Comparing Shakespeare's Sonnet 116 'And The Flea'

William Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 116” and Edna St. Vincent Millay’s “Love Is Not All” both attempt to define love, by telling what love is and what it is not. Shakespeare’s sonnet praises love and speaks of love in its most ideal form, while Millay’s poem begins by giving the impression that the speaker feels that love is not all, but during the unfolding of the poem we find the ironic truth that love is all. Shakespeare, on the other hand, depicts love as perfect and necessary from the beginning to the end of his poem. Although these two authors have taken two completely different approaches, both have worked to show the importance of love and to define it. However, Shakespeare is most confident of his definition of love, while Millay seems

Donne however, wrote “The Flea” in the first person giving the writing a comical twist as the speaker portrayed the aggressor, who metaphorically used the bite of the flea to defend his case to promote promiscuity. John Donne applied a consistent rhyme scheme using frequent assonance in each stanza which consisted of an iambic tetrameter followed by an iambic pentameter projecting the free willing mindset of the aggressor (Lorcher 2012). The speaker’s repeated use of ‘mark’ and ‘suck’ rhetorically reinforced the strength of his persuasiveness (Lorcher

bed and then tells of how the woman still kills the flea but how the

He goes on to suggest that, when she has killed the flea that holds blood, which in this case is considered as ?life?, from both him and her, that the blood lost had not weakened them (?Find?st not thyself, nor me the weaker now?) and she had not lost any honour. Therefore, with these points considered, the blood she would lose to him would not make her weaker and she would not lose any honour, ?Just so much honour, when thou yield?st to me/ Will waste, as this flea?s death took life from thee?. To some extent, both poets express a way in which they will consummate or have consummated their mistress. Marvell suggests that they should ?roll all their strength and all/ Their sweetness into one ball? and ?tear? their pleasures ?with rough strife/ Through the iron gates of life.? Whereas Marvell explains the consummation as aggressive, sensual and romantic, Donne uses the flea, a very insignificant, unromantic creature, to imply sexual intercourse, ?and in this flee, our two bloods mingled be.?

The flea enjoys the blood and so does the man enjoy foreplay. The pamper'd swells could be that of sexual organs before sex and yet, because that is not happening, the flea is having a better time at the moment than he is, by sucking their blood. I think that by using this comparison, John Donne is being very intellectual and at this point I feel he may win his argument. The second stanza, John Donne becomes weaker as the girl starts to defend herself and he tries to convey his love for her.

As in the other stanzas, this arranges its four supporting arguments into three couplets and a triplet by rhyme. However, whereas the first stanza loosely held the ideas to couplets, the second shows more organization in thought. This further structure is necessary to support the conceit of the flea as a holy church. The support for this idea is arranged into the following four sub-argument: one, do not kill the flea, because we have conceived within it; two, thus, the flea is like a “marriage bed,” and by extension, a “marriage temple”; three, despite your parents’ and your concerns, that’s the way it is; and four, if you kill the flea, you commit three sins – killing me, killing yourself, and sacrilege by violating the sanctity of the marriage temple. Note that Donne does present an argument to seduce his beloved in this stanza. His words are filled solely with reverence and concern for the flea. Through this, we can see the earnestness and seriousness of the passion he has for his beloved: the sanctity of their relationship – even their surrogate relationship within the flea – is sacred to him.

He takes it a step further by stating that in the flea they “yea more than married are” (2.1). It is one thing to note that a flea contains two individuals’ blood, but to say that this union is greater than marriage is very extreme. Yet Donne executes this unlikely comparison with the utmost confidence, creating a surprisingly poignant argument. When the speaker says “though parents grudge,” he acknowledges that the woman’s parents (and society in general) would show great disapproval for such behavior (2.5). However, he replies that they are “cloistered in these walls of jet” (2.6). He describes their blood as secluded within the flea to remind his lady that they are also far away from any condemning parents. When the lady threatens to kill the flea, the speaker shows his opposition when he states “And sacrilege, three sins in killing three” (2.9). Once again, it seems strange to jump to the defense of a bothersome insect, but when we consider the flea as two lovers and the chamber that houses them it becomes more rational.

            Finally, "The Flea" contains two major unique characteristics. One of Donne's most successful effects is sudden contrast.ii[ii] The insect seems to be no connection with romance, but by sucking blood of two characters of the poem, the flea builds a bridge between the two persons that surprises many readers.

Following a unique poetic language of the Renaissance, John Donne's ‘The Flea' is a poem illustrating the metaphor of a flea to represent the sexual act and relations between a man and woman. Portrayed through language, imagery, and structure John Donne's poem is one of conceit and seduction, as the speaker (assumed to be a man) follows a consistent pattern of persuasion to have premarital sex with a woman.

As the girl threatens to kill the flea, the speaker begs her to stop. He states that all three of their lives are in this flea, and that through the blood of the flea he and her are already married. If the girl were to kill the flea, he feels that it would be the equivalent of murdering all three of them. The speaker is desperately trying to manipulate the girls actions too his advantage. Donne uses more metaphors too twist his words into a more convincing argument.

He uses the flea as an excuse for marriage and that they are now permitted to have sex. Out of desperation Donne shifts to a more religiously point of view by saying, “And sacrilege, three sinnes in killing three.” (Line 18) This means that if the woman kills the flea, she is killing the flea, him, herself, and God. However, the women squashes the flea along with his argument and Donne is left with one final go at convincing the woman. The final stanza of the poem expresses his sheer desperation to have sex with the woman as he deviates to using a lenient approach. He blames her not for killing the flea, but says that her act did not damage her honour in any way, and that she should still “yeeld’st to mee” (Line 26), or should still sleep with him. The content of The Flea demonstrates the exact sexist attitude that John Donne possessed when he wrote his early love poems. Likewise, the same desire for physical pleasure can be seen in the poem The Sunne Rising. This poem encompasses Donne’s ignorance of his surroundings and his obsession for sexual pleasure. Throughout the poem he attacks and challenges the sun with contempt, and does so by personifying it. He is obviously disturbed and troubled by the “unruly Sunne” (Line 1) and tells

Shakespeare examines love in two different ways in Sonnets 116 and 130. In the first, love is treated in its most ideal form as an uncompromising force (indeed, as the greatest force in the universe); in the latter sonnet, Shakespeare treats love from a more practical aspect: it is viewed simply and realistically without ornament. Yet both sonnets are justifiable in and of themselves, for neither misrepresents love or speaks of it slightingly. Indeed, Shakespeare illustrates two qualities of love in the two sonnets: its potential and its objectivity. This paper will compare and contrast the two sonnets by Shakespeare and show how they represent two different attitudes to love.

Within sonnet 116, Shakespeare personifies the abstract noun of love when he states ‘Whose worth’s unknown’. Through personifying his ideology of true love, it makes it increasingly

Shakespeare, who wrote the sonnets in 1609, expresses his own feelings through his greatest work of literature. The theme of love in the poems reflect thoughts from the Renaissance period. Love is one of many components of Shakespeare’s life shown in the sonnets. Love can be defined in many ways other than a strong affection for a lover. In Shakespeare’s sonnets, the concept of love can be seen through many uncommon means such as the love of life before death in “Sonnet 73,” love in marriage in “Sonnet 116,” love through sexual desire in “Sonnet 129,” and love through nature in “Sonnet 130,” proving that love can be expressed through many different feelings and emotions.

“Sonnet 130” written by William Shakespeare, is one of his most well known poems and can be analyzed and broken apart in great depth. The poem is written in fourteen lines which makes it a sonnet. Like all of Shakespeare’s sonnets the meter is iambic pentameter. The rhyme scheme for “Sonnet 130” is ABAB CDCD EFEF GG. An overlaying theme for “Sonnet 130” is, “True love is based on how beautiful you find someone on the inside.” Shakespeare proves to have a great view on true love in this sonnet. He cares more about what’s on the inside rather than what’s on the outside. “Sonnet 130’s” theme can be proven by Shakespeare's use of poetic and literary devices, the tone and mood of the sonnet, and the motif of true love.