3/28/2017 4 Comments Poetry of The Past #11619: “How Many Paltry, Foolish, Painted Things” by Michael Drayton
Link: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/44155 Hello lovelies! Today I’m gonna start a new series (or at least a potential new series…)! When I first read through the sonnet (Remember sonnets? 14 lines, alternating rhyme scheme with a rhyming couplet at the end!) “How Many Paltry, Foolish, Painted Things”, I was a bit confused about the actual subject of the poem. And so I went back and stared at the title for a while, breaking it down into its individual segments, and then bringing it together as a whole: Something that is “paltry” has little meaning, importance, or worth. “Foolish” is self-explanatory: lacking good judgment! “Painted Things” are… hmm…art related maybe? Or perhaps about women “painted” in makeup? This part is where I have trouble determining Drayton’s attitude. Is he referring to artwork in general as a “thing” because he doesn’t see any true masterful qualities about it? Or is he being derogatory towards women in referencing them as “things”? To try to find some clarity, I read through the first four lines of the piece. From there, I was able to tentatively conclude that this poem is about women. The first line brings about an insulting, degrading, salty tone that hovers over the lines, with the constant punctuation adding a suffocating density to it. The next two lines add a new puzzling element to my quest to figure out who or what this poem is truly about: “That now in coaches trouble every street,/ Shall be forgotten…” At first (don’t judge), I sincerely thought that this poem was about prostitutes. The “now in coaches trouble every street” led me imagine that Drayton was possibly annoyed that the buggies (a new invention) were improving access to prostitutes and making them more “visible” on the street. The “shall be forgotten” bit also made me think this way. But then I questioned whether or not Drayton was just misogynistic about all “types” of women during that time period: dainty women next-door, rich noble ladies, etc. The second half of line 3 and line 4, “whom no poet sings,/ Ere they be well wrapp'd in their winding-sheet?”, and the subsequent stanzas completely reverted my interpretation of the work as a whole. Drayton metaphorically compares the occupation of poet to that of a singer, and for the rest of the poem uses this comparison to glorify the “song” he plans to write about the subject woman. Line 5 marks a shift from the bitterness of the first stanza to a more lighthearted and optimistic tone. Drayton chooses to write an “immortal song” (line 14) for the subject woman, so that young girls, women, and mothers in the future will read the “lyrics” and envy her, “[grieving] they liv’d not in these times/ To have seen [her], their sex’s only glory” (lines 11 – 12). Here, Drayton places the subject woman on a pedestal of grandeur, which leads me to believe that the subject woman is someone close to Drayton’s heart. This mysterious lady is in fact so important that he blatantly places all other women on an abysmal level below her, forcing them, when “nothing else remaineth” (line 6), to be forgotten in time… Well, that was a rollercoaster…that’s it for now! Leave a comment below about your interpretation of the piece. Who (or what) do you think is the subject of this poem? Is Drayton misogynistic, or is he uplifting the forgotten women of the Elizabethan era?
4 Comments
Eng
4/1/2017 11:36:13 am
Excellent work--I like how you've worked through misconceptions and various ideas. It's quite similar to Shakespeare who tends to praise his subjects, noting that immortality is achieved through verse. Do you think he has been successful in achieving the immortality for his love?
Reply
Josie Kremer
4/5/2017 08:48:15 am
I really enjoyed your analysis, Alecia! It is impressive how much of the meaning of the poem you were able to interpret from the title alone. I interpret the first four lines as Drayton suggesting that every person is immortal and insignificant lest they be remembered in song, as he plans to do for his subject. But why are these women "paltry, foolish," and "painted things" unless they are immortalized in art?
Reply
Davis
4/5/2017 08:51:24 am
I think this is a great analysis and find your breakdown of the title very interesting. Do you think when poets or authors title their work they imagine it being broke down into individual pieces? I find the tone of the poem to be very degrading also as you mention. It is hard to ever determine what the true attitude of the speaker is because of his constant change in heart.
Reply
Bryce
4/5/2017 09:10:31 am
This is a very good analysis, especially your breakdown of the title alone. I would have never thought to break down the title into individual parts, but I can see that it can impact an interpretation greatly. Due to the fact that Drayton does not single out a woman specifically and say it is about one woman, do you think he could be talking about all the women of his era? To me, it sounds a little like Drayton is making sure that no woman is forgotten, because "no [other] poet sings" (3) and he feels the need to do it himself.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorHello everyone! My name is Alecia Guishard. Welcome to Reader's Delight, a site that fosters an open discussion on literature, as well as provides an avenue for my own thoughts on various reads. Archives
March 2017
Categories |