Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #4

-->

Entry 4 – November 2, 2011

Sonnet 71 enticed me with its somber yet resilient attitude towards death. As a sonnet, it fulfills all the necessary components and more. With a few exceptions (such as line 12), the meter and rhythmic structure of this poem fits that of a sonnet. The end rhyme schemes were consistent, although a few ended in slant rhyme rather than perfect rhyme. Many literary elements were imbedded successfully within this poem; alliteration, consonance, personification, metaphor, and anastrophe to name a few. Overall, the poem was able to intrigue with its strength of language.

As a piece of writing supposedly by William Shakespeare, it greatly disappointed me. Shakespeare appeals to me because of his ability to explore a multitude of themes within a simple piece of writing. When I look into any of Shakespeare's work, I can peal back layer after layer of meaning. He had opened my eyes to how literary elements could be so intertwined in order to provide a deeper profundity. I found this sonnet of his to be in stark contrast to many of his other works – barren. What he explores in this sonnet is a theme which has been told and retold by innumerable men. It would be as if Voltaire wrote about the correct methods to summer harvesting.

In his defence, some may argue that the constricting features of sonnet form limits the ability of the poet to fully express a range of ideas. This is not true.

Taking a look at the over-studied sonnet 116, we can see that it explores a plethora of ideas. It is passionate, witty, and overflowing with great metaphors. Maybe this is the reason for the popularity of Sonnet 116, and the relative obscurity of Sonnet 71. Both these sonnets were written by the same man.

Perhaps I am just being too picky, or have not yet realized how great this sonnet really is. To expect some sort of enlightening reverie from a mere fourteen lines of verse, is unrealistic to say the least. What really destroyed the magnificence of this poem for me, was the personal nature of it. I feel that the best poetry is written when ideas are humanized, and not the other way around.

The reputation of a man precedes him, I guess.

Written for English Literature 12

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #3

-->

Entry 3 – October 31, 2011

Wow. After consulting with two notable Shakespearean critics – Amanda Mabillard and W. J. Rolfe – I have found some incongruities which I would like to address. First and foremost, I have been consistently mistaken in my belief that the silent auditor within the poem was the speaker's lover. There is evidence to suggest that the speaker within Sonnet 71 is Shakespeare himself. According to Rolfe, there are many who believe that the collection of sonnets – including sonnet 71 – were in nature autobiographical because of their dedication to a certain Mr. W. H. (Shakespeare's p. XIV)

Accordingly, sonnet 71 was actually written for one of Shakespeare's patrons, a man by the name of Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton. This is where things begin to get interesting. Supposedly, the speaker is a notably older man, addressing the idealized form of a young man – Southampton (Mabillard par. 2). Keeping this in mind, the traditional interpretation of a lover becomes that of a dear friend. However, the extend of affection shown by the speaker seems to suggest something more than friendship – romance, perhaps. In her critique, Mabillard acknowledges the relationship between an older and younger man, but still refers to the silent auditor as the lover. It raises questions about the implied sexuality of Shakespeare, but we shall leave that sensitive topic alone.

Very little criticism was given to the sonnet as an individual entity. Both critics speak favorably about the sonnet, citing the good use of syntax; namely figurative devices. While Rolfe likens the speaker's tone to modesty, Mabillard suggests that it negatively connotes self-pity. I agree with the latter's opinion in that the speaker highlights the miserable condition of his life. Whether this is conducive to the author's melancholic mood or an attempt to evoke pity for the reader, I do not know for sure. However, I thought that this tone of self-pity greatly undermined the obvious purpose of the speaker; one seeking to lessen the pain caused by his death. At this point, I suspect that Shakespeare may have been trying to say the opposite of the poem's superficial context. He may be asking the auditor to keep memory of him even after his death.

Written for English Literature 12

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #2

-->

Entry 2 – October 29, 2011

My interpretation of the poem after a second reading remains much the same as the first. However, I am able to see the poem in a more positive light now. As much as the poem goes on to discuss the implications of death, it also explores the bond of love. Although Shakespeare's approach to the topic of death was banal, his approach to discussing love is unequivocally innovative.

In literature, love is commonly seen as being fickle, hard to obtain, or lacklustre. The subject of love frequently evokes the themes of loyalty, sorrow, and fidelity.

The speaker in the poem approached the subject of love with an attitude contrary to most of the afore-mentioned values. Instead of convincing his love that they can last forever, the speaker tells his lover to forget about him. Using a imperative tone of speech, the speaker forbids his lover from remembering him, even as she “ [looks] upon this verse” (ln. 6). The speaker basically urges his lover to expunge all thoughts of him, living or dead. The speaker construes this meaning in quite a forceful way, although the tone does become less harsh starting in line 7.

There are contradictions within the poem itself. As evidenced by the words “vile” (ln. 4), “clay” (ln. 10), and “decay” (ln. 12), the speaker's state of being after death is far from idyllic. Rather, his death brings forth sickening images of decomposition, and the entrapment of his body compacted into clay (the earth). I am tempted to say that the speaker purposefully painted this image in order to evoke some sort of pity for himself. Another possible explanation is that the speaker wanted to show his defiance to whatever death may bring.

If the former were true, then a conflict of theme would ensue; where on the one hand, the speaker persuades his lover to forget him, and on the other, he brings forth imagery evoking pathetic sentiments. If the latter were true, then the speaker is a magnanimous lover, as well as a person. While many men seek remembrance by the whole world, this man in the poem, seeks to fade into oblivion. Maybe this is true love, or maybe just the result of a drunken reverie.

Written for English Literature 12

Old Journal Entry On William Shakespeare's Sonnet 71: #1

-->

Entry 1 – October 28, 2011

Upon preliminary inspection, I found this poem to surprisingly be lacking in depth and originality. One would suspect that the poem, having been authored by none other than the great Shakespeare himself, would encompass some great literary profundity. However, the poem talks about a relatively overused literary theme; overcoming loss.

In his Sonnet 71, Shakespeare creates a speaker who has passed away. It seems reasonable to conclude that there are no underlying meanings other than the death of his physical body. The speaker focuses on the effect that his death on whomever he is addressing – which in this case seems to be his lover. If this is the case, Shakespeare has shown that the speaker is inordinately possessive of his lover. This is evidenced in the fact that he should try to control the thoughts and actions of his lover even during his afterlife – which must be a creepy experience for the implied auditor of the poem.

Although I can appreciate this half-zombie speaker's hopes of comforting his love, it seems redundant of a certain cycle. The cycle is something that any person could describe; death leads to mourning, mourning leads to consolation, consolation heals the wounds. The imagery that Shakespeare employs is also quite commonplace. The “bell” has always been synonymous to signalling of death (ln. 2). It is also not hard to see what he is referring to when talking about the dwelling place of the “vilest worms” (ln. 4). The speaker also describes being “compounded... with clay”, a very obvious reference to burial. These are just some examples of how a cliche effect was achieved by this sonnet.

Despite the cliche content, there are good examples of alliteration in lines 2 and 4. Shakespeare also employs pertinent diction. However, I felt disappointed and cheated in that this sonnet failed to amaze me. Death in itself, is such a powerful concept – especially when applied to the art of creating literature. It is innately terrifying, yet it is also mesmerizing. It is the cruel practitioner of termination, yet it is also the merciful angel of release. I feel that death loses much of its power and hold over the reader when it becomes centred around the speaker rather than the concept of death itself.

Written for English Literature 12