|
Post by Harry on Jun 8, 2002 9:51:28 GMT -5
HOW oft when thou, my music, music play’st Upon that blessed wood whose motion sounds With thy sweet fingers, when thou gently sway’st The wiry concord that mine ear confounds, Do I envy those jacks that nimble leap To kiss the tender inward of thy hand, Whilst my poor lips, which should that harvest reap, At the wood’s boldness by thee blushing stand! To be so tickl’d, they would change their state And situation with those dancing chips, O’er whom thy fingers walk with gentle gait, Making dead wood more bless’d than living lips. Since saucy jacks so happy are in this, Give them thy fingers, me thy lips to kiss. This sonnet appears to be inspired by the Poet's mistress playing on a virginal, a stringed instrument with keys. Evans says it is much like a spinnet without legs. When that is understood, the suface meaning of the sonnet is fairly straight forward. "Jacks" are the keys of the instrument. The Poet imagines them kissing the fingers of his mistress and is a bit jealous of them. I believe that the first use of the word "music" in the first line means "mistress." The use of a single word which shifts its meaning is not uncommon in the sonnets and "will" be played on wonderfully in Sonnets 135 and 136. The Poet refers to the jacks of the virginal as if they were rival suitors for the Dark Lady. Perhaps he is, in fact, referring to real rivals and saying that it's okay if she allows them to show her favor as long as the Poet gets her real love. Given the character of the Dark Lady, I doubt he'd have much success with a more proprietry stance. I also suspect that a sexual meaning is not far below the surface. Perhaps the Dark Lady's fingers play on the Poet as if he were the virginal--or maybe he just wishes they would.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 8, 2002 14:17:35 GMT -5
If I recall correctly, Shakespeare had some clever puns on "Virginal" in All's Well That Ends Well, and I could see it working here, as well. She plays the Virginal, both the instrument and the role. I don't think it's a stretch to imagine that, because any reader back then would have immediately understood he was describing a Virginal, and would probably be aware of the potential for puns. This might further be demonstrated by Shakespeare's constant usage of the word wood, which I believe even back then may have been a euphamism for erection. It makes phrases like "wood's boldness" take on new meaning, as well as "dead wood".
|
|
|
Post by Bardolph on Jun 8, 2002 15:46:58 GMT -5
That's a keen observation. It's been too long since I read All's Well. I'll have to stroll through the Lexicon for the similarities. Your comment might have an impact on dating theory.
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Jun 8, 2002 21:01:49 GMT -5
I like the virgin/virginal idea. That would give, perhaps, a threefold meaning of the sonnet: The Dark Lady plays the virginal--she plays the virgin--she plays the Poet like a musical instrument. Erections are a subject in other Dark Lady sonnets, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it here. Dark Lady sonnets are a lot more erotic than the Youth sonnets. This is one of the factors which lead me to believe that we misinterpret if we read the Youth sonnets as homosexual. In this regard, I note a connection between the couplet of this sonnet and that of Sonnet 20, one of the most overtly homoerotic Youth sonnets: But since she pricked thee out for women's pleasure, Mine be thy love, and thy love's use their treasure. "She" is nature, and there is a pun on "pricked." The word refers to the act of drawing up a coat-of-arms. It also means just what you think it means. Note the similarity in the last lines. In each case the Poet asks for "true love." Love without sex from the Youth, and sex from the Dark Lady.
|
|
|
Post by Ganymede on Jun 8, 2002 22:14:47 GMT -5
This entire poem is sexual, what with the tickling and blushing and the wood and perhaps other references to sexual organs that I will not mention Also, jack may also refer to "penis," which makes these lines even more interesting: Do I envy those jacks that nimble leap To kiss the tender inward of thy hand, Perhaps Shakespeare is using the image of the virginal rather ironically here, making the Dark Lady truly dark in unchastity. In terms of comparing this poem to the homoerotic youth sonnets, I believe this is just another case of the "love between men is pure and love between a woman and a man is base" sort of ideology that permeated Renaissance thoughts on love. Yet, Shakespeare does *think* of love with the Youth (he wants "pleasure" but thinks he cannot have it because he isn't a woman"), even if he does proclaim that he wants "true" perhaps purer love. Yet, can this pure love that he's telling himself he wants ever fully replace earthly sexual love? Personally, I think no, which may be why he turns to a woman, which was a more socially appropriate object of lust, at least in fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Jun 9, 2002 13:28:17 GMT -5
The idea that love between men is pure but love between men and women is sinful certainly permeates Shakespeare--particularly the sonnets. This should become apparent as we work through the Dark Lady sonnets. Sonnet 129 is a good one for this theme and I'll probably post it now so that we can go into this in detail. Of course, Sonnet 144 is even better, but we'll get to it. I had earlier noted line 8, "At the wood’s boldness by thee blushing stand!" But the Poet was speaking of his lips in line 7 so I thought maybe it was just my dirty mind that thought "erection." Now, with your comments on "jacks" I'm not so sure. Maybe Shakespeare intended "stand" to let us know that he wasn't just thinking of his lips kissing her fingers.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 10, 2002 15:23:51 GMT -5
Well, I was hesitant to point this out at first, but as long as we're all being dirty here, "lips" can have a double meaning as well
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Jun 10, 2002 21:19:47 GMT -5
But surely those are the Poet's, and not the Dark Lady's, lips. I would describe Shakespeare as bawdy (at least here) not dirty. It is a problem. I'm trying to keep things frank but matter-of-fact. The subject matter exists. We can ignore it or discuss it. I know that some will be turned-off by any frank discussion. We could do what they do in high school and only discuss the "clean" sonnets. No wonder so few in high school like Shakespeare. I know that this is complicated by problems of youth access to sites like this. As far as I know, only one youth actually visits this site regularly, and he is such a mature young man (smile Iago, you're being complimented ) that I don't worry too much about him. I'm more worried about scandalizing his parents than about scandalizing him. In any case, Shaxper, I'll be guided by you on this.
|
|
The_Turtle
Denizen
Nay, faith, let not me play a woman; I have a beard coming
Posts: 52
|
Post by The_Turtle on Jun 11, 2002 6:34:32 GMT -5
I do believe I concur with all your observations. The sexual tension is obvious. The Dark Lady, if I remember correctly, has often been identified as a black prostitute living in London at the time. The rivals as Harry so euphemistically calls them would then simply be clients (is that the word?). The poet can cope with them, he seems to say, as long as the lady's lips are his.
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Jun 11, 2002 19:48:06 GMT -5
By "black" do you mean African? I don't think that's a necessary interpretation of the Dark Lady. I suppose it's not impossible, but "black" or "dark" in this context could simply mean black-haired. I wouldn't claim that even the hair like black wires comment in Sonnet 130 requires an African head of hair. The sonnet is a send-up of the usual sonnet hyperbole where a beloved's hair might be described as fine golden wire. Welcome aboard. It's always nice to see fresh faces.
|
|
The_Turtle
Denizen
Nay, faith, let not me play a woman; I have a beard coming
Posts: 52
|
Post by The_Turtle on Jun 12, 2002 7:46:23 GMT -5
Not necessarily African, but dark-skinned yes. And no, I hardly think it is necessary for the dark lady to be dark-skinned. I only thought about the theory that claimed her to be a prostitute in light of this sonnet's other lovers (supposing that that's what the jacks are supposed to be). However, we'd better leave all this in the middle until we reach sonnet 150 with all its puns on 'whore' and 'moor.'
Anyways, thanks for the hearty welcome.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 12, 2002 16:50:42 GMT -5
Welcome aboard, The_Turtle! It's great to see that you're already leaping into the frey, so to speak ;D I'm looking forward to reading more of your thoughts. I know that this is complicated by problems of youth access to sites like this. As far as I know, only one youth actually visits this site regularly, and he is such a mature young man (smile Iago, you're being complimented ) that I don't worry too much about him. I'm more worried about scandalizing his parents than about scandalizing him. In any case, Shaxper, I'll be guided by you on this. My stance is pretty simple. I don't believe in censorship. I want this to be a site of learning and appreciation, which necessarily includes the learning about, and the appreciation of Shakespeare's bawdy side; a side that can be just as serious and important as it is humerous. I don't tolerate cursing or being dirty for the sake of cursing or being dirty, but where literature and a higher goal are involved, all's fair. Even then, I believe it is possible to tastefully make a bawdy joke, though I would ask our members to choose their words carefully and consider their actions when doing so. I do want to keep this site accessible to all age groups. Proboards' official ruling on prohibited content is as follows: "User's web site may not contain content promoting the use of illegal drugs, alcohol, sex, pornography, nudity, or any other form of adult content, profanity, hate, "spam," fraud, racism, mlm, pyramid schemes, or promote any illegal activity. " "Adult content" and "profanity" are a bit subjective though, so I ask members to use good judgement. If a comment is intended for the purposes of learning, then it probably isn't doing any harm. If I disagree with your judgement, then I'll be sure to let you know Oh, and I second the praising of Iago for his remarkable maturity level. It's amazing enough to see someone his age become so excited about Renaissance Literature, but you wouldn't even know his age from the way he converses. Take a bow, Iago
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Jun 12, 2002 19:54:28 GMT -5
Dear Shaxper, That's about how I had it figured, and pretty much is the stance I would take if this were my site. I believe it is possible to discuss "adult" subjects frankly without being "dirty." And, I like the goal of making this site acceptible to all. I'll try to make sure the educational fig leaf covers enough of my posts. It's just that this seemed a reasonable place to ask. Dear Turtle, Perhaps I misunderstood your earlier comment. Of course, a prostitute (or tavern girl) is one of the possibilities. I'm sure we'll all have more to say on this and I'm looking forward to Sonnet 150.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 12, 2002 22:30:15 GMT -5
Dear Shaxper, That's about how I had it figured, and pretty much is the stance I would take if this were my site. I believe it is possible to discuss "adult" subjects frankly without being "dirty." And, I like the goal of making this site acceptible to all. I'll try to make sure the educational fig leaf covers enough of my posts. It's just that this seemed a reasonable place to ask. It was the perfect place to ask. Thank you for bringing it up. Yes, we must all remember our fig leaves; myself in particular
|
|
Juliet
Denizen
There's many a man hath more hair than wit.
Posts: 53
|
Post by Juliet on Jun 24, 2002 20:09:33 GMT -5
Hey all-- As a newcomer to this post, I'm very glad to agree "Down with censorship!" (Diplomatic fig leaves aside ) First off, Shakespeare *is* dirty, no getting around that, and his bawdy is an integral part of the plays and sonnets. Secondly, it's ridiculous to censor because of the "young innocent children;" there is nothing on these posts that the "dear young innocent children," don't hear on the bus every day on the way to school! Ah well, rant aside, it's a great discussion. There certainly are a lot of bawdy layers to this poem that I never picked up on. However, it's always nice to remember the first layer of the sonnet, which is lovely in itself. This is one of my personal favorites, just because it's simply adorable. Not terribly deep, perhaps, but it captures an idyllic, playful moment. It reminds me a bit of R&J when Romeo says, "She how she leans her cheek upon her hand? O that I were a glove upon that hand, that I might touch that cheek!" As far as love goes, it doesn't get much cuter than that. Which is, perhaps, what makes Shakespeare so wonderful. Here you have an extraordinarily dirty sonnet that is also beautiful to hear. He is bawdy and divinely goregeous at the very same time--no mean feat and rather, if you think about it, like life itself. It's nice to recognize some people (shaxsper? Harry?) from shakespeare.com queries, and I'm glad to be here! ~Juliet~
|
|