He uses many examples from Shakespeare regarding how multiple relationships failed due to faults and errors on of the lovers, stating their doom from the beginning, as they were more just lust than pure love. Another feature of a loving relationship that the writer subtly alluded to in his discussion is the necessity of good communication. Good communication, he attests, keeps a couple attentive to one another, and thus more relevantly in love. Honesty and communication is key to a successful marriage. Davies concludes with what he believes is the most critical element in a loving relationship, openness.
Beauvoir’s analysis of love is ultimately the comparison of the two genders. Within the differences of the genders authentic and in inauthentic love. De Beauvoir labels her theories on two forms of love. Inauthentic love, she believes that love is used as a liberator, where the woman takes pride in her matters over the one she loves (2010). Her love is inauthentic in the way she loves, due to viewing her lover, being godlike, this is inauthentic in the sense that no man is godlike.
“Prick love for pricking, and you beat love down.” (Act I Scene IV) Mercutio believes that love is only about being sexual to one's partner. He does not know what it feels to like to actually being in love so he talks about what he think love is like. “True, I talk of dreams; which are the children of an idle brain, begot of nothing but vain fantasy; which is as thin of substance as the air, and more inconstant than the wind, who woos, even now the frozen bosom of the north, and, being anger'd, puffs away from thence, turning his face to the dew-dropping south.” (Act 1, Scene 4, lines 97 – 103) Mercutio does not take love seriously and is constantly saying love is not real and that it is not important.. Mercutio is very persistent when it comes to love because he feels he knows what love is and therefore does not want to fall in love. When seeing love
Elizabeth Barrett-Browning’s sonnet sequence Sonnets from the Portugeuse, explores the experence of idealised love in the patriarchal confines of the Victorian era, juxtaposed against F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby, which comments on the unatanability of idealised love due to the corruption of the American dream. Through an exploration of love, both composers subvert societies preconcieved attitutdes to love through the reccurring motif of ‘Plato’s ladder of love’. Barrett-Browning’s poems highlight the realities of a spiritual, connected love, contrasting to Fitzgeralds commentary on the illusionary goals of ‘true’ platonic love in the post WWI hedonistic, materialistic society. Barrett-Browning conveys the Romantic ideals of platonic love, against the prudish rationalism of the Victorian era. The Petrarchan sonnet form has an inbuilt dialectic structure, enabling her to have a progressive narrative, which follows the path of the Platonic system.
Unrequited love In the Robert browning poem, ‘The laboratory’ and Shakespeare’s famous ‘Romeo and Juliet’, there is a reoccurring theme of unrequited love. Unrequited love is displayed throughout Romeo and Juliet, as we can see with Romeo’s love for Rosaline at the beginning of the play. Romeo's love for Rosaline is unrequited. He loves her but she cannot love him because she is going to become a nun and nuns are not allowed to have relationships. Rosaline is unobtainable, just like Juliet was at first.
Compare how ideas about love are presented in Shakespeare’s Sonnet 116 and Barrett-Browning’s Sonnet 43. In the course of the essay, I will compare and contrast both poems’ idea of love. Both poems generally give a positive overview of love; both poets suggest that love is never ending and can battle through bad situations. Shakespeare’s sonnet takes the form of argument, talking about the unchanging and eternal qualities of love whilst Browning’s sonnet is like a direct poem to her husband discussing the nature of her love for him. Shakespeare starts the poem with the imperative “let me not to the marriage of true minds” which sets the tone and exploration of true love.
Lastly, Juliet’s view of love is logical; she does not follow love blindly. Mercutio’s view of love is humorous and cynical. He believes that love is a burden and love is not worth the burden. Mercutio talks to Romeo and says, “To sink in it, should you burthen love—Too great
Kelsey Pham Philosophy 325 2 October 2013 “Love’s Bond” by Robert Nozick In the writing, “Love’s Bond,” by Robert Nozick, he asserts that, “In love’s bond, we metamorphose” (239). This assertion serves as the basis of Nozick’s account of the nature of love, his belief that the attitude of love is inconsistent with the desire to trade up to another partner, and his view of why it is irrational to ask how love benefits an individual person. According to Nozick, the nature of love is the desire to ultimately form a “we” with whom you are in romantic love with. It is not coincidental that the desire to create an extension of oneself occurs when romantic love does; rather, it is inherent in the nature of love and what sets romantic love apart from the other kinds of love. One of Nozick’s major point is the idea of a shared well-being in which he states,“ Your own well-being is tied up with that of someone you love romantically.
There are lots of points of comparison between 'Sonnet 116' by William Shakespeare and 'To His Coy Mistress' by Andrew Marvell for example, though To His Coy Mistress talks about love being a fleeting experience it is three times the length of Sonnet 116, this draws contrast between the two poems. By defying your expectation that the structure would reflect the nature of love, it instead highlights it. Sonnet 116 talks about love as an abstract concept and presents the idea that love in invaluable "Whose worth's unknown" whereas To His Coy Mistress presents the idea that beauty and through that love fades with age, ‘Thy beauty shall no more be found,/ Nor, in thy marble vault’ this shows that although they were writing at very similar times they both had quite different ideas about love. Both poets are writing metaphysical conceits and the ideas that they present aren’t for a specific person, shown by Marvell writing; ‘His Coy Mistress,’ and Shakespeare by writing as an abstract thought. Although both poets are writing purely for entertainment, I take the ideas that they present as their own, and they are very different opinions on love.
In both of these dialogues, Plato clearly regards actual physical or sexual contact between lovers as degraded and wasteful forms of erotic expression. Because the true goal of erôs is real beauty and real beauty is the Form of Beauty, what Plato calls Beauty Itself, erôs finds its fulfillment only in Platonic philosophy. Unless it channels its power of love into “higher pursuits,” which culminate in the knowledge of the Form of Beauty, erôs is doomed to frustration. For this reason, Plato thinks that most people sadly squander the real power of love by limiting themselves to the mere pleasures of physical