Florizel prefaces his profession by commanding Polixenes, Polixenes' neighbor, "and men, the earth, and the heavens and all" (369-370) to "be witness to't," which shows that Florizel thinks that using words is both effective and necessary in effectively expressing his feelings to others. He next hyperbolizes his love for her by using superlatives such as "the most imperial monarch," "most worthy," "fairest youth," and "more than was ever man's" (lines 372-374) to create an exceedingly desirable hypothetical situation and claim that he would not prize it "without her love." The irony is that he has never actually been in this hypothetical situation, which exists in the minds of the listeners only because he used words to invent it; he uses words rather than tangible evidence (such as past actions: for instance, having been in the situation which he describes and rejecting the fancy lifestyle) to supposedly prove his love.
Camillo responds to this supposed proof with a pun, "this shows a sound affection," (378) that simultaneously supports and refutes it. The pun lies in the double meaning of the word "sound," the adjectival form of which means "free from error, fallacy, or misapprehension...exhibiting or based on thorough knowledge and experience," and the nounal form of which means "the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing" (Merriam-Webster). This double meaning is ironic because, as I explained in the above paragraph, the words themselves are Florizel's supposed proof because they do not describe existing evidence, but rather, their creation is the evidence. This pun suggests that words themselves do not exhibitknowledge or experience but rather that they can be used to express knowledge or experience.
Although you say that his proclamations of love are just hypothetical claims, isn't Florizel's willingness to flee Bohemia and sacrifice his royalty to marry Perdita a concrete action signifying his love for her?
ReplyDeleteGreat point. It totally is a concrete action that signifies his love for her. Here's my rebuttal:
ReplyDeleteI never argued that Florizel does not love Perdita, but rather that his use of words in this speech did not effectively PROVE his love, and that Shakespeare uses this speech to satirize the notion that hypothetical claims can prove felt love. I agree that his felt love exists.