Analysis of a Sonnet Comparison

In the essay I reviewed, Comparison of Petrarch's Sonnet 292 of the Canzoniere and Shakespeare's Sonnet 130 by Steven A. Carbone II, the author compares the different ways Shakespeare and Petrarch discuss the appearance of their loves, from ridiculously poetic and idealistic in Petrarch’s case to a more reasonable and realistic description in the case of Shakespeare. Although he supposes that the reader has a basic understanding of what a sonnet is the author follows any points he makes with a clear example of what he’s talking about, such as frequently citing the words of the sonnets for those of us who haven’t read them or explaining the structural differences between Italian sonnets and English sonnets. The author follows many rules for ‘proper writing’, such as a clear introduction and conclusion with unique paragraphs for each new thought he introduces, but he really only uses logical appeals in this essay since he doesn’t actually need to sway the reader’s judgment. Although the central focus of both of the sonnets is the narrator’s love it becomes clear early on and repeatedly through that this and the fact that it is considered a love sonnet are some of the few similarities, seeing as the sonnets themselves are considered different based off of their structures' origins and their means of letting the reader understand what the sonnet’s author wants to convey. The author himself uses language comprehensible to any high school student, but the verses he cites are written in a sophisticated manner of old English origin leading to some of the quotes and the comments he makes about them being slightly difficult to understand if you didn’t know what the terms meant.

The author structures his paragraphs in such a way as to clearly contrast the differences between the two sonnets, whether how they are structured, how they differ in descriptions of their love’s appearance, or any difference which he figures is important enough to mention. The author brings up several interesting points about how the authors based their sonnets, whether Petrarch’s habit of virtually making his love into a goddess and using adjectives which make him seem so far past head over heels he must have walked over a cliff for her to Shakespeare describing his love in a way which makes a bit of a mockery of Petrarch’s over the top characteristics by almost insulting his love’s appearance. He describes the ways in which the two use literary devices such as metaphors or rhythm scheme in the differing sonnet forms, in Petrarch’s case it’s primarily seen in the original Italian version of the sonnet but is still slightly seen in translations, but in his comparison of the two sonnets and their authors he simply lays down the facts needed to get his point across, stressing a point if attention is required but otherwise stating differences and citing the sources only. In his comparison of the sonnets the only time that the author waxes poetic is when copying down the verses, the comparison between the writing styles, Petrarch’s flowing descriptions, Shakespeare’s unflattering statements, and the author’s blunt description, allows for the essay to clearly display differences between how the author’s have their narrators speak.