William Shakespeare’s Sonnet 35 belongs to the Fair Youth sequence and delves into the theme of self-conflicted love, wherein the speaker laments his own emotional contradictions and the destructive nature of his feelings for the beloved. The sonnet is a perfect example of Shakespeare’s mastery in blending paradoxes, exploring the complexity of love, guilt, and self-deception. Through a combination of imagery, metaphysical reasoning, and moral reflection, Sonnet 35 highlights the tension between the speaker’s love and his self-awareness of its imperfections. This essay will analyze the poem’s structure, tone, and then provide a detailed analysis of each quatrain and the final couplet.
Shakespeare’s Sonnet 35
No more be grieved at that which thou hast done.
Roses have thorns, and silver fountains mud;
Clouds and eclipses stain both moon and sun,
And loathsome canker lives in sweetest bud.
All men make faults, and even I in this,
Authorizing thy trespass with compare,
Myself corrupting salving thy amiss,
Excusing thy sins more than thy sins are.
For to thy sensual fault I bring in sense—
Thy adverse party is thy advocate—
And ’gainst myself a lawful plea commence.
Such civil war is in my love and hate
That I an accessary needs must be
To that sweet thief which sourly robs from me.
The Structure and Tone of Sonnet 35
Sonnet 35 follows the traditional Shakespearean sonnet structure, consisting of 14 lines divided into three quatrains and a concluding couplet. The rhyme scheme is ABABCDCDEFEFGG, which is typical of Shakespeare’s sonnets. This rigid form reflects the tension between order and chaos, a tension that is central to the thematic concerns of the poem.
The tone of the poem is confessional and self-recriminatory. The speaker seems to be caught in a cycle of love and self-loathing, a paradox where affection for the beloved leads to both self-justification and self-condemnation. This duality creates an emotional turbulence, which is mirrored in the poem’s rhythm and structure. The language is introspective, and the speaker shifts between making excuses for the beloved’s faults and acknowledging his own complicity in those faults.
Analysis of Sonnet 35
Lines 1-4
No more be grieved at that which thou hast done.
Roses have thorns, and silver fountains mud;
Clouds and eclipses stain both moon and sun,
And loathsome canker lives in sweetest bud.
The first quatrain opens with the speaker attempting to console the beloved by urging them not to mourn for past actions. The speaker begins by invoking a series of images that suggest imperfection is inherent in the natural world. “Roses have thorns” and “silver fountains mud” both illustrate the idea that even the most beautiful and pure things have their flaws. This idea is further developed with the image of clouds and eclipses “staining” the sun and moon, two celestial bodies often associated with purity and light. The contrast between beauty and corruption is emphasized with the metaphor of the “loathsome canker” (a destructive fungus or pestilence) living in the “sweetest bud,” underscoring the idea that corruption is inevitable, even in the most seemingly innocent or perfect things.
This quatrain suggests that human faults, like natural imperfections, are unavoidable. It introduces the theme of reconciliation, as the speaker seems to advocate for an acceptance of flaws, both in the world and in relationships.
Lines 5-8
All men make faults, and even I in this,
Authorizing thy trespass with compare,
Myself corrupting salving thy amiss,
Excusing thy sins more than thy sins are.
The second quatrain shifts the focus from external imperfection to the speaker’s own complicity. The speaker acknowledges that “all men make faults,” including himself, and admits that he has excused the beloved’s “trespass” (wrongdoing) by comparing it to his own imperfections. The phrase “authorizing thy trespass with compare” suggests that the speaker has not only justified the beloved’s faults but has actually contributed to them by finding ways to minimize their seriousness. The line “myself corrupting salving thy amiss” is particularly significant. The verb “corrupting” implies that in attempting to “salve” (heal or excuse) the beloved’s mistakes, the speaker has actually made things worse, perhaps by enabling the same behavior.
Here, the speaker’s guilt is both moral and emotional. He not only forgives the beloved’s faults but goes so far as to excuse them to an extent that distorts the truth. This acknowledgment of his own self-deception highlights the deep emotional conflict at the heart of the sonnet.
Lines 9-12
For to thy sensual fault I bring in sense—
Thy adverse party is thy advocate—
And ’gainst myself a lawful plea commence.
Such civil war is in my love and hate.
In the third quatrain, the speaker shifts from recognizing his own faults to explaining how his love for the beloved paradoxically works against him. The phrase “to thy sensual fault I bring in sense” suggests that the speaker is rationalizing the beloved’s actions, perhaps those of infidelity or selfishness, by appealing to physical or sensory desires, thus allowing himself to overlook the moral implications. The speaker goes so far as to say that the “adverse party” (the one who opposes the beloved) becomes the “advocate” (the one who defends the beloved), a reversal of roles that highlights the confusion and contradiction in the speaker’s emotions.
The speaker then compares his emotional turmoil to a “civil war” within himself, where love and hate are at war, both claiming the same territory. This internal conflict—between love for the beloved and resentment toward their faults—becomes a kind of self-destructive force.
Lines 13-14
That I an accessary needs must be
To that sweet thief which sourly robs from me.
The final couplet brings the sonnet to a self-reflective climax. The speaker confesses that he is an “accessory” to the “sweet thief” (the beloved), who “robs” him of his peace of mind. The word “accessory” implies a degree of complicity, suggesting that the speaker’s emotional attachment to the beloved makes him an unwilling accomplice in his own suffering. The phrase “sweet thief” reflects the paradox of the beloved’s ability to steal from him despite being “sweet,” further underscoring the tension between love and harm.
The final line, “sourly robs from me,” captures the essence of the speaker’s tortured love: the sweetness of love is tinged with bitterness, as it simultaneously gives and takes away. The juxtaposition of “sweet” and “sour” reflects the deep contradictions that define the speaker’s emotional experience.
Conclusion
Shakespeare’s Sonnet 35 is a masterful exploration of the emotional complexities of love, guilt, and self-deception. Through vivid metaphors and careful structure, the speaker navigates the tension between accepting imperfection and acknowledging personal complicity. The sonnet reflects the inner turmoil of someone who loves deeply but cannot reconcile their feelings with the moral contradictions that love often brings. Shakespeare uses paradoxical imagery—such as sweet thieves and corrupted healing—to illustrate the duality of love: it can be both nurturing and destructive, elevating and debilitating. The speaker’s journey in this sonnet mirrors the universal human experience of navigating the fraught intersection of love, desire, and moral clarity.
