Carver Vs Shakespeare

1247 Words3 Pages

Jesse McCrea Mrs. Knapp English IV Concurrent 3 March 2024 Love Is a Word Love is a powerful and complex human emotion. How an individual comes to understand love evolves over time, and these differences can be expressed and exemplified through literature. Both William Shakespeare, in his poem titled “Let me not to the marriage of true minds,” and Raymond Carver, in his short story, “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love,” explore the idea of love, though in dramatically different ways. Shakespeare defines an abstract, idealized rendition of love, while Carver presents multiple complex perspectives that are more realistic. Shakespeare and Carver explain the idea of love through two very different approaches. The most obvious of these differences …show more content…

Conversely, Carver does not make concrete claims about what love is or is not, instead, he employs fictional characters, Mel, Terri, Laura, and the narrator, Nick, to exemplify multiple valid interpretations. Terri was abused by her ex-boyfriend, Ed, and she believes that “sometimes he may have acted crazy. But he loved” her nonetheless (Carver, 2). Similarly to Shakespeare, but with much less extremity, Mel insists that a relationship involving such violence could not also be loving, implying that, to Mel, love cannot consist of at least a certain degree of negativity. In other words, to Mel, Ed’s violence crosses a line that means love cannot be present in Ed and Terri’s relationship. By including Mel and Terri’s contrasting points of view, Carver not only acknowledges the position that love cannot contain negativity, but also acknowledges the opposing perspective and consequently presents the idea that love does not have one true meaning—the antithesis of Shakespeare’s …show more content…

Of course love coincides with negativity, and in acknowledging this fact, Carver does a much better job at portraying love as it exists within each of our lives. If I’d allow myself to be blunt, I’d argue Shakespeare’s poem is nothing but fantasy and potentially harmful if taken at face value. If one were to subscribe to Shakespeare’s definition of love, they might forfeit a relationship at even the slightest hint of negativity and forgo a potentially beautiful and fulfilling relationship. It is amusing, and maybe for some, comforting to entertain the idea that love is perfect. However, I find it self-centered and egotistical to suggest that mortal beings based on this reality can experience an emotion that is somehow supernatural and exists above all else. Nevertheless, I have no recollection of death, and I cannot say for certain whether or not emotions persist as some form of supernatural apogee of human life after my mortal body ceases to

Open Document