must be unwavering, throughout time and forever, through good times and through the bad. The interesting thing about this sonnet, however, is that Shakespeare vows to renounce love should he be proven wrong. Shakespeare has always been known for his plays of love (Romeo and Juliet for example) and his love sonnets, so for him give the possibility of his renouncement of love is a huge deal.
Millay’s poem holds a stark contrast to the Shakespearean one, one may argue, however, we cannot be sure that she is actually talking about true love. She may be admitting, in this poem, to have being a slut, or that she may never have felt the kind of love that Shakespeare was describing. It definitely seems to be that she is describing lust and calling it love, but that may just be what I’m taking from it…
Great reading of Shakespeare's sonnet. But is Shakespeare's speaker renouncing love in the last two lines, or challenging the reader/audience to prove him that what he says is not true?
ReplyDeleteDo please avoid judgement in your comments, especially that the number of lovers in Millay's sonnet is not specified and may not, thought it may be, no more than two.