Reading through this, I'm starting to realize the meaning of the title. It's about the misunderstanding of how one should treat and go about love and loving someone. In this case, the "labor of love" is completely taken in a new way. Instead of respect and other amiable qualities that lovers will work hard to possess and perfect to woo their women, they use rhetoric and wordplay as a means to the end. Of course, this is incorrect as "Love's Labour" in a romantic sense.
In this way, Love's Labour have become Lost. Not lost in that it can't be found, but lost as in misguided and confused. Abused wordplay has been confused as a way to gain love or impress lovers, but it couldn't be farther from the truth in this play.
Do you think that the labors of love have been lost in the sense they aren't working because of the endless use of rhetoric? Or is the labor lost because the characters we see are ever striving to impress one another. Is their pride becoming their downfall in their quest for happiness?
ReplyDeleteI think both are completely true. Shakespeare was a master of endless wordplay (see: This play), and the title should be counted out of the double-meaning fun.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't pride usually cause the downfall of happiness, though? I think we're all familiar with the Pride Cycle. I think that this play will turn out with a complete pride cycle at the end, if my suspicions are correct.
One thought that came to me...The whole play the men have been driven by pride and self-image, self-justification.
ReplyDeleteWhy are they wooing the girls? Is it because they would make great trophies? Does this add to the pomp of the men? Or is it just a innocent bystander to the a theme driven play?