Stanley Guevarra

11G

THE IDEALIZATION OF LOVE IN SHAKESPEARE’S SONNETS

There is little to understand yet more to ponder on one of life’s greatest mysteries—the
dominance, persistence, and influence of Shakespeare’s writing that has been subsisting since his
death four hundred years ago. Truly, the most influential writing can never be eradicated, as proven
by the Holy Bible, The Republic by Plato, The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli, The Iliad by Homer,
and of course, Shakespeare’s works. It is crucial to know, however, that while Shakespeare’s
works have been highly regarded, we can only speculate about his life as an individual. For
instance, there are no records concerning his sexuality, his education, his professional life in
London after his schooling ended, his reason for leaving Stratford to pursue a theatrical-oriented
life in London, and his rise as a prominent figure by the early 1950s. As a matter of fact, we can
never say for sure whether he was the multifaceted theater man who became a wealthy land-owner
because of the richness of his works that contain the voices of England, or whether he was the
rambunctious, undisciplined man who drank too indulgently that he died at “a merry meeting”
with the poets Michael Drayton and Ben Jonson. Nevertheless, it is without a doubt that we know
him too well as a playwright, poet, and actor—he is England’s national poet, the writer of the most
well-known comedies and tragedies, one of the founders of the Globe, and the producer of works
that have prevailed over cultures across the world. How this man received high regard even after
his death should be no question, and the presence of his name on the body of his plays and poems
should be, as always, acknowledged.

To critique Shakespeare’s works, however, is a different question that can be approached

with several theories. Structuralists would argue that his works are composed of underlying
principles that establish an iconic writing atmosphere and style; whereas formalists would treat
each of his works on its own, where the key to understanding one is exclusive to only the text
itself. Shakespeare’s works, however, cannot be dissected without the context of his nature as a
writer and the period and environment that undoubtedly influenced his writing. How can we
neglect the intellectual energy of drama and literature during Shakespeare’s times when we analyze
his works? Such is the reason why Renaissance criticism is best as a bridge of insight to
Shakespeare’s works. Renaissance criticism, as the name suggests, explores on a piece of writing
using the historical context from the Renaissance period toward its literature. According to Rahn
(2011), “the Renaissance in Europe was, in one sense, an awakening from the long slumber of the
Dark Ages.” Consequently, three major expressions—New Learning, The Humanities, and
Humanism—adopted an association to the Renaissance period, which influenced many of
Shakespeare’s works. For instance, the presence Shakespeare’s knowledge of Virgil, Ovid, and
Plutarch in his works can be seen as a reflection of the revival of Greek and Roman mythologies
during the Renaissance period, which were considered as inspirational material for artistic
creation. Another example is the effect of English court life and the opinions of noble patrons to
his works: “The nuanced communication style of Shakespeare’s vivid characters had its genesis in
the court of the English royalty” (Rhan, 2011). Furthermore, the spirit of optimism and
humanism—concepts of improvement and earthly perfection, respectively—gave way to the
discovery of oneself and of others, which could be behind Shakespeare’s themes of love, lust, and
obsession. Moving forward and away from the horrors of the Dark Ages was thus the predominant
thought within the people’s minds during the Renaissance period, which we can observe from their
literature, especially from Shakespeare.

The English language can also give credit to Shakespeare’s distinctive writing style; his
words and use of language have a level of sumptuousness that display “verbal pyrotechnics” by
using imagery that produces an effect similar to that of a “sensory collage”. In particular, his
sonnets exhibit these traits with the prevalent themes of love, human emotions, sexual obsession,
and structure of self. Sonnet 130, for example, makes use of objects perceived by sight as
references for comparison to his mistress:

My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun;

Coral is far more red than her lips’ red;

If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;

If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head (1-4).

Aside from considering the use of figurative language to produce a vivid description of the
mistress, we can also apply Renaissance criticism to comprehend these lines. We can say, for
instance, that Shakespeare skewers the poetic conventions of clichéd beauty derived from the
perfectionist view of humanism, which can be interpreted as Shakespeare’s mockery to the concept
of idealized beauty during the Renaissance period. This, however, does not mean to say that
Shakespeare does not fall into the trap of idealizing beauty and love; in fact, many of his sonnets
show how he idealizes reassurance in the form of love from a “young man”, yet he is so consumed
by his emotions and feelings that he is blinded to the reality that the young man will never fulfill
his desires. This produces an effect that we can call as “clouded judgement”—derived from
excessive reassurance-seeking that will later result to depression-related constructs (Joiner,
Metalsky, Katz, & Beach, 1999). Consider these lines from Sonnet 58:

O, let me suffer, being at your beck

Th’ imprisoned absence of your liberty,

And patience, tame to sufferance, bide each check

Without accusing you of injury (5-8).

What more can be interpreted here other than the persistence of suffering from the sins of the
subject—recognized without giving blame? This is a clear indication of clouded judgement
associated with depression-related constructs. Moreover, the evidence of excessive reassurance-
seeking can be found from the last two lines of the same sonnet: “I am to wait, though waiting be
so hell, / Not blame your pleasure, be it ill or well” (13-14). Surely, the subject’s absence and
mistreatment to the speaker is evident, yet humanism drives Shakespeare to maintain an
unrealistic, idealized version of the subject who would, for once and for all, return the favor of his
love.

One thing that readers of Shakespeare’s sonnets never fail to perceive is that Shakespeare
was, indeed, in love. Love, as we know, is irrational—so irrational that it can result to great
emotions that blind one to reality. However, there are many different types of love; as such,
scrutinizing the love that can be seen from Shakespeare’s sonnets needs classification. Fortunately,
it can easily be identified; since his sonnets often depict praises to the traits and actions of his
subjects, the love that clouds his judgements can be seen as reactive. According to Abramson and
Leite (2011), “’reactive’ love is a paradigm appropriately felt as a non-self-interested response to
particular kinds of morally laudable features of character expressed by the loved one in
interaction.” Shakespeare’s reactive love, however, can also be perceived as an obsession, and
when obsessive, reactive love chooses to linger despite causing emotional distress, idealized love
surfaces. This type of love, rooted from reactive and obsessive love, is rather rare—Conn (1887)
even maintains that “it belongs to emotional poets rather than to the common people.” Idealized
love is, thus, a reaction from specific features of the loved one and an obsession that brings about
excessive reassurance-seeking—a state that is closely associated with depression-related
constructs (Joiner et al., 1999). As a result, suffering will consume the lover, which is defined as
“the distress caused by a perceived threat to the integrity of the whole person” (Cassel, 1991). In
this case, the “perceived threat” is the excessive-reassurance seeking due to idealized love. During
the Renaissance period, idealized love was almost engrained to the way of thinking of the masses
because of humanism, in which “mankind was believed capable of earthly perfection beyond what
had ever been imagined before” (Rahn, 2011). This makes reactive love and obsession “natural”
for the people from the Renaissance period; consequently, idealized love surfaces, which can be
perceived as a social issue. In Shakespeare’s sonnets, he explores on idealized love through the
young man and the speaker, the young man and the dark lady, and the dark lady and the speaker.
By doing so, Shakespeare also compares the idealized love found in his sonnets with the messy,
complicated love found in real life.

First, Shakespeare writes about the young man with such distinction that his idealized love
for him becomes an obsession; in fact, most of his sonnets are dedicated to this young man—with
themes of admiration such as beauty, procreation, and tribute to themes of grief such as sorrow,
separation, loss, and absence. For example, Sonnet 98 presents two contrasting themes where
beauty and separation are present:

Yet nor the lays of birds nor the sweet smell

Of different flowers in odor and in hue

Could make me any summer’s story tell,

Or from their proud lap pluck them where they grew (5-8).

It is shown that spring-time beauty does not please the speaker because of the loved one’s absence
as mentioned in line 13, “Yet seemed it winter still, and, you away”. What this exhibit is the effect
of the loved one’s absence to the speaker’s perception on his surroundings. The evidence of
idealized love is here because the wanting of the loved one’s presence can be inferred as an
excessive reassurance-seeking condition, whereas the lack of appeal can be inferred as a
depression-related construct. Apparently, the speaker idealizes love from the beloved so much that
his absence is the cause of his suffering; hence, there is an indication of idealized love in an
obsessive nature. Furthermore, just from these themes and few sets of lines, one cannot fail to
consider whether homosexuality is present in Shakespeare’s sonnets for the young man. Consider
these lines from Sonnet 20:

And for a woman wert thou first created,

Till Nature as she wrought thee fell a-doting,

And by addition me of thee defeated

By adding one thing to my purpose nothing (9-12).

This set of lines is open to many interpretations, but it can be speculated that the speaker feels
“defeated” because he fell in love with a man. Line 9 shows how the speaker sees the loved one
as a woman created by Nature. Line 10 to 11 show how Nature becomes so infatuated with her
own creation that she turns it into a man “by addition” of, assumptively, a penis. Line 11-12 express
the deprivation of the speaker because the person he is in love with is inside the body of a man.
From this, it is probable that the speaker would rather have fallen for a woman most likely because
of the insight on homosexuality during the Renaissance period. According to DeMarce (2015), an
orientation other than heterosexuality could not be considered as a lifestyle during the seventeenth-
century; in fact, homosexuality was considered as a phenomenon, especially for the upper class.
What’s more, homosexuality was also considered as a capital offense, though Puritan colonies
were reluctant to punish the said “crime” severely as they were not much worse than “ordinary”
sex crimes (Oaks, 1978). This may explain the nature behind Shakespeare’s writing toward the
young man—he must have felt deprived because homosexuality was seen as a taboo, but he was
not fully restrained from expressing his identity because the courts often employed the concept of
remission of sentences for homosexuality. Thus, Shakespeare exhibits idealized love for the young
man due to the emotional suffering that the speaker from his sonnet undergoes, which cannot be
relieved because of the way homosexuality was perceived during that time.
 Second, Shakespeare writes about the young man and the dark lady in a few of his sonnets,
but the emotions he presents here are concentrated to jealousy. Apparently, the young man and the
dark lady, who is assumed to be the speaker’s mistress, engage in a relationship that is at least a
friendship, yet at most an affair; consequently, the speaker feels envious for the relationship
between the young man and the dark lady. This is because people naturally attribute their own and
their partner’s third-party affairs to similar causes of jealousy, but “jealousy is especially intense
when the partner's behavior is seen as reflecting a negative attitude towards the jealous person or
the relationship” (Buunk, 1984). Of course, jealousy is considered normal between partners when
one engages with a third party, but to feel jealousy for someone you have no legitimate relationship
with is, once again, an indication of excessive reassurance-seeking—the root of idealized love.
This is the case of the speaker behind Shakespeare’s sonnets—the speaker envies the young man
and the dark lady when he doesn’t even have a requited relationship with either of them in the first
place. Look at these lines from Sonnet 40: “But yet be blamed if thou thyself deceivest / By willful
taste of what thyself refusest” (7-8). From these two lines, it can be said that the speaker blames
the young man for making love to one person while refusing to make love to him. Not only is envy
present in these lines, but also blame to the young man with a sense of “ownership” as if the young
man should have accepted the speaker’s love in the first place. What’s worse, however, is that even
though the speaker acknowledges that his love is unrequited, he still chooses to endure his
sufferings from the beloved’s lack of affection because of, then again, idealized love. In Sonnet
57, the speaker explains the way his love consumes his rationality; love has made him a faithful
fool that he does not perceive any wrong from the beloved no matter what he does to satisfy his
desires: “So true a fool is love that in your will, / Though you do anything, he thinks no ill” (13-
14). This shows how idealized love can make one go through emotional pain, even though the
subject knows that it is idealized love that causes his sufferings. Nonetheless, it is worth
mentioning that intimate male friendship was a Renaissance theme. According to Borris (2015),
“Renaissance endeavors to revive classical literature and philosophy also revitalized antique ideals
of love and friendship, and these, much to the embarrassment of Christian sexual orthodoxy,
encouraged passionately romantic same-sex attachments.” This suggests the speaker’s perceived
emotional and envious attachment to the young man, but idealized love causes the speaker’s
decision to emotionally endure an unrequited love.
 Third, Shakespeare writes about the dark lady, the speaker’s mistress, similar to how he
writes to the young man—with idealized love; however, compared to his writing for the young
man, his sonnets for the dark lady are more objective rather than subjective: he gives taunting
compliments to her and, at the same time, bitterly rejects her. Shakespeare’s speaker even admits
that the dark lady is neither beautiful nor chaste, though he shows how he has an overwhelming
sexual desire for the said woman. For instance, Sonnet 51 displays the sexually obsessive nature
of his love:

My soul doth tell my body that he may

Triumph in love, flesh stays no farther reason

But, rising at thy name, doth point out thee

As his triumphant prize. Proud of this pride (7-10).

From this, it can be said that the speaker’s senses take over his body because of lust and sexual
desire. Sexual desire is evident from these lines as it fits the definition according to Shaffer (1978):
“Sexual desire is a state of a subject which is directed toward an object but does not necessarily
involve any desiring that concerning the object and which is such that, if it is followed by sexual
arousal, then certain subsequent events will be felt as constituting the satisfaction or frustration of
that original state.” With this definition, it can be said that the speaker’s sexual desire is directed
toward a need for intercourse with the dark lady, for it can satisfy the speaker’s “flesh” or his penis.
His desire is also followed by sexual arousal—the erection he mentions in Line 10, “rising at thy
name”. The subsequent events that would either be satisfaction or frustration are not mentioned in
this sonnet, though there are many indications of frustration due to the speaker’s unsatisfied hunger
in other sonnets, such as in Sonnet 135: “Wilt thou, whose will is large and spacious, / Not once
vouchsafe to hide my will in thine?” There is wordplay on “will” here, but it is, in essence, a
question to the dark lady’s refusal to allow the speaker’s desire to enter her. Sexual desire and
behavior, however, was not exclusive for the people during the Renaissance times; public display
of physical and sexual intimacy did not even surprise anyone because of the overall lack of privacy
provided by the living conditions of the era (DeMarce, 2015). Although this is the case, sex laws
still prohibited extramarital sex, fornication, adultery, sodomy and prostitution (Dabhoiwala,
2013). Because this is the case, then it is apparent that the dark lady enforced sexual blockages
within her “affair”—considering that she is the mistress—with the speaker, which are,
surprisingly, closely related to romantic love (Wilkinson, 1978). This means that the speaker,
despite having been rejected of sexual engagement by the dark lady, continues to develop romantic
love for her due to the presence of sexual blockages. The speaker thus idealizes love for the dark
lady because of his obsessive, sexual desire that maintains unsatisfied—leading to more
fantasizing, romanticizing, and reassurance-seeking.

Because of Shakespeare’s sonnets, it can be inferred that idealized love derived from
humanism was the source of clouded judgement during the Renaissance period. Romantic love,
however, is the source of clouded judgement beyond that period. According to a review by H.W.
Conn, “romantic love is a feeling of high sensitiveness, and only those with highly developed
sensibilities can experience it in its fullest degree…it is largely ideal rather than actual” (1887).
There is also research that suggest the decline of romantic love in the U.S. as permissiveness
increases (Wilkinson, 1978). What this means is that the love we claim as romantic isn’t romantic
at all—we are in doubt of the depth of it because of the change of the spirit of modern literature
and because of absence of sexual blockages. To elaborate, Conn maintains that “the development
of modern love story and poetry, and not the isolated masterpieces of Dante and Shakespeare,
gives us the impression of the great prevalence of romantic love today” (1887); whereas Wilkinson
proves with his research that “the sexual blockage theory predicts that, if these trends (the removal
of restrictions of sexual relations during dating and the encouragement of extramarital sexual
relations) continue, romance in marriage will decline” (1978). Apparently, we are blinded by
modern literature and by the marvelousness of sex that we don’t know for sure whether we really
love our partners romantically. Perhaps the absence of romantic love can be seen as a social issue;
likewise, idealized love can also be seen as such in the context of the Renaissance period, and the
presence of clouded judgement between the two persists.
References

Abramson, K., & Leite, A. (2011). LOVE AS A REACTIVE EMOTION. The Philosophical
Quarterly, 61(245), 673-699. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23012923

Buunk, B. (1984). Jealousy as Related to Attributions for the Partner's Behavior. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 47(1), 107-112. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3033894

Cassell, E. (1991). Recognizing Suffering. The Hastings Center Report, 21(3), 24-31.
doi:10.2307/3563319

Conn, H. (1887). Romantic Love and Personal Beauty. Science, 10(241), 143-144. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1763880

Dabhoiwala, F. (2013). The Origins of Sex: A History of the First Sexual Revolution. London:
Penguin.

DeMarce, V. (2015). Grantville Gazette. Sexuality in the Seventeenth Century, 62. Retrieved from
https://grantvillegazette.com/wp/article/sexuality-in-the-seventeenth-century-2/

Joiner, T., Metalsky, G., Katz, J., & Steven R. H. Beach. (1999). Depression and Excessive
Reassurance-Seeking. Psychological Inquiry, 10(4), 269-278. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449445

Magnusson, L. (2009). Shakespeare's Sonnets: A Modern Perspective. In Shakespeare's Sonnets

and Poems (pp. 627-638). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Mowat, B., & Werstine, P. (Eds.). (2009). Shakespeare's Life. In Shakespeare's Sonnets and Poems
(pp. xiii-xix). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Mowat, B., & Werstine, P. (Eds.). (2009). Shakespeare's Sonnets. In Shakespeare's Sonnets and
Poems (pp. 3-17). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Oaks, R. (1978). "Things Fearful to Name": Sodomy and Buggery in Seventeenth-Century New
England. Journal of Social History, 12(2), 268-281. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3787139
Shaffer, J. (1978). Sexual Desire. The Journal of Philosophy, 75(4), 175-189.
doi:10.2307/2025657

Wilkinson, M. (1978). Romantic Love and Sexual Expression. The Family Coordinator, 27(2),
141-148. doi:10.2307/581829