Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Although the speaker reinforces the value of the rules and bounds, this sonnet’s turn
comes at the beginning of its eight line, followed, then, by an enjambement from the eight to
ninth line, breaking the formation of an octet and sestet, as it would be expected from a
traditional Petrarchan sonnet. The lines: “In truth the prison, into which we doom / Ourselves,
no prison is: and hence for me,” mark the change on the poem’s tone, shifting from the situation
being presented to the argument of the speaker. He, the speaker, who may embody the poet’s
voice, uses the last lines to focus on how having boundaries (to work with) helped him deal with
the weight of excessive liberty, thus reinforcing how both the importance of clearly defined
structures and self-imposed restrictions may be, contrary to common-belief, freeing.
My question for this poem would be in regards to the speaker’s willingness in breaking
the rules of a traditional sonnet whilst valuing its boundaries as a way to help creation.
Considering the use of the word “brief” in the last line, and how this sonnet seems to have its
own form, would it be possible to say that, for the speaker, the solace offered by these rules
works only as a temporary suspension of the difficulties found in creating without directions?
Or would this transgression of the sonnet’s form in this poem work as a statement that, while
boundaries do offer some safety, it’s not enough for one, such as the speaker, who wants to
create?