Whoso List To Hunt
Interpreting Sir Thomas Wyatt's Whoso List to Hunt:
August 24, 2006 by Gwen Wark Gwen Wark Published Content: 1 Total Views: 0 Favorited By: 0 CPs Full Profile | Subscribe | Add to Favorites Recommend (37)Multiple pages Font SizePost a comment Volatile 16th Century Politics and Scandal Meet Art Head on
Throughout the reign of the volatile Henry VIII, writers were posed with a very sensitive problem: how to convey a message to their intended audience without giving offense to the ruler. This problem was addressed most directly in a passage from Sir Thomas More’s work Utopia, in which it is written: “[B]y the indirect approach you must seek and strive to the best of your power to handle matters tactfully...” (710)
More’s work then …show more content…
goes on to deliver scathing political commentary while seeming on the surface to be an instructive story about a “nowhere” country, written in a style that mimics the popular travel diaries of the period. Another example of this indirect method of addressing a subject can be seen in Sir Thomas Wyatt’s translation of Francesco Petrarch’s sonnet 190, to which Wyatt added the title “Whoso List to Hunt”. In comparing Wyatt’s translated version of this sonnet to Petrarch’s original work the reader can note where Wyatt’s own emotions have colored the interpretation, while still managing to remain within the boundaries of translation.
With the careful selection of form and the manipulation of the poem’s translated content Wyatt uses the sonnet as an instrument for the conveyance of his message, ultimately leaving it as the reader’s task to decide how to interpret the piece. Sir Thomas Wyatt’s sonnet “Whoso List to Hunt” is an example of More’s “indirect approach” because it uses Petrarch’s sonnet 190 as a vehicle to present the writer’s personal opinions while on the surface still functioning as a translated Italian sonnet.
Wyatt demonstrates the ability to create a sonnet that can be read and interpreted on multiple levels; he deviates from his source in order to manipulate the translation and force it to convey his own message. Wyatt’s manipulation can be seen in his choice of what to include from Petrarch’s content, the form in which he phrases his translation, and the choice of words he uses. These differences and similarities are what indicate to the reader that “Whoso List to Hunt” has a second meaning being indirectly conveyed.
Wyatt’s work uses the content of Petrarch’s sonnet 190 as a basis and develops as a translation of that sonnet; however, it is the specific treatment of the original content that establishes Wyatt’s second meaning.
The poet has used the original substance of Petrarch’s sonnet to his advantage, lifting the symbols and ideas from the original and causing them to be reinterpreted by the reader.
For example, just as the deer in Petrarch’s poem represented an unattainable mistress, so too does Wyatt’s “hind”; however, the women symbolized by the pursued deer are very different. Petrarch is using the image to symbolize his mistress, while Wyatt uses that same image to represent his own lady. By using the original content of the sonnet to his advantage, Wyatt ensures that his poem operates on the surface as a translation while still containing his own message.
Another point in the sonnet where Wyatt has invested his translation with multiple layers of meaning is the description of the words of Caesar, written about the deer’s neck. In both Petrarch’s original sonnet and Wyatt’s translation the quarry has been protected from capture by ownership, and this image works to Wyatt’s advantage. Wyatt uses the line “Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am.” to denote that the quarry is the property of someone more powerful than the speaker; this line is similar to that of Petrarch’s …show more content…
original.
There is another meaning to this line, however, in that the woman who is symbolized by the deer belongs to another, more powerful, man. Wyatt uses this concept to his advantage: working within the boundaries of translation, the symbols may also be read to represent the interest of Henry VIII in Anne Boleyn. The concept of ownership itself in this line can also be interpreted in different ways: as either literal physical ownership of a piece of property, or as the bonds of a relationship. Again, Wyatt has used the original content of the sonnet he is translating and by adapting the symbolism to his personal situation conveys his feelings subtly and indirectly.
The content of the poems as a whole have places in which they are similar, but Wyatt’s translation is far from direct and imparts a much different tone than the original. Through his language and content, Wyatt conveys a sense of weariness and futility to the reader; a sentiment that is wholly Wyatt’s and which does not come from the original. One subtle difference between the two pieces that demonstrates Wyatt’s personal layer of meaning is the attitude of the hunter.
“Yet I may by no means my wearied mind/Draw from the deer, but as she fleeth afore/Fainting I follow.” In this line, Wyatt’s speaker demonstrates his inability to forget the deer, whereas at the end of Petrarch’s sonnet his speaker “fell into the water, and she disappeared.” making no mention of being unable to stop thinking of the quarry. Both speakers are pursuing the deer, but it is Wyatt’s speaker who is “wearied” and “fainting”.
This specific variation in content demonstrates how the sonnet still functions as a translation, while interpretation of the content allows the reader to also take note of the poet’s own attitude. In line two of Wyatt’s work, the speaker has abandoned pursuit of the quarry: “But as for me, alas, I may no more.” Here, Wyatt’s work has diverged from being a simple translation in that his hunter’s actions differ from Petrarch’s hunter’s actions: Wyatt’s speaker leaves off pursuit where Petrarch’s speaker makes no mention of quitting the chase, actions which contain a parallel to Wyatt’s own situation and so add another layer of meaning to his work.
This abandonment leaves the reader with a sense of hopelessness and loss, a feeling that is absent from Petrarch’s sonnet and so wholly belongs to Wyatt. Both the abandonment of the hunt and the feeling of futility present in Wyatt’s sonnet are examples of how the poet has grafted his own emotions onto the Petrarch original through translation. The language choices in Wyatt’s translation help to lend his version an air of frustration which was not present in Petrarch’s original piece: another example of how Wyatt is using the translation to convey his own emotions through the use of double meanings. In both sonnets the speakers follow the deer, but in Wyatt’s translation the hunt is referred to as a “vain travail” in line three-a parallel to Wyatt’s own pursuit of his mistress, making indirect reference to the situation between the two of them. Wyatt’s speaker is “wearied” and “fainting”, as if the hunt has taken all of his energy: this powerful, pointed language which is not present in the original demonstrates Wyatt’s state of mind. Wyatt uses the hunted “hind” of the poem to represent his pursued mistress, demonstrating again the multiple levels that the language of the sonnet is operating on.
The words of Wyatt’s sonnet were chosen deliberately to manipulate both sound and the reader’s very breath as they are spoken aloud. Wyatt delivers his own gusty sighs to the reader in the first lines through the heavy repetition of the “h” sound in the words “hunt” and “hind” as well as the use of words with open vowels such as “where”, “as”, and “alas”. The combination of these gusty sounds cause the reader to sound as though they are sighing, lending to the poem’s adopted air of resignation and hopelessness.
By using the sighing sounds of his words to create a melancholy mood, Wyatt conveys his own weariness to the reader while still remaining within the boundaries of translation.
Later, Wyatt uses the tool of enjambed lines to force the reader’s breath into another pattern. By forcing a prolonged reading of the lines the reader is left out of breath, mimicking the “fainting” of line 7. The enjambed lines could be simply read as part of the translation, but Wyatt’s intentional inclusion of them in this poem indicate Wyatt’s own breathless, weary state of mind.
By using lines that run together to mimic the chase of the quarry, Wyatt further imprints his own emotions on the piece. The manipulation of the language within the translation allows Wyatt to add another layer of meaning to the sonnet through the use of tone and color.
The symbolism that Petrarch uses in his original sonnet has been maintained in Wyatt’s translation. Again, Wyatt chooses specific wording in his translation so that the poem may be read in different ways. For example, Wyatt uses the “hind” of line 1 of the poem in several ways: she has been taken directly from the Petrarch version where she symbolizes an unattainable mistress, yet she comes to represent Wyatt’s own
mistress.
She is both a figure from the translation and a symbol for Wyatt’s own mistress. Wyatt also uses the image of “Caesar” to his advantage: he is a figure from the translation and in Petrarch’s version represents a man more powerful than the speaker, while in Wyatt’s translation he is representative of a specific monarch. Through the words that Wyatt has selected as part of his translation, Wyatt makes it possible to read his work as both a literal translation of Petrarch’s sonnet and as a piece with a personal, more intimate meaning.
Through the use of translation, Wyatt creates a poem in which it is possible to read a second, more personal meaning without making any sort of direct statement that would implicate the poet. Wyatt uses words that can be interpreted in many ways: within the context of the translation, within the context of Wyatt’s poem, and within the context of Wyatt’s personal relations. Each word, sound, and image that Wyatt has selected to include in his adaptation of Petrarch’s sonnet 190 functions on both the literal level as translation and on a symbolic level as a vehicle for Wyatt’s personal sorrow.
It is left to the reader to decide whether the poem may be read as a translation of a Petrarch sonnet or a demonstration of Wyatt’s frustrations with his situation. These layers are what make the sonnet an example of the indirect method of approach as outlined by More in Utopia. Sir Thomas Wyatt uses the content of Petrarch’s sonnet 190 to create his sonnet, “Whoso List to Hunt”, and by reinterpreting the symbols and content of the original he creates a piece that operates as a translation and as an instrument for conveying his own sorrow.
August 24, 2006 by Gwen Wark Gwen Wark Published Content: 1 Total Views: 0 Favorited By: 0 CPs Full Profile | Subscribe | Add to Favorites Recommend (37)Multiple pages Font SizePost a comment Volatile 16th Century Politics and Scandal Meet Art Head on
Throughout the reign of the volatile Henry VIII, writers were posed with a very sensitive problem: how to convey a message to their intended audience without giving offense to the ruler. This problem was addressed most directly in a passage from Sir Thomas More’s work Utopia, in which it is written: “[B]y the indirect approach you must seek and strive to the best of your power to handle matters tactfully...” (710)
More’s work then …show more content…
goes on to deliver scathing political commentary while seeming on the surface to be an instructive story about a “nowhere” country, written in a style that mimics the popular travel diaries of the period. Another example of this indirect method of addressing a subject can be seen in Sir Thomas Wyatt’s translation of Francesco Petrarch’s sonnet 190, to which Wyatt added the title “Whoso List to Hunt”. In comparing Wyatt’s translated version of this sonnet to Petrarch’s original work the reader can note where Wyatt’s own emotions have colored the interpretation, while still managing to remain within the boundaries of translation.
With the careful selection of form and the manipulation of the poem’s translated content Wyatt uses the sonnet as an instrument for the conveyance of his message, ultimately leaving it as the reader’s task to decide how to interpret the piece. Sir Thomas Wyatt’s sonnet “Whoso List to Hunt” is an example of More’s “indirect approach” because it uses Petrarch’s sonnet 190 as a vehicle to present the writer’s personal opinions while on the surface still functioning as a translated Italian sonnet.
Wyatt demonstrates the ability to create a sonnet that can be read and interpreted on multiple levels; he deviates from his source in order to manipulate the translation and force it to convey his own message. Wyatt’s manipulation can be seen in his choice of what to include from Petrarch’s content, the form in which he phrases his translation, and the choice of words he uses. These differences and similarities are what indicate to the reader that “Whoso List to Hunt” has a second meaning being indirectly conveyed.
Wyatt’s work uses the content of Petrarch’s sonnet 190 as a basis and develops as a translation of that sonnet; however, it is the specific treatment of the original content that establishes Wyatt’s second meaning.
The poet has used the original substance of Petrarch’s sonnet to his advantage, lifting the symbols and ideas from the original and causing them to be reinterpreted by the reader.
For example, just as the deer in Petrarch’s poem represented an unattainable mistress, so too does Wyatt’s “hind”; however, the women symbolized by the pursued deer are very different. Petrarch is using the image to symbolize his mistress, while Wyatt uses that same image to represent his own lady. By using the original content of the sonnet to his advantage, Wyatt ensures that his poem operates on the surface as a translation while still containing his own message.
Another point in the sonnet where Wyatt has invested his translation with multiple layers of meaning is the description of the words of Caesar, written about the deer’s neck. In both Petrarch’s original sonnet and Wyatt’s translation the quarry has been protected from capture by ownership, and this image works to Wyatt’s advantage. Wyatt uses the line “Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am.” to denote that the quarry is the property of someone more powerful than the speaker; this line is similar to that of Petrarch’s …show more content…
original.
There is another meaning to this line, however, in that the woman who is symbolized by the deer belongs to another, more powerful, man. Wyatt uses this concept to his advantage: working within the boundaries of translation, the symbols may also be read to represent the interest of Henry VIII in Anne Boleyn. The concept of ownership itself in this line can also be interpreted in different ways: as either literal physical ownership of a piece of property, or as the bonds of a relationship. Again, Wyatt has used the original content of the sonnet he is translating and by adapting the symbolism to his personal situation conveys his feelings subtly and indirectly.
The content of the poems as a whole have places in which they are similar, but Wyatt’s translation is far from direct and imparts a much different tone than the original. Through his language and content, Wyatt conveys a sense of weariness and futility to the reader; a sentiment that is wholly Wyatt’s and which does not come from the original. One subtle difference between the two pieces that demonstrates Wyatt’s personal layer of meaning is the attitude of the hunter.
“Yet I may by no means my wearied mind/Draw from the deer, but as she fleeth afore/Fainting I follow.” In this line, Wyatt’s speaker demonstrates his inability to forget the deer, whereas at the end of Petrarch’s sonnet his speaker “fell into the water, and she disappeared.” making no mention of being unable to stop thinking of the quarry. Both speakers are pursuing the deer, but it is Wyatt’s speaker who is “wearied” and “fainting”.
This specific variation in content demonstrates how the sonnet still functions as a translation, while interpretation of the content allows the reader to also take note of the poet’s own attitude. In line two of Wyatt’s work, the speaker has abandoned pursuit of the quarry: “But as for me, alas, I may no more.” Here, Wyatt’s work has diverged from being a simple translation in that his hunter’s actions differ from Petrarch’s hunter’s actions: Wyatt’s speaker leaves off pursuit where Petrarch’s speaker makes no mention of quitting the chase, actions which contain a parallel to Wyatt’s own situation and so add another layer of meaning to his work.
This abandonment leaves the reader with a sense of hopelessness and loss, a feeling that is absent from Petrarch’s sonnet and so wholly belongs to Wyatt. Both the abandonment of the hunt and the feeling of futility present in Wyatt’s sonnet are examples of how the poet has grafted his own emotions onto the Petrarch original through translation. The language choices in Wyatt’s translation help to lend his version an air of frustration which was not present in Petrarch’s original piece: another example of how Wyatt is using the translation to convey his own emotions through the use of double meanings. In both sonnets the speakers follow the deer, but in Wyatt’s translation the hunt is referred to as a “vain travail” in line three-a parallel to Wyatt’s own pursuit of his mistress, making indirect reference to the situation between the two of them. Wyatt’s speaker is “wearied” and “fainting”, as if the hunt has taken all of his energy: this powerful, pointed language which is not present in the original demonstrates Wyatt’s state of mind. Wyatt uses the hunted “hind” of the poem to represent his pursued mistress, demonstrating again the multiple levels that the language of the sonnet is operating on.
The words of Wyatt’s sonnet were chosen deliberately to manipulate both sound and the reader’s very breath as they are spoken aloud. Wyatt delivers his own gusty sighs to the reader in the first lines through the heavy repetition of the “h” sound in the words “hunt” and “hind” as well as the use of words with open vowels such as “where”, “as”, and “alas”. The combination of these gusty sounds cause the reader to sound as though they are sighing, lending to the poem’s adopted air of resignation and hopelessness.
By using the sighing sounds of his words to create a melancholy mood, Wyatt conveys his own weariness to the reader while still remaining within the boundaries of translation.
Later, Wyatt uses the tool of enjambed lines to force the reader’s breath into another pattern. By forcing a prolonged reading of the lines the reader is left out of breath, mimicking the “fainting” of line 7. The enjambed lines could be simply read as part of the translation, but Wyatt’s intentional inclusion of them in this poem indicate Wyatt’s own breathless, weary state of mind.
By using lines that run together to mimic the chase of the quarry, Wyatt further imprints his own emotions on the piece. The manipulation of the language within the translation allows Wyatt to add another layer of meaning to the sonnet through the use of tone and color.
The symbolism that Petrarch uses in his original sonnet has been maintained in Wyatt’s translation. Again, Wyatt chooses specific wording in his translation so that the poem may be read in different ways. For example, Wyatt uses the “hind” of line 1 of the poem in several ways: she has been taken directly from the Petrarch version where she symbolizes an unattainable mistress, yet she comes to represent Wyatt’s own
mistress.
She is both a figure from the translation and a symbol for Wyatt’s own mistress. Wyatt also uses the image of “Caesar” to his advantage: he is a figure from the translation and in Petrarch’s version represents a man more powerful than the speaker, while in Wyatt’s translation he is representative of a specific monarch. Through the words that Wyatt has selected as part of his translation, Wyatt makes it possible to read his work as both a literal translation of Petrarch’s sonnet and as a piece with a personal, more intimate meaning.
Through the use of translation, Wyatt creates a poem in which it is possible to read a second, more personal meaning without making any sort of direct statement that would implicate the poet. Wyatt uses words that can be interpreted in many ways: within the context of the translation, within the context of Wyatt’s poem, and within the context of Wyatt’s personal relations. Each word, sound, and image that Wyatt has selected to include in his adaptation of Petrarch’s sonnet 190 functions on both the literal level as translation and on a symbolic level as a vehicle for Wyatt’s personal sorrow.
It is left to the reader to decide whether the poem may be read as a translation of a Petrarch sonnet or a demonstration of Wyatt’s frustrations with his situation. These layers are what make the sonnet an example of the indirect method of approach as outlined by More in Utopia. Sir Thomas Wyatt uses the content of Petrarch’s sonnet 190 to create his sonnet, “Whoso List to Hunt”, and by reinterpreting the symbols and content of the original he creates a piece that operates as a translation and as an instrument for conveying his own sorrow.