April 21, 1995

From Gerald R. Lucas

Certainly one does not feel all warm and fuzzy at the end of this sonnet sequence, but, as the last line indicates, sourly sweet. The image of the “sweet thief which sourly robs” is representative of a way of looking at life, especially with the approach of the twenty-first century. The poet will still see the beauty in his friend, but that beauty will not be self-deceiving—this fact will take even more imagination and hard work than his fantasy vision did. The wonderful bliss of innocence is lost, but that is part of the human condition—nothing is constant—we must always be able to adapt or die. Life is that “sweet thief” which sourly robs from us all.

Perhaps we need Shakespeare more now than the Elizabethans did? Twentieth-century humanity is as guilty as ever of conjuring false visions of Nirvana only to become disillusioned and disenfranchised when they are discovered not to have a basis in reality. The unwillingness to work at a relationship, to incorporate every bit of strength and productive imagination, is detrimental to humanity. Humanity needs relationships, relationships are built and maintained by the ability to see the true beauty of someone; therefore, humanity needs beauty. Therefore, we still need Shakespeare, though any thorough analysis of the sonnets, indeed all of his works, is complicated, confusing, and never complete. This, however, mirrors relations between humans: never can we know everything and rarely is it simple. Shakespeare provides the basis of beauty in his understanding of the existential human condition—by attempting to understand Shakespeare we can develop into “true minds” free of “impediments” whom Shakespeare addresses in Sonnet 116.


  • Bermann, Sandra L. (1988). The Sonnet over Time. Chapel Hill, NC: U of NC P.
  • Booth, Stephen (1969). An Essay on Shakespeare’s Sonnets. New Haven: Yale UP.
  • Collins, John Churton (1902). Ephemera Critica. New York: Dutton and Company.
  • Ferry, Anne (1983). The “Inward” Language: Sonnets of Wyatt, Sidney, Shakespeare, Donne. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Ingram, W. G.; Redpath, Theodore, eds. (1964). Shakespeare’s Sonnets. London: U of London P.
  • Kermode, Frank (1971). Shakespeare, Spenser, Donne: Renaissance Essays. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Krieger, Murray (1964). A Window to Criticism: Shakespeare’s Sonnets and Modern Poetics. Princeton: Princeton UP.
  • Landry, Hilton (1963). Interpretations in Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Berkley: University of California Press.
  • Martin, Philip (1972). Shakespeare’s Sonnets: Self, Love and Art. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. p. 68.
  • Muir, Philip (1972). Shakespeare’s Sonnets: Self, Love and Art. London: George Allen & Unwin.
  • Pequigney, Joseph (1985). Such is My Love: A Study of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 104. Retrieved 2021-07-25.
  • Poisson, Rodney (1976). "Unequal Friendship: Shakespeare's Sonnets 18-126". In Landry, Hilton. New Essays on Shakespeare’s Sonnets. New York: AMS Press, Inc.
  • Ransom, John Crowe (1938). The World’s Body. Louisiana State University Press: Baton Rouge.
  • Seymour-Smith, Martin (1976). "Shakespeare's Sonnets 1-42: A Psychological Reading". In Landry, Hilton. New Essays on Shakespeare’s Sonnets. New York: AMS Press, Inc.
  • Spender, Stephen (1962). "The Alike and the Other". The Riddle of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. New York: Basic Books.
  • Winny, James (1968). The Master-Mistress: A Study of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. New York: Barnes & Noble.