Sonnet 29

When, in disgrace with Fortune and men's eyes,
I all alone beweep my outcast state,
And trouble deaf heaven with my bootless cries,
And look upon myself and curse my fate,
Wishing me like to one more rich in hope,
Featured like him, like him with friends possessed,
Desiring this man's art and that man's scope,
With what I most enjoy contented least;
Yet in these thoughts myself almost despising,
I haply think on thee, and then my state,
Like to the lark at break of day arising
From sullen earth, sings hymns at heaven's gate;
  For thy sweet love rememb'red such wealth brings,
  That then I scorn to change my state for kings.

Another interpretation of my friend's is that "outcast state" refers to a literal state of being outcast. I don't see it. As I said in a previous entry, the context makes it dubious beyond reason: the person wishes not for an end of exile, or of being outcast, but for looks, friends, talent and "scope." The desire for friends is the only thing of these four that support my friend's reading, but where is the wish for redemption that would change the mind of whoever cast him out, or the emotional assertions of innocence? The absence of such have convinced me that "outcast state" is simply a minor metaphor, if that, for being alienated from the good will of Fortune (and "men's eyes).

My friend argued against this that the persona had no need to complain about what my friend considers his literally outcast state because he'd just done that in the preceding sonnet in the series. Now, the persona of the previous sonnet does complain about being away from his friend, but he doesn't claim to be outcast--in fact, he's been on a journey no details of which have been given, according to "Sonnet 27." If he brings up his (personal) "exile" from his friend again in "Sonnet 29," he is obliged, it seems to me, to deal with it again. Otherwise, why bring it up again. Aside from that, nothing in "Sonnet 29" indicates that it is to be taken as anything other than a stand-alone sonnet. There are no allusions in it to any previous or other poem. And, if my interpretation (which is that of most of the experts I've read) is accepted, no external texts need be consulted for the poem to make perfect sense, by itself.

Another slight interpretive problem that comes up in this poem is whether the person is speaking about those times that his luck is bad, or indicating that he is now permanently in "disgrace with Fortune" and speaking about those times while in that continuing state he complains about it. I don't think it matters much, but I prefer the former: "whenever I feel that my luck is horrible and I'm not thought much of by others, and complain about it, wishing for a better life, and almost despise myself, thoughts of you revive me" versus "when, as a person having horrible luck and not thought well of by other, I complain about it and--wishing for a better life--almost despise myself, thoughts of you revive me." Both say about the same thing. And one reading does not contradict the other. All poems are afflicted with passages where the reader can't say for sure what is specifically meant, but can get enough of a gist of what is meant for the poem to work for him. That is the case here.

There, so much for "Sonnet 29"--unless something (an offer of money) convinces me it's worthwhile making a better-written version of my last four entries, or someone points out some grievous mistake I've made. This latter I consider highly unlikely.