Talk:The Passionate Shepherd to His Love

Regarding the fifth stanza

Is there any reason why one of the stanzas is sometimes omitted from the poem? I'm currently writing a term paper on the this poem and Raleigh's reply 'The Nymph's Reply to the Shepherd' and find it rather strange that the additional stanza is not directly refered to by Raleigh as are the other five. 129.70.219.184 (talk) 16:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to Tucker Brooke:

"The famous song of ' The passionate Shepherd to his love ' has come down to us in four different versions, none of which seems to be entirely accurate. I follow that given in the popular anthology, England's Helicon (1600) ,* but print, of course, all the variant readings in the notes. The text of the recently discovered Thornborough Common-place Book (MS,) is very interesting and probably corrects the printed versions in one or two particulars, though it was almost certainly written down from memory. There is no evidence for the date of this poem, except that it would seem to be older than the parody of it in The Jew of Malta"

An earlier discussion from Alexander Dyce, for example, explains some of the differences rather well.--Lmstearn (talk) 05:41, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there are as many as seven stanzas, as in Palgrave's edition. As Raleigh's reply contains just six, he may well have been mocking a six-stanza original, but, even if so, that number may simply reflect the version of Marlowe's then-recent poem that Raleigh had at hand. Mucketymuck (talk) 04:06, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eye-rhyme

The couplet "And if these pleasures may thee move, // Come live with me and be my love" are not, as a previous, probably American, editor considered, reliant on British pronunciation. They are in fact an example of eye-rhyme, or at best, parial-consonance. Marlowe's seeming difficulty with rhyming simple words (whilst effortlessly rhyming, for instance, "falls/madrigals" and "kirtle/myrtle") are an example of the naively honest message and tone of the poem.

Richard III

I took out this sentence: "Shakespeare was a contemporary of Marlowe, but given that his historical play was set in the 15th century, the use of Marlowe's lyrics was anachronistic, if effective." Given that the adaptation in question features electric trains, hypodermic needles, and tanks, it seems rather odd to me to note the anachronism of a 16th-century poem. MJSS (talk) 12:01, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may have seemed odd to you, but the respective differences in the dates of the historical events of the play and of the poem were still worth noting. Any professional historian or literary historian would have thought so.Lolliapaulina51 (talk) 19:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But MJSS was justified in removing that sentence anyhow, as it offered tangential criticism of a single later adaptation of the poem. Mucketymuck (talk) 20:08, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Drake

I wonder if Nick Drake's Clothes of Sand was inspired by this poem? Nantucketnoon (talk) 01:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Passionate Pilgrim

Is it of any value to include mention of the earliest known appearance of (a form of) the poem in publication? In this case, The Passionate Pilgrim may not be the best source for citation.--Lmstearn (talk) 05:59, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's earliest appearance should be noted. Especially since it was attributed as having been written by William Shakespeare. And then the following year, it was re-attributed as having been written by Christpher Marlowe. It's eerie how often these two authors are intertwined and how William Shakespeare seemingly plagarized Christopher Marlowe so many times. HaarFager (talk) 06:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the poem here?

The poem is at Wikisource. Why does it need to be here as well. Is it common to include texts in multiple locations? Please ping me if you respond here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed edit to "effect and influence" section?

"As a courtier and as a poet, Raleigh was a more realistic man and artist than Christopher Marlow; thus, the Nymph's dismissive reply to the shepherd's talk of ideal love in the country."

Claiming subjective personal characteristics like "Raleigh was a more realistic man than Marlowe" just on the evidence of the poem is terrible scholarship (citation needed? did you know the guys??), and I think it completely mis-reads a main theme of the poem. Marlowe is being a bit satirical -- the idealized pastoral simplicity of "valleys and fields," "roses and posies" at the beginning gets undercut by the luxurious materialism of "gold," "coral," and "amber." Obviously no humble shepherd could afford these. At the time, they would have been expensive materials imported from far away, which suddenly involves the worlds of commerce and international trade. He's making a little cynical comment on the classic love poem by showing worldly materialism disrupting the pastoral "ideal." Taking the poem completely at face value is doing a disservice to Marlowe, who was nothing if not witty and deliberate. 140.180.240.234 (talk) 20:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]