More Close Reading! - Capitalization in Donne's "The Flea"

When I read that this week would give me an opportunity to ruminate on any of the readings in the past five weeks, I found myself relieved. In the past two weeks with the close reading assignments, I’ve really gotten a clearer understanding of the texts we’ve been studying. I found the differences between the Norton and the manuscript versions really interesting and eye-opening. The manuscript versions of some of the poems can definitely be read completely differently than the Norton Anthology’s versions, due to spelling and capitalization alone. When we had to close read and respond in 75 words or less, it was really hard for me to limit myself – I felt like I had so much to comment on! I’ll take this week as an opportunity to ruminate on this and compare the differences between a manuscript version and a Norton anthology version of a poem – specifically, “The Flea” by John Donne.

The Norton Anthology version of “The Flea,” written in a type of English we’re (more) familiar with and using conventional capitalization and grammar rules, comes across as a very tongue-in-cheek, sexual poem. In reading this poem, I found myself the most concerned with the sexual implications of Donne’s use of the flea. In this poem, the flea contains both the blood of the narrator and his lover, mingled, so the narrator pleads with his lover to spare its life. While there are also mentions of sin and marriage (or a thereof), I got the impression that Donne was brushing these ideas off – sin and marriage don’t concern him and his lover.

However, in the manuscript version, selective capitalization has made me second-guess this. Both “Sinne” and “Maydenhead” (or virginity) are capitalized, as well as “Marriage,” “Parents,” and “Sacriledge.” I feel that capitalization usually implies some sort of respect or importance for the word being used, implying that Donne is not as cavalier about these ideas as he implies. Is Donne actually anxious about these ideas and how they fit into his actions with this woman? In the poem, Donne is really anxious that his lover will kill the flea? Donne expresses concern that if she kills the flea, she kills the both of them. Is Donne worried that the ideas of “Sinne” and “Marriage” will catch up with their affair? Will they both eventually have to suffer the consequences?

The word “flea” is also capitalized, though not consistently throughout the poem. In the first stanza, flea is lowercase when Donne says, “And in this flea our two blouds mingled be.” However, in the second stanza, Donne capitalizes “flea” when equating it directly with him and his lover. He states, “The Flea is you and I.” I think that this implies that Donne’s capitalization of words implies importance. When he is referring to the flea as an actual flea, he doesn’t capitalize, yet when he directly equates the flea with him and his lover, a relationship between two human beings, he capitalizes the word.

Cruel Time in Shakespeare's Sonnets

            Going into the reading this week, I was interested in what elements connected each individual sonnet to the overall lyrical sequence, whether through motifs or narrative. Shakespeare’s sonnets read differently from the sonnet sequences we’ve studied previously in that the narrative of the sonnets is much looser and open to interpretation, but the themes and motifs of the sonnets are very central to the sequence. In the sonnets about the beautiful man, the most noticeable motif is time.

Time is not necessarily an original topic of poetry during the period in which Shakespeare was writing. Naturally, most societies in history have had some grasp of time and how it affects us. Shakespeare’s sonnets are interesting, though, because there is a distinctive negative connotation associated with time. Words used to describe time include “devouring” (1063) and “sluttish” or slovenly (p. 1066). These terms not only personify time, but they personify it as sloppy, cruel, and relentless.

When Shakespeare is degrading time, he is usually connecting time with its negative effects on beauty and youth. For example, in Sonnet 60 he states, “Time doth transfix the flourish set on youth / And delves the parallels into beauty’s brow” (p. 1066-7). At first glance, Shakespeare seems disturbingly obsessed with youth and beauty, and one might think that he might be a little superficial. Is he really that terrified of wrinkles? Not quite. I think Shakespeare’s obsession with beauty and youth has less to do with the aesthetics of both ideas and more to do with Shakespeare’s fear of death. As the sonnets progress, they shift more towards the idea that poetry can preserve beauty. Shakespeare’s opinions of time and aging are so inherently negative because, as evidenced in these sonnets, Shakespeare views time as a ticking countdown to make a mark on the world. He is encouraging that man in Sonnet 3 to produce heirs not for the sole purpose of beauty, for the purpose of making your imprint on the world last, ultimately leading back to Shakespeare’s fear of death.

This is supported through the metaphors Shakespeare uses to discuss the motif of time. Shakespeare uses seasonal metaphors to depict the progression of one’s life, beautiful summer being the prime of one’s life and cold, dead winter representing the end or decaying of one’s life. For example, in Sonnet 12 Shakespeare writes that “When lofty trees I see barren of leaves/ Which erst from heat did canopy the herd / And summer’s green all girded up in sheaves / Borne on the bier with white and bristly beard” (p.1062). Shakespeare also compares life to the progression of a day. Also in sonnet 12 he describes “brave day” and “hideous night,” and goes forth to describe the effects of aging such as “sable curls all silvered o’er with white” (p. 1062). Time is also described as possessing a scythe, painting a decidedly negative picture of time by associating it with death. It appears that Shakespeare’s gripes with time are wholly focused on the fact that time eventually brings death.

The Antlers - Hospice

The Antlers are an indie rock band out of Brooklyn, and the above album Hospice is their ambitious third studio album, which also happens to be their first concept album. This album was the first thing that sprang to my mind for this assignment, because as a concept album all of the songs relate back to one central love story. It also happens to be incredibly depressing love story, so brace yourselves.

At its surface, Hospice is a story about a terminally sick hospice patient (Sylvia) and her lover (the narrator). The entire album is is from the first person point of view of the patient's lover. It's also been suggested that the surface story of the album is really a metaphor for a destructive or abusive relationship.  The disease represents the factors in their relationship that are tearing them apart. This theory is supported by some of the lyrics in the song "Two."

"Two" begins with hospice imagery of a dying patient, but the lyrics soon deviate to describe a deteriorating relationship. Lead singer Peter Silberman sings in a wavering falsetto, "But after a year, I stopped trying to stop you / From stomping out that door, coming back like you always do / Well no one's going to fix it for us, no one can / You say that 'No one's going to listen and no one ever understands.'"

My favorite song off the album, "Bear," is another song that's open to many interpretations. Silberman sings, "There's a bear inside your stomach / The cub's been kicking you for weeks / And if this isn't all a dream / Well then we'll cut him from beneath." The "bear" could be referring to the terminal illness (like a cancer), an accidental pregnancy and its tolls on an already dysfunctional relationship, or to stretch it further, the bear could represent the internal struggles Sylvia has with the relationship. Sylvia's illness could represent her pulling away from her relationship with the narrator. By the conclusion of the album they've ended the affair - or, on the other end of the spectrum, Sylvia has died. 

No matter the interpretation, Hospice focuses around one major theme: deteriorating love, whether the love itself is deteriorating or the loved one. Personally, I think this is one of the most emotionally affecting albums I've ever encountered, and it's definitely worth a listen. It's not whiny or trite like an album of the subject would have the potential to be, but it's poignant and powerful.