SONG: WHY SO PALE AND

WAN, FOND LOVER?

Sir John Suckling
16091642
 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1
Sir John Suckling (10 February 1609 1 June 1642) was an English
poet and a prominent figure among those renowned for careless gaiety,
wit, and all the accomplishments of a Cavalier poet (= a broad
description of a school of English poets of the 17 th century who came
from the classes that supported King Charles I during the English Civil
War).
Suckling was born at Whitton, in the parish of Twickenham, Middlesex,

on February 10, 1609. His mother died when the boy was four years of
age. His father, descendant of a prominent Norfolk family, was
appointed Comptroller of James I's household in 1622. Suckling
matriculated at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1623, but left without
taking a degree three years later.
In 1628, he left London to travel in France and Italy, returning before

the autumn of 1630, when he was knighted.

He joined the English soldiers serving in the army of Gustavus

Adolphus during the Thirty Years' War.

He returned to the English court in May 1632, where he became very

popular through his wealth and charm. He was known as a gamester,

and is credited with having invented the game of cribbage.
In fact, Suckling was so passionately devoted to cards that he would

frequently spend the whole morning in bed with a pack before him,
studying the subtleties of his favorite games. He was considered not
only the most skillful card-player, but also the best bowler in England.
He travelled the country playing cribbage with the gentry, and managed
to win around 20,000, an amount equivalent to about 4 million in
todays money.
 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2
In 1634, a great scandal was caused in his old circle by a beating which he received at the
hands of Sir John Digby, a rival suitor for the hand of the daughter of Sir John Willoughby.
In 1639, Suckling recruited and equipped cavalry to help King Charles I in his first Scottish

war. He was ridiculed in London for the troops' scarlet uniforms and plumed hats, but he
was well-favored by the King.
In May 1641, Suckling took an active part in the royalist plot to rescue Strafford, who had

attempted to strengthen the royal position against Parliament from the Tower. When
Parliament ordered him to account for his movements, Suckling fled to Paris. He died in
Paris a few months later, in 1642, either from suicide by poison, or, as another story tells, by
the hand of a servant who placed a razor in his boot.
His play, Aglaura, was published in 1638 and performed twice for Charles I. The play had

two different endings, one tragic and one happy. It was not a critical success, but it
introduced the wonderful lyric poem Why So Pale and Wan, Fond Lover.
Suckling treated
In the same poetry
year, casually,
Suckling's as a pastime,
comedy neverwas published. It was much influenced by
The Goblins
committing
Shakespeare'shimself
The to a serious
Tempest andstudy of literature.
is generally thought to be Suckling's best.
He never attached himself to any school of poetry in
particular. While his friend, Carew, was a disciple of
Jonson, Suckling wrote disparagingly of Jonson. He
was more inclined in the direction of Donne's style,
with its elaborate metaphors and explosive passion.
Suckling's poetry lacks depth of feelingindeed, he
seems to have prided himself on its absence.
 ANALYSI
S1
Fond] foolish
Prithee] please, may I ask
Why so pale and wan, // fond lover? a
Prithee, // why so pale? b
Will, // when looking well cant move her, a
Looking ill prevail? b
Prithee, // why so pale? b
Why so dull and mute, // young sinner? a
Prithee, // why so mute? c
Will, // when speaking well cant win her, a
Saying nothing dot? c
Prithee, // why so mute? c
Quit, // quit, // for shame; // this will not move, d
This cannot take her. a
If of herself she will not love, d
Nothing can make her: a
The devil take her! a
Although improbable, homosexual undertones may
be ascribed to the poem, especially when one
considers the unaccountable interest of the
speaker in the young mans welfare, as well as in
his love life. Moreover, the angry outburst
apparent in the last line of the poem appears to be
not only excessive but also unprovokedthe lady in
question is unlikely to have ever interacted with
The poem features in one of Sucklings playsnamely
Aglauraas a song sung by an anti-Platonic lord
who deems it a little foolish counsel, given to one of
his friends when he was falling into a consumption
as a result of unrequited love.
The THEME of the poem is related to the concept of
unrequited love, with the speaker concluding that
blind devotion to ones love interest despite blatant
rejection is foolish.
The first two stanzas of the poem feature a bitter and sarcastic TONE
that is, nonetheless, solicitous, the speaker evincing concern for the
decline in the young mans health and spirits. As readers move on to the
last stanza, sarcasm is elided into exasperation, as evidenced by the
initial spondaic inversion in line 11, as well as the three caesurae in the
same line: the former lends itself to the portrayal of frustration, and the
repetition of the word quit (line 11) illustrates the fact that the
speaker will brook no further comment from the besotted young man;
the latter, especially the third caesura, grants an impression of finality
the speaker seems to imply that he has already made a decision for
the hapless lover, and it does not bode well for his relationship with his
love interest.
The poem is largely composed of trochees, which create a sense of forceful
exasperation, implying that the speaker is overly keen to get his point
across. The number of metrical feet per line, however, is uneven, which
might mirror the addressees confusion with regard to his love interest;
alternatively, the prevalence of catalexis might hint at the lack of
comprehension on the young mans part, as he cannot perceive the futility of
his continued affection for the lady. As for the rhyme scheme, it features
identical rhymes that extend throughout all three stanzasfor example, the
word her in lines 3, 8, 12, 14, and 15; this is conspicuously repetitive,
perhaps implying that the addressees behavior has likewise become tedious
and predictable due to his infatuation. All lines in the poem are end-
stopped, implying that the speakers friend is trapped, languishing in
unrequited love with minimal inclination to move on.
 ANALYSI The rhetorical questions present throughout the poem serve a double
purpose: firstly, they represent the speakers attempt at venting
S2 while trying to persuade the young man of the impracticality of his
approach to romance; secondly, they emphasize the disadvantages of
the predicament in which the addressee finds himself, namely that
Why so pale and wan, // fond lover? a his emotional distress has begun to take a toll on him, making him
pale (line 2) and presumably unattractive, and that his garrulity
Prithee, // why so pale? b
has deserted him, making his company dull.
Will, // when looking well cant move her, a
Looking ill prevail? b The word prithee (lines 2, 5, 7, and 10) is
Prithee, // why so pale? b unnecessarily formal, belying the speakers mounting
frustration with his friend; alternatively, it may take
on a mocking meaning, as though the speaker were
Why so dull and mute, // young sinner? a taunting the young man with his newly acquired
defects, which, in the speakers opinion, are self-
Prithee, // why so mute? c
imposed.
Will, // when speaking well cant win her, a
Saying nothing dot? c The frequent caesurae give the poem an abrupt feel, as though the
Prithee, // why so mute? c speakers eloquence has fled with the advent of anger. They
likewise give the impression that the speakers arguments are
spur-of-the-moment, concocted in an effusion of frustration to force
Quit, // quit, // for shame; // this will not move, d his friend to acknowledge the truth of the situation at hand.
Moreover, as a result of their prevalence, the speakers objections
This cannot take her. a
are given more weight than they would normally possess.
If of herself she will not love, d
Nothing can make her: a
The word nothing (line 14), as well
The devil take her! a as all of the other negations apparent
throughout the poem, implies that the
The speakers focus on his friend abruptly changes to the lady in the third young lovers attempts at winning the
stanza. In fact, his whole attitude seems to undergo a metamorphosis: lady of his choice are doomed to
instead of continuing to blame the young man for his own plight, he starts fruitlessness, his situation being
railing against the lady, presumably in an attempt to bolster his friends hopeless.
confidence; indeed, the speakers poor opinion of the woman could not be
more apparentthe phrase The devil take her! (line 15) is an outright
imprecation.