Comparison between Sonnet 116 and His coy mistress
After looking at Sonnet 116 I have realised that it has some comparisons and differences to To his coy mistress. Sonnet 116 is a short poem which discusses the features of true love and how it cannot be killed by time, it is everlasting. However To his coy mistress describes a man that doesn’t care about love as he says he would love her if he had all the time in the world and discusses how he would love her.
Sonnet 116 is a Shakespearean sonnet; a sonnet is also seen as the perfect poem even though it is quite short. It uses iambic pentameter however His coy mistress does not use any of this. In Sonnet 116 a stressed syllable is followed by a distressed syllable, this shows that true love should be balanced. By the end of the Sonnet Shakespeare says that if all this is proven to be wrong about his theory of true love then he is not a writer, when in fact he is stored in history as one of the greatest writers, so he is saying this is what true love is. However in To his coy mistress he discusses all the things he would do if he had time to love her but at the end he concludes his thoughts by saying but they don’t have all the time so he won’t do all of that.
In Sonnet 116 Shakespeare writes ‘Love’s not Time’s fool’ this symbolises that love does not listen to time, in His coy mistress on the other hand, love begs for time which is a use of personification. The Shakespearean sonnet says how love can live on even after death but His coy mistress stresses on the idea how it is impossible and love dies straight as your life ends. Both the poems use quatrains where there is an ABAB rhyming system to the structure.
To conclude I think that the poems have more differences than similarities but both us time and love as an extended metaphor. But they are described differently as the sonnet looks on a positive side of true love and what people who are experiencing it will feel however His coy mistress is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document