Shakespeare Fans discussion

This topic is about
Shakespeare's Sonnets
The Sonnets
date
newest »



I'll do that, Leslie. I hadn't heard of these.


I'd forgotten the name means that. Yes:
And Moses said unto God... The children of Israel shall say unto me, What is his name? What shall I say unto them?
And God said unto Moses, I am that I am: and thou shalt say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me to you.
-- which is an etymology of YHWH, Yahweh. And a pun, which is up Shakespeare's street.
I will look into making room for reading The Sonnets...maybe by July. I've enjoyed following along here on these posts...

I also love the sonnet "Not marble, nor the gilded monument/of princes shall outlive this powerful rhyme". I like the sense of immortality in it.



To have these Sonnets associated with him is... odd, but the Arden 3rd says he courted such flouting of conventions and encouraged an unusual intimacy of behaviour.



I've read that there is evidence that she was a madame.(I'm switching subjects, here. This time not goofing.)


http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...
The best thing I know of written on the sonnets is L.C. Knight's Shakespeare's Sonnets published in Explorations. Only 20 pages, but packed with understanding. The first sentence sets the theme,
"That there is so little genuine criticism in the terrifying number of books and essays on Shakespeare's Sonnets can only be partly accounted for by the superior attractiveness of gossip."

I've been afraid to go near the criticism, in the Sonnets' case. Anyway I want to get a feel for them first, just me and the Sonnets - partly out of suspicion of Sonnet criticism. I'll hunt down the L.C. Knight. Googling tells me he detaches them from biography, and he doesn't see them as a unified sequence - at least not written that way. I've seen Helen Vendler The Art of Shakespeare's Sonnets often recommended. Opinions on that one, or other suggestions for criticism? I quarrel with the footnotes in Katherine Duncan-Jones' Arden 3rd - though I appreciate what she has done for the Sonnets with her introduction - and have moved to a plain text copy, not to be distracted by argument with the notes.
Very roughly and thus far, I've been struck by two things - perhaps because these are things I didn't expect. First, the drama and even storyline; and second the voice. I hesitate to mention the voice - I don't claim it's Shakespeare's. I understand people took on a voice and an imaginary identity in which to write first-person sonnet sequences. But the first-person of the Sonnets, whatever his relationship to the writer, has been a real find for me. And that isn't separate from the dramatic aspect: I hadn't thought to find them so readable-aloud, like the speeches, with such expression in the voice. I stumbled on this in the Rival Poet section, where the fluctuation of his emotions, the vivid personality on display, made me feel I was standing in a room next to... not Shakespeare, but the I. It's a private voice, the I, you're closeted with him. Sulky in one line, noble in the next, or noble on the surface while sulky underneath: the voice, the I, I found very likeable, in his struggles to be magnanimous or lofty and his fallings-short that peep out of the line, very much ill-disguised.
Also I didn't know how witty, gently humorous or otherwise funny they were - although how they can fail to be...? It is Shakespeare.


I'm getting to know them in a real way for the first time. I began by dipping in at random, but one day got caught up in the story - I had no idea how much they follow on from each other, or that last lines lead into first lines of the next. I'll have to read them consecutively from the beginning.
And they can be very different when laid out as a story. As a for instance: I always disliked that famous one, 116: Let me not to the marriage of true minds/Admit impediments... Then I met it in sequence, in context, and see what he's doing with the marriage service; it's terribly bold of him, isn't it, like his snatches of blasphemy, in 105: Let not my love be called idolatry, or a casual Bible-use in the one I'm up to, 121, where he declares No, I am that I am, which is how God defines himself (quick Google consult) yes, when Moses asks him who he is exactly.
Isn't this on the outrageous side? I guess Marlowe can blaspheme.