I chose Sonnets 113, 99 and 75.

113

Since I left you, mine eye is in my mind;
And that which governs me to go about
Doth part his function and is partly blind,
Seems seeing, but effectually is out;
For it no form delivers to the heart
Of bird, of flower, or shape which it doth latch:
Of his quick objects hath the mind no part,
Nor his own vision holds what it doth catch;
For if it see the rud'st or gentlest sight,
The most sweet favour or deformed'st creature,
The mountain or the sea, the day or night,
The crow, or dove, it shapes them to your feature.
Incapable of more, replete with you,
My most true mind thus maketh mine eye untrue.

Today in class we discussed sonnet 113 when I asked about it as an example of Shakespearean sonnets not necessarily being an argument for or against a particular issue, which is exemplified by this sonnet but the subject of the definition of a argument came up. One person said that a statement is very similar to an argument which got me thinking. In terms of language, what makes an argument out of a statement is the reaction of whoever is in earshot of the statement. It will be obvious I have armed myself with this ideology as you read my feeble attempt to conquer the assignment. Like I said earlier in sonnet 113 Shakespeare doesn’t seem to be arguing but stating that his love has overridden all of his senses, “Since I left you, mine eye is in my mind; And that which governs me to go about
Doth part his function and is partly blind” Shakespeare seems to be making excuses for himself by saying love has actually intoxicated him causing him to do things he normally would not “And that which governs me to go about Doth part his function and is partly blind” is a perfect example as well as “Incapable of more, replete with you, My most true mind thus maketh mine eye untrue.”

99

The forward violet thus did I chide:
Sweet thief, whence didst thou steal thy sweet that smells,
If not from my love's breath? The purple pride
Which on thy soft cheek for complexion dwells
In my love's veins thou hast too grossly dy'd.
The lily I condemned for thy hand,
And buds of marjoram had stol'n thy hair;
The roses fearfully on thorns did stand,
One blushing shame, another white despair;
A third, nor red nor white, had stol'n of both,
And to his robbery had annexed thy breath;
But, for his theft, in pride of all his growth
A vengeful canker eat him up to death.
More flowers I noted, yet I none could see,
But sweet, or colour it had stol'n from thee.

In sonnet 99 Shakespeare seems to be arguing that this person who stole someone or something very dear to the poet has done him very drastically wrong and should be given a pox, “But, for his theft, in pride of all his growth A vengeful canker eat him up to death.” Sonnet 99 seems to be a view into Shakespeare’s bitter attitude toward the OOP’s thievery, “In my love's veins thou hast too grossly dy'd. The lily I condemned for thy hand, and buds of marjoram had stol'n thy hair.” Shakespeare uses the metaphor of flowers to describe his emotional state and the downward spiral it takes, “The roses fearfully on thorns did stand,” according to the footnotes in my book “on thorns did stand” was the parlance of the time to describe anxiety. “One blushing shame, another white despair; A third, nor red nor white, had stol'n of both” is a description of the pedals on the flowers but also seems to be a metaphor for Shakespeare’s ever changing emotional status.

75
So are you to my thoughts as food to life,
Or as sweet-season'd showers are to the ground;
And for the peace of you I hold such strife
As 'twixt a miser and his wealth is found.
Now proud as an enjoyer, and anon
Doubting the filching age will steal his treasure;
Now counting best to be with you alone,
Then better'd that the world may see my pleasure:
Sometime all full with feasting on your sight,
And by and by clean starved for a look;
Possessing or pursuing no delight
Save what is had, or must from you be took.
Thus do I pine and surfeit day by day,
Or gluttoning on all, or all away.

In Sonnet 75 Shakespeare seems to be arguing with the OOP, telling him or her that no pleasure is pleasurable without the OOP involved, “Possessing or pursuing no delight Save what is had, or must from you be took.” The stereotypical view of the miser, during Shakespeare’s time was a person considered to be a wealthy penny pincher. Shakespeare uses the term Miser to describe himself in the relationship between him and the OOP meaning he feels like he must ration out the OOP into uncomfortable amounts even though he has the means to live lavishly. “As 'twixt a miser and his wealth is found. Now proud as an enjoyer, and anon Doubting the filching age will steal his treasure; Now counting best to be with you alone, Then better'd that the world may see my pleasure: Sometime all full with feasting on your sight.”