Physicality and Emotional Attachment in Shakespeare's Sonnet 46
In "Sonnet 46" of his works about the blond young man, William Shakespeare presents a unique view on the classic debate about physical lust versus emotional love. The poet struggles to decide if his feelings are based upon superficial desire and infatuation, represented by the "eye" (1), or true love independent of the physical world, symbolized by the "heart" (1). With a deft movement from violent imagery in the first two lines to the civilized language of law, Shakespeare dismisses the commonly accepted view of a battle between the eye and the heart. The diction of warfare denotes two very separate alien sides clashing in destructive confrontation. Shakespeare advances quickly away from such wording, setting his debate in the civilized context of a courtroom. While the parties engaged in a lawsuit are competing, they are not seeking the destruction of their opposition. A common bond exists between the two sides of a legal case, the bond of society. They are parts of the same whole, or they would not be bound by the laws of that whole. The same holds for the eye and the heart, as well as their metaphysical counterparts, lust and spiritual bonding. The eye and the heart are but organs that make up the body. Physical desire and emotional attraction are just aspects of the overlying concept of love. This is Shakespeare's final point: both physicality and emotional attachment combine to form the powerful force humans know as love.
The opening quatrain of "Sonnet 46" sets up the conflict of infatuation versus true love, acknowledging the classic view of a battle between opposing forces, but swiftly moving beyond such a black an...
... middle of paper ...
...an iambic foot, "As thus" (13), allowing the third quatrain to flow directly into couplet. The poet also repeats the rhyme of "part" (13) and "heart" (14) from lines 12 and 10 of the third quatrain, tying the couplet even closer to the body of the poem. Shakespeare presents a common sense solution to the problem, declaring the entire conflict to be almost irrelevant. Lust is based on external aesthetic appeal, so the poet bestows the "outward part" (13) of the poem's young object upon the eye. True love draws its strength from an internal bonding of spirits, and therefore Shakespeare deeds the "inward love" (14) to the heart. And these two halves together form love.
Work Cited
Shakespeare, William. "Sonnet 46." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Eds. M. H. Abrams and Stephen Greenblatt. 7th ed. 2 vols. New York: Norton, 2000. 1: 1033.
Obedience is when you do something you have been asked or ordered to do by someone in authority. As little kids we are taught to follow the rules of authority, weather it is a positive or negative effect. Stanley Milgram, the author of “The perils of Obedience” writes his experiment about how people follow the direction of an authority figure, and how it could be a threat. On the other hand Diana Baumrind article “Review of Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience,” is about how Milgram’s experiment was inhumane and how it is not valid. While both authors address how people obey an authority figure, Milgram focuses more on how his experiment was successful while Baumrind seems more concerned more with how Milgram’s experiment was flawed and
In July of 1961, Stanley Milgram began his experiment of obedience. He first published an article, Behavioral Study of Obedience, in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology in 1963. This article, Behavioral Study of Obedience, is what this paper will be critiquing. He then wrote a book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View, in 1974 discussing his results in more detail. Milgram’s inspiration was the World War II and Adolf Hitler. During World War II, millions of innocent people were killed in a very organized manor. Milgram (1963) compares the organization and accuracy of the deaths, to the “efficiency as the manufacture of appliances” (p. 371). Milgram (1963) defines obedience as “the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purpose” (p. 371). Milgram acknowledges that it may only take one person to come up with an idea, such as Hitler coming up with a way to eradicate the Jews, but would take an
Compliance is “a form of social influence involving direct requests from one person to another”, whilst Obedience is “a form of social influence in which one person simply orders one or more others to perform some actions” (Baron, R.A. & Branscombe, N.R., 2014, p. 255). These two terms are methods of social influence, particularly prominent in Milgram’s study on obedience. Milgram’s study is a psychological experiment focusing on whether or not people would obey authority figures, even when the instructions given were morally wrong. Back then; the terms of the experiment were completely acceptable, but due to the strict controls of contemporary psychology today, this test would be impossible to repeat. The trial breaches many ethical factors
Erik Erikson developed eight psychosocial stages that occur through life. These stages help parents of younger children understand what the child is thinking and why they are acting the way that they do. For a person to become a well-rounded adult they need to succeed in each level. This essay will discuss the first six stages into young adulthood.
...s many benefits, and when properly used can maintain order, develop good habits, build strong moral character and encourage positive behavior.
Milgram, Stanley. Issues in the Study of Obedience: A Reply to Baumrind. From American Psychologist. Vol. 19, pp.848-852, 1964.
Erikson believed that people develop in psychosocial stages. He emphasized developmental change throughout the human life span. In Erikson's theory, eight stages of development result as we go through the life span. Each stage consists of a crisis that must be faced. According to Erikson, this crisis is not a catastrophe but a turning point. The more an individual resolves the crises successfully, the healthier development will be.
Baumrind, Diana. “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience.” Writing and Reading for ACP Composition. Ed. Thomas E. Leahey and Christine R. Farris. New Jersey: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2009. 224-229. Print.
Physical separation is a powerful obstacle that is sometimes faced by those bound to each other in love. It brings about intense emotional pain and can hinder any relationship with which true love is at its core. Shakespeare’s Sonnet 56 involved two lovers that experienced physical separation as a stumbling block in their kinship. The “sad interim” with which the lovers found themselves suffering caused the intensity of their love to vanish. With their love fading quickly, the two desired for “sweet love” to “renew thy force.” They wanted their love for each other to be “blunter be than appetite, / Which but today by feeding is allayed, / Tomorrow sharpened in his former might.” They wished for a love like hunger, constantly returning and needing to be quenched. However, due to their separation, the people’s “spirit of love” had become “a perpetual dullness.” The “hungry eyes” of their love would “wink with fullness” and had lost its potency and strength. In order to repair the love that had waned, the lovers longed to “Come daily to the banks” of the ocean so that the “Return of love” could come to their relationship, and they desired “this sad interim” to be “winter, which being full of care / Makes summer’s welcome thrice more wish’d.” Sonnet 56 was a sad story in which separation caused two people’s love to become dull and boring. The obstacle of separation was also evident in the relationship between Hero and Claudio found in the play, Much Ado About Nothing. At the beginning of the play, Don Pedro and some of his men returned to Messina after battling in war. One of the men that Don Pedro brought with him was young Claudio. Claudio was highly respected in the eyes of Don Pedro and had exceptional war performan...
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67 (4),
...s thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong, / To love that well which thou must leave ere long [before long] (Shakespeare 13-14). Through these last two lines, Shakespeare conveys to his readers the importance of holding on to life and love while it exists for one day it will cease to be.
Shakespeare and Petrarch, two poets popular for their contributions on the issue of love, both tackle the subject of their work through sonnet, yet there are key contrasts in their style, structure, and in the way, each approaches their subjects. Moreover, it is clear that in "Sonnet 130," Shakespeare in fact parodies Petrarch's style and thoughts as his storyteller describes his mistress, whose "eyes are in no way as the sun" (Shakespeare 1918). Shakespeare seems, by all accounts, to mock the exaggerated descriptions expanded throughout Petrarch’s piece by giving an English poem portraying the speaker’s love in terms that are characteristic of a flawed woman not a goddess. On the other hand, Petrarch's work is full of symbolism. In reviewing "Sonnet 292" from the Canzoniere, through “Introduction to Literature and Arts,” Petrarch’s utilization of resemblance and the romanticizing of Petrarch's female subject are normal for the Petrarchan work. The leading major contrast between the two poems is the piece structure utilized (McLaughlin).
In most of the sonnets from around Shakespeare's era, love is a common theme. Written is a standard Shakespearean form, the rhyme scheme nor the meter deviate from the typical sonnet structure; although the form does not differ much, the central meaning and approach to love does. While the majority of sonnets speak of love for someone else, in sonnet 116 Shakespeare describes the truth of love between a couple. In 'Let me not to the Marriage of True Minds' Shakespeare utilizes legal terms to support their right to marriage and backs up his argument by employing solid metaphors regarding their love. In doing so, he allows the reader to be the judge, jury, and executioner and decide the fate of the couple in the poem.
Sonnet XX, by William Shakespeare, is fraught with wordplay and ambiguity. Shakespeare misleads the audience with variety of puns and double entendres. Due to the large amount of criticism this poem produces, it is necessary to analyze this piece twice: once from the perspective of a female attraction, and once from the perspective of a male attraction. Only when both sides of this equilibrium are examined can true insight be achieved. It is my goal to present the same mystifying experiences as Shakespeare: the initial debate as to whether this fair youth is male or female, and the ultimate debate as to whether our narrator’s intense fondness for this youth is the result of platonic love or carnal lust. After all, Shakespeare obviously created this uncertainty for a reason. The question that remains is “Why?”
Canfield Reisman, Rosemary M. “Sonnet 43.” Masterplots II. Philip K. Jason. Vol. 7. Pasadena: Salem Press, 2002. 3526-3528. Print.