This essay compares Robert Burns' "A Red, Red Rose" and William Shakespeare's "Sonnet 130" as two contrasting approaches to love poetry. Both poems employ hyperbole and metaphor, yet they arrive at opposite conclusions: Burns elevates his love to a supernatural, transcendent force that will outlast nature itself, while Shakespeare deliberately subverts conventional romantic praise to celebrate his lover's earthly humanity. Despite their opposing strategies, the essay argues that both poets share the same ultimate goal — convincing their lovers that the affection they offer is uniquely genuine and rare. The analysis also touches on Burns' secondary theme of separated love and Shakespeare's implicit critique of dishonest poetic flattery.
Robert Burns' A Red, Red Rose and Shakespeare's Sonnet 130 are both poems of love that use hyperbole to highlight aspects of romantic feeling. However, while both poems address the topic of love, they do so in dramatically different ways. Burns' poem approaches love in a stereotypical manner, using hyperbole and metaphor to emphasize the extreme, transcendent nature of the romantic relationship — the result is a poem whose theme is supernatural love. Shakespeare's sonnet also uses hyperbole and metaphor, but to a very different effect, highlighting instead the earthly nature of the woman in the poem. The result is a poem whose theme is love that is decidedly not supernatural. Oddly enough, though the poems approach love in very different ways, both manage to convey the message that there is something unique and special about the relationships they describe — yet the means by which each poem makes that case are entirely different.
In order to understand how the theme of A Red, Red Rose is supernatural love, it is important to define that term carefully. The word "supernatural" is not used here in its common sense — to convey some kind of superpower — but simply to convey something greater than nature. To establish this theme, Burns begins by comparing his love to nature. He opens with "O my Luve's like a red, red rose," establishing that his love is as beautiful as something readily found in nature, which is widely regarded as exceptionally beautiful (Burns). He then compares his love to something that goes beyond the natural: "O my Luve's like the melodie, / That's sweetly play'd in tune" (Burns). Here he transitions from comparing his love to something found in nature to something that is beautiful yet cannot be found in nature, effectively elevating his love beyond ordinary levels.
Such a transition is important because it sets the stage for the next part of Burns' poem, in which he proclaims that his love is greater than nature itself. Burns declares that his love is so deep that he will love her "Till a' the seas gang dry" (Burns). By making this statement, Burns asserts that his love will outlast nature — it is not literally possible for his love to endure until the seas go dry, and this is precisely how Burns employs hyperbole. He reinforces the notion by proclaiming that his love will last when "the rocks melt wi' the sun" and while "the sands o' life shall run" (Burns). These images make it clear that Burns believes his love is somehow greater than the natural world.
An additional theme of Burns' poem is lost love. He appears to be speaking to a woman from whom he is separated, and the poem reads as his attempt to convince her that, despite their separation, his love will continue. He states "fare-the-weel, a while," making it clear that he intends the separation to be short-lived. This notion of a temporary parting is reinforced by his declaration that he "will come again…tho' twere ten thousand mile" (Burns). That closing line shows how Burns' two themes intersect: he invokes an almost supernatural example to demonstrate his determination to return to his love.
The full extent of this hyperbole may not be immediately apparent to a modern audience. Ten thousand miles was an almost incomprehensible distance when Robert Burns wrote the poem, and covering it would have taken a tremendous amount of time regardless of the method of travel. The exaggeration therefore carried far greater emotional weight for his original readers than it might today.
In sharp contrast to Burns' poem, Sonnet 130 makes it clear that Shakespeare does not believe his love is supernatural. Where many love poems — like Burns' A Red, Red Rose — describe love as something greater than nature, Shakespeare's sonnet celebrates the earthly nature of his beloved. Instead of deploying commonplace metaphors to exalt his lover's beauty, Shakespeare uses those same metaphors to demonstrate that his lover is not an exceptional beauty. Her eyes are "nothing like the sun"; "her breasts are dun"; "black wires grow on her head"; and her breath reeks (Shakespeare). In other words, Shakespeare acknowledges that his lover is simply a woman, not something greater than this earth. He specifically states that his lover is not a goddess, and compared with the extravagant love sonnets of the day, it might initially seem as though he has little affection for her at all.
"Shakespeare affirms love while critiquing false flattery"
"Both poets ultimately pursue the same romantic goal"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.