Citlali Valentina Bonilla Garca John Donne is considered to be one if not the major metaphysical poet of his time.

A metaphysical poet is that poet whose work, according to Samuel Johnson, was characterized by the inventive use of conceits and by speculation about topics such as love or religion. This poem is a clear example of this definition for it mixes two concepts that bore an important role in the people of the sixteenth century. Marriage was a holly sacrament to catholic people and sex before marriage was prohibited. To perform such an activity before being married was a sin, and the lady in question would lose her reputation. So, these were matters of great importance in those days and Donne achieves to downplay them with the extended metaphor of the flea. The tone maintained throughout the poem is highly crude verging sometimes on the ribald, although it cannot be said that the poem is entirely ribald, for its extended metaphor also serves to give it a humoristic touch. It mixes two concepts that were on opposite sides in his time: sex and religion, and what is even worst, he downplays the holly sacrament of marriage, by comparing it to a flea. It contains several phrases that, even if they may be ordinary to us, their meaning was extremely sexual during the sixteenth century, such as two bloods mingled be, which was a clear reference to the sexual act; pampered swells with one blood made of two, which according to some may be a reference to an erected male genitalia or to a pregnancy, for my part, I think it referrers to male genitalia; and finally, when you yieldst to me, which is far from veiled a reference to the woman surrendering to the poets advances. He also downplays the fact that an engagement should have the parents approval when he says though parents grudge, with the previous line when he says they are already married for their blood is already mixed inside the flea. But, let us analyze it a little further. The poem begins with the word mark, with this, the poetic voice is calling the readers attention to something he will declare in the next line. And this call is to be reinforced by the repetition of that word in the same line, as if the issue to be referred next was something that had been already discussed several times before. How little that which thou deniest me is, is the second line of the poem, as if the poetic voice were trying to make the woman realize how unimportant or trivial is what she is denying him. The woman has been stopping his advances claiming religion, virtue and honor, as it is to be understood by the choice of words the poetic voice uses in the sixth line of the first stanza: sin, shame, and loss of maidenhead. Then, in

the next line, Yet this enjoys before it woo, where the word yet serves as a conjunction meaning nevertheless or in spite of that, which suggests that the lady in question had also implied that the poetic voice should earn her favor, he had to court or woo her, so, this entire stanza can be interpreted as a complain to the lady. The sexual references here are evident since the third line with the repetition of the word suck, then the phrase our two bloods mingled be, and then, as I mentioned before, the next to last line And pampered swells with one blood made of two, which is, I believe, a clear reference to an erected male genitalia for, if the phrase two bloods mingled be is a reference to intercourse, what happens during said intercourse to the pennies? It swells. Then, in the second stanza becomes clear the extended metaphor for the marriage since the first line, the three lives the poetic refers to may be the two spouses and god, that would be the reason for the ending sentence of the second line nay more than married are, they are united before god inside the flea and therefore, physical sexual intercourse should not cause such a fuss in his fiancs mind. Although, what he says in the fifth line might shed some light on the reasons of her denial: Though parents grudge, and you, were met, which makes evident that her parents did not approve him as a fianc for their daughter, and not only that, the woman did not want him either, but in spite both their rejections, the couple had already been mingled by the flea. If not, why else would she try to kill him? The last stanza ends with his last attempt to convince her how futile and trivial is her argument of losing her honor by surrendering to his demands, when the flea has already taken her blood, this can be appreciated in the last three lines of the poem: Tis true; then learn how false, fears be: / Just so much honor, when you yieldst to me, / Will waste, as this fleas death took life from thee. But before that, the poetic voice accuses her of being cruel for denying him what he considers to be an innocent plea, and again he establishes how insignificant is what he is asking of her by comparing it with the flea.