A comparison of structure, poetic/language devices and themes between ‘Hour’ and ‘Sonnet 116’ Both ‘Hour’ and ‘Sonnet 116’ were written 500 years apart, yet both of these poems explore the significant characteristics of love and time. Both poems explore that time and love does not match. But in ‘Sonnet 116’ love is the dominant figure from time and in ‘Hour’ time is the dominant figure from love.
In the poem, ‘Hour’, Carol Ann Duffy is talking about how one ‘Hour’ of their day can be spent as if they have all the time in the world. Using the tales of Rumpelstiltskin and King Midas, Duffy has managed to compare time and love in very different ways. This sonnet is a typical sonnet: it has 14 lines, it talks of love and it has a rhyming couplet at the end. Duffy has decided to put a rhyming couplet at the end because it is like a conclusion to the story being told in the sonnet: ‘than here. Now. Time hates love, wants love poor but love spins gold, gold, gold from straw’. In ‘Sonnet 116’ it is a typical Shakespearean sonnet and the rhyming couplet is indented to show a ‘full-stop’ of the poem. The effect of these rhyming couplets are to let the reader know that no matter how much time hates love, love will keep on making gold constantly hence the repetition of the word ‘gold’ and that love is not a fool of time respectively. Another structural feature is the rhyme scheme. The rhyme scheme in ‘Sonnet 116’ is ABABABABABABAA. Likewise the rhyme scheme for ‘Hour’ is ABABABABABABAA. The effect of this is to show how each of the poems has a consistent relationship running throughout the poems. Also there is enjambment in the poem from lines 5-14 of ‘Hour’, ‘For thousands of seconds we kiss……..gold from straw’. This enjambment gives the reader the impression that the poem is one continuous story and that there is, again, a consistent, unbroken relationship. However the enjambment does not flow continuously in ‘Sonnet 116’. Here the enjambment is broken up in different...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document