When reading Love's Labor's Lost, I can identify myself with the men who pledge their scholarly allegiance to the king. How can this be? Well, a little over a year ago, I was done with the whole BYU dating game and decided that I was going to devote my Junior Year of schooling to serving others, getting awesome grades, and preparing to go on a mission the following year. However, obviously since I am currently blogging about Shakespeare instead of knocking on doors, this plan of mine was foiled. (Of course, I am glad).
Just as I was beginning to enact my pledge as King Ferdinand and his men did, my "Princess of France" showed up, too. But, the comparison only goes so far, because I cannot say that I was writing poetry and trying to woo someone after that. I was pretty stuck in my "pledge" and had to get wooed myself. Another aspect that is definitely not the same, is that after the declaring of love, etc., I did not leave for a year like the women do in Love's Labor's Lost. Devin and I got married at the end of the summer, and he even followed me to Virginia, where I had a couple jobs already lined up, and worked so that we could be together all summer.
So, I can understand the whole scholarly pledge thing with the men of the court, but I cannot understand how they could just break their pledge, really without a second thought, and then after all that, let their ladies go when all the love works out. Yes, they complain about them leaving and say that they will spend the year in a hospital, etc. but they still end up letting them go. Devin is a better man than them - he wouldn't take "I'm leaving" for an answer and followed. It makes their love seem like infatuation to me, and not the kind of long-lasting marriage love...
AWWWWwwwWWW you guys were so cute at the play. i'm glad i got to meet him. your very own princess of france ;)
ReplyDeleteDid he ever recite romantic Shakespearean language to you?
ReplyDeleteI clicked the link and was confused. Then realized, "Hey, she linked to my blog!!" It made me feel good:)
ReplyDeleteAnyways, cute story and good job connecting yourself to some of the characters. I like your comment on it being infatuation more than love. Yet, isn't that what all of it was back then? In Shakespeare's time there were still more arranged marriages than not, and people married more for convenience than love. So the "dating game" we play today would have been more like "find someone attractive who's personality is compatible with yours and marry her game". Of course the idea of a deeper/true love was there, but it was impractical for most people. Still, I think Shakespeare's original audience would have hoped for more of a love story and less of a give up.
I stumbled across this "Life in Elizabethan England" website (http://elizabethan.org/compendium/10.html) that has some pretty good hints about love and marriage in Shakespeare's era. I wouldn't be surprised if the Princess of France was already betrothed and was just along for the ride..
ReplyDeleteI know exactly what you mean. I ended up eating so many things that I had said previously when I met my husband and of course with all that followed after. I feel like it wasn't as easy for me to give up the oaths I'd made for myself though as it seemed to be for the men in "Love's Labour's Lost" though. I fought really hard against love for quite awhile before I finally gave in (saying giving up just sounds bad). I'm very happy about how everything all worked out, and I'm glad that I didn't lose my love because I didn't labor for it at first.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad your husband was a better man than those in the play and that he didn't let you leave. That's very romantic and I actually love it a lot.