Poem #12: Sonnet 130 by William Shakespeare

“There are a thousand ways to love a poem. The best poets make up new ways, and the new ways mostly take getting used to.~Donald Hall

My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun;
Coral is far more red than her lips’ red;
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.
I have seen roses damasked, red and white,
But no such roses see I in her cheeks;
And in some perfumes is there more delight
Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks.
I love to hear her speak, yet well I know
That music hath a far more pleasing sound;
I grant I never saw a goddess go;
My mistress when she walks treads on the ground.
And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare
As any she belied with false compare.

Now this one is my favorite Shakespeare sonnet! That’s the sense of humor I’ve got—and have passed on to my urchins, for better or for worse. Drama Daughter says no one understands her sense of (somewhat sarcastic) humor, but I think she and Will would have gotten along just fine.

And it ends on a gentle, almost plaintive, note: I believe my love is just as precious and special as any of those so-called beauties who get all the cliched accolades. By heaven.

I found a video for this one, too, with Snape, or Colonel Brandon as I like to call him since I don’t know Snape, aka Alan Rickman reading the sonnet:

Texas Tuesday: Apparent Danger by David R. Stokes

Apparent Danger: The Pastor of America’s First Megachurch and the Texas Murder Trial of the Decade in the 1920’s by David R. Stokes.

I get a lot of emails from publicists pitching books that I might want to review here on the blog. Mostly, I don’t respond because a) most of the books just don’t sound that interesting to me, and b) I don’t like being pressured to read a book and write a review on someone else’s time schedule. However, when I received an email about Apparent Danger, I took the bait because I am interested in Texas history, particularly Southern Baptist history in Texas, and the book was about the notorious J. Frank Norris, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Fort Worth from 1909 until Norris’s death in 1952.

What I knew about Norris before I read the book: He was the pastor of FBC, Fort Worth. He got thrown out of or left the Southern Baptist Convention with his church. He was a real, live “fundamentalist.” He was involved in some kind of scandal or something?

What I learned from the book: J. Frank Norris was much more than just a run-of-the-mill pastor of a large church. He was a celebrity with aspirations to become the religious and political leader of the fundamentalist movement after the death of orator and politician William Jennings Bryan. The “scandal” I vaguely associated with Norris was really more than one scandal, but the biggest one was that he shot and killed an unarmed man in his church office —and was subsequently indicted and tried for first-degree murder. (And we think we have outrageous behavior among the clergy nowadays!) Of course, the book goes into much more detail about Norris, the murder, the trial, Norris’s relationships with Fort Worth’s finest, almost everything you’d ever want to know about Fort Worth and its politics and culture in 1926.

And I ate up every word. The picture that Mr. Stokes paints of this larger-than-life preacher and his strange reaction to criticism and controversy is fascinating. I kept trying to figure out what made J. Frank Norris tick and why so many people were so devoted to him and to his church for so long. That I never completely understood or got answers to those questions was not the fault of the author so much as the subject. Pastor J. Frank Norris didn’t seem to want to be understood so much as feared and followed and obeyed and admired. He was virulently anti-Catholic, associated with the Ku Klux Klan if not a member, and yet he spent a lot of time visiting in the homes of his six thousand church members and and seemed to see himself as a crusader against the evils of alcohol, gambling, and immorality in general. But he didn’t see anything immoral or even questionable about his shooting of Mr. D.E. Chipps in cold blood in the church building on July 17, 1926.

I thought the book, again, was wonderful in its detailed and comprehensive view of the time period and of the particular circumstances of Chipp’s death and the subsequent trial of J. Frank Norris. At the same time I very much wanted to know who Norris was and why he did what he did. Did he really believe what he preached? Was he a charlatan out to make a buck and enjoy his power over the masses? Was he ever sorry for the events of July 17th? What did his children think of him? Or his grandchildren? If he didn’t really believe the Bible, how did he sustain such a ministry for a lifetime? If he did, how did he square his actions with Jesus’s commands to practice peace and humility and lovingkindness? How could a Christian man ever feel justified in killing another human being, even in self-defense? (Oddly enough, George W. Truett, pastor of FBC, Dallas, during the same time that Norris was in Fort Worth, accidentally shot and killed a friend in a hunting accident, and it nearly ended his ministry. Truett was deeply depressed by the accident and only recovered after much prayer and encouragement from his congregation and family.)

I found this article, A Tale of Two Preachers, by author David Stokes linked at his website, and it added some to the story. But still I came away from the book wishing I knew more about this man, Doctor J. Frank Norris. (He received an honorary doctorate from Simmons College, as my alma mater, Hardin-Simmons University, was called back in those days.) How could he continue on for twenty-five more years in the ministry at the same church without ever revealing his heart? Did he have a heart? Did he preach the gospel, or just so much legalistic, racist, anti-Catholic nonsense? Was it all so mixed-up that you couldn’t sort it out? What really sustained Norris, besides Kipling’s poem If, a poem he had posted on his study wall and could quote by heart?

Apparent Danger is a must-read for anyone interested in the history of fundamentalist Christianity, of Fort Worth, of Texas Baptists, or of religion in the 1920’s. It reads like a fresh news story and seems to be well-researched and sourced without having the story itself get bogged down in footnotes and minutia. Recommended history.

Poem #11: Sonnet 73 by William Shakespeare

“You cannot translate a poem into an explanation, any more than you can translate a poem into a painting or a painting into a piece of music or a piece of music into a walking stick. A work of art says what it says in the only way it can be said. Beauty, for example, cannot be interpreted. It is not an empirically verifiable fact; it is not a quantity.”~Wendell Berry, Life is a Miracle: An Essay Against Modern Superstition (2000), p. 117

This sonnet surprised me by appearing on three people’s lists. I don’t remember ever reading it before.

That time of year thou mayst in me behold
When yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hang
Upon those boughs which shake against the cold,
Bare ruin’d choirs, where late the sweet birds sang.
In me thou seest the twilight of such day
As after sunset fadeth in the west,
Which by and by black night doth take away,
Death’s second self, that seals up all in rest.
In me thou see’st the glowing of such fire
That on the ashes of his youth doth lie,
As the death-bed whereon it must expire
Consumed with that which it was nourish’d by.
This thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong,
To love that well which thou must leave ere long.

The website, No Sweat Shakespeare, has prose translations of Shakespeare’s sonnets:

You may see that time of year in me when few, or no, yellow leaves hang on those branches that shiver in the cold bare ruins of the choir stalls where sweet birds sang so recently. You see, in me, the twilight of a day, after the sun has set in the west, extinguished by the black night that imitates Death, which closes everything in rest. You see in me the glowing embers that are all that is left of the fire of my youth – the deathbed on which youth must inevitably die, consumed by the life that once fed it. This is something you can see, and it gives your love the strength deeply to love that which you have to lose soon.

So the poet is old, and the addressee is young. But whoever it is the poet is talking to can see what the poet is and used to be, and so age makes the young person love the poet more? Even though the inevitable parting is coming soon. (Ha! I agree with Mr. Berry, but that doesn’t stop me from trying anyway.)

The urchins asked if I was going to add a video to every one of these poetry posts, and I said no, but I couldn’t resist this one. “Dallas Bill” quotes Sonnet 73, and then he goes on to explain sonnets in general and the meaning of this sonnet in particular. Priceless.

For the Love of Venice by Donna Jo Napoli

I picked up this YA romance novel at a used book sale because I’ve read other books by the author and enjoyed them. This one was quite readable and will be recommended to the older urchins as entertainment.

Seventeen year old Percy (bad choice of name for the protagonist, by the way, sorry if your name is Percy) is forced to go to Venice with his family because his dad has a summer job there. As Percy begins to explore Venice on his own, he meets a girl (of course!) in a gelateria, an ice cream store. Graziela, the girl, is lovely and interested in Percy, but she has secrets, and there are cultural differences that threaten to end the relationship before it can properly begin.

The book is fairly clean; premarital sex is implied but not described. Percy is an atheist; Graziela is Catholic, but not too involved in Catholicism other than as a cultural tradition. The couple ends with a philosophy of love and life that I disagree with, but it’s fairly common. The book would be a good discussion starter. Is it possible to have an intense summer romance that you know will end without someone’s getting hurt? Is it desirable? Why? How do Europeans see Americans? How do American young people see Europeans? Is there prejudice on both sides? If so, how can the prejudice be overcome? The book was published in 1998; have things changed since then? Better or worse?

The book reminded me of Madeleine L’Engle’s teen romances, a bit dated, set in Europe with American characters interacting with Europeans and the resulting stereotypes and misunderstandings. Ms. Napoli is a good writer, and her book made me think about why Americans and Europeans have such different outlooks on the world and politics. Eldest Daughter experienced quite a bit of European/American cultural clash and misconstruction when she was in Italy for a summer, then France for a year. Some of it was humorous; some, not so funny. However, there’s no doubt that They don’t really understand us, and we probably don’t get them very well either.

I really like the cover, don’t you? With the Venetian canal and bridge scene and then the boy and girl, it gives a good taste of what’s inside.

Poem #10: Sonnet 29 by William Shakespeare

“Everyday one should at least hear one little song, read one good poem, see one fine painting, and —if at all possible—speak a few sensible words.”~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

When, in disgrace with fortune and men’s eyes,
I all alone beweep my outcast state
And trouble deaf heaven with my bootless cries
And look upon myself and curse my fate,
Wishing me like to one more rich in hope,
Featured like him, like him with friends possess’d,
Desiring this man’s art and that man’s scope,
With what I most enjoy contented least;
Yet in these thoughts myself almost despising,
Haply I think on thee, and then my state,
Like to the lark at break of day arising
From sullen earth, sings hymns at heaven’s gate;
For thy sweet love remember’d such wealth brings
That then I scorn to change my state with kings.

You are my sunshine, my only sunshine.
You make me happy, when skies are grey.
You’ll never know, dear, how much I love you.
Please, don’t take my sunshine away.

If you like the singer Rufus Wainright and if you like the Keira Knightley/Matthew Macfadyen version of Pride and Prejudice, I found this video in which they are paired with Wainright singing a lyrical version of Sonnet 29. I prefer Emma Thompson for my Elizabeth and the very handsome Colin Firth as Darcy, but this video has some smoldering looks and and chemistry that go well with the sonnet.

And here we have Mr. Macfayden reciting SOnnet 29 in a modern setting:

Drama Daughter thought this one was ridiculous, but I rather liked it.

Here’s a lesson plan for teaching some of Shakespeare’s sonnets, including Sonnet 29.

Enjoy today’s poem, and be thankful, especially if you have someone to love and someone who loves you.

Sunday Salon: Top 100 Children’s Novels

Betsy at Fuse #8 has been counting down the Top 100 Children’s Novels from the survey she took back in January. Then, Teacher Ninja turned the list into a meme: which of the Top 100 Children’s Novels have you read? I put the ones I’ve read in bold, and the ones I’ve tasted in italics.

100. The Egypt Game – Snyder (1967)
99. The Indian in the Cupboard – Banks (1980)
98. Children of Green Knowe – Boston (1954)
97. The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane – DiCamillo (2006)
96. The Witches – Dahl (1983)
95. Pippi Longstocking – Lindgren (1950)
94. Swallows and Amazons – Ransome (1930)
93. Caddie Woodlawn – Brink (1935)
92. Ella Enchanted – Levine (1997)
91. Sideways Stories from Wayside School – Sachar (1978)
90. Sarah, Plain and Tall – MacLachlan (1985)
89. Ramona and Her Father – Cleary (1977)
88. The High King – Alexander (1968)
87. The View from Saturday – Konigsburg (1996)
86. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets – Rowling (1999)
85. On the Banks of Plum Creek – Wilder (1937)
84. The Little White Horse – Goudge (1946)
83. The Thief – Turner (1997)
82. The Book of Three – Alexander (1964)
81. Where the Mountain Meets the Moon – Lin (2009)
80. The Graveyard Book – Gaiman (2008)
79. All-of-a-Kind-Family – Taylor (1951)
78. Johnny Tremain – Forbes (1943)

77. The City of Ember – DuPrau (2003)
76. Out of the Dust – Hesse (1997)
75. Love That Dog – Creech (2001)
74. The Borrowers – Norton (1953)
73. My Side of the Mountain – George (1959)

72. My Father’s Dragon – Gannett (1948)
71. The Bad Beginning – Snicket (1999)
70. Betsy-Tacy – Lovelace (1940)
69. The Mysterious Benedict Society – Stewart (2007)

68. Walk Two Moons – Creech (1994)
67. Jeremy Thatcher, Dragon Hatcher – Coville (1991)
66. Henry Huggins – Cleary (1950)
65. Ballet Shoes – Streatfield (1936)

64. A Long Way from Chicago – Peck (1998)
63. Gone-Away Lake – Enright (1957)
62. The Secret of the Old Clock – Keene (1959)
61. Stargirl – Spinelli (2000)

60. The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle – Avi (1990)
59. Inkheart – Funke (2003)
58. The Wolves of Willoughby Chase – Aiken (1962)
57. Ramona Quimby, Age 8 – Cleary (1981)
56. Number the Stars – Lowry (1989)
55. The Great Gilly Hopkins – Paterson (1978)

54. The BFG – Dahl (1982)
53. Wind in the Willows – Grahame (1908)
52. The Invention of Hugo Cabret (2007)
51. The Saturdays – Enright (1941)
50. Island of the Blue Dolphins – O’Dell (1960)

49. Frindle – Clements (1996)
48. The Penderwicks – Birdsall (2005)
47. Bud, Not Buddy – Curtis (1999)
46. Where the Red Fern Grows – Rawls (1961)

45. The Golden Compass – Pullman (1995)
44. Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing – Blume (1972)
43. Ramona the Pest – Cleary (1968)
42. Little House on the Prairie – Wilder (1935)
41. The Witch of Blackbird Pond – Speare (1958)
40. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz – Baum (1900)
39. When You Reach Me – Stead (2009)

38. HP and the Order of the Phoenix – Rowling (2003)
37. Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry – Taylor (1976)
36. Are You there, God? It’s Me, Margaret – Blume (1970)

35. HP and the Goblet of Fire – Rowling (2000)
34. The Watsons Go to Birmingham – Curtis (1995)
33. James and the Giant Peach – Dahl (1961)
32. Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH – O’Brian (1971)
31. Half Magic – Eager (1954)
30. Winnie-the-Pooh – Milne (1926)
29. The Dark Is Rising – Cooper (1973)
28. A Little Princess – Burnett (1905)
27. Alice I and II – Carroll (1865/72)

26. Hatchet – Paulsen (1989)
25. Little Women – Alcott (1868/9)
24. HP and the Deathly Hallows – Rowling (2007)
23. Little House in the Big Woods – Wilder (1932)
22. The Tale of Despereaux – DiCamillo (2003)
21. The Lightening Thief – Riordan (2005)
20. Tuck Everlasting – Babbitt (1975)
19. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory – Dahl (1964)

18. Matilda – Dahl (1988)
17. Maniac Magee – Spinelli (1990)
16. Harriet the Spy – Fitzhugh (1964)
15. Because of Winn-Dixie – DiCamillo (2000)

14. HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban – Rowling (1999)
13. Bridge to Terabithia – Paterson (1977)
12. The Hobbit – Tolkien (1938)
11. The Westing Game – Raskin (1978)
10. The Phantom Tollbooth – Juster (1961)
9. Anne of Green Gables – Montgomery (1908)
8. The Secret Garden – Burnett (1911)
7. The Giver -Lowry (1993)
6. Holes – Sachar (1998)
5. From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler – Koningsburg (1967)
4. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe – Lewis (1950)

3. Harry Potter #1 – Rowling (1997)
2. A Wrinkle in Time – L’Engle (1962)
1. Charlotte’s Web – White (1952)

Betsy-Bee says she’s read or listened to 40 out of the 100. I count 68 for me. I’m handicapped by my refusal to read HP and by my distaste for Dahl. It’s my pretense to being rebellious.

An Expert in Murder by Nicola Upson

I love Josephine Tey’s mystery novels. I’m especially fond of Daughter of Time, her solution to the mystery of who killed the Princes in the Tower (not Richard III, according to Tey’s detective work). The novel, featuring Inspector Alan Grant practicing his detecting skills from a hospital bed, is a tour de force, a combination of murder mystery and historical fiction, with quite a bit of actual history thrown in.

I’m also a fan of The Franchise Affair, in which a young girl alleges that a middle-aged spinster and her elderly mother held her captive for weeks, while the mother and daughter deny ever having made the girl’s acquaintance. Who’s telling the truth? The reader is kept guessing until the very end of the book.

And Ms. Tey’s other mysteries are all good reads. So when I read over a year ago that author Nicola Upson had written a mystery with Josephine Tey as the main character and sleuth, I knew I would either like it very much or hate it. Not that I knew very much about the Josephine Tey outside of her books. It turns out that Tey’s real name was Elizzabeth Macintosh, and that she used yet another pseudonym, Gordon Daviot, for the plays she wrote. She worte and had produced several plays, the most successful of which was RIchard of Bordeaux, about Richard II, the play that made actor John Gielgud famous.

An Expert in Murder takes place during the final weeks of the run of Richard of Bordeaux in London. Tey is travelling to London to “see the play off” as it ends its run in London and prepares to go on tour through the country. On the train, Ms. Tey meets a young fan, Elspeth SImmons, and . . . well, the game’s afoot, and murder happens fairly quickly.

I vacillated while reading An Expert in Murder. The writing has aspirations to being literary, and it’s rather succesful in that attempt, remiding me of P.D. James. However the plot bogged down a bit in the middle, and I figured out a lot of the secrets before they were actually revealed. Then, the murderer and the reasons behind the murder were revealed, and there were still two more (long) chapters to go in the novel. What more could be said?

One of those two final chapters proved to be an unbelievably calm discussion of the history of the murderer’s accomplice as Tey rationally and unsuccessfully tried to talk said accomplice into surrending to the police instead of committing suicide. The final chapter of the book explored the relational vissicitudes of Tey and her gentleman friend, Inspector Archie Penrose. As far as I know the real Tey didn’t have a policeman boyfriend, but as a fictional device, it works just fine. The villain in the piece is Evil without redeeming character qualities, but maybe that’s to be desired in this sort of book rather than manipulating the reader into sympathizing with the murderer as some authors do.

On the whole I liked the book, and I’d like to try out the next book in the series, Angel With Two Faces, published last year. This second mystery featuring the fictional Tey and her friend Penrose is set not in London, but in Cornwall, and it starts off with a (horse)riding accident, very Tey-ish.

Poem #9: Sonnet 18 by William Shakespeare

“Poets are never allowed to be mediocre by the gods, by men or by publishers.”~Horace, as quoted by Montaigne

Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer’s lease hath all too short a date:
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimm’d;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance or nature’s changing course untrimm’d;
But thy eternal summer shall not fade
Nor lose possession of that fair thou owest;
Nor shall Death brag thou wander’st in his shade,
When in eternal lines to time thou growest:
So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this and this gives life to thee.

Poets are sometimes rather enamored of themselves and impressed with their own talent, aren’t they? In both this poem and the earlier one by Spenser, the poet says that his beloved is going to live forever —because of this slam-dunk poem I wrote!

“Lovely” has become my adjective of choice lately, but I did think that this version of Shakespeare’s sonnet put to music and sung by David Gilmour (formerly of the band Pink Floyd?) was, well, lovely.

Poetry Friday is happening at Seven Impossible Things Before Breakfast today. Check it out.

Poem #8: Sonnet 116 by William Shakespeare

“Poets, as a class, are business men. Shakespeare describes the poet’s eye as rolling in fine frenzy, from heaven to earth, and giving to airy nothing a local habitation and a name, but in practice, you will find that one corner of that eye is generally glued on the royalty returns.”~P.G. Wodehouse

You knew Shakespeare was coming up soon. This sonnet, first published in 1609, was the most popular Shakespearean sonnet to make the list, although certainly not the only one.

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.

Shakespeare wrote 154 sonnets, and the poems were most likely composed over a period of several years in the late 1500’s. The first 126 sonnets in sequence, which was first published in 1609, are supposedly addressed to a young man, for whom the author has a thing. I’m not convinced.

Sonnets 1-126 seem to be addressed to an unnamed male friend, younger than Shakespeare. The intensity of feeling and the language imply a sexual love, but that is to impose our modern perceptions of sexuality on the poems. Even the most masculine of men were not afraid to express a view of their feelings for other men and admiration of their beauty, unlike the fear modern men have of being thought to be homosexual if they did that. Speculation about Shakespeare’s sexuality is a red herring. In those sonnets, 1-126, we see a growing friendship with the young man and the development of an intensity of feeling. In sonnets 1-17 Shakespeare seems concerned with the desire to urge the young man to marry and reproduce. Then, as the friendship develops and the poet comes to love the young man intensely, we see feelings of grief caused by the poet’s separation from him. They live in different worlds: the young man is a nobleman and that, in itself, is cause for a certain kind of separation. Moreover, the young man is idle and wanton, whereas Shakespeare is a hard-working actor, writer and businessman, and that, too, is a major difference in lifestyle and another level of separation. However, these sonnets reveal a deep love for the young man, an admiration of his exceptional physical beauty, and, perhaps, the payment of dues to a benefactor. ~No Sweat Shakespeare

Whatever. The sonnet itself is a paean to the immutability of Love, and as such, it has been claimed by lovers everywhere as means of expressing undying love to the beloved.

And here’s a heart-rending clip from the movie Sense and Sensibility in which Marianne quotes The Bard’s love sonnet to express her wild sensibility and love for WIlloughby:

Recent blog mentions:
A Circle of Quiet: “I know this is a love sonnet, usually saved for romantic love, but my heart is filled with love for my dear mother today. . . . My mother has been the model of loyalty and faithful love, and it is an honor to be with her in this season of life. Right to the edge of doom, Mama.”
Donna at Quiet Life: We watched Have you heard about the Morgans? again this weekend. This sonnet is recited in a very sweet scene in the movie.
Alyssa at Many Small Things: “I am thankful for Shakespeare because he was just such a darn good writer who provided us with entertaining and fascinating plays and sonnets which are still a joy to read several centuries later.”

Poem #7: The Sunne Rising by John Donne

“Poetry is a counterfeit creation, and makes things that are not, as though they were.”~John Donne

Busie old foole, unruly Sunne,
Why dost thou thus,
Through windowes, and through curtaines call on us?
Must to thy motions lovers seasons run?
Sawcy pedantique wretch, goe chide
Late school boyes, and sowre prentices,
Goe tell Court-huntsmen, that the King will ride,
Call countrey ants to harvest offices;
Love, all alike, no season knowes, nor clyme,
Nor houres, dayes, months, which are the rags of time.

Thy beames, so reverend, and strong
Why shouldst thou thinke?
I could eclipse and cloud them with a winke,
But that I would not lose her sight so long:
If her eyes have not blinded thine,
Looke, and to morrow late, tell mee,
Whether both the India’s of spice and Myne
Be where thou leftst them, or lie here with mee.
Aske for those Kings whom thou saw’st yesterday,
And thou shalt heare, All here in one bed lay.

She is all States, and all Princes, I,
Nothing else is.
Princes doe but play us; compar’d to this,
All honor’s mimique; All wealth alchimie.
Thou sunne art halfe as happy’as wee,
In that the worlds’s contracted thus;
Thine age askes ease, and since thy duties bee
To warme the world, that’s done in warming us.
Shine here to us, and thou art everywhere;
This bed thy center is, these walls, thy spheare.

You can read the poem here with updated spelling, but I rather think the seventeenth century spelling adds to the spirit of the thing.

Arrogant, heedless, self-centered love, true love! And we moderns thought we invented the worship of romantic love! The sunne itself is servant to the lovers in their bed and restricted to their bedroom. And thereby the sunne warms the world, which is also captive to the lovers themselves. In fact the poet and his love are the entire world. Nothing else matters.

Really? Yet, don’t many, many couples, enamoured of one another, freshly in love, thinking that no one else has ever loved as they love, feel exactly like the speaker in Donne’s poem? Lovesickness is a common malady that only the lovers themselves take to be uncommon.

As a poet, Donne has had his admirers and his detractors. Here are a few varying opinions from influential critics.

The “Aginners”:
Ben Jonson: “Don[n]e for not keeping accent deserved hanging.”
Samuel Johnson: ““The most heterogeneous ideas are yoked by violence together; nature and art are ransacked for illustrations, comparisons, and allusions.”
Stanley Fish: “Donne is sick, and his poetry is sick.”

The Fan Club:
Izaak Walton: “The recreations of his youth were poetry, in which he was so happy, as if nature and all her varieties had been made only to exercise his sharp wit and high fancy; and in those pieces which were facetiously composed and carelessly scattered, – most of them being written before the twentieth year of his age – it may; appear by his choice metaphors, that both nature and all the arts joined to assist him with their utmost skill.”
Samuel Taylor Coleridge: “With Donne, whose muse on dromedary trots, / Wreathe iron pokers into true-love knots; / Rhyme’s sturdy cripple, fancy’s maze and clue. / Wit’s forge and fire-blast, meaning’s press and screw.”
T.S. Eliot: “Expert beyond experience, / He knew the anguish of the marrow / The ague of the skeleton; / No contact possible to flesh / Allayed the fever of the bone.”
A.S. Byatt: “His great love poems stir both body and mind in an electric way that resembles nothing else.”

If you’re a part of the latter group, you can get your own John Donne T-shirt here. Or here. Amazing, what you can find, while exploring poetry on the internet.