Shakespeare’s Sonnet 134 is a deeply emotional exploration of the complex dynamics of love, ownership, and the nature of human relationships. Within the confines of the Petrarchan sonnet form, the poem’s structure and tone combine to create a layered, rich reflection on personal sacrifice and the interplay of power in a romantic context. Through a deft interplay of metaphor, wordplay, and a profound sense of tension, Shakespeare expresses the poet’s suffering, betrayal, and emotional entrapment.
Shakespeare’s Sonnet 134
So, now I have confessed that he is thine
And I myself am mortgaged to thy will,
Myself I’ll forfeit, so that other mine
Thou wilt restore to be my comfort still.
But thou wilt not, nor he will not be free,
For thou art covetous, and he is kind;
He learned but surety-like to write for me
Under that bond that him as fast doth bind.
The statute of thy beauty thou wilt take,
Thou usurer that put’st forth all to use,
And sue a friend came debtor for my sake;
So him I lose through my unkind abuse.
Him have I lost; thou hast both him and me.
He pays the whole, and yet am I not free.
The Structure and Tone of Sonnet 134
The sonnet follows the standard structure of a Shakespearean sonnet, consisting of 14 lines written in iambic pentameter, divided into three quatrains and a final rhymed couplet. The poem adheres to the ABAB CDCD EFEF GG rhyme scheme typical of Shakespeare’s work.
The tone of the poem is both melancholic and resigned, tinged with bitterness and frustration. There is a sense of emotional bondage, with the speaker (presumably Shakespeare himself) lamenting the loss of a loved one to another, and in a larger sense, feeling the sting of his own emotional submission. The tone fluctuates from self-pity to self-recrimination, as the speaker feels both a victim and a participant in the tragic circumstances that bind him.
Analysis of Sonnet 134
Lines 1–4
“So, now I have confessed that he is thine
And I myself am mortgaged to thy will,
Myself I’ll forfeit, so that other mine
Thou wilt restore to be my comfort still.”
In these opening lines, the speaker acknowledges a painful confession: the lover belongs to someone else. The use of “mortgaged” is particularly powerful, as it evokes a sense of indebtedness and emotional enslavement. The poet’s will is “mortgaged” to the whims of the beloved, suggesting a complete surrender of autonomy. The speaker is willing to sacrifice himself in exchange for the restoration of his former self, asking only for a return to emotional comfort. The word “forfeit” here suggests both a personal sacrifice and a loss of control, reinforcing the idea that the speaker is at the mercy of external forces.
Lines 5–8
“But thou wilt not, nor he will not be free,
For thou art covetous, and he is kind;
He learned but surety-like to write for me
Under that bond that him as fast doth bind.”
The poet shifts to address the nature of the situation: the beloved refuses to relinquish ownership or control, as they are “covetous” (greedy or possessive), while the lover (the “he” in question) is “kind,” yet still trapped by his obligations to the poet. There is a suggestion of mutual entanglement in these lines—neither the beloved nor the lover are free. The metaphor of a “bond” is significant here, as it refers not only to a legal or financial contract but to an emotional commitment. The lover’s kindness is entangled in this bond, which has trapped him as surely as the speaker is trapped by his own feelings.
Lines 9–12
“The statute of thy beauty thou wilt take,
Thou usurer that put’st forth all to use,
And sue a friend came debtor for my sake;
So him I lose through my unkind abuse.”
In these lines, the poet intensifies the metaphor of financial transaction. The lover is no longer a mere victim of circumstance; the beloved is now likened to a “usurer”—someone who lends money at high interest. The “statute of thy beauty” suggests that the beloved’s beauty is the law or rule by which the transaction is governed, and the usurer is extracting a heavy cost for it. The phrase “put’st forth all to use” refers to the beloved using their beauty for their own gain, while the speaker’s loss is represented by the lover’s position as a “debtor.” The “unkind abuse” points to the speaker’s own role in losing the lover, possibly by neglect, cruelty, or emotional neglect, reinforcing the idea of emotional debt and retribution.
Lines 13–14
“Him have I lost; thou hast both him and me.
He pays the whole, and yet am I not free.”
In the final couplet, the speaker reflects on the ultimate cost: the loss of both the lover and himself. The lover is depicted as paying the entire emotional price, but the poet remains trapped in his own situation. Despite the sacrifice and loss, freedom is elusive. The loss of the lover seems to be a metaphor for the emotional enslavement that the speaker has suffered; despite losing the object of his affection, he has not gained his own freedom. The tragic irony here is that the speaker’s initial willingness to forfeit himself has only resulted in greater emotional entrapment, highlighting the futility of his sacrifice.
Conclusion
Shakespeare’s Sonnet 134 is a poignant meditation on the nature of love, ownership, and personal sacrifice. The use of financial and legal metaphors—mortgage, bond, usury—serves to emphasize the oppressive nature of the relationships depicted in the poem. The speaker’s willingness to lose himself for the comfort of another is ultimately shown to be futile, as he remains trapped in a cycle of emotional dependence. This sonnet explores the tension between desire and ownership, the sacrifices one makes for love, and the haunting consequences of emotional investment. Through vivid metaphor and a tightly controlled structure, Shakespeare crafts a deeply resonant reflection on the complexities of love and human relationships.
