When reading the first 17 sonnets (knowing they are writ to/for a particular person who is beauty embodied) I've completely glazed over the ugly bits. In your insightful piece, I now see how the over stating of the recipient's outward beauty, dismisses the cry for procreation in the Uglies (a tie-in to the Netflix movie, where the ugly people were the ones who were truly beautiful). I wonder if WS considered himself worthy of procreation? 🤔
Hi CP. Thanks for the comment! Appreciate that. Isn't it interesting to read them satirically? In my view, that makes way more sense of the speaker's claims, so many of which are obviously dubious. For instance the speaker suggests one can defy death through baby-making: “Then what could death do if thou shouldst depart, / Leaving thee living in posterity?” Seems to me this is supposed to be funny, not serious or straightforward like most critics assume.
There's a Netflix movie called the Uglies? Had no idea! Might have to check it out
I guess it would be safe to assume the recipients of the sonnets would have understood his humor, even if there was substance behind the message.
It makes one wonder, who was it that got a hold of these Sonnets in order to publish them? And why do it without his permission while he was still alive?🤔
The Uglies is #1 on Netflix, but curiously, the Uglies are all extremely attractive 😕
Yes! I think it takes an act of faith to believe the Sonnets as we have them are at all as he intended. The question isn't just whether they're in the order he would have wanted, but whether he even wrote most of them. Ever read about his printers, like William Jaggard? Again and again, they sought to profit off his popularity, publishing miscellanies and attributing them to Shaks—a huge but never-discussed problem I'll take up another time.
New subscriber, mythologist and professional wordsmith. Love this already.
This line-- Let those whom Nature hath not made for store
I hadn't considered the phrase "made for store" before. Is this an established phrase that Shakespeare is borrowing or is it one he coined? (Googling it just brings up the sonnet itself without any etymology)
I'm assuming that by "store" we mean store as in preserve, so that it continues to be made available, as opposed to scrap or trash which doesn't survive into the future?
Hi Faith! Thank you commenting and subscribing - great to you have on board. Good question! Can't say I know the origin of the phrase, but yes, it seems to relate to preservation and in my view is another giveaway that this group of sonnets are satirical in nature, as the speaker seeks to preserve or even immortalize something obviously transient
Beauty being in the eye of the beholder, what does one do, should a new standard arise.
For centuries the woman with plenty of padding and wide hips was amongst the most desirable, now it seems, the thinner the better. Who is to say, what standard of beauty is to be used, or for how long?
Who is to say what is the proper standard for judging beauty? For years HOLLYWOOD decided for us all! Witness Ava Gardner, Marilyn Monroe, Gary Cooper and Errol Flynn. BUT with more and more citizens becoming considerably overweight, that seems to be changing. James Earl Jones, who died today, is a good example of masculine attractiveness, with Melissa McCarthy waving the bnner for the women.
One might define beauty for women by the popular hair styles of any decade--the bob during the Depression, "big hair" in the 80's, the beehive in the 50's. Nothing quite so unattractive tas an out dated hair style.
When reading the first 17 sonnets (knowing they are writ to/for a particular person who is beauty embodied) I've completely glazed over the ugly bits. In your insightful piece, I now see how the over stating of the recipient's outward beauty, dismisses the cry for procreation in the Uglies (a tie-in to the Netflix movie, where the ugly people were the ones who were truly beautiful). I wonder if WS considered himself worthy of procreation? 🤔
Hi CP. Thanks for the comment! Appreciate that. Isn't it interesting to read them satirically? In my view, that makes way more sense of the speaker's claims, so many of which are obviously dubious. For instance the speaker suggests one can defy death through baby-making: “Then what could death do if thou shouldst depart, / Leaving thee living in posterity?” Seems to me this is supposed to be funny, not serious or straightforward like most critics assume.
There's a Netflix movie called the Uglies? Had no idea! Might have to check it out
I guess it would be safe to assume the recipients of the sonnets would have understood his humor, even if there was substance behind the message.
It makes one wonder, who was it that got a hold of these Sonnets in order to publish them? And why do it without his permission while he was still alive?🤔
The Uglies is #1 on Netflix, but curiously, the Uglies are all extremely attractive 😕
Yes! I think it takes an act of faith to believe the Sonnets as we have them are at all as he intended. The question isn't just whether they're in the order he would have wanted, but whether he even wrote most of them. Ever read about his printers, like William Jaggard? Again and again, they sought to profit off his popularity, publishing miscellanies and attributing them to Shaks—a huge but never-discussed problem I'll take up another time.
New subscriber, mythologist and professional wordsmith. Love this already.
This line-- Let those whom Nature hath not made for store
I hadn't considered the phrase "made for store" before. Is this an established phrase that Shakespeare is borrowing or is it one he coined? (Googling it just brings up the sonnet itself without any etymology)
I'm assuming that by "store" we mean store as in preserve, so that it continues to be made available, as opposed to scrap or trash which doesn't survive into the future?
Hi Faith! Thank you commenting and subscribing - great to you have on board. Good question! Can't say I know the origin of the phrase, but yes, it seems to relate to preservation and in my view is another giveaway that this group of sonnets are satirical in nature, as the speaker seeks to preserve or even immortalize something obviously transient
Beauty being in the eye of the beholder, what does one do, should a new standard arise.
For centuries the woman with plenty of padding and wide hips was amongst the most desirable, now it seems, the thinner the better. Who is to say, what standard of beauty is to be used, or for how long?
Who is to say what is the proper standard for judging beauty? For years HOLLYWOOD decided for us all! Witness Ava Gardner, Marilyn Monroe, Gary Cooper and Errol Flynn. BUT with more and more citizens becoming considerably overweight, that seems to be changing. James Earl Jones, who died today, is a good example of masculine attractiveness, with Melissa McCarthy waving the bnner for the women.
One might define beauty for women by the popular hair styles of any decade--the bob during the Depression, "big hair" in the 80's, the beehive in the 50's. Nothing quite so unattractive tas an out dated hair style.