What does it mean?

[KillerMuffin]

What does this poem mean to you?

As a person?
As a poet?
As a reader?

What lessons does it teach you and do you think they're important to learn?

Sonnet 130

My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun;
Coral is far more red, than her lips red:
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.
I have seen roses damasked, red and white,
But no such roses see I in her cheeks;
And in some perfumes is there more delight
Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks.
I love to hear her speak, yet well I know
That music hath a far more pleasing sound:
I grant I never saw a goddess go,
My mistress, when she walks, treads on the ground:
   And yet by heaven, I think my love as rare,
   As any she belied with false compare.

 

[Senna Jawa]

What does this poem mean to you?

As a person?
As a poet?
As a reader?

What lessons does it teach you and do you think they're important to learn?

Muffin, are you asking us to do your homework for you? You should state so clearly. -- Ok, I don't care, it is your problem. I'll play along.

As a person: it is a negative text, its voice sounds dishonest.

As a poet: I am not in a business of writing about poems, only in the business of writing some.

As a reader: I am bored with this text very quickly.

The lesson which you should learn, dear Muffin, is that the poor, trite, cheaply contrived poetry didn't start with Literotica. It goes back at least to the time of this "sonet 130". (Of course poor poetry must be as old as poetry itself). Know no fear, Muffin, tell it your teacher and don't blaim me if you fail your course. It will be your fault only

(Ask me and I will telll you why )

 

[KillerMuffin]

I think I agree with you, SJ, you really shouldn't break your habit of not writing about poetry. It's kind of sad how little insight you possess.

Education, it's what's for dinner.

(I don't have to ask you why, they don't teach shakespeare in calc)

ps, it's spelled "blame" snookums.

 

[Senna Jawa]

[...]Education, it's what's for dinner.[...]

I did warn you, Muffin, that passing my opinion to your instructor may not help you much! (Not that you are doing that great anyway). I guess, you were in need of a dozen of "" before you would get my message -- I didn't sprinkle enough of these helpful emoticons for you. Next time I will remember about your special educational needs. I'll assist you better.

Now, seriously, I stand by every word I have written in my post. In this simple case I am obviously right. (And you, Muffin, go on, keep thoughtlessly repeating opinions by your superiors without any understanding, don't mind me, don't feel suddenly embarassed).

PS. I told you: "(Ask me and I will tell you why )"

       

 

[darkmaas]

What's for dinner?

Geez, you type "What's for dinner?" into the search engine and this is all you get. Not even a recipe for left-over turkey soup.

I must say though that I feel sorry for poor old Willy, dragged down here for a public wanking. He deserves better than to be involved in a clash of irreconcilable poetic beliefs.

I think that it is impossible to look objectively at the poem given the author's rep.

Subjectively I lean more to the SJ side of the chasm. There once was a school of European painting that chose as its subject matter "the still life". An immense amount of painterly virtuosity was squandered on dying flowers, dusty vegetables and the odd dead fish or rabbit. This poem left me, when I first read it, with the same sense of waste.

Or, maybe I just like dancing on the graves of my betters.

darkmaas

 

[Star At Sunrise]

Reviewing Billy!

Oh boy! A chance to take Shakespeare to the woodshed! Yee-haa!!! I been done waitin' for this here chance for plum-pert near two-hunnert years!

Okay this will be fun. I was in a Shakespeare play about a year ago, and I know the only way to really "get" Billy (I hope you don't mind if I call him Billy, we're buds) is to look up the meaning of the words that you don't immediately know, and then deliver them right.

A lot of acting in Billy’s plays is like verbal (as well as physical) charades, so YOU have to know exactly what you’re talking about before you can deliver it in such a way (with verbal inflections, pauses, and body language) that can make it at least a little clear to the average audience member. They may not understand everything that you just said, but if you’re good and have done your homework, they’ll understand what you MEAN.

The reason I say this in relation to a sonnet, is that you don’t have an actor present to interpret it. For the first time reader, it comes off as gibberish. It only takes two or three sentences of old fashioned grammar for the average reader to start to tune out, and, as a poet nowadays, that's when I’m wanting a reader to tune IN. Add the words and spellings that are simply out of use, and it makes it even more distant.

So, trying to draw a conclusion: It would take a dedicated Shakespeare fan or student, to take the time to study and learn a sonnet before it could be properly appreciated. I don’t think a casual reader would respond anymore, and few armchair poets will take the time and do the plain hard work of looking up words or reading text aloud repeatedly to appreciate Shakespeare.

This is my own analysis, but only after reading up a bit on the Net. This was particularly helpful:
Mabillard, Amanda. "An Analysis of Shakespeare's Sonnet 130". Shakespeare Online. 2000. http://www.shakespeare-online.com (3 March, 2003).

~

It’s a out of the ordinary love sonnet with a bit of a twist. It seems to be about a plain, or even unattractive, black woman. The poet loves her, and says so in a simple way at the end.

Sonnet 130

My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun;

I interpret as dark colored eyes, or eyes that are not bright or especially dazzling. This may also be a humorous jab at metaphysical poets of Shakespeares time. Anyone could say what something is NOT like. "My computer is nothing like my sock." But Billy can back up this seemingly audacious opening line.

Coral is far more red, than her lips red:

How could this refer to anything but brown or black lips? Coral is very light pink, right?

If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;

Again, saying that her breasts are not white.

If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.

Now, I learn that back in Billy’s time, comparing hair to wire was complimentary, as if comparing it to soft threads rather than what we think of as "wire" today. But clearly this woman has black hair in any case.

I have seen roses damasked, red and white,
But no such roses see I in her cheeks;

Her cheeks are never pink!

And in some perfumes is there more delight
Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks.

She even has bad breath!

I love to hear her speak, yet well I know
That music hath a far more pleasing sound:

Ouch. She doesn’t even have a pleasant speaking voice.

I grant I never saw a goddess go,
My mistress, when she walks, treads on the ground:

Clearly stating that no one is going to mistake this woman for a goddess. I imagine she was no head turner.

And yet by heaven, I think my love as rare,
As any she belied with false compare.

But he loves her truer than someone who would try to win her by telling her she’s beautiful when she’s not.

~

Now, I don’t know about you, but it was worth an hour of work. That ending chokes me up, but it never would if I had just read it and tossed it away.

Now, you may not like Billy and his stuff, but anyone who thinks that they don't have anything to learn from William Shakespeare simply isn't a serious poet.

Shakespeare's words existed before your great-grandparents were born, and long after your great-grandchildren have been forgotten, Shakespeare's words will still exist.

And that's for a reason.

 

[karmadog]

I think this poem was a lightweight toss-off intended as a rebuke for some of his poet friends. Just a light jab at them, perhaps.

I suspect that Shakey had seen his friend's girls, and then read the poems that they had written about them. "her eyes sparkle like the sun, from her coral lips, comes breath as sweet as perfume!"

So Shakey just turned all that on its head and let them know he knew they were liars just trying to get some nookie. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[darkmaas]

Star

Thanks for the analysis, but that was not my point. The problem is not the lack of comprehension. This is one of Shakespeare's more approachable sonnets. He can also be forgiven since it is in fact a parody of the traditional sonnet form.

If we answer KM's title question directly:

What does it mean?

My lover isn't pretty.
But I love her dearly

For the rest I stand by my last post. That is not to say that Shakespeare doesn't deserve his place in the pantheon or that we have nothing to learn from him. I suspect that he would be amused at the attention that Sonnet 130 has accrued.

 

[Senna Jawa]

I think this poem was a lightweight toss-off intended as a rebuke for some of his poet friends. Just a light jab at them, perhaps.

I suspect that Shakey had seen his friend's girls, and then read the poems that they had written about them. "her eyes sparkle like the sun, from her coral lips, comes breath as sweet as perfume!"

So Shakey just turned all that on its head and let them know he knew they were liars just trying to get some nookie. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

KarmaDog, excellent! I am sure that you are right, that this was not any "serious poem" with any artistic ambitions but a joke played on other poets. Indeed, the mechanical order of the "virtues", the nonsensical and trivial concept (she's absolutlely ugly in every possible way, has no positive virtues but I love her so) indicate that it had to be a joke.

Recently an American poet, a friend of mine, said that Shakespeare was a great poet. I told him that I started to study Shakespeare poetry and especially seriously sonnets (only selected sonnets, while I read quickly most of them or even all of them) a few years ago with a great anticipation. I was disappointed (i still have written a skakespearian sonnet in Polish---in Polish Petrarca sonnet form is common and classical but shakespearian is very rare). Skaspeare's non-sonnet poems are quite crude, and his sonnets are brain games first of all. To my surprise my friend agreed with me totally. he said that Shakespeare was a great poet due to his plays not poems! We have agreed after all. (I would give you some excellent references for Shakespeare's sonnets, but I left my personal library on the other side of the continent, more than 3000 miles or five thousand kilometers away). Most of the analysis concentrates on the gossip, who with whom etc. A larger portion of comments explains also the linguistic aspect of the poems. It is a great pleasure to read expert comments by scholars. Personally, I was busy with getting Shakespeare's melody in his sonnets. I adopted it in my own, as well as the theme of friendship. Hey, perhaps one day I should translate my sonnet
"szekspiriada" into English

BTW, just as well known geographic places have their names adapted to other languages (say "Warsaw" in English, not the original "Warszawa", while unknown places are spelled as in their original language), in Polish also known names are adapted as well. Thus we often write Szekspir instead of Shakespeare. It is a great honor and a proof of recognition to have your name adapted rather than spelled as is.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Sonnet 130 is juvenalian satire. There's two kinds, basically, juvenalian, which is a gentle poking and horatian, which is dark and ridicules (an example is Swift's Modest Proposal). Like karmadog so eloquently said, this poem was written to poke fun at Shakespeare's contemporaries who wrote tons of effluvient odes to everything from their lady's dandruff to her toe nail clippings. Now that that's out of the way.

I really find it interesting the different ways people look at this particular poem. I don't like Shakespeare for the most part because, well, I'm a snot. I don't like this poem, either, it's boring to read.

What I do like is to see how various people react to it and what they get from it. Everyone reads a poem differently, as we all know and can attest. All I see is the satire because I'm just that kind of a negative person.

I like how darkmaas saw the she's ugly, but I love her dearly in the poem.

 

[karmadog]

It's interesting to me that I was mocked for saying almost exactly what I said about this poem here in high school. Not by my teacher, but by the other students.

Still, I must disagree with the muffin. Shakespeare's plays are deservedly revered (except when someone like Baz Luhrman fucks them up). Even the plays that read poorly (like the one with the two sets of twins--the name escapes me now--I saw that performed years ago, and it was hilarious).

Despite the fact that virtually every play is, at least in part, plagiarized, ol' Shakey is, if anything, underappreciated as an entertainer.

I think too many people think of his plays as a chore, rather than a pleasure.

 

[darkmaas]

What's for dinner? Reprise

If:

"Education, it's what's for dinner."

Where's the beef?

Can we at least start the festivities with a pre-prandial? I vote that KillerMuffin should spring for the first round.