The first 12 lines in sonnet 129 deal with the ambivalent nature of “lust in action” where one craves desperately for that which, once had, only makes one miserable. The poet contrast momentary bliss to the length of suffering that precedes and follows after lust, he writes “A bliss in proof; and proved, a very woe”. Finally he concludes that,
All this the world well knows, yet none knows well
To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.
In Sidney’s sonnet, the poet enumerates in the first thirteen lines the various Platonic ideas: that physical beauty is “but a shade”, that “true” beauty is virtue and that one should seek to move upwards towards this virtue. The poet seems to acknowledge all these values by repeating the word true, but the final line turns upside down these values by using the same phrase structure and saying,
True, and yet true that I must Stella love.
The main structural difference between the two sonnets is Shakespeare’s use of the final couplet. Although Sidney rhymes the last two lines, they do not work as a couplet. Sidney’s final line remains isolated from the whole and this will make the irony and contradiction more evident in Sidney. On the other hand, Shakespeare’s final couplet will work as a whole that subtly twists, by means of ambiguity, what had been previously said.
The structural arrangement of these sonnets does not necessarily imply that there is more than one voice in them. It could well be that the final couplet in 129 is only a pessimistic note on the unfortunate condition of mankind; a reproach on his inability to follow reason. Still by paying attention to tone we can perceive that there is a clear break between two voices.
What first strikes as suspicious in 129 is the fast enumeration of adjectives. It seems to me that if the poet had wanted to convey the disgusting nature of lust, he could have used much more suggestive imagery than that offered by a list of adjectives. The words he uses are strong and this strength is very much enhanced by the punctual and constant rhythm produced by the enumeration,
Is perjured, murderous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust;
Still, the speech seems pretty vacant. One has no more than a spouting of words that could well be any preachers voice, a condemnation that uses guilt as a forcible argument to prevent people from giving in to lust. In Sidney, the other voice is not so much a condemnation as it is an acknowledging of the principles of Platonic love. The other voice seems to be that of poetic tradition; the strife towards virtue. The repetition of the word true suggests a dialogue between this tradition and the poet as he seems to be confirming what has been said to him, he seems to repeat something that is not his voice. This apparent acceptance of the abstract values of the voice of tradition, in the end, amounts to nothing in the face of the reality of physical desire. The final repetition of the word true in “True, and yet true that I must Stella love.” makes a distinction between the truth of this intellectual values and the truth of physical desire. The understanding of the values is unable to conquer the will of the second voice.
In Sidney the presence of another voice is more evident precisely because of this apparent dialogue with another. In fact the straightforward contradiction of the whole sonnet in the final line offers few options as to how the sonnet should be read. It seems very unlikely that this “love” for Stella is something other than physical desire.
In contrast, the ambiguity of the final lines in Shakespeare’s sonnet offer a wider range of possible readings. As I have said above, one could see a continuity between the first twelve lines and the final couplet, although I think it is important to be attentive of the final change of tone. The location of the words heaven and hell should catch our eye. The choice of the word heaven to describe “lust in action” seems unlikely for a voice such as the one present at the beginning of the poem. On the other hand, the use of the adjective “this” in reference to hell is ambiguous in that there is no clear referent of what this hell is. It may be the experience of this “very woe” produced by lust, and yet it could also be the hell of listening to this voices of guilt. Another ambiguous “this” would be the one that refers to what the world knows. Is “this” the content of the words said above or the mere vacant learned speech. Again we encounter a distinction between understanding and will. The playful twisting of the line “All this the world well knows, yet none knows well” also suggests this change of voice by contrasting the grave tone of the previous twelve lines and contradicting the possibility of shunning lust. The second “well” in “yet none knows well” could also be a pun between well, in its previous sense and will, in the sense of the disposition.
The presence of these different voices seems very interesting as consciousness of the condition of man. Sidney himself said “our erected wit maketh us know what perfection is and yet our infected will keepeth us from reaching unto it” (Tillyard 30). This dualism is a frequent subject in Elizabethan poetry and is at one with the Platonic and the Christian perspective on life.
The fact that these poets deal with these ideas is not at all noteworthy. What is striking is that by means of poetry the two poets accept their condition and begin to move towards a different understanding of man, where movement towards the Platonic Good will become less important than acceptance of man’s condition. It may well be that our “infected will” keeps us from reaching perfection, yet, by the adoption of two different voices the poets overcome the other voice through irony. Irony makes evident that what the other voice proposes is a vacant and unattainable ideal; irony results in an almost cynical acceptance of man’s condition. Each poet seem to acknowledge, as Prospero finally acknowledges Caliban, “this thing of darkness, mine” (Tillyard 42).
Bibliography:
Abad García, Ma. Pilar. “Shakespeare y el soneto” in Estudios literarios ingleses: Renacimiento y Barroco. Cátedra: Madrid, 1986
De Grazia, Margreta and Stanley Wells. The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Lozano Mantecón, María. “Sir Philip Sydney: El juego entre el poeta y su persona literaria en Astrophil and Stella” in Estudios literarios ingleses: Renacimiento y Barroco. Cátedra: Madrid, 1986.
Tillyard, E.M.W. The Elizabethan World Picture. Penguin: London, 1978.