[ewrgall]

Shakespeare's Sonnet 126

O thou my lovely Boy who in thy power,
Doest hould times fickle glasse, his sickle, hower:
Who hast by wayning growne, and therein shou'st,
Thy lovers withering, as thy sweet selfe grow'st.
If Nature (soveraine misteres over wrack)
As thou goest onwards still will plucke thee backe,
She keeps thee to this purpose, that her skill,
May time disgrace, and wretched mynuit kill.
Yet feare her O thou minnion of her pleasure,
She may detaine, but not still keepe her tresure!
Her Audite (though delayd) answer'd must be
And her Quietus is to render thee.
( )
( )
</pre>

This is the last sonnet in the Southampton series. Following it the Dark Lady sonnets begin. It is not like the other sonnets because it is in six couplets and ends with two lines containing only parenthesis. There is really nothing puzzling about this poem. It is an envoy and makes a statement summing up the most important message of the Southampton Sonnets. It has only appeared obscure because the intention of the Southampton Sonnets, the message they were to send to Southampton, has been so completely misconstrued.


Line 1
O Thou lovely Boy who in thy power,

"Boy" is an old term once in use in the English legal system. It is French in origin (after the Norman conquest French was the language of the courts--it was being phased out during the reign of Elizabeth and James I.) and means "executioner" or "hangman". Shakespeare has been dismissed (as he foreshadows in the sonnets) from Southampton's service.
Shakespeare uses this "Boy=hangman" joke quite often in his comedies. Cupid was a Boy and therefore a hangman. Some examples follow:
"He hath twice or thrice cut Cupid's bow string and the little hangman dare not shoot at him" --- Much Ado About Nothing
"And hang me up at the door of a brothel-house for the sign of blind Cupid --- Much Ado About Nothing
Shakespeare use of Boy=Hangman was therefore a commonplace in his writing and would have been well understood by his London audiences, a good portion of whom had legal and government experience. And Shakespeare was not the only writer to use the joke--and I doubt that it originated with him.

"Power" is also French. It is the word "pouver" (which meant power). At that time the letter v was not used within a word (only to start a word) and "pouver" would have been printed "pouuer". A double U was often replaced with a W creating what was to become the standard English spelling "power". Here the printer used that convention. (In other words the English "power" comes directly from the French "pouver" by means of a printing convention--an interesting bit of etymology.)


Line 2
Doest hould times fickle glass, his sickle, hower;

"Hower"--This word has been mistakenly taken for "hour" but it is really the French word "houver" with the "uv" by the same printing convention as above converted into a "w". "Houver" in French meant "hover". So we see that "time's fickle glass" (the sand in it) and "his sickle" are held "hover" (hovering, suspended) making perfect sense of the line's commas.
Doest hould times fickle glass, his sickle, hover; (hovering)

Lines 3&4
Who hast by wayning growne, and therein shou'st
Thy lovers withering, as thy sweet selfe grow'st

As Southampton grows into a man he wains as a boy (a common poetic image of the time). Shakespeare, in a previous sonnet, has said that when he sees Southampton aging (Southampton will be his mirror) he will then know that he is aging. Shakespeare has also predicted that as Southampton "grows" he will outstrip Shakespeare's powers to properly describe him (Thy lover's withering) and will then lose Southampton's patronage. So Southampton's growth reveals Shakespeare's lack of ability in writing.

But the line also carries a double meaning. Southampton and Shakespeare did not part as friends (the previous sonnets reveal this). So Shakespeare also says to Southampton--as you have grown older, the number of your lovers grows less--your friends and supporters are leaving you. (In a few more years Southampton will be in the Tower of London convicted of treason because he lost all favor with the Queen and her inner circle and finally rebelled against her.) So how does an English yeoman like Shakespeare rebuke an English earl?---very ambiguously, unless you want to get your head handed to you.


Lines 5,6,7 & 8
If Nature (soveraine misteres over wrack)
As thou goest onwards still will plucke thee backe,
She keeps thee to this purpose, that her skill,
May time disgrace, and wretched mynuit kill.

In these lines Nature is personified and represents the Logos created by God that control all regeneration. It is suggested that though Southampton is no longer a boy (having grown into a young man) Nature may decide to keep him from aging further, her reasons being merely to demonstrate her power over time (any king would have no difficulty understanding the phrase "use it or loose it"--power needs to be continually exercised, even arbitrarily, or someone else will take it from you) and to use Southampton as an ornament in her "court" to help relieve her unending boredom. (Nature herself is not creative. She merely recreates again and again the forms and creatures God invented during the first six days.)

Lines 9,10,11 & 12
Yet feare her O thou minnion of her pleasure,
She may detaine, but not still keepe her tresure!
Her Audite (though delayd) answer'd must be,
And her Quietus is to render thee.

In these lines Southampton is warned to beware of Nature's gifts, to beware of worldly prizes, because Nature's powers are only earthly powers. She is not the owner of his soul (to "still keep" meant to keep a distillation of the essence of something--Shakespeare uses distillation imagery earlier in the sonnets). Nature herself will be called to Audite or final accounting (the italics indicate this is a classicism--the actual Latin sense is that Nature will be given a hearing and the context implies a judical hearing). At the Last Judgement all the world will be destroyed and Nature herself will cease to exist, but Nature's Quietus (Latin for final act) will be to render up to God all the bodies of the dead for God's judgement. Southampton will eventually have to stand before God.
It should be emphasized that Shakespeare is warning Southampton against Nature (who is preserving his life) and not Time (who would take it). If Shakespeare were writing from a secular point of view he would be telling Southampton to fear Time and cozy up to Nature who is extending his life and giving him so many good things. But he is writing from a Christian point of view and Shakespeare's concern is with Southampton's soul, not with how long or how magnificently Southampton will live. Death is not to be feared--the lost of one's soul by being too worldly is what is to be feared.



<FONT >Lines 13&14
( )
( ) </FONT s></pre>

So why are lines 13&14 of this poem merely empty parentheses? Southampton had a worldly outlook and was interested in personal fame and worldly honors. Shakespeare final poem warns Southampton that he must someday face the judgment of God and he leaves the last lines of this poem blank asking Southampton to fill them in, saying--"Southampton, eventually you must face the judgment of God--what will that judgment be?--You, Southampton, (not me) are the one who writes the final lines of this poem, who decides how God will judge you. Think what you want these lines to say and then act accordingly."

So, in the sonnets, Shakespeare's final message to Southampton (a Christian message) is to tell him to take care for the state of his soul.


ewrgall



[This message has been edited by ewrgall (edited September 20, 2001).]

[Tom]

Very, very interesting, and fun to read. More.

[Caleb Murdock]

Ewrgall is a conspiracy theorist, only he looks for conspiracies among Shakespeare's sonnets rather than in the usual places. He's started threads like this before.

[This message has been edited by Caleb Murdock (edited September 13, 2001).]

[Len Krisak]

Ewrgall,

(Your gall?),


PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE

go away...and never come back.

[A. E. Stallings]

(Let's refrain from the ad hominem please--and confine comments to the poem and the interpretation thereof.)

[robert mezey]

Why is everybody jumping on ewrgall
here? I see nothing outrageous in his reading
of 126. It makes very good sense to me, and
I learned a couple of things.

[Brett Thibault]

I agree with Tom and Mr. Mezey.

Well done. I would not have reached the same conclusions and certainly appreciate ergwall's post.

BT

[Caleb Murdock]

It might be wise to check his facts before accepting his theories.

[robert mezey]

Good. Which facts did he get wrong?

[ewrgall]

Originally posted by Tom:
Very, very interesting, and fun to read. More.

Well, If you go to the top right of the Mastery board and ask to to be shown All Topics you will find a couple more. Look for my handle--ewrgall. For one thing you will be given a complete solution to the great mystery sonnet 107--find that and read it first before reading the others. In other words---read the oldest first. (I also explain the mad song Tom O'Bedlam which is quite interesting, I think.)

Amusingly you will discover that the other Shakespeare threads have been closed and you will not be able to comment on them. (Perhaps the new Mistress of Mastery will consider reopening them.



[This message has been edited by ewrgall (edited September 16, 2001).]