rich14285

Originally Posted by Virgil

I don't understand what you're getting at (not enough ), but you should list the sonnet so others can read it while you provide your thoughts. Here:

Thanks for the suggestion. I should like to suggest Shakespeare is a Christian writer, and in this case the bases of his praise of the master-mistress of his passin, i.e., Henry Wriothesley, is as in an understanding of a spin on a single eye, "An eye" that is, "If your eye is single, your whole body shall be filled with light" (Matt. 6:22). This explains the nature of the light that is "gilding the object whereupon it gazeth", and when speaking of "a man in hue all hues in his controlling" etc, the poetic conceit suggests the appearance of this man that is as in an understanding of a manifestation of the indwelling of the supernatural light of the Holy Spirit. And therefore, by logical extension anyone who happens to become the object who is gazed upon, as in "gilding the object whereupon it gazeth", said person is illumined with golden shafts of supernatural light, and that is the same cause why this man has an unusual complexion what with an hue that attracks all eyes, and so on. See my point? The master-mistress of Shakespeare's passion is a man, but as per scripture, such a man as this would be considered a new creation. To understand this, Shakespeare's spin on this new creation, the reader needs help, and to get this kind of help, Paul was chosen to explain it and that he does in various places in certain epistles. Without this kind of help, and this kind of understanding, the read will totally not get the basis of praise crafted by Shakespeare's "best painter's art", Sonnet 24:4, "And perspective, it is best painter's art".

Originally Posted by Virgil

Rich, I'm going to have to disagree with you. Shakespeare may use Biblical allusions at times, but I don't think he's "a Christian" writer. He's Christian of course, but I don't think he's motivated to write from that perspective. Now given his background, of course Christian allusions will come out. As to this poem, I can't help but feel your analysis is a stretch. But you defend your thoughts well.

Petrarch's Love here on Lit Net is an expert on Shakespeare's sonnets. Why don't you send her a PM or a note in her profile page to check this blog and get her thoughts? This is her:
http://www.online-literature.com/for...ber.php?u=9941

I left a note on her message board. Have a great day.

Originally Posted by rich14285

I left a note on her message board. Have a great day.

P.S., in my view, let me add, what you term a stretch, I call a valid way to explain the unusual appearance of Henry Wriothesley. As lines 9-10 in sonnet 3 can remind,
"Thou art thy mother's glass, and she in thee
Calls back the lovely April of her prime:"

In other words, one can see traces of his mother's facial features in his youthful countenance; additionally in sonnet 20 Shakespeare paints more than merely the physical and natural heritage given to him at birth visible in sonnet 3. In sonnet 20 Shakespeare paints with a view to the inside of the man, and to what accounts for the gleam in his eye and the appearance of unusually fair skin. That kind of thing. Sonnet 20 offers a basis for an understanding of a spiritual praise report that is crafted by the Bard. Given an understanding of "it" that is in spiritual terms, as in "gilding the object whereupon it gazeth", we have also an insight into why the sun delights to peep in Sonnet 24. Same reason why.
Further, the above approach to an understanding of the essence of the master-mistress of Shakespeare's passion that is in spiritual terms instead of carnal terms opens the door to a fruitful discussion of some of Shakespeare's plays wherein appears invention of a maid in a man's attire who was made not just for amorous play, two instances being Ganymed in "As You Like It", and Balthazaar in "The Merchant of Venice". In both plays, Shakespeare crafts a mirror that includes a key issue in the life of Henry Wriothesley.

Originally Posted by Virgil

You substantiate your claims well. I'm finding it hard to find evidence to undermine your argument on this poem. I could argue that light coming from the women could be a reference to lots of things, but Shakespeare clearly has a Biblical allusion in mind with this line: "And for a woman wert thou first created." I would love to see what Petrarch thinks of your reading. But for now you have persuaded me.

You have made my day! May your day be truely a blessed one.

Originally Posted by Virgil

You substantiate your claims well. I'm finding it hard to find evidence to undermine your argument on this poem. I could argue that light coming from the women could be a reference to lots of things, but Shakespeare clearly has a Biblical allusion in mind with this line: "And for a woman wert thou first created." I would love to see what Petrarch thinks of your reading. But for now you have persuaded me.

Just a note to try to clarify a point you make in the above quote, when you say "I could argue that light coming from the women could be a reference to lots of things", let me suggest that the idea here is that the light is not coming from women because the light is coming from incarnations of an invention of "the master-mistress of my passion" (sonnet 20), an invention devised by Shakespeare to strike the mind's eye with an image of the youthful countenance of Henry Wriothesley painted upon art's borrowed face. In other words, invention of a "maid in a man's attire who was made for amorous play", an invention devised by Marlowe to strike the mind's eye with an image of Henry Wriothesley's youthful countenance painted upon Leander's face in "Hero and Leander" is a response made by Marlowe to his rival's poet, that is to Shakespeare, and that is to Shakespeare's invention of "the master-mistress of my passion". In each instance, the invention is devised not to strike the mind's eye with an image of a woman. The idea rather for both Shakespeare and Marlowe, both Wriothesley's poets, is that they labour to devise an invention in a distinct way, one that brings to mind an image of the youthfull Henry Wriothesley. So the light as in "gilding the object whereupon it gazeth" is not coming from a woman, for the reader who gets the poetic devise or conceit. The light comes from within inside "the master-mistress of my passion", and that is as in an understanding of a speaking on the name and fame of Henry, the Third Earl of Southampton. That understanding is as in an understanding of "And perspective, it is best painter's art" (sonnet 24.4).