Structuralist Critique
Last Name 1
Student Name
Professor Kristen Westrick
English 1102
Day Month Year
Professor Kristen Westrick
English 1102
Day Month Year
My Mistress' Eyes Are Nothing Like the Sun: Unrealistic Beauty
Elizabethan sonneteers were known for their use of unrealistic similes and grandiose metaphors when describing their poem’s muse. These early Renaissance poets, such as Phillip Sidney, would compare their love’s features to the most beautiful aspects of the natural world in an attempt express the power of their feelings. Shakespeare saw these Petrarchan expressions of love as tacky appraisals of women’s beauty. In Sonnet 130, “My Mistress’ Eyes Are Nothing Like the Sun”, Shakespeare describes his “Mistress” in a way that that denounces traditional comparisons of beauty made by these poets.
Shakespeare repeatedly contradicts several common Petrarchan comparisons of beauty to undermine their significance in the matter of love throughout Sonnet 130. When describing his Mistress, Shakespeare bluntly admits that her “eyes are nothing like the sun” (1) and that “coral is far more red then her lips’ red” (2). Though at first glance these statements may seem to be attacks on his Mistress’s beauty, they are in fact rejections of “idiotic comparisons” found in traditional love sonnets and, instead, statements of “sane and human acceptance of a woman for what she is” (Edwards 344). Shakespeare continues his satiric attack on the Petrarchan form when he admits that his Mistress was not the “goddess” most romantic poets of his time described, in fact, she was a mere mortal forced to walk the ground (11-12). As J.W. Lever argues in his article “The Elizabethan Love Sonnet”, Shakespeare’s unflattering description of his Mistress was a consciously aimed assault, not on the Mistress’s appearance, but on fellow sonneteers’ unrealistic portrayal of women’s beauty (Lever 294).
Shakespeare concludes his sonnet with a powerful couplet that both expresses his strong love for his Mistress and belittles the false comparisons made by other Renaissance poets: “And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare / As any she belied with false compare” (13-14). Here Shakespeare is declaring that despite his Mistress’s inability to live up to the traditional Petrarchan expressions of female beauty, his love for here was deep and rare. In fact, he stakes that he feels his love just as powerful and rare as that expressed by any of his contemporaries through their grandiose comparisons. It is in these lines that Shakespeare liberates his Mistress, and women in general, from the unattainable physical standards set by sonneteers of their time.
Shakespeare’s reluctance to praise his Mistress in Sonnet 130 was another attempt to reject the embellished beauty and advertising nature of other Elizabethan sonnets. As Lever further argues, “Shakespeare would not praise [his Mistress] because he purposed not to sell” (Lever 294). Lever was referencing the secondary meaning of “praise” which is to assign a value or fix a price. While his fellow sonneteers were willing to be “procurers of their painted beauty” (Lever 294), Shakespeare’s Mistress’s was to be admired by him and him alone.
Despite the unflattering picture painted by Shakespeare of his Mistress in Sonnet 130, his love for her was clear. It was his divergence from the traditional comparisons of beauty used by other poets of his time that set the stage for a realistic love. A love not based on the mythical imagery of some goddess, but on the naturals qualities found in all women. Through his poem Shakespeare artfully dismisses the unnatural beauty described by follow Elizabethan poets.
Shakespeare repeatedly contradicts several common Petrarchan comparisons of beauty to undermine their significance in the matter of love throughout Sonnet 130. When describing his Mistress, Shakespeare bluntly admits that her “eyes are nothing like the sun” (1) and that “coral is far more red then her lips’ red” (2). Though at first glance these statements may seem to be attacks on his Mistress’s beauty, they are in fact rejections of “idiotic comparisons” found in traditional love sonnets and, instead, statements of “sane and human acceptance of a woman for what she is” (Edwards 344). Shakespeare continues his satiric attack on the Petrarchan form when he admits that his Mistress was not the “goddess” most romantic poets of his time described, in fact, she was a mere mortal forced to walk the ground (11-12). As J.W. Lever argues in his article “The Elizabethan Love Sonnet”, Shakespeare’s unflattering description of his Mistress was a consciously aimed assault, not on the Mistress’s appearance, but on fellow sonneteers’ unrealistic portrayal of women’s beauty (Lever 294).
Shakespeare concludes his sonnet with a powerful couplet that both expresses his strong love for his Mistress and belittles the false comparisons made by other Renaissance poets: “And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare / As any she belied with false compare” (13-14). Here Shakespeare is declaring that despite his Mistress’s inability to live up to the traditional Petrarchan expressions of female beauty, his love for here was deep and rare. In fact, he stakes that he feels his love just as powerful and rare as that expressed by any of his contemporaries through their grandiose comparisons. It is in these lines that Shakespeare liberates his Mistress, and women in general, from the unattainable physical standards set by sonneteers of their time.
Shakespeare’s reluctance to praise his Mistress in Sonnet 130 was another attempt to reject the embellished beauty and advertising nature of other Elizabethan sonnets. As Lever further argues, “Shakespeare would not praise [his Mistress] because he purposed not to sell” (Lever 294). Lever was referencing the secondary meaning of “praise” which is to assign a value or fix a price. While his fellow sonneteers were willing to be “procurers of their painted beauty” (Lever 294), Shakespeare’s Mistress’s was to be admired by him and him alone.
Despite the unflattering picture painted by Shakespeare of his Mistress in Sonnet 130, his love for her was clear. It was his divergence from the traditional comparisons of beauty used by other poets of his time that set the stage for a realistic love. A love not based on the mythical imagery of some goddess, but on the naturals qualities found in all women. Through his poem Shakespeare artfully dismisses the unnatural beauty described by follow Elizabethan poets.
Works Cited
Edwards, Philip. "The Sonnets to the Dark Woman." Shakespearean Criticism, edited by Sandra L. Williamson, vol. 10, Gale, 1990. Shakespearean Criticism Online, ezproxy.gsu.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.gsu.edu/ps/i.do?p=LCO&sw=w&u=atla29738&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CIUSNJC577582903&it=r. Accessed 26 Mar. 2017. Originally published in Shakespeare and the Confines of Art, by Philip Edwards, Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1968, pp. 17-32.
Lever, J. W. "Shakespeare." Shakespearean Criticism, edited by Sandra L. Williamson, vol. 10, Gale, 1990. Shakespearean Criticism Online, ezproxy.gsu.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.gsu.edu/ps/i.do?p=LCO&sw=w&u=atla29738&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CDRTZMZ386395448&it=r. Accessed 26 Mar. 2017. Originally published in The Elizabethan Love Sonnet, by J. W. Lever, Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1956, pp. 162-272.
Shakespeare, W. The sonnets. In R. G. White (Ed.), The complete works of William Shakespeare. New York: Sully and Kleinteich.
Lever, J. W. "Shakespeare." Shakespearean Criticism, edited by Sandra L. Williamson, vol. 10, Gale, 1990. Shakespearean Criticism Online, ezproxy.gsu.edu/login?url=http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.gsu.edu/ps/i.do?p=LCO&sw=w&u=atla29738&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CDRTZMZ386395448&it=r. Accessed 26 Mar. 2017. Originally published in The Elizabethan Love Sonnet, by J. W. Lever, Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1956, pp. 162-272.
Shakespeare, W. The sonnets. In R. G. White (Ed.), The complete works of William Shakespeare. New York: Sully and Kleinteich.