Let me not to the marriage of true minds (Sonnet CXVI)
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
Commentary
The last time we ran a metaphysical poem1, I went into a rather detailed analysis of its construction, talking about the many conceits used, how they fit into a logical sequence, and how the idea of logic gave structure to the poem as a whole. Several readers wrote in to say that they enjoyed that particular essay, and they’d like to see more of the same on the Minstrels.
Of course, not all poems lend themselves to that sort of critical dissection, and there are many which I believe should not be analysed, just read and enjoyed in themselves. (Several of you wrote to express this latter point of view as well; you can’t win, sometimes <grin>). Nevertheless, I will be analysing today’s poem in depth; I think it offers a lot more to the reader who is willing to spend some time inquiring into its meaning.
The Shakespeare of the sonnets is a very different person from the playwright who gave us King Lear, The Tempest and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. In the plays he is the consummate craftsman, entertaining audiences with masterpieces of dramatic effect while exploring human character to a degree seen never before or since. The sonnets, though, reveal a more thoughtful, introspective writer, a philosopher-poet inquiring, especially, into the question of Time and its effect on human affairs. But he’s never coldly intellectual; his sonnets burn with emotion and (unrequited?) love. And it’s in this respect that I feel that Shakespeare’s sonnets are the definitive statement of the metaphysical poet’s art: he presages Donne and Marvell and their ‘passionate intelligence’ with remarkable accuracy.
‘Let me not to the marriage of true minds’ is about as metaphysical as a poem can get; indeed, if I didn’t know better, I would have credited it to Donne. Its themes are the usual Shakespearean preoccupations: in his commentary to ‘Full many a glorious morning have I seen’2, Martin writes, “If you’ve read any of Shakespeare’s sonnets, the sequence of images is instantly familiar. Time triumphs over flesh, and Love over all.”.
This is the central idea of today’s poem as well, but whereas in the previous sonnet Shakespeare talks about the frailty of the flesh, here he is more concerned with the constancy of Love.
Love (the ‘marriage of true minds’) does not weaken when the circumstances that gave rise to it are changed - ‘Love is not love / Which alters when it alteration finds’. Nay, it is a constant, like a star that glimmers fixed in the sky, far above the tempests that batter the wandering bark3. And the navigator of life’s ship can measure a star’s height to obtain a reading of his own position; thus the star (Love) acts both as a symbol of constancy and as a beacon, guiding the voyager onwards.
Nor is Love at the mercy of Time; although the external manifestations of beauty (‘rosy lips and cheeks’) may fall within the arc of the Grim Reaper’s sickle, Love itself does not decay or crumble with the passage of hours and weeks.
— Thomas
[Aside]
Until I read today’s sonnet, I would never ever have thought of using a phrase as clunky as ‘admit impediments’ in a poem… it just goes to show, I suppose.
-
John Donne’s Valediction, archived at poem #330 . John Donne is a relatively recent discovery of mine; be warned, this list will be seeing quite a bit of him in the near future! ↩
-
This is the familiar conceit of life being a voyage; ‘bark’ is just a synonym for boat (usually, with an added implication of frailty). ↩
Show 18 commentsHide comments
From the Wondering Minstrels mailing list, 1999–2008.
Sitaram Iyer · 7 March 2000
oh, lovely poem, fond textbook nostalgia.
Bethany Wintermute · 14 February 2002
“The Shakespeare of the sonnets is a very different person from the playwright who gave us King Lear, The Tempest and A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” This poem certainly does change my perspective of Shakespeare.
Wesley Petersen · 9 December 2003
Let me not to the marriage of true minds - it’s really the most mind-blowing poem of love that I’ve ever come across. How do I love thee, let me count the ways…IT doesn’t even compare to the master that was Shakespeare. So many people search for love and get involved in relationships that eventually fail and it’s all because they don’t really understand what love actually means. I’d refer anyone to this poem if they ask for a definition of LOVE. Great site, love your work too!
Kind regards,
Wesley Petersen
Jesse Allen · 21 October 2004
Tiny point
Thomas mentions “wandering bark” as a metaphor for a boat. Actually, “bark” may (notice use of weasel word) be a failed spelling translation to modern English to a “barque” (pronounced the same as “bark”), which is a three masted sailing vessel, one of several common ship designs for ocean-capable boats. English did not standardize spellings for some words for some time and so apparently non-standard spellings would appear at times. Indeed much of the heritage of modern American English spellings stems from the efforts of Americans like Thomas Jefferson trying to bring (what he regarded as) common sense and logic to spelling and grammar which was random and illogical and encompassed multiple accepted spellings for identical terms. Lots of “u” and “que”s and such with which modern British English is rife are absent from American English. The Elizabethian “wandering bark” may be either an different spelling for “barque” or one that suffered Americanization at some time subsequent to the Bard’s penning it.
J
Tyrrell Frank · 23 June 2005
But what about the phrase “let me not…” I’m a little (OK, a lot) uncertain about what that means.
Anyone?
Frank Tyrrell
Senior Technical Consultant
Movaz Networks, Inc.
Atlanta, Georgia
Michael Fliegner · 6 July 2005
“Let me not … admit impediments” - In my opinion it’s just there for rythm and - a sort of - rhyme, repetition of initial consonants.
Regards mfl
Dawn Baker Levi · 29 August 2005
“Let me not…admit” Means I will not admit. Shakespeare is denying that anything can come between true lovers (that is, be an impediment to their love.)
-DB
py-ref · 29 August 2005
In answer to Jesse Allen’s question/comment, a brief Google search for “First Folio” brought up an e-text page at the University of Virginia. It uses “barke,” not “barque.” The Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology comments that the usage of “barke” for “a boat” is dated to about 1420, and adds that it may have come through Old French “barque” from the Latin “barca.” I don’t know if this clears the waters or not.
Janmaartens · 1 September 2005
Although “Time” is capitalized in line nine, and may therefore evoke the Grim Reaper……when rosy lips and cheeks
“Within his bending sickle’s compass come”,
does it not more strongly evoke the arc motion of a sextant on the voyage of life of the ‘bark’ (boat or ship symbolizing true love) of which the physical attraction of youth forms a part, though not the whole?
Jan Maartens
Portland
Oregon
Richard Rawnsley · 19 November 2005
This is my favourite of Shakespeare’s sonnets… I love the bit where he alludes to navigation and writes “ Whose worth’s unknown, although his height be taken”…love is really unmeasurable despite our efforts to measure it and those measures guide us with their symbolism. Wow! I definitely have bardolatory! Kay
Elizabeth Viall · 28 April 2006
The editions I have spell the word as barque, which is identified as a type of sailing vessel, which ties in nicely to the allusion to navigation, and a true reference point on a voyage from point A (birth) to B (death).
Liz Viall
Elizabeth Viall · 28 April 2006
After much searching back and forth, I chose this as my reading for my wedding (15+ years ago). When it was read, and the reader was concerned because he “got stuck” with reading Shakespeare and was overly nervous, the congregation sighed with recognition after only the first line. Some sonnets, and lines from plays, carry such meaning that only a brief reminder is enough to bring out a much deeper emotional response that most readers would expect from themselves.
Liz Viall
Graeme Tetley · 9 May 2006
May I suggest a reading to the first line. I hear in it the poet chastising himself for not ‘keeping the faith’ in his love. I think the stress falls on ‘not’ … admit impediments’ even though my lover may ‘alter’ or ‘remove’. The second ‘not ‘ (‘love is not love’) helps this idea along. And then he goes on to write the great almost ecstatic description of what love is. GAT
Butterblume21091 · 12 July 2006
Können sie das auf Deutsch übersetzen. ist schon schwer auf Englisch zu lesen. Wir sollen das auch verstehen!!!
Danke
CBES
Jack Repenning · 9 October 2006
“If this be error and upon me proved” ..
What about that “upon me”? It sounds to me like a reference to chivalrous combat in defense of honor. To prove something “to” someone is only to present convincing arguments. But to prove it “upon” them is to engage in combat or a duel, and to win, thereby proving the truth of the claim by the valor of the battle. Shakespeare, does not merely present an idea or theory: he announces he’s ready to fight for it.
-==-
Jack Repenning
Director, Software Product Architecture
w:c:
Lwdail · 15 October 2006
Those blessed enough to find this kind of true love have been given a rare and precious gift.
I know! Shakespeare must have had this kind of love in his life too; without the gift, no one can possibly understand it.
Bob Swan · 4 December 2006
‘Me’ is that collection of attachments with which we label ourselves and, consequently, everyone/thing else as well. ‘I am tall’, ‘I am short’ . male, female, English, Chinese . I love seafood, trains, countryside - and on - and on. All this is ‘me’. All this is observed by ‘I’, the first person. We all say ‘I’ no matter what we go on to describe. ‘I’ is the constant; ‘me’ is everything else; changeable, temporary, subject to mood, company, etc. So, “Let ‘me’ not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments. Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds .” Methinks!
Sorry if this is all a bit late - only just discovered your site (and am enjoying it too).
Bob Swan
Switzerland
Alma S. Ferrer · 9 June 2007
I am just a high school graduate (Puerto Rico) and was lucky to have an English teacher from the U.S. who made it clear only English was to be spoken during her classroom hour. This is the best thing that ever happened to me wherein all other English teachers would explain everything in Spanish. At first everybody was scared but after a day of two everybody was so involved they were really relaxed and enjoying the class. We had never studied anything related to Shakespeare but because of her now we know. This sonnet 363 is my favorite as I had to memorize it for the class. I am so happy I found your site and will repeteadly use it from now on. Good job…..!!!!!