Sonnets 116, 144 and 147 are all constructed in the usual Shakespearean sonnet mode. They consist of three quatrains and a concluding pair which is composed in iambic parametric quantity. The rhyme strategy for all of those sonnets is abab cdcd efef gg. In all of them the writer has used different literary devices to show his chief thoughts.

The three sonnets 116, 144 and 147 come from different sequences. Sonnet 116 is still speaking about the Platonic and true love of Shakespeare towards the immature young person, while sonnet 147 is concentrated on the lubricious love of the writer towards the “ dark lady ” which is the 2nd of import image in the Shakespearian sonnets. Sonnet 144 is the lone 1 who is incarnating the two images at one topographic point and likely suggesting for a secret relationship between them. Thus the relationship between those three sonnets is really interesting to contrast and compare, because the images of the dark adult female and the just adult male could be traced in the whole existence of the Sonnets, as a chief subject of his battle and his desire of understanding the true nature of love and they have their “ meeting ” in the lines of sonnet 144.

Sonnet 116 is explicating the godly nature of love. Every quatrain is explicating a different vision on love. The last two lines are guaranting the writer ‘s stable positions on the place he took about love in the old quatrains. In this sonnet love is portrayed as platonic, there is an absence of the usual lecherousness and desire connected with love. The writer negotiations about the “ matrimony of true heads ” , connoting that in its purest signifier true love is Platonic and it is linking the heads of the people in sacred brotherhood. This type of love is the first type of love Shakespeare is explicating in the effects of the immature adult male sonnets. In 116 he is visualizing this type of love as ageless and firm from different troubles, even clip is non strong plenty to interrupt the thought of this perfect relationship between heads. Again the flesh is denied as a portion of the perfect love “ Love ‘s non Time ‘s sap, though rose-colored lips and cheeks ” . This illustration of true love is a strong indicant that the writer ‘s position of love is beyond flesh, because clip could cancel the beauty and therefore the true love could merely be found in the connexion of the “ true heads ” . In sonnet 116 Shakespeare is showing the thought that the head is where love begins and so this type of love is the existent and the most lasting one.

In contrast in sonnet 147 the writer is speaking about his other type of love – the dark lady. This type of love is compared to an incurable unwellness. The writer uses this metaphor through the whole sonnet to show the hopeless state of affairs he is in. In contrast to sonnet 116, here love is connected with unwellness and decease “ Desire is decease, which physic did except ” . There is nil immortal and pure as it was in the sonnet written for the immature adult male. The desire for the flesh is the metaphor of the decease of the pure love ; Shakespeare sees that type of love as the 1 that could metaphorically kill his psyche. The dark lady is pictured as the “ doctor to my love ” ; she is the lone 1 who is able to bring around him. But the remedy here is still maintaining with the iniquitous wont of loving the dark lady. The writer is fighting over his cognition that type of love is lubricious and connected with the flesh, and therefore he knows he needs to get the better of it, on the other manus he is non able to travel away from his wont of loving the kept woman and this is making a quandary for him. Again as the usual Shakespearean sonnet format the last two lines represent the declaration of the old three quatrains. Here in contrast of the sonnet 116, the writer is saying his non certain hereafter, and his failing that even though he knows the dark lady is non “ thee carnival and thought thee bright ” , he ca n’t decline this type of love.

Those two sonnets are both discoursing the same topic- love. The difference is the topic of the love in the two sonnets. In the first one the topic is the immature adult male and therefore love is immortal and get the better ofing everything. The writer is certain about his purposes and the righteousness of this type of love. In sonnet 147, love is lubricious and dark, it is upseting the existence of the Shakespearean sonnets and it is organizing an unsure hereafter for the writer.

The meeting point of the two different facets of Shakespearean love is in sonnet 144. There the writer states his penchants towards the type of the love he has with the immature adult male. His chief issue is that likely there is a chance that his two universes collide in one and therefore he would be left out.

“ Fishy I may, yet non straight tell ;

but being both from me, both to each friend ”

Besides, in this sonnet the writer is connoting likely the thought of the bad angel, who will destroy his good angel, because she will destroy his pure thought of the image of the immature adult male.

In sonnets 116 and 144 and Shakespeare is portraying his love existence and his different atititudes towards love. In 147, the lubricious love and the platonic, pure love exist in the lines of the sonnet, making a perplexed existence for the writer. He is fighting to maintain his love towards the immature adult male pure, and to be able to get away from the lubricious love of the dark lady. In sonnet 147 contrasting to the other two, a new inquiry emerges, whether there is a possibility of neither of the loves to be the true 1. Probably the declaration comes, when the Platonic love is tested under the calls of the flesh.

Yet this shall I never know, but live in uncertainty,

till my bad angel fire my good one out