Sonnet 40

The speaker tells the beloved that he has taken all the speaker's loves and now possesses them, so the beloved has gained nothing new—all the speaker's affection was already his.

Original

Modern

1 Take all my loves, my love, yea take them all,

Opening invitation to infidelity as a logical test

Take all my loves, my beloved, yes take every one,

my loves = the people I've loved romantically

Wordplay: “loves”

Romantic partners, lovers; the speaker's sexual history becomes property to be taken

2 What hast thou then more than thou hadst before?

What do you have then that you didn't have before?

3 No love, my love, that thou mayst true love call,

Nothing new, my beloved, that you can truly call love,

true love = genuine, authentic love

4 All mine was thine, before thou hadst this more:

Everything I had was already yours before you took this more:

before thou hadst this more = before this new affair

5 Then if for my love, thou my love receivest,

So if for my love, you receive my love,

6 I cannot blame thee, for my love thou usest,

I cannot blame you for using my love,

usest = use, employ

7 But yet be blamed, if thou thyself deceivest

But yet you should be blamed if you deceive yourself

deceivest = deceive, fool

8 By wilful taste of what thyself refusest.

By deliberately tasting what you reject for yourself.

wilful taste = deliberate indulgence; refusest = deny

Volta The volta occurs at line 9 with 'I do forgive thy robbery gentle thief'—shifting from accusations of theft to absolution, reframing infidelity as a paradoxical non-theft.

9 I do forgive thy robbery gentle thief

The volta's paradoxical forgiveness: 'I do forgive thy robbery gentle thief'

I forgive your theft, gentle thief

robbery = theft; gentle thief = paradoxical: the beloved is both criminal and beloved

Wordplay: “robbery”

Theft, but of something already possessed; the beloved steals what was his

Wordplay: “gentle thief”

Oxymoron: the beloved is simultaneously criminal and beloved, predator and loved one

10 Although thou steal thee all my poverty:

Although you steal away all my poverty:

steal thee = steal away; poverty = lack of romantic worth

Wordplay: “poverty”

Lack of romantic worth; the speaker is poor in love, so has nothing of value to steal

11 And yet love knows it is a greater grief

And yet love understands that a beloved's betrayal causes far more suffering

love knows = my love reveals

12 To bear greater wrong, than hate’s known injury.

To bear greater wrong than hate's familiar harm.

greater wrong = larger betrayal; hate's known injury = injury from an enemy

13 Lascivious grace, in whom all ill well shows,

The volta's devastating image of sin made beautiful

Sensual beauty in whom all badness looks good,

lascivious grace = lecherous charm; all ill well shows = all vice appears attractive

Wordplay: “lascivious grace”

Lustful charm; the beloved's beauty makes his infidelity seductive and forgivable

14 Kill me with spites yet we must not be foes.

Hurt me with cruelty yet we must not be enemies.

spites = malicious acts; foes = enemies

Sophistic Forgiveness: Theft of Non-Possession

Lines 1–6 execute a brilliant rhetorical move. The speaker invites the beloved to 'take all my loves,' then immediately asks: what has he gained? The answer: nothing. Nothing real. The 'true love' was already the beloved's. All the speaker's other loves were false substitutes for the beloved. Therefore, the beloved hasn't stolen anything; he merely reclaimed what was always his. Lines 5–6 drive home this logic: 'Then if for my love, thou my love receivest, / I cannot blame thee, for my love thou usest.' The beloved is using the speaker's love, which is an inanimate possession. Technically, the argument goes, infidelity is impossible when the real love was never actually given to the other person. This is sophistry, but it's sophisticated sophistry—a way to absolve the beloved of guilt by redefining what love 'counts.'

The Paradox of Loving a Betrayer

Lines 9–14 shift from logic to emotion. The speaker forgives the 'gentle thief'—a paradoxical epithet that contains both tenderness and accusation. Line 10's 'steal thee all my poverty' is brilliant: 'poverty' can mean both lack of wealth and lack of romantic merit. The beloved steals the speaker's diminishment. Lines 11–12 then make the crucial revelation: the greater grief is not being betrayed by a rival but by someone you love. Hate's injury is cleaner; love's betrayal is more wounding because it violates the sacred bond. Lines 13–14 conclude with an image of seductive evil: the beloved's 'lascivious grace' makes 'all ill well shows'—sin looks beautiful when embodied in the beloved. The final line—'Kill me with spites yet we must not be foes'—admits that the speaker is being killed emotionally yet insists on friendship. It's heartbreaking resignation.

If this happened today

Your best friend sleeps with your ex or your crush. You're devastated. But then you think: well, I was only with that person because I was thinking about you anyway. My heart was already yours. So technically, you didn't steal anything that was truly mine. It's twisted logic, but it's what hurt people tell themselves to survive.

← Sonnet 39 All Sonnets Sonnet 41 →