The sonnets of Astrophel and Stella: A stylistic study 9783111391489, 9783111028989

Citation preview

STUDIES IN ENGLISH Volume

LITERATURE XLl

THE SONNETS OF

ASTROPHEL

AND

A STYLISTIC STUDY

by SHEROD M. COOPER, JR. University

of

Maryland

a 1968

MOUTON THE HAGUE . PARIS

STELLA

© Copyright in The Netherlands. Mouton & Co., N.V., Publishers, The Hague. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

Printed in The Netherlands by Mouton & Co., Printers, The Hague

To my wife and my parents

PREFACE

In An Apologie for Poetrie Sidney asserts that the English language "is most fit to honor Poesie, and to bee honored by Poesie", an opinion that was not quite self-evident in the 1580's. However, Sidney and others were demonstrating in their carefully constructed works that his verdict was just. One purpose of my detailed analysis of Sidney's style in Astrophel and Stella is to emphasize his concern with the craft of poetry. Hence this emphasis suggests a resolution to the controversy over whether the sonnets are inspired outbursts of overwhelming emotion or contrived literary exercises. The close analysis also throws light on such problems as Sidney's meaning at the end of sonnet 1 when he states, " 'Foole', said my Muse to me, 'looke in thy heart and write' ". More significantly, it clarifies Sidney's approach to poetry and, by extension, provides an insight into Elizabethan methods of composition. This study is a revised version of my Ph. D. dissertation written under the direction of Professor Matthias A. Shaaber at the University of Pennsylvania. I am indebted to him for steering me to this topic and for important suggestions and corrections. Professors Allen G. Chester and Robert A. Pratt of the University of Pennsylvania also read the dissertation version and made valuable comments. I have received help of various kinds and encouragement from many colleagues and friends, especially Professors Charles D. Murphy, Charles C. Mish, and Gayle S. Smith of the University of Maryland; Professor Pierre Han of The American University; Mr. Willis S. Greene; and Dr. G. Van Herk. It should be superfluous to add that despite my extensive in-

8

PREFACE

debtedness, I am wholly responsible for the contents of this study. The Clarendon Press, Oxford, has given me permission to quote from The Poems of Sir Philip Sidney, edited by William A. Ringler, Jr. The Cambridge University Press has allowed me to quote from The Complete Works of Sir Philip Sidney, edited by Albert Feuillerat. I am grateful to these two presses for their kindness. I wish to record here my appreciation to my parents, Dr. and Mrs. Sherod M. Cooper, and to my wife's parents, the Reverend and Mrs. O. R. Williams, for encouragement and financial help during the years of work which culminated in this study. To Janet, my wife, belongs my most personal indebtedness for her practical help and most of all for the many sacrifices which she willingly made in my behalf. Sherod M. Cooper, Jr. University of Maryland April 6,1966

CONTENTS

Preface

7

I. Sir Philip Sidney on Style

11

II. Astrophel and Stella as an Integral Work .

.

.

III. The Versification of the Sonnets IV. The Rime Schemes of the Sonnets

27 47

.

.

.

.

V. The Vocabulary of the Sonnets VI. The Rhetoric of the Sonnets VII. The Imagery of the Sonnets

64 75 94 118

VIII. The English and French Stylistic Influences on Astrophel and Stella

139

Conclusion

159

Appendix: A Word Count of the Nouns, Adjectives, and Verbs in the Sonnets of Astrophel and Stella . . . .160 List of Works Cited

178

Index

181

I SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

Sir Philip Sidney makes frequent references in his works to problems of style, not only those inherent in poetry and other artistic means of expression, but also in such mundane activities as the way a woman arranges jewels in her hair. He recognizes that matters of style are involved in even the most prosaic activities that affect nature as well as in the creative arts. Furthermore, the principles pertinent in one area of activity may be related to basic theories that apply to the other area. Consequently, a review of Sidney's comments on style in general, whether on poetry or on the way a woman arranges her hair about a pearl head band, may be useful in revealing his basic stylistic principles. In the Arcadia Sidney makes numerous statements which demonstrate a concern with the relationship between nature and art. In Book I, of the Arcadia, for example, Sidney describes Palladius' first glimpse of Pyrocles in the disguise of an Amazon: "Well might he perceave the hanging of her haire in fairest quatitie, in locks, some curled, & some as it were forgotten, with such a carelesse care, & an arte so hiding arte, that she seemed she would lay them for a paterne, whether nature simply, or nature helped by cunning, be more excellent." 1 The essential problem is here stated quite succinctly: is nature unadorned sufficient to provide an aesthetic effect or must it be modified or the parts arranged according to some artistic principles in order to be pleasing? One of the fundamental limitations of art is also 1 Sir Philip Sidney, The Complete Works of Sir Philip Sidney, ed. Albert Feuillerat, 4 vols. (Cambridge, Eng., 1922-1926), I, 75. Hereafter this edition will be cited as Works.

12

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

suggested here. The locks of hair that were forgotten were neglected according to a plan, a carefully premeditated pretense of carelessness, to the end that the art employed would not be obtrusive. In other words, the end of art is to achieve the effect of nature, not untamed and wild nature, but nature as it appears at its most beautiful. Art, then, does not change nature into something different; rather, art attempts to epitomize natural beauty. Sidney further suggests that there is no natural beauty that cannot benefit from the application of art. Once, indeed, Doras speaks of a maiden who possesses "the finest stamp of beawtie, & that which made her bewtie the more admirable, there was at all no arte added to the helping of it".2 However, in this situation, Dorus is describing a fictitious girl to deceive Miso. Consequently, one must assume that Sidney believed that art is necessary to create beauty out of the raw materials provided by nature, even though in theory he accepted the possibility of perfect natural beauty. However, any attempt to enhance beauty may result in the destruction of the natural effectiveness of that beauty. Queen Andromana's beauty, for example, is described as "truely in nature not to be misliked, but as much advaced to the eye, as abased to the judgemet by arte". 3 The Queen's natural endowments were sufficient to merit acclaim, but by the addition of art they became more dazzling to the eye at the same time that they became aesthetically less satisfying to the judgment. Art, then, when it is applied to the extent that nature itself is transformed or modified, can sully that which in nature was beautiful. Although the very brilliance of an effect may be arresting, it produces superficial satisfactions rather than the aesthetic delight afforded when artistic talent so skillfully complements natural beauty that the observer cannot attribute any element of the result to art rather than to nature. The art employed must not be apparent for its own sake, but must serve only as a means to enhance what is already present. Hence one should not attempt to make some characteristic appear altogether different from what 2 3

Ibid., II, 17. Ibid., I, 2 7 9 .

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

13

it really is. This standard is implied in the following description of Pamela: "For well one might perceyve she had not rejected the counsaile of a glasse, and that her handes had pleased themselves, in paying the tribute of undeceyving skill, to so high perfections of Nature." 4 Pamela attempts no change by hiding or modifying; rather she so orders her beauties that they appear as perfect as possible. Up to this point, the discussion has centered on concepts of art as they are employed to present nature at its best. These concepts are important because they suggest that Sidney felt that the highest beauty resides in nature rather than in art, and that art is really no more than an adjunct to nature. The problem of the creative artist is somewhat different, but again, his artistic endeavor is not primarily to change nature but rather to reflect it through an artistic medium. Sidney makes this point in the Apologie for Poetrie when he says that "There is no Arte delivered to mankinde, that hath not the workes of Nature for his principall obiect".5 Nature, then, is the basis for all creative art, and the work produced can do no more than reflect that which has an actual existence. Art is grounded in nature and cannot exist apart from nature. Elsewhere in the Apologie Sidney reiterates this idea as it applies to oratory, but the principle pertains as well to poetry. Sidney has observed that several relatively poorly educated courtiers possess "a more sounde stile, t h e n . . . some professors of learning: of which I can gesse no other cause, but that the Courtier following that which by practise hee findeth fittest to nature, therein (though he know it not) doth according to Art, though not by Art: where the other, using Art to shew Art, and not to hide Art (as in these cases he should doe), flyeth from nature, and indeede abuseth Art". 6 Again Sidney is stating that the purpose of art is to make the material seem natural. Rather 4

Ibid., I, 403. Sir Philip Sidney, An Apologie for Poetrie, ed. Evelyn Shuckburgh (Cambridge, Eng., 1891), p. 7. Hereafter this edition will be cited as Apologie. « Ibid., p. 59. 5

14

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

than an end in itself, art is a means to the end of representing nature accurately. The unlearned courtiers, not knowing the artistic rules, can only imitate the speech that they hear around them. Since they then use actual speech patterns, they accomplish the ends that art, rightly used, is intended to achieve. Ironically, some of the learned professors confuse means with ends in using art, not to counterfeit nature, but to create a beauty in its own right. The result is a departure from nature and a consequent perversion of art. Sidney has assumed that the perfections inherent in ideal natural beauty are superior to any perfections that art can contribute to nature. In the same way, the creative artist can only approximate a reproduction of this ultimate beauty but cannot realize it completely. This awareness of the inadequacy of art to re-create nature is acknowledged when Sidney states that the portrait of Philoclea was "drawne as well as yt was possible Arte shoulde counterfeict so perfect a worckmanship of Nature". 7 The painting was as perfectly made as possible, but clearly it fell short of the perfection of the original. To the poet Sidney assigns a special position among the artists who strive to depict nature through various media. Although the function of art in general is to reflect nature, however imperfect such a reflection must necessarily be, the poet enjoys a unique advantage over his fellows. The poet, because of his special endowments, is not restricted to attempts to imitate as accurately as possible the world around him: "Onely the Poet, disdayning to be tied to any such subiection, lifted up with the vigor of his owne invention, dooth growe in effect another nature, in making things either better than Nature bringeth forth, or, quite anewe, formes such as never were in Nature. . .: so as he goeth hand in hand with Nature, not inclosed within the narrow warrant of her guifts, but freely ranging only within the Zodiack of his owne wit." 8 This statement points out that the poet's special position is not based on his own ability exclusively, but that his power is a divine gift. God has set the poet above nature, so that the poet, when inspired "with the force of a divine ' 8

Works, IV, 8. Apologie, p . 8.

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

15

9

breath", is enabled to create a nature that surpasses the world of actuality. This concept of inspiration is presented explicitly in a scene in the Arcadia in which Pyrocles disguised as Zelmane watches Philoclea bathe in a river: . . . taking up the Lute, her [Zelmane's] wit began to be with a divine furie inspired; her voice would in so beloved an occasion second her wit; her hands accorded the Lutes musicke to the voice; her panting hart daunced to the musicke; while I thinke her feete did beate the time; while her bodie was the roome where it should be celebrated; her soule the Queene which shoulde be delighted. And so togither went the utterance and the invention, that one might judge, it was Philocleas beautie which did speedily write it in her eyes; or the sense thereof, which did word by word endite it in her minde, whereto she (but as an organ) did onely lend utterance. 10 The inspired poet functions apart from his own ability, in the sense that he is an agent through which the external object or the supernatural vision gains a synthetic expression. Pyrocles wrote only in the sense that his body functioned as an instrument which was manipulated and restricted in its expression by Philoclea's beauty. This idea is also implicit in sonnet 55 of Astrophel and Stella. After informing the muses that he had often invoked their help in the selection of the best words to convey his emotions, the poet concludes: But now I meane n o more your helpe to trie, Nor other sugring of my speech to prove, But on her name incessantly to crie: For let me but name her whom I do love, So sweete sounds straight mine eare and heart do hit, That I well find no eloquence like it.11 » Ibid., p. 9. i» Works, I, 218. 11 The Poems of Sir Philip Sidney, ed. William A. Ringler, Jr. (Oxford, 1962). Unless otherwise noted, all subsequent references to Astrophel and Stella are to this edition. Ringler uses "Astrophil" instead of "Astrophel": " 'Astrophel' as Sidney's contemporaries perceived and as Grosart and Miss Wilson have pointed out, is meaningless as a proper name. It should be 'Astrophil', lover of the star, Stella, with a play upon Sidney's own first name, Philip, as in 'Philisides' of the Old Arcadia." Ringler points out that Newman's quarto of 1591 and the 1598 folio read "Astrophel" (p. 458). Even though incorrect, "Astrophel" has become the accepted spelling, and I choose to follow it as the traditional form.

16

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

The mere mention of the name of his beloved so affects him that the proper words surge forth without any intellectual effort whatsoever. The creation emerges independently of the poet. Here Sidney acknowledges the existence of inspiration, although not quite in the same way as he did in the Apologie. In the Apologie, the poet is not tied to nature as represented, for example, by Philoclea or Stella, but is enabled through his inspired faculties to invent forms that transcend nature. He can invent creatures that never existed; he can endow nature with beauties that go beyond actuality; he can depict men who possess the essence of perfection. It is clear, then, that Sidney adhered to the doctrine of inspiration as it pertains to both the material to be presented and the means through which it is presented. In Astrophel and Stella, Stella is frequently identified as the source of the poet's expression. The poet himself has no skill, but rather functions as a mechanical recorder of Stella's beauty. Sonnet 3 of Astrophel and Stella, for example, ends with the comment that . . . in Stella's face I reed, What Love and Beautie be, then all my deed But Copying is, what in her Nature writes. If Sidney were consistent in his view of inspiration, obviously he would have no comments to make on style since it would be beyond the poet's responsibility to alter that which is dictated by beauty. The poet as an instrument would be completely passive. However, Sidney does not hold to this position; indeed, passages such as those cited above are greatly outnumbered by those in which Sidney either explicitly or implicitly places the responsibility for a poem on the poet. Actually, the doctrine of inspiration is often denied completely. In the Apologie he states that those who "delight in Poesie it selfe should seeke to knowe what they doe, and how they doe; and especially, looke themselves in an unflattering Glasse of reason, if they bee inclinable unto it".12 Here he argues that the poet must know the techniques of art; he must know what effects he is trying to achieve and must know the devices by which these effects may be accomplished. A few 12

Apologie, p. 50.

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

17

lines later, he seems to lower his concept of divine inspiration to the level of aptitude and observes that a poet will achieve excellence only through "Arte, Imitation, and Exercise". 13 He then laments that his contemporaries do not adhere to the principle of art, imitation, and exercise, and sums up by saying: "For, there being two principal parts, matter to be expressed by wordes, and words to expresse the matter, in neyther wee use Arte or Imitation rightly." 14 His statement implicitly acknowledges that both matter and manner are under the poet's control. Consequently, Sidney seems to disavow completely his previous statements about the divine nature of poetry. Obviously the practitioner and theorist are at odds with each other. Richard B. Young in his English Petrarke observes that in the Apologie Sidney is "elaborating a theory of imitation in which the relation of manner and matter is an aspect of the fundamental relation of Art - the imitation - and Nature, or Truth, or Reality - that which is imitated". 13 The poet is faced with the problem of communicating through words the reality of his own thoughts, impressions, attitudes, and so forth. In effect, he is presenting, not life as it is, but life as it seems to him. This reality is the matter of poetry, although not all realities are necessarily expressed through poetry. Art is necessary only when an idea must be presented effectively because, by its nature, art embellishes the subject so that the reader will be attracted and persuaded by the point of view expressed. At the same time, the art will serve to impart an aura of sincerity to the utterance. Art is unnecessary to convey true feelings since the people involved are apparently able to communicate quite directly and naturally without language. Such at least seems to be the implication of the following lines about the art of love: Nay what need the art to those, To whom we our love disclose? It is to be used then, »

Ibid. Ibid. 15 In Three Studies in the Renaissance: Sidney, Jonson, Milton (New Haven, 1958), p. 6. 14

18

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

When we doe but flatter men: Friendship true in heart assured, Is by natures gift procured.18 These lines suggest that art is necessary only to impart a sincere tone to insincere or superficially felt sentiments. The expression of true feeling, when communicated Verbally, requires no artistic props. As Lalus in the Arcadia points out, No stile is held for base, where Love well named is: Ech eare suckes up the words, a true love scattereth, And plaine speach oft, then quaint phrase, better framed is.17 Natural speech, then, is often more effective than rhetorically phrased protestations. This point is stated many times in the Arcadia under a variety of circumstances. As explicit a statement as any appears in Sidney's description of Pamela and Philoclea as they write to the lords during the night before the trial: "Remembring with them selves, that yt was like yc next day the Lordes woulde proceede ageanst those they had imprisoned, they imployed the rest of the Night in wryting unto them with such earnestnes as the matter requyred, but in suche styles as the state of theyre thoughtes was apt to fasshion." 18 Rather than make a conscious attempt to formulate a style, the girls allow their emotional states to frame the manner of their appeal. Indeed, when a person attempts to beautify an expression of sincere emotion, he is more likely to diminish the effectiveness 18

"

18

Works, II, 327. Ibid., I, 127. Ibid., IV, 343. In

speaking of these letters later, Sidney seems to contradict himself when he describes the extreme care with which the girls wrote: "Many blottes had the tears of these sweete Ladyes made in theyre Letters, w c h many times they had altered, many times torne, and written a newe; Even thincking some thing either wanted, or were too muche, or would offend, or w c h was worst, woulde breede denyall" (Ibid., IV, 370). Although this statement may appear inconsistent with the statement that the princesses wrote "in suche styles as the state of theyre thoughtes was apt to fasshion", it seems to me that Sidney is here talking about matter rather than manner. They evaluated their writing from the point of view of the effects that the contents would have on the readers. The style, apparently, was determined by the natural anguish of the two girls and was not evaluated for its effectiveness in persuading and affecting the readers.

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

19

of his presentation than to enhance it. In Book III of the Arcadia, Sidney pictures Dorus in the agony of composing a poem to Pamela. Rather than express his feelings naturally, Dorus analyzes each word and finally fashions a poem that fails to achieve its potential beauty because of excessive revision. . . . never words more slowly maried together, & never the Muses more tired, then now with changes & rechanges of his devises: fearing howe to ende, before he had resolved how to begin, mistrusting ech word, condemning eche sentence. This word was not significant, that word was too plain: this would not be coceived; the other would be il conceived. Here Sorow was not inough expressed; there he seemed too much for his owne sake to be sory. This sentence rather shewed art, then passion; that sentence rather foolishly passionate, then forcibly moving. At last, marring with mending, and putting out better, then he left, he made an end of it.19 Besides implying the superiority of plain over artistic speech for the expression of true feeling, this passage either contradicts the concept of the inspired poet as presented in the Apologie or at least suggests that all poets are not necessarily inspired. If the poet were really inspired, such a critical examination of the parts of the poem would be unnecessary. However, it is possible that the natural speech appropriate for this expression is the result of inspiration and that the poet, too much aware of the statements in the rhetorics, does not recognize the significance and perfection of what he has written. At all events, it is noteworthy that the basic idea of the passage quoted above is essentially the same as that of sonnet 1 of Astrophel and Stella; however, Dorus did not have a muse to rebuke him with, "Foole . . . looke in thy heart and write". This idea, of course, is exactly that of the wellknown passage in the Apologie in which Sidney attacks contemporary poets for their close imitation of famous poets. He observes: "But truely many of such writings, as come under the banner of unresistable love, if I were a Mistres, would never perswade mee they were in love: so coldely they apply fiery speeches, as men that had rather red Lovers writings, and so caught up certaine swelling phrases, which hang together . . . then »

Ibid., I, 356.

20

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

that in truth they feele those passions: which easily (as I think) may be bewrayed by that same forciblenes or Energia (as the Greekes cal it) of the writer." 20 Actually he is condemning these poets for copying rather than imitating, for it must be remembered that imitation is one of the means of developing one's poetic talents. It is also significant that Sidney does not say that the poet must feel the emotions that he is presenting; instead of writing as if he has read the works of other poets, he should write as if he feels the passions that he is describing. Since the poetic medium is used to imitate reality, the poet must use artistic devices in order to approximate the force of passionate natural speech. If the poet really feels the sentiments that he is writing about, he need not resort to art, but can write as Pamela and Philoclea did in prison and as Doras should have done when composing a poem to Pamela. This situation necessarily implies the division of art and reality. Art is used to counterfeit, to imitate reality; reality exists and finds expression without the support of art. This point is made several times in Astrophel and Stella. For example, in sonnet 6, after describing the devices with which many love poets decorate their poems, Sidney concludes: I can speake what I feele, and feele as much as they, But thinke that all the Map of my state I display, When trembling voice brings forth that I do Stella love. Since the poet is really experiencing love, the sincerity of his natural speech will convey his feelings without artificial aids. Only those whose passion is shallow must resort to decoration to make their protestations seem convincing. In sonnet 28, the poet denies using allegory in his sonnets and affirms in the last three lines that what he says is the unadorned expression of his emotional state: But know that I in pure simplicitie, Breathe out the flames which burne within my heart, Love onely reading unto me this art. 10

Apologie,

p. 57.

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

21

Obviously, then, art is necessary only to create the appearance of reality. Reality itself is completely divorced from art.21 T h e subject matter of poetry, however, is not restricted to the portrayal of intense passion. Sidney apparently feels that almost any subject can be legitimately treated through the medium of poetry. In the Apologie he speaks approvingly of the Greeks w h o used poetry as a means of discoursing o n morality, war, and policy. 2 2 H e triumphantly points out that even Plato used poetry in order to present his ideas effectively. 2 3 Condescendingly, he notes that such historians as Herodotus felt the need of taking advantage of the poetic form. 2 4 The unique advantage of poetry 21 Astrophel's protestations of sincerity and denial of art in the sonnets support Hallett Smith's position that Astrophel is not Sidney. After quoting sonnet 6 of Astrophel and Stella, Smith points out that the last lines do not apply to the Astrophel and Stella sonnets, but rather to what he calls "stage property" sonnets, that is, sonnets which Astrophel writes (Hallett Smith, Elizabethan Poetry: A Study in Conventions, Meaning, and Expression (Cambridge, Mass., 1951), p. 151. In other words, Astrophel is a dramatic character who talks about sonnets which we never see. In presenting this character within the loose framework of a series of sonnets, Sidney uses a great number of the poetic devices at his command. It is important, then, to keep Sidney and Astrophel separate. Astrophel expresses his emotions without artistic embellishment; Sidney, using the first person, describes this process through a highly artistic medium. There are, then, assuming that Astrophel is a dramatic character, two sets of sonnets: the sonnets sent to Stella, sonnets which we never see; and the sonnets in which Astrophel talks about his love, the sonnets of Astrophel and Stella. This situation also helps to explain the apparent contradiction between Sidney's theory and practice. In the Apologie and in Astrophel and Stella, the doctrine of inspiration is frequently stated or implied, whereas in his practice and in many comments in the Arcadia, the necessity of careful artistic construction is illustrated and discussed. This contradiction can be resolved when it is recalled that in the Apologie Sidney is defending poetry against its detractors. Since inspiration would tend to enhance the significance of poetry, Sidney emphasizes this point rather than purely mechanical artistic considerations. In Astrophel and Stella Sidney emphasizes inspiration as a means of complimenting Stella: she has so inspired him that he can articulate his feelings without recourse to art. Since in the Arcadia these considerations do not determine his point of view as often, he can recognize the importance and validity of art in composition. That his poetry takes advantage of artistic devices is obvious. 22 Apologie, p. 3. 23 Ibid., p. 4. 24 Ibid.

22

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

is that it is free of the restraints of actuality. Has mankind, he asks, "brought foorth so true a lover as Theagines, so constant a friende as Pilades, so valiant a man as Orlando, so right a Prince as Xenophons Cyrus, so excellent a man every way as Virgils Aeneas . . .?" 25 The entirety of human affairs, as well as material that has no foundation in reality, is the substance out of which the poet fashions his work. However, the subjects of poetry are qualified by the knowledge of the poet; when Sidney castigates the contemporary poets, he states that "for where we should exercise to know, wee exercise as having knowne: and so is oure braine delivered of such matter which was never begotten by knowledge".26 What Sidney seems to be saying is that poetry must be grounded in fact even though the persons and actions described in a poem are fictitious. Given a particular frame of reference, the characters and actions must be internally consistent and probable. Thus, even though the poet create a world and characters in it, he must have sufficient knowledge to enable him to present those people as they would act in the circumstances in which they find themselves. For example, in his "Defence of the Earl of Leicester", Sidney complains of the excesses of the writer of an attack on the earl: Perchawnce he had redd the rule of that sicophant, that one showld bakbyte boldli, for tho the byte wear healed, yet the skar woold remain. But sure that scoolmaster of his, woold more conningli have carried it, leaving som shaddows of good, or at least leaving out som evill that his treatis might have carried som probable shew of it: For as reasonable commendation wins beleef, and excessiv getts onli the praiser, the tytle of a flatterer; so much more in this far wors degree of lying, it mai well rebound uppon him self, the vyle reproch of a railer, but never can sink into any good mynd.27

Sidney is pointing out that in this circumstance extremes of praise or invective are likely to be met with disbelief since the reader would feel that the person involved could not really be that good or bad. To convince the reader, the author must temper his remarks so that they conform to what the reader will accept 25 2

Ibid., p. 9. » Ibid., p. 50.

27

"Defence of the Earl of Leicester", Works, HI, 62-63.

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

23

as probable. In essence, Sidney is subscribing to the Aristotelian view that it is the probable, not the possible, that should be presented in poetry. The key word in the passage cited above is "reasonable". The reader must feel that the poet's creation is reasonable. Since what is reasonable is determined by one's experiences and knowledge, the poet must possess sufficient knowledge to develop characters and situations that satisfy the reader's demands of probability and reasonableness. Even though Sidney has denied that any subject lies beyond the poet's legitimate concern, he seems to admit that certain subjects cannot be treated satisfactorily through poetry. Sidney cannot state, however, that the poet should avoid such topics, because the poet writing within the limitations imposed by the nature of poetry is still better able to treat these subjects effectively than artists who work in other media. The two extremes of human emotion, ecstatic joy and profound despondency, are such intense emotions that the poet is incapable of fully reflecting them in his poetry. For example, the lament for Amphialus in the Arcadia ends with the following lines: But ah; my Muse hath swarved, From such deepe plaint as should such woes descrie, Which he of us for ever hath deserved. The stile of heavie hart can never flie So high, as should make such a paine notorious: Cease Muse therfore: thy dart o Death applie; And farewell Prince, whom goodnesse hath made glorious.28 Although the first two lines by the use of the verb "swerve" seem to imply that the fault for the failure to express deep feeling lies with the poet's lack of ability, the fourth and fifth lines state directly that the artistic medium is incapable of expressing deep grief. In other words, a stylized utterance cannot approximate the grief that is actually felt. Similarly, in Astrophel and Stella, sonnet 93, the poet asks, "What inke is blacke inough to paint my wo?" Obviously there are feelings of such acuteness that mere words, no matter in what combination or how embellished, cannot reflect them. 18

Works, I, 502.

24

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

Just as poetry is inadequate for the expression of grief, so too is it limited in its capacity for revealing joy. Sonnet 69 of Asstrophel and Stella proclaims, " O JOY, too high for my low stile to show". Sonnet 70 presents a similar idea when the poet states, "my pen the best it may / Shall paint out joy, though but in blacke and white". Both these quotations convey the idea that the expression of intense joy lies beyond the power of words. In the first the poet states this point directly, but rather than explain his lack of power on a theoretical basis, he imputes his incapability to his own stylistic deficiencies. The words, "the best it may", in the second quotation suggest a limitation to the degree of joy that the poet can reveal through poetry. However, on the basis of these few lines only, one cannot generalize that Sidney felt that poetry was inadequate to reflect certain situations, especially since the lines are open to other interpretations. Possibly the poet was assuming a pose of modesty; possibly he was using hyperbole to compliment Stella by saying that the joy that she had brought to him is too intense for expression through mere words. Furthermore, on other occasions the poet has stated that he is fully able to express his feelings; he says in sonnet 44 that "MY words I know do well set forth my mind", and in sonnet 6 that "I can speake what I feele". Despite these qualifications, however, the fact that Sidney has mentioned limitations to poetry is significant in suggesting that at times, at least, he felt that the extremes of emotion cannot be conveyed effectively through poetry. Within these limitations, then, poetry can legitimately claim as its province the whole of human thought, experience, and emotion, as well as subjects that lie beyond the bounds of reality. Although the poet may treat almost any subject, he is not really creating it; rather he is reflecting or imitating either something that has an existence or something that at least does not transcend the limits of a reader's range of belief. Even if the poet invents forms that do not actually exist, he must do so within a frame of reference of reality. If he does not, his account will be unintelligible. In selecting and developing his subject, then, the poet must face the problem of the imitation of reality. I pointed out above that Sidney felt on at least one occasion that the poet cannot

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

25

imitate accurately the extremes of grief and joy. Aside from these two situations, however, the poet can range freely within the realm of actuality. Sidney states this view explicitly in the Apologie when he remarks that "There is no Arte delivered to mankinde, that hath not the workes of Nature for his principall obiect, without which they could not consist, and on which they so depend, as they become Actors and Players, as it were, of what Nature will have set foorth". 29 All art, then, including poetry, is no more than an imitation of nature. If this be so, it follows that the poet should know as much of life as possible. That Sidney recognizes this point is manifest in his criticism that many contemporary poets do not try to learn about life. He says, "for where we should exercise to know, wee exercise as having knowne: and so is oure braine delivered of much matter which was never begotten by knowledge". 30 In his subjects the poet is obliged to adhere closely to what really exists, and, in consequence, one of his duties in preparing himself for poetry is to determine the nature of reality. The poet must know about life. The poet, however, is not strictly accountable to nature. In contrast to the historian, the grammarian, and so forth, the poet may transcend the bounds of literal fact "in making things either better than Nature bringeth forth, or, quite anewe, formes such as never were in Nature . . .: so as hee goeth hand in hand with Nature, . . . ireely ranging onely within the Zodiack of his owne wit". 31 That the poet depicts "formes such as never were in Nature" does not mean that the poet is not tied to nature and is not obliged to know about life. Sidney's elaboration on the passage clarifies this. Although he mentions that the poet may create "Heroes, Demigods, Cyclops, Chimeras, Furies, and such like", 32 he emphasizes at greater length that the poet may depict a more perfect nature than exists in reality. He also points out that the poets have described more perfect lovers, friends, princes, and so forth than can be found among human kind. The essen29 30 31 38

Apologie, p. 7. Ibid., p. 50. Ibid., p. 8. Ibid.

26

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY ON STYLE

tial point is that the author has taken a quality that exists and has depicted it in its highest form. Consequently, the poet is imitating nature in the sense that he is epitomizing or developing to the highest degree of perfection qualities that have an imperfect existence in actuality. Although Sidney has not worked out a formal statement of aesthetic and stylistic theory, he has emphasized that the basis of both matter and manner is in nature. However, because art is only an imitation of nature, the artist must employ various techniques to make this imitation seem convincing and true. Sidney's use of some of these techniques in the sonnets of Astrophel and Stella will be examined in detail in the following chapters.

II ASTROPHEL

AND STELLA

AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

The sonnets of Astrophel and Stella, considered together, are usually called a sonnet sequence. However, aside from a few exceptions, there is in fact little sequential development from sonnet to sonnet. Indeed, there is considerable justification for saying that Sidney did not compose his sonnets in terms of any single organizational principle. Sonnet 1 is obviously an introductory sonnet written after Astrophel had fallen in love, an event which, as sonnet 2 makes clear, did not occur when he first met Stella. The purpose of sonnet 1 is to explain the reason for writing love poems to Stella: LOVING in truth, and faine in verse my love to show, That the deare She might take some pleasure of my paine: Pleasure might cause her reade, reading might make her know, Knowledge might pitie winne, and pitie grace obtaine, I sought fit words to paint the blackest face of woe,

Furthermore, Astrophel speaks of her in the third person in this sonnet and uses the past tense to refer to his use of poetry to win her.1 The sonnet then explains the circumstances which led Astrophel to write poetry to Stella and the reason why the poems take the form that they do. The assumed audience for sonnet 1 is certainly not limited to Stella. Hallett Smith's theory that sonnets such as 74 are meaningless unless two audiences with different expectations (Stella, and Sidney's fellow courtiers) are postulated gains added weight from the fact that sonnet 1 intro1

The first sonnet addressed directly to Stella is 30.

28

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

duces the sonnets of Astrophel and Stella not to Stella but t o some other readers. 2 Sonnet 2 then begins the story. Using the past tense as in sonnet 1, the poet explains that he did not fall in love with Stella when he first met her, but that over a period of time he gradually came under her spell until he was finally hopelessly subdued by the power of love. Quite clearly, the first two sonnets do not present a running account of Astrophel's affection for Stella. Instead they suggest that the succeeding sonnets will deal with the development of his love for Stella in some sort of sequential pattern. If sonnet 2 were actually being used to introduce the first theme of a sequence, sonnet 3 might very well describe the initial meeting of Astrophel and Stella. But any such anticipation is disappointed since sonnet 3, in which Sidney disparages the artificiality and imitativeness of his fellow poets, is not related in any way to sonnet 2. Sonnet 4, addressed to Virtue, is in no way connected with sonnet 3. Not only is there no narrative thread, but also no thematic unity. This situation continues almost without exception up to sonnet 69, which does begin a short sequential series of sonnets. Occasionally a pair of sonnets will bear a slight relationship to each other. For example, both 16 and 17 describe the genesis of his love for Stella, but in different terms. The two sonnets are connected by the fact that they both deal with the same theme, but no other similarity appears. In sonnet 16 he states that his love abruptly began when he saw Stella: Mine eyes (shall I say curst or blest) beheld Stella; now she is nam'd, need more be said? In her sight I a lesson new have speld, I now have leam'd Love right, and learn'd even so, As who by being poisond doth poison know. In sonnet 17, Astrophel describes a family dispute involving Cupid, Mars and Venus. Then Nature gave Cupid two new bows: Of Stellds browes made him two better bowes, And in her eyes of arrowes infinit. 2

Smith, pp. 146 f f .

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

29

O how for joy he leapes, o how he crowes, And straight therewith, like wags new got to play, Fals to shrewd turnes, and I was in his way. Obviously, the relationship between these two sonnets is at best marginal. Only rarely are pairs of sonnets more closely related. Sonnets 57 and 5 8 can be considered complementary because each deals with the same idea in the same way. In 57 the poet decides to try to take Stella by surprise with his laments, hoping that she would not have time to prepare herself to be unkind. This strategy, however, fails: She heard my plaints, and did not only heare, But them (so sweete is she) most sweetly sing, With that faire breast making woe's darknesse cleare: A prety case! I hoped her to bring To feele my griefes, and she with face and voice So sweets my paines, that my paines me rejoyce. Sonnet 58 opens by raising the question of whether the orator achieves his power through rhetoric or elocution, but the sestet conveys virtually the same idea as the sestet of sonnet 5 7 : Now judge by this: in piercing phrases late, Th'anatomy of all my woes I wrate, Stella's sweete breath the same to me did reed. O voice, o face, maugre my speeche's might, Which wooed wo, most ravishing delight Even those sad words even in sad me did breed. Since the two sestets convey almost identical ideas, these two sonnets are thematically connected. Sonnet 69 begins the first group of sequential sonnets. This first group extends from sonnet 69 through sonnet 7 4 and includes the second song, which follows sonnet 72. In sonnet 69 the poet is jubilant " F o r Stella hath with words where faith doth shine, / Of her high heart giv'n me the monarchie". 3 Astrophel lightly dismisses Stella's restriction that he must follow a virtuous course. In sonnet 70 he discusses the suitability of the sonNote that sonnet 69 is not addressed to Stella. It tells the friend mentioned in line five about the victory.

3

30

' a s t r o p h e l AND STELLA' a s a n i n t e g r a l w o r k

net form to describe joy, the joy he feels because of his conquest in sonnet 69. Sonnet 71 at first glance seems to be a deviation from the mood established by the poet's exultant joy in 69. However, it actually ties in with the one restriction that Stella imposed, that he maintain a virtuous course. In the first thirteen lines of sonnet 71 Astrophel speaks of Stella's virtue and of the way in which her virtue leads others to virtue: "So while thy beautie drawes the heart to love, / A s fast thy Vertue bends that love to good." Up to this point, Astrophel is obeying Stella's injunction by speaking as she would have him speak. Suddenly, in line fourteen a new idea is introduced, an idea that provides a thematic advance over the two preceding sonnets: " 'But ah', Desire still cries, 'give me some food' ". Even though the poet can intellectually acknowledge the validity of Stella's position, he cannot by reason extinguish his desire. This theme is continued in sonnet 72, which is addressed to desire. He states that he must banish desire because it requires more than a Platonic relationship, but in the last line he admits his inability to carry out the banishment. At this point, with an acknowledgment of the power of desire, the sonnets are interrupted by the second song. In this song, Astrophel finds Stella asleep, and taking advantage of her vulnerability, he kisses her: See the hand which waking gardeth, Sleeping, grants a free resort: Now will I invade the fort; Cowards Love with losse rewardeth. Yet those lips so sweetly swelling, Do invite a stealing kisse: Now will I but venture this, Who will read must first learne spelling. That Astrophel should kiss Stella is quite understandable in view of the fact that he had just acknowledged in the two previous sonnets his inability to sublimate his desire. A narrative advance also takes place in sonnet 73, which follows the second song. Stella apparently found out what had happened while she slept and is angry about it:

'ASTROPHEL A N D STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

31

And yet my Starre, because a sugred kisse In sport I suckt, while she asleepe did lie, Doth lowre, nay, chide; nay, threat for only this: This group of related poems ends with sonnet 74 which, although on a different subject, hinges on the stolen kiss. After eliminating several possible reasons why his sonnets move so smoothly, he finally reveals the true cause: "My lips are sweet, inspired with Stella's kisse". Sonnet 75 then goes on to an entirely different subject. This group of six sonnets and one song is the longest sequence in Astrophel and Stella. Even here, the narrative is very slight, and several sonnets are connected only by similarity of subject, for example desire in sonnets 71 and 72. The other long sequence extends from sonnet 93 through 99, but in this group the relationship between the sonnets arises not from any narrative or theme but from the fact that they all convey a mood of unhappiness. Hence even though sonnets 1 and 2 might lead the reader to anticipate a continuous narrative, such a narrative does not in fact appear except in isolated groups of sonnets. Several other facts suggest that Sidney did not intend any necessary sequential relationship between the sonnets. Although Astrophel kissed Stella in the second song, which follows sonnet 72, it is implicit in sonnets 80 and 81 that he had never kissed her, and in sonnet 82 he impulsively attempts to kiss her, apparently for the first time. In sonnet 80 he praises her lips, but says at the end of the sonnet that in order to know how inadequate his praise is, he has to be taught by a kiss. This situation suggests that he has never kissed Stella, as does his statement in sonnet 81: O kisse, which soules, even soules together ties By linkes of Love, and only Nature's art: How faine would I paint thee to all men's eyes, Or of thy gifts at least shade out some part. But she forbids, He would like to describe Stella's kiss, but she refuses to allow him the necessary experience. Two other contiguous sonnets are actually contradictory. In sonnet 60 the poet says that when he is in Stella's presence, she

32

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

"throwes onely downe on me / Thundred disdaines and lightnings of disgrace". However, in sonnet 61 he says that when he petitions her, she responds with a "sweet breath'd defence". Obviously there is no attempt here to maintain a consistent approach. A more subtle contradiction occurs between sonnets 84 and 85, even though there is a narrative link between them. Sonnet 84 is an apostrophe to the highway which leads Astrophel to Stella's house. Sonnet 85 begins with his first glimpse of the house, which ends the trip mentioned in 84. However, the image in line 2 of sonnet 85 is incongruous in terms of his land journey in 84 since he says "Beware full sailes drowne not thy tottring barge". Even though it appears that Sidney intended to present a continuous narrative here, he apparently had no intention that the two sonnets should harmonize in any other way: otherwise, he would not have juxtaposed a journey by horse and a journey by barge. As I stated at the beginning of this chapter, Sidney did not adhere to any single organizational principle. Although the first two sonnets of Astrophel and Stella seem to introduce a narrative, only a few short series of sonnets present even a slight plot line. Rather than restrict himself to a narrative or thematic plan, Sidney intended to present a number of variations on the theme of love, the object being, as W. J. Courthope states, "to exercise the imagination on a set theme according to the traditional rules of a particular poetic convention, which required, above all things, a display of 'wit' by the poet, partly in placing a single thought in a great number of different lights, partly in decorating it with a vast variety of far-fetched metaphors". 4 More recently, C. S. Lewis has stressed the point that the primary function of a sonnet sequence is not to tell a story, but to present a "prolonged lyrical meditation". Any narrative details become an "island" or an "archipelago" in the "lyrical sea". 5 Even the point of view in Astrophel and Stella is not consistent, for the first twenty-nine sonnets are not addressed to any clearly identified individual, and the thirtieth, which lists a num*

A History of English Poetry, 6 vols. (New York, 1895-1910), II, 228. English Literature in the Sixteenth Century Excluding Drama (Oxford, 1954), p. 327.

5

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

33

ber of problems in international politics, refers only incidentally to Stella in the second person in the last line: "I, cumbred with good maners, answer do, / But know not how, for still I thinke of you." The first sonnet built around a direct address to Stella is 36, which begins: STELLA, whence doth this new assault arise, A conquerd, yelden, ransackt heart to winne? Whereto long since, through my long battred eyes, Whole armies of thy beauties entred in.

But the very next sonnet, number 37, is directed to others: "Listen then Lordings with good eare to me, / For of my life I must a riddle tell." Thus, even though Stella is central in the sonnets, she is by no means the center of interest in every sonnet. The arrangement of the songs within the sequence must also be considered in this analysis of the disposition of the sonnets. In the 1591 editions of Astrophel and Stella, the songs follow the sonnets; but in the Countess of Pembroke's edition of 1598, the songs are interspersed within the sequence. Furthermore, to the poems in the 1591 editions were added sonnet 37, stanzas 1825 of the eighth song, stanzas 5-7 of the tenth song, and the eleventh song.6 Since some of the songs are related to the sonnets and songs that flank them, as song 2 is related to sonnets 72 and 73, and since one must assume that the Countess of Pembroke probably knew as much as anyone about her brother's intentions, the dispersion of the songs in the 1598 edition has considerable authority. In inserting the songs among the sonnets, Sidney may have been following the precedent of Petrarch or of some later poet, such as Ronsard, who also added songs of various types to his sonnet collections. Aside from wishing to adhere to the authority of his predecessors, Sidney may have inserted the songs into the sequence to give the reader relief from the rigid sonnet form. This conjecture is suggested by the fact that the first song comes after sonnet 63; instead of distributing the songs evenly, Sidney inserted all eleven into the latter part of the sequence. Quite possibly he felt that some variety in form was 8

Mona Wilson, Sir Philip Sidney (London, 1931), p. 169.

34

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

necessary in order to maintain the interest and attention of his readers. However, if such were the intent, the placement of songs 5 through 9 in succession is injudicious since more variety could have been achieved by a greater degree of scattering. An analysis of the eleven songs is necessary in order to determine the extent to which the songs form an organic part of the sequence. But first it is important to realize that the songs exhibit a wide variety of forms, so wide indeed that Theodore H. Banks believes that Sidney was deliberately experimenting with lyric poetry.7 The validity of this judgment cannot be determined conclusively, but it is persuasive in the light of the fact that song 6 has three feet; songs 2, 4, 8, 9, 10 have four feet; song 1 has five feet; song 3 has a stanzaic pattern of four lines of six feet and two lines of four feet; song 5 has six feet throughout; and song 7 has seven feet.8 In six songs (2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11), the meter is trochaic and in five iambic, and, furthermore, only three songs (4, 6, 7) do not utilize feminine rimes at all.9 However, if these songs were indeed intended to break up the potential monotony of a long series of sonnets, it is only reasonable that Sidney would want to use forms that differed markedly from the usual iambic pentameter and masculine rimes of his sonnets. Thus at the same time that he was contributing to the artistic effectiveness of his sequence, he could indulge his love of experimentation. Song 1 comes between sonnets 63 and 64. A song of praise which does not, however, mention Stella by name, it has no relationship at all to sonnet 63, an apostrophe to grammar, or to sonnet 64, in which Astrophel implores his love to alter her usual advice. Song 2, as already noted, is related to sonnet 72, which precedes it, and to sonnet 73, which follows, as part of a longer series extending from sonnet 69 through 74. However, the third song is not integrated into the themes of the sonnets which flank it. Sonnet 83, addressed to "GOOD brother Philip", is a humorous sonnet which describes how a bird enjoys an access to Stella which is denied to Astrophel. The third song compliments 7

8 •

"Sidney's Astrophel and Stella Reconsidered", PMLA, Ibid. Ibid.

L (1935), 409.

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

35

Stella's voice and beauty. The succeeding sonnet, 84, is an apostrophe to the highway that leads to Stella's house. Thus, song 3 differs in both subject and tone from the two sonnets between which it intrudes. Song 4, on the other hand, carries on the general idea of sonnet 85, which precedes it. In sonnet 85, Astrophel has arrived at Stella's house and is meditating on the strategy of his conduct. He ends by deciding: Let breath sucke up those sweetes, let armes embrace The globe of weale, lips Love's indentures make: Thou but of all the kingly Tribute take. In the song, Astrophel is alone with Stella at night while the rest of the household, which includes Stella's mother, is asleep. Deviating somewhat from his resolution in sonnet 85, he takes this opportunity to implore Stella repeatedly to "Take me to thee, and thee to me", but she, in the first direct quotation of her words, just as repeatedly replies, "No, no, no, no, my Deare, let be". Sonnet 86, which follows this song, does not evolve from it since Astrophel is deploring Stella's change of attitude toward him. In the song, although Stella refuses him, she does not become hostile and threatens to hate Astrophel only if he persists in his amorous advances. At the very end of the song, when Astrophel suggests that his death will please her, she replies with her inevitable refrain, "No, no, no, no, my Deare, let be". Consequently, the "change of lookes" in sonnet 86 does not refer to any action in the song. Sonnet 63, however, would be appropriate after the song. This sonnet presents an apostrophe to grammar rules because grammar ordains "that in one speech two Negatives affirme!" The situation which calls forth this statement is Stella's refusal of Astrophel's request: "She lightning Love, displaying Venus' skies, / Least once should not be heard, twise said, No, No." The point is that she did not say "no" twice, but rather "no, no" twice. This is exactly what occurs in the refrain of the fourth song. However, since the order of sonnets has behind it the authority of all the early editions, if anything is misplaced, it is more likely the fourth song, which would be appropriate before sonnet 63 rather than before 86. It should not be assumed, however, that it is desirable or possible to rearrange all the sonnets and songs in terms of some

36

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

unifying principle; what is clear is that, in this instance, a song would logically complement a sonnet other than the one it does in the arrangement of the 1598 edition. Following sonnet 86 and extending for 316 lines in Ringler's edition come songs 5 through 9. The fifth song, in which Astrophel bitterly berates Stella for her unyielding attitude and threatens to abuse her in verse, is appropriate psychologically after sonnet 86, which reveals that Stella has turned against Astrophel. The sixth song has nothing whatsoever to do with the fifth. After the bitter threats of the fifth, the pretty sixth song with its debate over the relative beauty of Stella's voice and face is illogical and inappropriate. The seventh song, like the sixth, is concerned with the beauty of Stella's voice and face. However, although similar in idea, the execution is quite different. For example, the seventh stanza of the sixth song reads: Musike doth witnesse call The eare, his truth to trie: Beauty brings to the hall, The judgement of the eye, Both in their objects such, As no exceptions tutch.

The last stanza of the seventh song, on about the same subject, is more obviously rhetorical and less lyrical: Heare then, but then with wonder heare; see but adoring see, N o mortall gifts, no earthly fruites, now here descended be: See, do you see this face? a face? nay image of the skies, Of which the two life-giving lights are figured in her eyes: Heare you this soule-invading voice, and count it but a voice? The very essence of their tunes, when Angels do rejoyce.

The eighth song bears no relationship at all to the seventh, and, in fact, is unique among the songs and sonnets for two reasons. First, this song is the only one in Astrophel and Stella in which the third person is used to refer to Astrophel; 10 in all other poems Astrophel is either the explicit or assumed speaker. The first two stanzas follow: 10 Jean Robertson, "Sir Philip Sidney and His Poetry", Elizabethan ( N e w York, 1960), p. 118.

Poetry

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

37

IN a grove most rich of shade, Where birds wanton musicke made, May then yong his pide weedes showing, New perfumed with flowers fresh growing, Astrophil with Stella sweete, Did for mutuall comfort meete, Both within themselves oppressed, But each in the other blessed. Subsequent references to Astrophel are in the third person pronoun. However, the song ends with these lines: Therewithall away she went, Leaving him so passion rent, With what she had done and spoken, That therewith my song is broken. 11 Since the "him" in the second line refers to Astrophel, the question arises as to the identity of the "my" in the last line. Quite clearly, the first person pronoun must refer to Sidney in propria persona as distinct from Astrophel; hence Astrophel and Sidney are not to be considered the same person, and the sonnets and songs are not necessarily autobiographical. However, on the basis of this minor deviation from the otherwise consistent point of view, one cannot refute the scholars and critics who consider Astrophel and Stella a reflection of an actual love affair between Sidney and Penelope Devereux. But the fact remains that this deviation exists, and a case can be built on it without recourse to the inferences and assumptions that the devotees of an auto11

Jean Robertson states that "in the Bodleian Library MS. Rawl. Poet. 85, f. 36b, the last line reads 'That therewith his harte was broken' " (p. 119). At this point in her argument, Miss Robertson is trying to show that theories such as Hallett Smith's, which postulate "stage property" sonnets, are unnecessary. Since the "my" reading supports Smith's contention, apparently she is suggesting that there is some doubt about the wording of the last line. However, all the early editions and the Bright MS. concur in the "my" reading. See Feuillerat, II, 384-385 for notes on this song; all the editions which he collated contain "my". Ringler speculates that Sidney wrote the trochaic songs, which include 8 and 9, as "a set of detached songs". Later he wrote the sonnets and combined the songs with them, without, however, making the changes necessary to eliminate the inconsistencies (p. xlvi).

38

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

biographical interpretation must rely on. B u t a more provocative, although unanswerable, question remains: w h y for this song did Sidney suddenly and inexplicably change from the first person to the third person? Furthermore, the change is not permanent, for the ninth song, which follows, is again in the familiar first person, although Astrophel is in the unfamiliar role of a shepherd. Speculation on the change in point of view in the eighth song is futile because none of the possible hypotheses can b e verified. Still, in this one song, at least, Astrophel and Sir Philip Sidney are two separate men. Further, in this song the character of Stella is different from her character in the other songs and sonnets. Whereas on other occasions she either refused Astrophel's petitions or granted him the solace of a Platonic love, here she admits to a passion as deep and burning as Astrophel's. But she still cannot grant a consummation of their love because of the restraints of honor: 'If more may be sayd, I say, All my blisse in thee I lay; If thou love, my love content thee, For all love, all faith is meant thee. 'Trust me while I thee deny, In my selfe the smart I try, Tyran honour doth thus use thee, Stella's selfe might not refuse thee. 'Therefore, Deere, this no more move, Least, though I leave not thy love, Which too deep in me is framed, I should blush when thou art named'. F o r these reasons, then, the eighth song seems out of place, not only in its position after the seventh song, but also in the sequence as a whole. Although song 8 seems inappropriate in Astrophel

and Stella,

the ninth song, which is likewise strange, follows it logically. In this song, Astrophel's disappointment in being denied his desires is recorded with considerable bitterness: Why alas doth she then sweare, That she loveth me so dearely,

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

39

Seing me so long to beare Coles of love that burne so clearely; And yet leave me helplesse meerely? Is that love? forsooth I trow, If I saw my good dog grieved, And a helpe for him did know, My love should not be beleeved, But he were by me releeved. But what really makes this song noteworthy is that Astrophel for the only time in the sequence assumes the pastoral pose and tells his flock about "Stella fiercest shepherdesse". Just why the pastoral mode should be utilized at this point is not clear since throughout the sequence Astrophel quite obviously is a courtly gentleman. Again, speculation, although tempting, is risky; however, if Sidney chose the pastoral form for this song to achieve greater variety, he went too far, because Astrophel the shepherd is in too great conflict with the Astrophel who was expected to be fluent on such topics as the intentions of the Turks and the Poles, the politics of the French, public opinion in Holland, and so forth. The ninth song brings to a close this group of five consecutive songs, but it leads into sonnet 87 which follows it. This sonnet refers to the events described in song 8, although there is nothing in songs 8 and 9 about the necessity for Astrophel to leave Stella: WHEN I was forst from Stella ever deere, Stella food of my thoughts, hart of my hart, Stella whose eyes make all my tempests cleere, By iron lawes of duty to depart: Alas I found, that she with me did smart, I saw that teares did in her eyes appeare; I saw that sighes her sweetest lips did part, And her sad words my sadded sence did heare. For me, I wept to see pearles scattered so, I sighd her sighes, and wailed for her wo, Yet swam in joy, such love in her was seene. The tenth song follows sonnet 92 and, like this sonnet, is based on the assumption of Astrophel's separation from Stella. However, the tones of the sonnet and song are different. The sonnet follows speech rhythms as Astrophel rebukes someone who has seen Stella

40

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

recently but who, to Astrophel's queries about her, responds in uninformative generalities. The song is a more formal lyric which begins: O DEARE life, when shall it be, That mine eyes thine eyes may see? And in them thy mind discover, Whether absence have had force Thy remembrance to divorce, From the image of thy lover? Thus song 10 and sonnet 92 are linked by theme. Song 10, however, has no connection with sonnet 93, in which Astrophel reveals that Stella is offended at something he has done. Since this idea is introduced as a new theme in sonnet 93, one cannot infer that Stella's vexation is necessarily connected with what has occurred during the separation that is assumed in song 10. The last song, number 11, follows, but is not related to, sonnet 104. The sonnet is addressed to the "envious wits" who pedantically interpret the poet's words, sighs, actions, and so forth. The song is another dialogue between Astrophel and Stella, with Stella's words quoted directly. In this song Stella orders Astrophel to stay away from her. H e argues that absence will not cure his affliction, but she is adamant in her insistence that he come to her no more. Because Stella explicitly orders Astrophel to leave, this song would more appropriately precede sonnet 87, in which the first quatrain refers to Stella's order. However, the second quatrain and sestet of sonnet 87 would be inappropriate in reference to this song. The fact that the question of absence appears in song 11 suggests that it has been misplaced because sonnets 87, 88, 89, 91, and 92, and song 10 all somehow refer to absence. However, sonnet 105, which follows song 11, assumes that Astrophel has not seen Stella for some time since he laments the fact that he missed an opportunity to see her as she passed through the streets and ends by referring to his absence from her. Sonnet 106 also refers to absence. Hence there is some justification for the placement of this song before sonnets 105 and 106, but both song and sonnets would fit in better with the earlier group of sonnets on the theme of absence. However, such a rearrangement presupposes a narrative

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

41

and thematic unity in Astrophel and Stella that does not exist elsewhere except in an occasional brief series of sonnets. Consequently, although one may speculate where song 11 and sonnets 105 and 106 might have been placed, he cannot determine that Sidney intended that they be placed there and that the received arrangement of the sonnets is incorrect. This analysis of the songs reveals that only two, songs 1 and 3, have no connection with the sonnets that flank them. However, only two are related to both of the sonnets or songs that precede and follow them: song 2 ties in with both sonnets 72 and 73, and song 9 with song 8 and sonnet 87. The other seven are related to one of the two sonnets or songs that flank them. Thus, for the most part the songs seem to be reasonably well integrated into the series of sonnets, although as I have pointed out, two of the songs would be more appropriate in places other than those in which they actually appear. However, the songs are perhaps more closely related to the sonnets near them than many contiguous sonnets are to each other. For example, sonnets 20 through 34 have no sequential or thematic relationship; that is, no one sonnet is connected to the sonnets immediately preceding and following it. In view of this fact, one cannot quarrel with the placement of the songs, particularly since Astrophel and Stella is not concerned with presenting a narrative. Since the sonnets and songs present a number of variations on the theme of love rather than a clearly defined narrative, it follows that the order of the sonnets, even though probably Sidney's own, has no special significance except in the rather rare sequences in which a number of sonnets relate a story. Certainly Mona Wilson's remark that sonnet 24 "may have been intentionally misplaced so that the story might not be too plain to the casual reader of the manuscript copies" 12 postulates a more pronounced narrative and autobiographical orientation than seems to exist. Similarly Alfred Pollard assumes that Astrophel and Stella chronologically details the events of a love affair between Sidney and Penelope Devereux. He says that the affair is revealed la Sir Philip Sidney, Astrophel p. xvii.

& Stella, ed. Mona Wilson (London, 1931),

42

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

as in a journal, in the sonnets and songs. The 31st and 32nd in their calm and splendid beauty form a magnificent pause before the turbid eloquence of their successors. If they were not written just before the news of Stella's marriage, it was a fine literary judgment which assigned them their position. With the 33rd, "I might! unhappie word - O me, I might!" - we plunge into the storm. Even if Dr. Grosart be right in referring it only to an interview missed, the sympathetic reader will hardly fail to conjecture that that interview was the first at which Sidney was to greet Stella as Lady Rich, and in the words in which he mourns his mistake there is blended a sorrow for a deeper error and a deeper loss. In the succeeding sonnets he pursues and comments on his suit in all the different notes of love's gamut.13 Although it is as difficult to disprove such statements as to prove them, not all the sonnets after sonnet 33 present the earnest lover of a married woman. Nor, for that matter, is a statement made about Stella's marital condition, nor does Astrophel even mention marriage. Even sonnet 37, which the seekers of autobiographical data emphasize, certainly starts in a humorous way in its picture of an Astrophel who can hardly restrain his desire to tell his latest riddle: MY mouth doth water, and my breast doth swell, My tongue doth itch, my thoughts in labour be: Listen then Lordings with good eare to me, For of my life I must a riddle tell. Despite the series of puns on the word "rich" which follows this quatrain, sonnet 37 does not seem the expression of a lover who is experiencing excruciating anguish because his love is beyond his reach. Sonnet 6 3 also is humorous, not to say frivolous, in its apostrophe to grammar rules and its hinging on the rule that two negatives equal an affirmative. The last four lines do not suggest a lover who is enduring profound emotional turmoil: But Grammer's force with sweet successe confirme, For Grammer sayes (o this deare Stella weighe,) For Grammer sayes (to Grammer who sayes nay) That in one speech two Negatives affirme. 1S

Sir Philip Sidney's 1888), p. xxvi.

"Astrophel

& Stella",

ed. Alfred Pollard (London,

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

43

A final example of a sonnet which is not especially oriented toward profound feeling is sonnet 89. This sonnet is a lour de force in which Sidney uses only two rime words, "night" and "day". Such a sonnet quite obviously was not intended to impress the reader for the ideas and emotions conveyed, but rather for the author's skill in constructing a sonnet within such arbitrarily imposed artificial restrictions. Sonnets 37, 63, and 89 quite clearly show that Sidney's attitudes after sonnet 33 are not much different from those before this allegedly crucial autobiographical sonnet. If it were not for their over-insistence on an autobiographical interpretation, many critics would not have been deluded into seeing a change in sincerity and emotion in the sonnets that follow sonnet 33. 14 However, Sidney himself in the Apologie observed: "But truely many of such writings, as come under the banner of unresistable love, if I were a Mistres, would never perswade mee they were in love: so coldely they apply fiery speeches, as men that had rather red Lovers writings, and so caught up certaine swelling phrases, which hang together . . . then that in truth they feele those passions: which easily (as I think) may be bewrayed by that same forciblenes or Energia (as the Greekes cal it) of the writer." 15 From this statement, one might infer that Sidney believed that to write sincere love poetry, the poet must in fact feel the passion that he is describing. But the actual point is that love poetry must be convincing and must seem to be inspired by an actual passion rather than by other authors' poems. In this area the poet's art comes into play. If his poetry is to be successful, it must convince the reader that the mistress, whether actual or hypothetical, would be persuaded that the poet's love was indeed profound. Conse14 Jack Stillinger suggests that Stella is sometimes Penelope Devereux but that it is a mistake to assume too much on this basis. He condemns the many critics who have insisted on a strictly autobiographical reading of the sonnets and songs: "Out of these witty, sophisticated poems they have fabricated an emotional crisis for Sidney, sometimes representing it as the turning point in his life; they have endowed him with guilt feelings, have defended or condemned his morals, and have found motives in the poems for his chivalrous conduct." 'The Biographical Problem of Astrophel and Stella", JEGP, LIX (1960), 639. 15 Apologie, p. 57.

44

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

quently, the poet's first problem is to create an atmosphere ot truth. Charles Lamb pointed out how Sidney met this problem, although Lamb does not commit himself on the question of whether the sonnets were factual: But they are not rich in words only, in vague and unlocalised feelings - the failing of too much of some poetry of the present day - they are full, material, and circumstantiated. Time and place appropriates every one of them. It is not a fever of passion wasting itself upon a thin diet of dainty words, but a transcendent passion pervading and illuminating action, pursuits, studies, feats of arms, the opinions of contemporaries and his judgment of them. An historical thread runs through them, which almost affixes a date to them; marks the when and where they were written.16 So that his sonnets would appear to be written by one who feels the passion he is describing, Sidney deliberately made many of them quite circumstantial, even to the point of identifying a particular lady as the object of his love. It is a tribute to Sidney's art and an indication of the success of his strategy to appear specific that so many critics cannot believe that these sonnets are not a transcript of an actual passion. Furthermore, scholars such as Emil Koeppel and Janet Scott, among others, have shown that Sidney not only "red Lovers writings", but also incorporated some of what he read into Astrophel and Stella. This fact does not lead, however, to the question of whether Sidney is sincere in his protestations, a question which has received more attention than it deserves. At best, if it could be shown that such a love affair occurred and that sonnet 33 referred to Penelope Devereux's marriage to Lord Rich, the sonnets could be dated more accurately and perhaps further inferences about Elizabethan attitudes toward literature might be made. However, no matter which side of the argument is being advanced, scholars at the end of their discussions inevitably have had to qualify their conclusions, which even at best are ultimately based on inferences rather than on documented facts. Hence, the scholar's view on the question tends to become a matter of conviction, as is Tucker Brooke's in A Literary History of England: 16

The Complete

p. 195.

Works and Letters

of Charles Lamb

(New York, 1935),

'ASTROPHEL AND STELLA' AS AN INTEGRAL WORK

45

Though these poems are, almost without exception, superb in form, nothing could be much more misguided than the effort to interpret them as merely formal exercises. The autobiographical sincerity asserted in many of them is evident in nearly all; not to recognize it disqualifies the critic.17 One such disqualified critic is C. S. Lewis who notes that facts may, of course, lie behind (and any distance behind) a work of art. But the sonnet sequence does not exist to tell a real, or even a feigned, story. And we must not listen at all to critics who present us with the preposterous alternative of 'sincerity' (by which they mean autobiography) and 'literary exercise'. . . . 'Look in thy heart and write' is good counsel for poets; but when a poet looks in his heart he finds many things there besides the actual. That is why, and how, he is a poet.18 In Lewis's view, Sidney is "writing not a love story but an anatomy of love".19 Mona Wilson, insisting on a narrative in Astrophel and Stella, states that to suppose this history of the rise and progress of passion in the soul, its advance and recoil, its recurrent and varied crises, was deliberately planned, is to credit Sidney with a dramatic art beyond the compass of his age. In these sonnets and songs he sounds a world of experience, unplumbed by any English lyrist before him. The whole nature of the lover, by turns tender, sensual, chivalrous, contemplative, passionate, and playful, is laid bare.20 As I have suggested, such an acceptance of an autobiographical account is not sound. However, not only does Miss Wilson find more narrative than actually exists, but also by saying that Sidney would be before his time in planning a work which explores the nature of love, she ignores the evidence in the Arcadia which in the course of both versions gives a full, though usually exaggerated, view of love. Musidorus's account of the genesis of his love for Pamela can serve as an example of the rather scrupulous dissection of love that appears frequently in the Arcadia: When I first saw her, I was presently striken, and I (like a foolish 17 "The Renaissance", A Literary History of England, ed. Albert C. Baugh (New York, 1948), p. 479. « P. 328.

19

Ibid., p. 329.

20

Sir Philip Sidney, p. 203.

46

' a s t r o p h e l AND STELLA' as an i n t e g r a l w o r k

child, that when any thing hits him, wil strike himselfe again upon it) would needs looke againe; as though I would perswade mine eyes, that they were deceived. But alas, well have I found, that Love to a yeelding hart is a king; but to a resisting, is a tyrant. The more with arguments I shaked the stake, which he had planted in the grounde of my harte, the deeper still it sanke into it. But what meane I to speake of the causes of my love, which is as impossible to describe, as to measure the backside of heaven? Let this word suffice, I love.21 There is no essential difference in the concept of love presented in Astrophel and Stella and in the Arcadia-, what is different is the style of writing through which love is displayed. Instead of the intricate and florid style of the Arcadia, Astrophel and Stella is developed through devices which give to many sonnets the tones of natural speech rhythms. In the following chapters, I shall examine these devices and other stylistic features of Astrophel and Stella.

21

Works, I, 115.

Ill THE VERSIFICATION OF THE SONNETS

The versification in Astrophel and Stella is an interesting and important element of Sidney's style. However, Sidney does not try through his techniques of versification to solve one of his main problems, that of avoiding monotony by providing variety within the restrictions of a narrow subject and the inflexible sonnet form. Although he does not use metrical variety to create and hold interest, I shall point out later that his manipulation of caesura and enjambement tends to decrease the effect of his metrical regularity. Except for six sonnets in hexameters, the sonnets of Astrophel and Stella adhere to the iambic pentameter pattern.1 They maintain this pattern so consistently that when there is a question whether a given foot represents a deviation, the reader must consider it iambic if he wishes to read the line as Sidney probably intended it.2 Against this background of consistency in the use of the iambic foot, any variation from it becomes particularly signif1

I have analyzed the versification of the sonnets by means of the traditional prosodie techniques. The validity of these techniques has been reaffirmed by W. K. Wimsatt, Jr. and Monroe C. Beardsley, "The Concept of Meter: An Exercise in Abstraction", PMLA, LXXIV (1959), 585-598. 1 Michel Poirier, in the introduction to his bilingual edition of Astrophel and Stella (Paris, 1957, p. 31), makes a similar point when he says that Sidney's metrical regularity is so great that "lorsque les premières editions offrent des leçons différentes, le test de la régularité métrique peut légitimement servir à les départager". It is for this reason that I would dispute Claes Schaar's scansion of the last foot of the third line of sonnet 80: "Nature's praise, Vertue's stall, Cupid's cold fire". He calls the last foot, "cold fire", a spondee, but since the foot can be read naturally with greater stress on "fire", I would scan it as an iamb. See Claes Schaar, An Elizabethan Sonnet Problem (Lund and Copenhagen, 1960), p. 149.

48

THE VERSIFICATION OF THE SONNETS

icant, especially if a pattern of deviation can be detected. The most frequent variation involves simple inversion of accent, the use of the trochee. However, even the trochee is used sparingly, except at the beginnings of lines. Only two to three per cent of the second, third, and fourth feet are trochaic. With such a small number of inversions involved, one cannot demonstrate that Sidney had a principle which guided him in deciding whether to employ a trochee. Although his decision to introduce a trochee in a line might be determined by the effect he wanted to achieve, more often he seems to tolerate an inversion necessitated by the words required to convey a certain idea or emotion. For example, the first line of sonnet 17 reads "HIS m