Sir Thomas Wyatt (1503-1542) is most famous for his introduction of the English sonnet form into the standard poetic repertoire of Western Europe . Building on the standard Petrarchan model, he employed the traditional “octave” (abbaabba), but changed the ending “sestet” (six line stanza) or “volta ” (meaning a “turn” of ideas or emotions) to a cddc ee (or sometimes cdcc dd) rhyme scheme that placed dramatic emphasis on the ending couplet. This versatile poetic form can prove fascinating to the avid scholar especially when one traces it all the way up to the present day through its many incarnations. What I find intriguing is not only Wyatt’s divergence from Petrarch’s form, but how he uses this divergence to change the emotional core of his translations. The change usually becomes most evident at the emphasized ending couplet.
If the English translation of I find no peace in the Norton Anthology is true to Petrarch’s original, it has a tone, certainly of inner turmoil and contradiction, but of a less self-centered kind than we find in Wyatt’s translation. Petrarch interprets his confusion as extraordinary and wondrous, ending his poem with an awed, reverential address to his lady: “In this state am I, Lady, on account of you.” Wyatt ends his poem with a cynical jab at the effects of love by commenting, not to his lady, but about his lady to himself or his audience: “And my delight is the causer of this strife.” The word “strife” in this case catches the reader’s attention all the more because it is reinforced by the coupled rhyme with “life”. The speaker of Wyatt’s poem is not only lost in the inner turmoil resulting from his love of the lady, but is somehow at war with her. He resents the object of his desire “That looseth nor locketh holdeth me in prison, / And holdeth me not, yet can I ‘scape nowise”, but he finds no escape from her or his passion.
In The long love that in my thought doth harbor, Wyatt’s deviation in tone is slightly more subtle. The two major differences I see in his emotional interpretation of Petrarch’s original are his use of the word “pain” in line 10 when he speaks of his love “Leaving this enterprise with pain and cry” and the last line, “For good is the life ending faithfully”, which is once again emphasized through a coupled rhyme with “die” in the preceding line and “cry” in line 10. The latter could be interpreted as a simple change in syntax from “For he makes a good end who dies loving well.” for aesthetic purposes, but I see more self-justification embedded in Wyatt’s ending. The speaker in Wyatt’s poem says, “For good is the life” not just “He makes a good end”. He wants to justify and somehow baptize his whole wretched existence that is steeped in selfish passion by dying in agony for the sake of love. There is a cynicism and masochism in Wyatt’s poetry that does not exist in Petrarch’s vision of love as a transcendent and wondrous (though often bewildering and frustrating) state of the mind and soul.
Nice job! I thought it was very interesting the way you paralleled the changing poetic structure with the changing themes that Petrarch and Wyatt expressed. What little studying of poetry I've done has focused on how more modern poets tweaked the typical structure of the English Sonnet to enhance whatever point they were trying to convey. I just never would have thought to apply that kind of analysis to a poet like Wyatt. But you're right, by using rhyme scheme to place emphasis on the closing couplet Wyatt gives his poems an interesting "catch," which seems like it set a trend for poets for centuries.
ReplyDeleteI think it's important to pay close attention to Wyatt's poetic form as it is drastically different from the classical Petrarchan structure. Wyatt's inventiveness altered the shape of his poetry, adding a more dramatic feel that was all his own. When I reread the poem after reading your blog I payed special attention to the rhyme schemes and realized and I was able to notice the ending couplets that had a profound impact on the end of the poem.
ReplyDeleteSee my note under "What's Got Me Responding". Great post.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your comment about Wyatt's poems being cynical. Even when comparing him to other authors of his time who write about similar subjects, he is a lot more hateful. His lake of hope in your latter mentioned poem really intrigued me, especially when compared to Surrey's.
ReplyDeleteI thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated your analysis of the two different translations. The intended purpose for these ruminations are to analyze, or shed light, on aspects of the readings that others may have missed. For me, you have accomplished just that. I had read both translations, just as you had, however I did not see these patterned parallels in subtle differences between them. When interpreting poetry, I feel like one can very easily "grab at straws" in order to service their desire to uncover, or explain, a deeper meaning than what meets the eye. This is not the case for what you have posted above. Your analysis is very well stated, and I completely agree with how you infer each of these men view love.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you discussed how Wyatt chose to change the poetic structure. In my ENGL101 class, we focus a lot on how structure can determine meaning and force the reader to focus on something in the text that they otherwise would not. The fact that Wyatt deviated from the typical Petrarchan sonnet is very interesting and beneficial to know as a reader.
ReplyDeleteI found this post to be rather helpful, insightful and educational. Sometimes I miss a lot when reading poetry and although I love poems, sometimes I am not the best at breaking them down into different stanzas and rhyme schemes. It was interesting and helpful to see you break down the rhyme schemes and how they were different between the two authors. This will definitely help me out as I continue reading.
ReplyDelete