ParsonsJournalForInformationMapping_Bevington-William Shakespeare Compare

8/17/2019 ParsonsJournalForInformationMapping_Bevington-William Shakespeare Compare

1/29

PIIM IS A RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

FACILITY AT THE NEW SCHOOL

© 2011 PARSONS JOURNAL FOR

INFORMATION MAPPING AND PARSONS

INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION MAPPING

68 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10011

THE PARSONS INSTITUTE

FOR INFORMATION MAPPING

212 229 6825

piim.newschool.edu

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?

Thou art more lovely and more temperate:Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,And summer's lease hath all too short a date;

Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,And often is his gold complexion dimmed;And every fair from fair sometime declines,

By chance or nature's changing course untrimmed:But thy eternal summer shall not fade,Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow'st,

Nor shall death brag thou wand’rest in his shade,When in eternal lines to time thou grow'st, So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see,

So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

KEYWORDS Couplets, Elizabethan literature, Helen

Vendler, keywords, quatrains, relational diagramming,

relational mapping, Shakespeare, signified and signifier,

sonnets, -, word mapping, word networks

PROJECT DATE

ABSTRACT Tat rich and emotional inward eeling—

where both desire and prooundity meet—is well ex-

pressed through the outward orm o the sonnet. Son-nets serve as companions in our quest or this type o

prooundness; the best sonnets deliver rich, intellectually

deep qualities reflecting lie’s insights and eelings. Such

prooundness may be gained through both general, and

close reading.1 Te intellectual depth o this experience

is yet more enriched through the incorporative effects o

taking in a sonnet sequence (i the author created such).2

Tough we may seek to grasp this “source” element, pro-

oundness, we realize it is externally intangible; we must

approach such obliqueness through tools and mentors.

Te tools are representational models that can direct us

toward our aim; the mentors assist us with these tools

(directly, or by adding more tools). Our signified thing (in

this case, prooundness) is achieved through signifiers (in

this case letters arranged into words, making the language

o the poem visible, and urther arranged through rules

and structures agreeably organized to constitute the type

o sonnet expected).3 Shakespeare is literally dead, but he

is figuratively alive through the representational strength

o the printed page (or digital means o visual and audio

rendering).

We physically read Shakespeare’s sonnets (symbols in

line) nearly as his contemporaries did in the late sixteenth

and the early seventeenth centuries ( and ).

Such representations are airly direct pathways to thesource. In this paper, we reer to these direct, textual con-

structs as tier-one representational models. Is it possible

to construct representations that yield even greater insight

into the author’s conceit? Yes, perhaps, through two ap-

proaches, the first by building a better tier-one representa-

tion—a representation that more inormatively points to

the source with less noise ( and ).

Comparing Shakespeare’sSonnet Sequence throughRelational Diagram Models

WILLIAM BEVINGTON, PI IM& ERIK FREER

: Sonnet : type setting, printing, and spellingconventions when Shakespeare sonnets were first published.

A tier-one representation.

: Sonnet , another example of a tier-one rep-resentation using current and applied spelling conventions(compare to above).

: Sonnet : a tier-two representation: relies upon atier-one representation as its proxy to “point” back to the thingsignified.


2/29

COMPARING SHAKESPEARE’S SONNETSTHROUGH RELATIONAL DIAGRAM MODELS

WILLIAM BEVINGTON, PIIM & ERIK FREER

PARSONS JOURNAL FOR INFORMATION MAPPINGVOLUME III ISSUE 3, FALL 2011[PAGE 2]

In loving thee thou know'st I am forsworn,But thou art twice forsworn to me love swearing:In act thy bed-vow broke, and new faith torn

In vowing new hate after new love bearing.But why of two oaths' breach do I accuse thee,When I break twenty? I am perjured most,

For all my vows are oaths but to misuse thee,And all my honest faith in thee is lost.For I have sworn deep oaths of thy deep kindness,

Oaths of thy love, thy truth, thy constancy,And to enlighten thee, gave eyes to blindness,Or made them swear against the thing they see:

For I have sworn thee fair: more perjured eye, To swear against the truth so foul a lie.

Te second approach is to construct a representation

that is more direct in its path to another representation then

it is to the source; we reer to this as a tier-two representa-

tion ( and ) . Tese representations, designed

to work in conjunction with other representations, may

yield new and valuable intelligence respecting the source.I tier-one representations are the bricks, tier-two repre-

sentations may allow us to understand the mortar, or view

the building the bricks were arranged to compose. Relying

most heavily on the research o the gifed critic and close

reader o Shakespeare’s sonnets, Helen Vendler, this paper

provides a built-out example o what is meant by, and

what may be gained through, the reorienting strengths o

tier-two representations.

INTRODUCTION Let us (or just a brave, brie moment) set

aside all conflicting thought and imagine a pure, intan-

gible, source-thing—something that must rely on exter-nal representation to be known. We have, or example,

measure and math to “see” observable and non-observable

physics as natural law. We know that this natural law

“permits” through restriction, “that which is.” As sentient

beings we act and react within this physical milieu; or us,

as part o this natural order, our sources include percep-

tions o what we are, what we encounter, and what this

composition yields. We can also imagine beyond our own

restriction, which may or may not lead us to deeper rev-

elation o yet-to-be-known source things.

Consider a phenomena, philosophy, or conceptual

contrivance to be worthy o being communicated to

another: through what representation is this sentience best

conveyed? Conversely, what kind o representation should

be utilized to generate the patterns that afford insight

rom the type o inormation we have at hand or desire to

know? Trough these representations we lead, or are lead

to both know and to “eel knowingness.” Felt knowingness

results in emotive response: contentment or rustration,

love or pride, ear or certainty, hope or despair, optimism

or pessimism, acceptance or rejection, desire to preserve

or desire to destroy, confidence or trepidation, glibness

or prooundness. Representations (though they point to

a source tangible thing), ultimately, point more deeply

to the non-tangible. Te most effective communicationsreach through to this depth—these intangible levers o hu-

man conscious and subconscious.

Inormation models, when directed at sentient recipi-

ents, those whom may possess prior knowledge (plus their

collected user profile) advance or retard these emotive

characteristics in combination to the “raw” intelligence

conveyed. An irony o overtly expression-centric com-

: Sonnet , A tier-one representation compared to figure a similar visual experience.

: Sonnet , a contemporary setting. Also visuallysimilar to figure . (However, with a significantly sentiment).

A tier-one representation.

: Sonnet , a tier-two representation, noticedsignificant visual difference of figure : the concept and literaldifiference of the sonnets becomes readly visualized.


3/29







municative models is that they, though intended to push

the emotive levers more directly, are ofentimes ephemeral

in their effectiveness. Alternately, inormation-centric

communications building upon prior knowledge (with an

aim to advance the intelligence pool o the recipient as op-

posed to directly thrusting upon the emotive), may serveto build a more ormidable emotive worldview. Tis is

why appeals to or through glibness are best conveyed with

relentless repetition, whilst things proound may strongly

alter views via singular exposure.

Having argued that every “deepest” source point is

intangible, it may benefit to back-pedal or a moment. For

these intangibles may have very “close,” very real, tangible

representational models. Te idea o a perect rabbit, or

example, is airly well represented by an actual, healthy

rabbit, (particularly at the county air where such things

are judged and declared to be so, or in the wild where

awareness and speed results in survival). However, theideal o this perect rabbit may be less well represented by

a photograph, or less still than a written description.

For our model, the source is the point at the center o

the thing, moving beyond the real because there are too

many “reals” and they cannot all be the source. From this

source-point tangible representational markers stretch out

in every direction rom that which they represent. Myriad

representational markers, as stars, in a galaxy o distances

and noise—surround that single ideal point which is noise-

less and “undistant” unto itsel—this is our über-model.

So now we’ve touched upon the source (the signified

intangible point); their proxies—representational mark-

ers or points (the signiying tangibles); the distance these

points are rom the source point; and the noise which

effectively tells us how successul one representational

model (in context o its use or occurrence) is at represent-

ing the source. Distance can be understood by how the

points may either be more, or less, accurately traceable in

their representational value (the actual rabbit), or more

or less cognitively tractable (the schema o the rabbit).

In the first instance the representation is ostensibly reflec-

tive o what the source thing looks like (we’ll call these less

distant ). In the second instance, the representation does

not appear at all like the thing it represents (more distant ).

Te ormer type (accurately traceable models), are morereadily comprehended by a greater audience with less

prior knowledge—the second type (cognitively tractable

models) are intended or a set o users with a much higher

degree o prior knowledge.

One would assume that increased distance would

be commensurately noise-prone, but this is not the case.

Every point in the sphere is susceptible to noise. Te best

deense against noise is the quality o the representational

patterns. Strong patterns resist intrusiveness; they displace

the potential or undesirable sub-patterns and chaos to en-

ter. Noise indicates how ineffective the representation is in

the transerence o the “sourceness” o the thing. Noise en-

ters due to lack o quality, pollution rom other representa-tions pointing to other sources, lack o prior knowledge,

etcetera. Excessive noise can “overcome” a representation

to the level that the representation no longer yields ac-

curate or cognitive value; that star has lost its hold on the

universe and is adrif. Some models are very distant, yet

virtually without noise (a swastika representing ascism),

while some models are very near but ull o noise (a very

poor quality photograph o anything, unless it represents a

poor quality photograph).

Tereore, some representations will be ar weaker

though they are less distant rom the source, and vice

versa. It is assumed that increased amiliarity (such ascommon usage and thorough knowledge o the interpre-

tative language) will yield a better understanding o the

source thing, however, this is not always the case. Gilman

Louie stated that, “A tool that presents me with new ways

o looking at new data is not nearly as useul as a tool

that presents me with new ways o looking at data I have

to deal with every day.”4 Even a radically different way to

look at inormation with which we are very amiliar (a

distant view) may yield surprising insight into what we

had thought we had known beore. It is the surprise o

the “anti-match,”5 the joy o discovering the unamiliar

through new representational tools applied to what we

thought we have known.

So here is our galaxy: a central source point and all the

points that serve as it representational models, all spaced

at myriad distances rom the center and each other. Tese

representations are undesirably accompanied with their

respective noise, in a ellipsoidal construct, at whose edge

communicative capability ails. In this galaxy there are

only two types o star classes; tier-one, those that point

as best they can to the source, and tier-two—those that

convey the source things through the reliance on tier-one

representations. Why develope the tier-two types? Tis shall

be addressed through our chosen invisible source (pro-

oundness), through a more tangible source (Shakespeare’spoetic conceits); through the tier-one representations

(printed text o a particular Shakespeare sonnet), through

the tier-two representational (relational models o word

types and patterns).


4/29







TIER-ONE REPRESENTATIONS & THE SONNET FORM

Te patterns o poetic construction provide maniold op-

portunities or investigating its composed language under

aspects such as meanings, literacy, and musicality. Tis

can be done inormally, or through ormal keys, as Harold

Bloom provides in his opening sections o Te Best Poemsof the English Language. Bloom distills his exhaustive

capability into a brie guide or deciphering the figura-

tive language o a poem according to a concise taxonomy

o types (irony, synecdoche, metonymy and metaphor).6

Tese figurative devices, in turn, may trigger the reader’s

discovery o some pattern (intended by the author, or

possibly not) through visual- or audio-representational

patterns constructed o symbols. Tese symbols have no

inherent meaning, yet when arranged into decipherable

patterns what ormidable messages they may convey!

I present, such patterns become “activated” through

prior knowledge (ormal and experiential) that a viewerbrings to the representation o the poem. Te source

poem, being as it were a conceit within (or our examples)

the mind o Shakespeare, is no more. Yet, reading it now,

even though we are “as an unperected actor on the stage”

makes one become, in some little corner o their nervous

system, like Shakespeare.

All representations all under Pictorial, Quantitative,

Relational or Symbolic structures, or some assemblage o

these. Each o these our visualization types can be urther

divided into “high-constraint” and “low-constraint” ver-

sions, yielding eight total structures or patterns.7 Gener-

ally, one underlying structure grows in popularity and

utility as a desirable representational type until it becomes

something o the communicative standard or the media

and message in question. Obviously, visualized literature

depends upon symbols in context to yield inormativeness

and accompanying levels o expressiveness.

In brie, a pictorial high-constraint representation may

be a high-resolution image, while a low constraint picto-

rial representation would be a sketch; a high-constraint

quantitative might be a Cartesian matrix, a low con-

straint, a quantigraph (a device representing a quantity);

a high-constraint relational would be a table, spreadsheet,

or arrangement o cells, while a low-constraint would

simply be nodes connected in a social network diagramwith links. Symbols also ollow the high/low logic: with

high-constraint being elements such as phonograms (our

letterorm devices, specifically graphemes that stand in or

phonemes), as opposed to low-constraint devices such as

logos and ormal symbols—such as a skull and crossbones.

It is worth noting that some elements o our text (question

marks, exclamation marks) are low-constraint symbols

that carry their own independent meanings. Our ocus is

on high-constraint symbols, those used primarily or nar-

ration and supported through a very simple pattern: a line.

Poetry and prose are the art o the line. Tis line is

then broken, or aesthetic reasons, to enhance its poetic

character, or or technical reasons, to fit all the copy uponthe page. Tereore, constrained-symbolic language de-

pends upon a relational matrix or its ultimate display (un-

less it is one very long line o text). I one tightly controls

the length o these lines rom a schematic point o view

the text shifs—by the mere aspect o arrangement—rom

prose to a kind o poetry.

Language merely made visible does add important

intellectual dimensionality. Poems, such as sonnets, can

deliver new subtleties and complexities through the visible

medium. Te rhyme aspect is also a turning point o the

line, but this is not always necessary or even desirable as

Tomas Campion and many others argued.

8

Some poets(E.E. Cummings) greatly exploit the visual; concrete po-

etry requires it.

Shakespeare’s conceit, which he ormed as a sonnet,

is what Shakespeare’s publisher wished to have signified

via the medium o letters, these in turn could be rendered

through the technology o printing via inked and movable

types upon paper. Te resulting representation was merely

a simple string o symbols; the string being broken into

lines. Te breaks become part o poetic physics. Here, the

poetic physics is a sonnet: ten syllables (in most cases)

permitted per line, these lines grouped into three sets

o our each (, , ) and a couplet () o two lines

(providing the typically ourteen line example). In this

respect the symbol/linear pattern o the poem is contained

within a simple high-constraint relational structure: a

grid o cells with ten columns and ourteen rows. Tis is a

Shakespearean sonnet rom a pure, cold, schematic view.

Te representation is a tier-one type: it is as direct

as possibilities and convention permit to the conceit o

Shakespeare’s intent. Not to distant and not too noisy.

However, (at least) three things do provide unwelcome

noise in the effectiveness o this sonnet transer: one is

intentional obuscation on the author’s part, another is

the inadequacy o the reader to decipher the poem (the

singular lack o linguistic or interpretative skills, etc.), thelast being the collective “cultural drif” rom the time o

publishing until today. It is however, the best we have in

raw orm, a good tier-one representation.


5/29







TIER-TWO REPRESENTATIONS & SONNET SEQUENCES

ier-two representations may be defined by a number o

characteristics. First, they should be understood as more

distant rom the source that they represent. Factors o

accurate traceablity take a back seat to cognitive tracta-

blity. ier-two representations will only appeal to userswith significant prior-knowledge, or who are trained to

specifically understand this new representation. A tier-two

representation reveals the nature o its signified thing with

orms that are barely, or nothing like the source. A map o

the stars is tier-one, a table o their names, brightness, and

distance is decidedly tier-two.

For this reason tier-two representational devices

depend upon tier-one representations as the “final mile” to

the source, just as an airplane gets one to the outskirts o

the city with speed (but not accuracy) and a taxi takes one

through mid-town with accuracy (but not speed). Famil-

iarization, however, may overcome this, and the somelevel, begin the process o turning tier-two representation

into tier-one representation.

A third, most critical actor is that tier-one and tier-

two representations never share the same basemap (i.e. pic-

torial, quantitative, relational, or symbolic primary organi-

zational pattern). So i a tier one representation is pictorial,

tier-two representations are either quantitative, relational,

or symbolic at their heart. In the examples given in this

paper, we are building high-constraint relational basemaps

that support low-constraint symbols. ext is a composition

o high-constraint symbols.

Te last actor respecting tier-one representations is

particularly revealing, it requires us to return to the galaxy

o stars metaphor. ier-one representations may address

singular ideas, or comparative ideas within a collective,

however, tier-two representations point out o their galaxy

altogether, across a universe o galaxies, they are intrinsi-

cally comparative in their nature.

A tier-two representation emerges as a tool to compare

tier-one devices to each other. In the ullset o devices

shown Shakespeare’s collective, his universe o sonnets,

can suddenly be seen holistically. Just as a sonnet sequence

evokes a theme and a story across the set o poems, so

does (in a ar more objective, i emotionally-drained way)

the meta-visualization o tier-two collections. Each maybe read independently, but in total they orm a ascinating

universe that speaks to the ebb and flow o passions and

observations long ago ormulated in the genius o Shake-

speare. It is worth noting, in passing, that sonnet sequenc-

es were popular in the Renaissance, ollowing exemplars

laid down by the prototype sonnet-maker, Petrarch. Te

topic is generally unulfilled desire—lie’s model lesson.

In most sequences the love object is not consummated. A

grand exception is Shakespeare’s sequence. Shakespeare

maintains a wonderul tension by not revealing the names

o rivals and objects o his desire (ofen one in the same)—

this is a powerul tool as it allows the reader to substitute

himsel/hersel, riends, or enemies into the quagmire.Many sequences create characters out-o-touch with terra

firma: this antasy allows some o the concepts to become

readily metaphysical.

Let us return to our tier-two models and add another

aspect that ofen serves as the entire rational or the cre-

ation o such representations: new data. When a new field

o data becomes available an opportunity arises to provide

additional clarity or insight toward the source thing. In

many cases this permits the build-out o tier-one represen-

tations to a higher order. New data fields provide opportu-

nities or new insights—the goal o finding the unknown

rom the inormation one already thought they knew. Forour model such a set o data was envisioned, researched,

and extracted by Helen Vendler in her book Te Art of

Shakespeare’s Sonnets.9 Ms. Vendler, through nine years o

poetic analysis ocused on Shakespeare’s sonnets created

an ostensibly objective dataset. Tese she called, Keywords,

Defective Keywords, and Couplet ies. We supported these

layers with another series, Personal Pronoun Sets. It is

primarily based on these inormational types that the tier-

two representations displayed here are developed.

NOTES ON HELEN VENDLER’S KEYWORD MODEL

Developing relationships in a set o data, one that inher-

ently dislikes being quantified, poses a problem. A schol-

arly commentary aids in the process. Helen Vendler’s de-

tailed inspections o each o Shakespeare’s sonnets in

her book Te Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets allows or more

comprehensive understanding. Vendler suggests that “the

density o Shakespeare’s sonnet-structure is ofen best un-

tangled through giving a separate diagram”.10 Untangling

through symbolic distance is precisely the goal o this

exercise, on a grander scale. In her commentary, Vendler

creates diagrams o sonnet’s “ideational” aspects. In the

constructs below, important topological ideas serve as a

basemap. Working with the sonnet basemap, a sequence

o superfice layers within which Vendler’s observationso undamental linguistic keys are graphically highlighted

come into play, rendering each dense poem new represen-

tational orms. All o Vendler’s word classifications help us

penetrate Shakespeare sonnets. Te couplet tie is “a word

[and it’s variants] appearing in the body o the sonnet,

which is repeated in the couplet, […] and almost always

thematically significant”.11 Te keyword, is ”a complex


6/29



orm o repetition, [… it] connect[s the] our units o the

sonnet—three quatrains and a couplet—repeating in each

o these units. Te implementation o root words, labeled

as key words by Vendler, is extremely difficult, especially

in the couplet, where “closure is necessary.”12 Tus, she

deems these words or word variants the most influen-tial component to a sonnet’s meaning. (Tese keyword

constructs, in our devices, are visually amplified by an

additional graphic element o a white highlighting ring).

Finally, the “ghosts” or omissions o key words maniest

themselves in Vendler’s logic as deective keywords; de-

fined as the “absence o an expected word. [Vendler says]

”we are meant to notice the thematically relevant word

‘suppressed’ in the quatrain or couplet where we have sup-

posed it would appear.”13 Labeling each sonnet in which

key words and deective key words appear enables the user

to connect sonnets thematically. Similar sonnets begin to,

not only linguistically unite beyond their place in numeri-cal sequence and color cycle, but also in terms o graphical

patterning. In Vendler’s analysis o Shakespeare’s sonnets,

she states: “I aim to disclose some o the sonnet’s signifi-

cant eatures—imaginative, structural, semantic, syntactic,

phonemic, graphic—and to point out their cooperation in

a mimetic aesthetic result. Tat is, I assume that the ea-

tures o these poems are designed to cooperate with, rein-

orce, meaningully contradict, and play with one another.”

Overall, these poems work toward an assumed “aesthetic

novelty with respect to lyric tradition” creating something

new.14 Exploiting Vendler’s inventory o keywords, deec-

tive keywords, and couplet ties, and conjunction with

other inormational set allowed or the construction into

tier-two devices. Tese, in turn, allow or new perceptions

in the well trodden path o Shakespearean interpretation.

EARLY DEVELOPMENTS OF TIER-TWO DE VICE

Te initial intent or this project was to establish a means

to make Shakespeare’s sonnets visually quantifiable. Look-

ing beyond the basic structure o text, the goal was to

move into in a diagramatic model. Early iterations were

simply word counts o nouns, adjectives, and verbs. Treecurves, differing in circumerence, color, and length were

used to distinguish the word type. In the center o early

models colored circles reerenced five possible thematic

cycles present within each sonnet. Tese were distinctions

o love within Greek philosophy. Te fifh theme was the

theme o death. Te classifications o love used were: agape

(purple), philial (blue), erotic (pink) and storge (rust).

Other variations represented the top ten words used

in each sonnet. Te problem was that the distinction

lef much o the Shakespearean richness and word play

untapped and unprocessed. How could the value o words

be scored? What words could be used to encapsulate thethematic material o each poem? One o many o these

early models is shown in .

Finding a more objective word identification model

rom Helen Vendler’s Te Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets,

opened up a pathway. Using her systemic counting o

keywords, etc., in combination with the relational skel-

eton developed in ormer models, along with the personal

pronoun count began to reveal a pulse to the diagrammic

devices. Tis nearly completed the model. Afer many

additional tweaks and some ramework revisions, particu-

lary with color and minor shaping the model was slowly

advanced to a device similar to the final ones shown here

( ).

30

28

33

29

46

eye | hearteye | heart | part | right

: Early attempts for the tier-two devices using clas-

sical divisions of for the greek word love and verb, noun, and

adjective counts.

: A nearly finalized model of the tier-two devices

showing the placement of elements in a fourteen- segmented

structure. elements.


7/29







BUILDING THE FINAL KEY

Te final representational device is composed to convey

and interrelate, via patterns, eight eatures. (Te specifies

o these eature will be discussed presenty.) Te devices

serve especially well as a means to cross-reerence the

entire sonnet series as a pooled collective. It becomesquickly apparent that some poems seem “calmer” in their

constructs even though these might be conveying very

complex ideas. Te visually complex examples speak to

another kind o energy, namely, a very active philosophi-

cal, intellectual, or metaphysical subplot to the poem.

Othertimes, the devices seem to reveal natural symmetries

or intellectual dichotomies.

THE BASEMAP COMPONENTS

Each sonnet is represented within a circular area. Te

circle is divided into sections or each o the components

o the sonnet. In all but one case (sonnet ) theseinclude quatrains o our lines each, and a couplet o two

lines. Tereore the basemap is dived into our pies, three

o which occupy approximately degrees o a circle and

one that occupies approximately . degrees. (sonnet

is composed o six couplets, twelve degree sec-

tions). Tese are indicated by white breaks, lines, in a

gray field ( ).

Part o the joy in reading a sonnet is to uncover its

“turn,” a shif in the division, or “argument,” o the poem.

In many instances this might occur in the couplet. Some-

times there is more than one turn, the author leading the

reader to new insight, or rom one viewpoint to another.

Te turn o the poem in the early stages seemed to have

effect upon how keywords, deective keywords, or couplet

ties were dispersed in the sonnet, but this was a very sof

observation. It made sense as a cross comparative element

to take note o these principle turns. Most o the turns are

quite apparent, some are not so, all readers (and critics)

may not agree with certain decisions here. Te turns are

represented by a color shif in the base-map rom gray to

putty color ( ).

Te basemap was also marked with a circular, ad-

ditional division i the the presence o a keyword was

evident in the sonnet. Vendler’s analysis and interpreta-

tion identified sonnets with keywords. In most casesthese keywords are identical, shared in all quatrains and

the couplet. Sometimes they are more tenuous, such as

an anagram o time/might in sonnet 100. Regardless, the

devices are true to Vendler’s research and no variations are

taken orm her composite list.15 Te sonnets with key-

words are identified through the use o the circular white

drop-out band ( ).

: Basemap element revealing the quatrain turn.

: A break in the basemap indicate Vendler key-

words.

: Core basemap elements: quatrain I, quatrain II,

quatrain iii, and the couplet.


8/29







SUPERFICE ELEMENTS COMPONENT SETS

Positioned upon the superfice are elements that generate

insight via their contextual assemblage. is an

illustration o the matrix in which these elements may

be placed. Te matrix is divided into (excepting sonnet

) ourteen even segments; every segment is o equallyincreasing dimension, radiating rom the center o the cir-

cular diagram. Every segment represents one line rom the

sonnet. Te first division is at the twelve o’clock position.

Te first our segments, running clockwise, represent the

first quatrain. Te next our, segments five through eight,

represent the next quatrain, the next our, nine through

twelve, represent the third quatrain. Te last two segments,

thirteen and ourteen stand in or the sonnet.

Syllable divisions are not represented within the ma-

trix. Instead wherever a Vendler-identified keyword ele-

ment, deective keyword element, or couplet tie element is

reerenced within the sonnet an indicator o such is shown.Tis is also the case with elements within the personal

pronoun sets. Tereore, the curved bars, as seen in these

tier-two devices are representative o the act that one o

the identified elements is ound on that line o the poem.

Our next concern is the concentric circles themselves.

Tese concentric circles, shown in this grid as divided

bands (two thin bands orm a ring), are used to position

the elements according to their type. Te first ring is used

to position personal pronouns: I, me, my, and mine. Te

next ring positions personal pronouns: you, thou, thy,

thine, thee, and your. Te third ring positions: he, his, him,

she, hers, and her. I more than one such personal pronoun

is used on any one line, the line is split indicating quantity.

Beyond these inner rings is a break separating the

Vendler-elements rom the personal pronoun elements.

Tese rings, numbers our, five, six, and seven are used

to place keywords or broken keywords when they occur

within the identified line. Unlike with the pronoun sets, the

Vendler-elements simply “add up” rom the ourth, i one,

to the fifh, i two, etcetera. Tere is an exception: i the

same keyword (say, the word love) occurs twice (or more)

in the same line then the ring is split to indicate such

multiples. In some cases a plethora o Vendler-elements re-

quire indicators outside the grid, as can be seen with cou-

plet ties that exceed that number or the line in question. shows how a color indicator is used at the

center o the tier-two device to indicate what part o the

sonnet sequence the sonnet in question alls within. Te

scholarly consensus (another example o how repetition o

opinion trends a thing rom the subjective to the objec-

tive) applies three main cycles to Shakespeare’s ull sonnet

sequence. Tese include: Te Fair Youth cycle, the Dark

: Te color key device representing the cycle

within the sonnet sequence

: Indicators: for the personal pronoun elements:

st, nd, rd rings.

: Te relational matrix upon which all the super-

fice elements will be arranged.


9/29







Lady cycle, and the ending pair o sonnets, the Anacreon-

tic Narrative. o add urther distinction to Shakespeare’s

general thrust o concern within the Fair Youth cycle, two

sub-cycles (within Fair Youth) are identified: these are the

Procreation cycle at the very beginning, and that interlop-

er, the Rival Poet in the middle o the Fair Youth cycle.Te color code associated with the sonnet numbers

within the complete sequence are as ollows:

Tese collections are shown in complete sets within

this document.

Figures , , , and illustrate what is discussed

above as reerenced to the grid determining the correct

positioning o the elements. One can clearly decipher how

the rings support the taxonomy o symbol types. In Figure

x black devices are placed within the first three rings to

indicate personal pronouns as they relate to their presence

within the line specified. Again, split elements indicate

multiples o that type o personal pronoun (first, in the first

line, second, in the second line, and third, in the third line).

Figure x shows the presence o Keywords as identified

by Vendler. Note two things, first, they are in black, and

second, they are only present i the white indicator line is

also present. Next. Figure x shows the presence o Deec-

tive Keywords (so named and identified by Vendler and

indicate that the word does not occur in all the quatrains

plus the couplet as Keywords do.); these are always shown

in gray. In general the textual importance determines howthese are arranged when multiples occur within the same

line. Again, split elements indicate the same keyword (or

deective keyword) occurring on the exact same line.

Pale yellow: Procreation cycle within Fair Youth:01 through 17

Pale blue: Fair Youth resumed:18 through 77

Medium Tan: Rival Poet intervening Fair Youth:78 through 86

Pale blue: Fair Youth resumed:

87 through 126 Pale Mauve: e Dark Lady Cycle:

127 through 152

Bright Brick: e Anacreontic Narrative:153 & 154

: Te ring used to reference Defective Keyword

indicators as defined by Vendler.

: Te ring used to reference Couplet-ie indicators

as defined by Vendler.

: Te ring used to reference Keyword indicators as

defined by Vendler.


10/29







OBSERVATIONS CONCERN ING THE DEVICES

I only one sonnet is mapped a general deduction is di-

ficult to make. However, as a series much may be ascer-

tained. Te complete set o representations or each o

the sonnets is provided in this paper. (See pages

through ) Tis set is urther enhanced through a count-

ing and graphing o the element-counts within each cycle.

Tis provides an interesting “pulse” to the word-

interplay, or lack thereo; as words proceed across sonnets,

and sonnets proceed across their sequence. It is easy to see

that some cycles, or parts o the cycle, have more o this

intensity than others have. We leave it to persons ar more

versed in Shakespeare’s sonnets (or things Shakespearean)

to find what they may. In order to initiate this process the

next six pages provide minimal commentary, supported

with some excerpts rom specific authors or anthologicalsources dealing with Shakespeare’s sonnets. Tese pages

have several examples culled rom the complete collection

(though taken rom the same cycle, or part o the cycle).

Having baked this shepherd’s pie there comes the desire to

taste, and share a bite or two—the real objective however,

is to take the wares to market; where those more deserving

may reflect upon their potential and eke, yet another tiny

morsel out o the banquet which is Shakespeare.

K e y w o r d & b r o k e n k e y w o r d i n d i c a t o r s

P e r s o n a l p r o n o u n s e t s

Color indication forsonnet “turn”

Line indicator ofKeyword-set presence

Color indicator representing sonnet cycle within fullsequence

Line break indicatorbetween quatrains orcouplet

Dot indicator for couplet-tie

Te last in this series, Figure x, shows the couplet ties.

Tese are indicated as dots within the relevant lines (and

quatrains) and as they are associated with the couplets.

In summation these are the eight levels o these tier-two

high-constraint relational devices as they apply to Shake-

speare’s sonnets:

the nomenclature as it applies to sonnet (within the Dark Lady cycle). Note the Vendler-identified Keywords,

shown in boldface, and the Defective Keywords, shown in lightface.

Basemap: Quatrain and Couplet divisions: by shape

Basemap: Color indication of sonnet turn: by color

Basemap: Circular line indicator of Keyword presence: by “break”

Superfice:

Superfice:

Superfice:

Superfice:

Superfice:

Cycle type indicator: by color

Personal Pronoun Set indicators:by elements

Keyword indicators: by elements

Defective Keyword indicators: by elementsand value

Couplet Tie indicators: by dot elements


11/29







COMPARISONS WITHIN THE PROCREATION CYCLE

It is probably too dangerous to suppose that the collection

o visual (tier-two) devices that present us with the high-

level view o Shakespeare’s sonnet sequence reflect, by

their composition, the big themes that underlie the work.

And yet, there is something. In each particular cycle thereis, o course, an energy o a type ‹ this is why a consensus

exists that provides the cycle divisions in the first place.

For comparison, sonnet , , and are shown as de-

vices here. Tese reflect a “simple” device (in appearance),

a “complex” device and a device o compelling pattern.

Te basic theme, or what we will call “first observations” is

that there does exist something o a quality o voice within

the sonnet that their mappings point toward, or reflect.

In sonnet , the simplest in the cycle (see page

or how the cycle graphs out via “volume” o elements),

Vendler opens her comments with, “Tis beautiul sonnet

is the first to exploit the powerul seasonal metaphor.”

16

Tis directly speaks to the idea that the more quite map-

pings are ofen metaphorical and narrative.

In sonnet , that with pattern, Shakespeare plays with

the word look. Te pattern is evidenced by the concept

o the sun, looking down on man, but ultimately setting,

compared to having a son, so that lie does not set.

Sonnet scores high or its complexity, Vendler

notes that this sonnet employs Shakespeare’s “grand mac-

rocosmic scale, one that is more suited to philosophical

poetry than to the love-sonnet.”17 Tis backs, to a degree,

an observation seen in other cycles as well, that devices

with a very high number o elements trace into philo-

sophical/metaphysical boundaries. Another high volume

example, the last in the cycle, number also plays the

game o the philosophical. (Again, see page or the

graphing.) Tis poem leads with poise and delicacy to the

couplet, which directly inorms his beloved that she can

“live twice” through her offspring. He thus, most fittingly

climaxes the procreation cycle.

5

15you

7


12/29







COMPARISONS CONTINUING IN

THE FAIR YOUTH CYCLE (PART I)

Sonnets , , and build in element volume. Te

graph on page shows a pretty wild fluctuation o

intensity, but our concern is or this little series o sonnets.

Tese three “betrayal sonnets” deals with a cycle conciselycaptured in Te Arden Shakespeare, beginning with the

reerence to , the text inorms, “Te speaker loves the

young man so much that however much advantage the

youth takes o his affection he can do him no wrong; or

any wrong he does will be orgiven. Sonnets and en-

large the narrative implications: the youth has betrayed his

riend by taking one o the poet’s loves, i.e. Love-objects.”18

Tis is true tragedy, yet as Bernhard en Brinks asserted in

one o his amous lectures (translated by Julia Franklin),

“We see, then, how it is the greatest masterpieces

of the comic Muse that transgress the limits of thecomics the spectator does not become too vividly

conscious of the painful and hurtful side of the

ridiculous material presented to him. It seems clear

to us that the question whether a certain failing or

certain evil appears ludicrous, depends not only

upon the kind and degree of evil and the extent of its

influence, but very essentially upon the standpoint of

those who happen to be the spectators at the time.” 19

ed Brink is reerencing Shakespeare’s Comedies here,

but the point is parallel: note the closeness o the viewer

through the sequence. As the volume o the keyword ele-

ments and intensities ratchet up the viewer, that is, you,

the reader are brought urther away rom the direct imag-

ined observation into a philosophical observation. Te

game, supported through the increased volume o word

interplay, and away rom “quieter” narrative, shifs us

rom empathetic spectators to intellectual spectators. Te

devices reflect this shif in their intensity o elements.

41

42love

40


13/29







COMPARISONS WITHIN THE RIVAL POET CYCLE

Te rival poet group alls within the late middle o the air

youth collection. Tere are nine in the cycle, sonnet num-

bers through . Tey are shown as a little collection

on page (in the most beloved orm o the modernist, a

three-by-three construct!)A challenge o showing the tier-two representations

is that, though they are intentionally spatial, they are, as

with tier-one, linear in their unolding. Shakespeare’s son-

nets are a sequence even though scholars may debate the

ideal sequence. Our devices should be laid out in a line as

well, but the dictates o presentation deny this advantage

here. Te graphical lines associated with the ull collection

(pages through ) help to assuage this shortcoming o

noise through association.

Te graph on page presents the pulse o the rival

poets as they are seen through the nine tier-two represen-

tations. As one would, expect when dealing with a lovetriangle, there is denseness in the center rings that deal

with the personal pronoun sets, particularly so or number

, which has !

Despite some o the relatively high volumes seen in the

rival poet cycle, there is not the very high numbers else-

where, as in the dark lady cycle. Trough a comparison

o all the devices this becomes evidenced because there

is more o a dichotomous nature, which increases the

number o keyword elements, but not the philosophical/

metaphysical twistings which elevate the numbers to the

highest levels in the ull sequence.

Vendler notes (while discussing sonnet ), “Shake-

speare excels in a orm o verbal emphasis pointing up the

conceptual oppositions o his verse. His mind operates

consistently on the basis o antithesis.”20 Sonnet , the

one selected here has the ewest keyword elements in the

cycle. As seems to be the case with other devices with

ewer element the author is trying to get across a concept

(that the rival poet is messing with his muse!), the argu-

ment is complex, the words must be chosen to advance

such a argument. Te other selected here is , it is ornate,

rich, and repetitive in an anti-repetitive manner; it is

complex and the argument is neither linear nor emotional

as much as intellectual.


14/29







COMPARISONS CONTINUING IN

THE FAIR YOUTH CYCLE (PART II)

In this culling we again look at our three “types”: a simple

device, a device exhibiting pattern, and a complex model

(also including a pretty strong pattern). As with a good

number o the simpler sort, number deploys a meta-phorical reerence to nature and the narrative.

Te pattern evidenced in the tier-two example, number

, but not so evidenced when looking at the text is the

interplay o the first and second person (except or the two

couplet ties it is the personal pronoun set that illuminates

this device).

Te third, complex example, number is made rich

with Vendler’s identified Keyword say/sacred because it

is about things the author said respecting his proession

o love to the beloved. Again, though, the overt volume

o key elements speaks to something o what Bloom calls,

“the resonance o the opposite.”

21

Indeed, it is the tensiono these opposites, seemingly indicated by our most com-

plex renderings that pre-reveals their enigmatic poise.

exhibits both complexity and broken symmetry.

Tis is well elt in the poem, where there is a tension be-

tween what the author said previously, then true, to what

is being said now, now true ‹ thus making past statements

alse. But, as Vendler points out, there needs to be a sort

o love word that rises above the earlier and now current

proessions o love, the word is “grow.” (Vendler provides

several lines concerning how love best, or burn, or dearer

apply, but reerences the power o using grow/growth in

the couplet).22 Te Folger Shakespeare Library sums it this

way, “Te poet acknowledges that the very act that his

love has grown makes his earlier poems about ullness and

constancy o his love into lies.”23 It appears that the author

has gotten over the rival poet interlude. Tis would make

sense, his orgiveness deepens the passion, but this will be

tested in the next cycle.

Pages and present the graphing o the volumes

present in the devices, note the pulse revealed by the

tier-two representations that cannot be seen through the

textual, tier-one representations. It is not difficult to ollow

the building o energy, and then, a all-off beore the Dark

Lady cycle about to unold.

t

97

88


15/29







COMPARISONS WITHIN THE DARK LADY CYCLE

Te dark lady cycle exhibits a ecundity o passion exactly

what one would expect with such a conflicted author, an

author who has invested so much in asserting the perec-

tion o his beloved. o “witness” her promiscuity requires

a depth o philosophical and metaphysical twists in orderto jive with the earlier arguments. In the rival poet cycle,

Shakespeare dealt with the anguish o loss through the

acts o another. Now he grapples with a yet more keenly-

elt loss, his loss o aith in his beloved, and himsel. Tat

is what is signified here. Te solution, generally, is to turn

the judgments back upon himsel.

What we’ve reerred to as volumes volley in gyrating

crescendos through this cycle. One o the most intense

in the entire sonnet series, number , presents ag-

gressive escapism and blame on inability to see things as

they clearly are. Te opening o the sonnet is the warn-

ing, “O me!” No ewer letters could prepare us so well.As one might expect, the Keywords, including eye and

love, supported by Deective Key Words o true/alse and

sight, drive the circulating constructs. Te agent seems to

be tears: tears that obuscate clear sight, tears the author

sheds, and, perhaps, tears o the beloved which urther

blind the poet.24

Te graph on pages and , in their sheer intensity

o rise and alls bear out the wild pulse evidenced by the

combined key, deective key, personal pronoun series, and

couplet ties volumes. Compare these graphs to all the

other cycles.

From the near-silence o sonnet , to the explosion

which proceeds through the above mentioned , to the

crescendo with (our graph breaks its boundaries or

sonnet ), we view a kind o math-induced madness.

Sonnet is silent, though, only in its lack o ele-

ments as a visceral, metaphorical message-machine it

speaks volumes to the warnings o every moralizer, “Oh

how you will regret the actions o your passions in the

morning!” It is the morning-afer lament, every word

crafed to the message, a message that builds through lin-

ear examples toward collective depth o the argument. Te

sonnet does not need keywords, et al, it’s argument is too

human and grounded, no sel-delusions.

Rocketing up to , we can see the volume thatVendler expresses, “With this enormously comprehensive

poem, the sequence o the dark mistress is brought to an

end.”25 So, though is intense in its volume, raises

the bar, the argument is simple, “you are a liar, I am that

twenty times more so.” o set this correctly, to argue it

within the context o Shakespearean shoots and ladders,

requires the textual interplay so adroitly and magnificently

carried off here.

129


16/29







THE ANACREONTICS

Anacreontic reers to the style o poem that reerences the

Greek poet Anacreon. Tis, in turn, reers to a seven-

syllable epigamic, poetic line; the term points also, as here,

to the mythic narrative and subject matter. As Vendler

summarizes, “Te myth represents a contest o chastityagainst passion in which passion wins, its heat transerred

to the water that quenches it.”26 Booth notes, “Te Greek

epigram and those o its descendants… all have vague but

considerable potential or bawdy anatomical reerence.”27

Tese twinned sonnets are outliers to the others in the

sonnet series—perhaps to cool down afer the heat o the

final dark lady verses, or to generalize the idea that passion

cannot be cooled or quenched. Instead, it is merely “trans-

erred” to another place, such as a pool o water, which is a

ready metaphor or sexual reerences as indicated here.

Te two last poems are heavily endowed with deective

keywords, and has a complete keyword set as well. Itis o interest to note that both sonnets are not too dense

with personal pronouns, but very rich with couplet ties.

Te playulness and figurative twists that Shakespeare de-

rives and lays upon the Cupidic myth can be seen visually

dancing within the two diagrams. Shakespears’s final line

o the sonnet sequence, “Love’s fire heats water, water

cools not love.” sums up the conclusive pair o sonnets,

and the myth, succinctly. Tis conclusive line is represen-

tative o the keywords and deective keywords that Vendler

identified: fire, bath, love, and, fire and heat.

154

153


17/29








: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : :

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9

10 11 12

13 14 15

16 17

look

self

you

01 :

02 :

03 :

04 :

05 :

06 :

07 :

08 :

09 :

10 :

11 :

12 :

13 :

14 :

15

16 :

17 :

F AI R Y O UT H S

E R I E S P R O C R E AT I ON S UB S E R I E S : S

ONNE T 0 1 T HR O U GH S ONNE T 1 7


18/29








18 19 20

21 22 23

24 25 26

27 28 29

30 31 32

33 34 35

36 37 38

woman

eye show

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

18 :

19 :

20 :

21 :

22 :

23 :

24 :

25 :

26 :

27 :

28 :

29 :

30 :

31 :

32 :

33 :

34 :

35 :

36 :

37 :

38 :

P R O C R E AT I ON

S E R I E S WI T HI NF AI R Y O UT H S E Q U

E N C E ( S ONNE T 1 8 T HR O U GH S ONNE T 7 7 )


19/29








39 40 41

42 43 44

45 46 47

48 49 50

51 52 53

54 55 56

57 58 59

love day / see

eye / heart

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

39 :

40 :

41 :

42 :

43 :

44 :

45 :

46 :

47 :

48 :

49 :

50 :

51 :

52 :

53 :

54 :

55 :

56 :

57 :

58 :

59 :


20/29








60 61 62

63 64 65

66 67 68

69 70 71

72 73 74

75 76 77

self

have

beauty

thee

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

60 :

61 :

62 :

63 :

64 :

65 :

66 :

67 :

68 :

69 :

70 :

71 :

72 :

73 :

74 :

75 :

76 :

77 :


21/29








78 79 80

81 82 83

84 85 86

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : :

78 :

79 :

80 :

81 :

82 :

83 :

84 :

85 :

86 :

R I VAL P OE T W

I T HI NF AI R Y O UT H S E Q UE N C E ( S ONNE T 7 8 T HR O U GH S ONNE T 8 6 )


22/29








87 88 89

90 91 92

93 94 95

96 97 98

99 100 101

102 103 104

105 106 107

t

t

t

t t

t t

t

more / mar

one praise

t

t

t

t

tt

t

t

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

87 :

88 :

89 :

90 :

91 :

92 :

93 :

94 :

95 :

96 :

97 :

98 :

99 :

100:

101:

102:

103:

104:

105:

106:

107:

C ONT I N UAT I O

N OF Y O UT H S E Q UE N C E ( S ONNE T 8

7 T HR O U GH S ONNE T 1 2 6 )


23/29








108 109 110

111 112 113

114 115 116

117 118 119

120 121 122

123 124 125

126

t t

ill

t

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

108:

109:

110:

111:

112:

113:

114:

115:

116:

117:

118:

119:

120:

121:

122:

123:

124:

125:

126:


24/29








127 128 129

130 131 132

133 134 135

136 137 138

139 140 141

142 143 144

145

: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

: : : : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

127:

128:

129:

130:

131:

132:

133:

134:

135:

136:

137:

138:

139:

140:

141:

142:

143:

144:

145:

146:

147:

T HE DAR KL ADY S E Q UE N C E ( S ONNE T 1 2 7 T HR O U

GH S ONNE T 1 5 2 )


25/29








: : : :

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

148:

149:

150:

151:

152:

:

: : :

: : : :

153:

154:

T

HE ANA C R E ONT I C S ( S ONNE T 1 5 3 T

HR O U GH S ONNE T 1 5 4 )


26/29







BIOGRAPHY

William M. Bevington currently serves as Associate

Proessor o Inormation Mapping in the School o Art,

Media, and echnology at Parsons Te New School or

Design, Te New School, New York. He ormerly served

as the Executive Director or Parsons Institute o Inorma-tion Mapping, Chairman o the Communication Design

department at Parsons School o Design, and various

proessorial and instructional roles at his Alma Mater , Te

Cooper Union or the Advancement o Science and Art.

He is an inormation designer and inormation theorist

specializing in creating tools or the rapid assessment o

complex data. His first significant project was the Blackout

Procedures Manual or Con Edison in , and the last

was a major Geospatial Media Mash-up ool under U.S.

government contract entitled the Geospace and Media-

ool (). Mr. Bevington has developed toolsets or

transit systems applications, stock trading applications,and health management tools as a principle designer

at Spire Integrated Design, New York. He has lectured

worldwide, illustrated Graphic Designers Production

Handbook, co-authored Working with Graphic Design-

ers and Designing with ype with Jim Craig. He is also

the author o ypography: he Principles, A Basic Guide

to Using ype published by he Cooper Union.

Erik M. Freer is an undergraduate student at Te New

School in the dual degree program pursuing a rom

Parsons the New School or Design in Communica-

tion Design and a rom Eugene Lang College the

New School or the Liberal Arts in Writing. At Parsons

his ocus is on Inormation, Print, and ypography and

at Lang his ocus is on Poetry and Playwriting, with a

minor in Japanese. Erik possesses a deep interest in ideas

o mapping and the visual representation inormation.

Te Comparing Shakespeare’s Sonnet Sequence project

eatured in this paper was developed as part o an assign-

ment in opic: Inormation Design studio course taught

by Proessor Bevington. In addition to the project images,

Erik contributed associated captions and schematic plans,

as well as the sections entitled “Helen Vendler’s Keyword

Model” and “Developing the relational device.” Erik dedi-

cates his spare time to any and everything cultural andcreative he can produce and or experience.

NOTES

1 A close reading is an in-depth analysis o the text,

searching or and reflecting on patterns present within

the text and then asking questions about the significance

o said patterns. Patricia Kai, “How to Do a Close Read-ing, Writing Center at Harvard University, http://www.

as.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CloseReading.html

(accessed July , ).

2 Te typical Elizabethan use o the sonnet was in

a sequence o love poems in the manner o Petrarch.

Although each sonnet was an independent poem, partly

conventional in content and partly sel-revelatory, the

sequence had the added interest o providing something

o a narrative development. Perhaps the greatest o all

sonnet sequences is Shakespeare’s, addressed to a young

man and a “dark lady.” In these sonnets the supposed lovestory is o less interest than the underlying reflections on

time and art, growth and decay, and ame and ortune.

Encyclopædia Britannica Online, “Sonnet,” , http://

www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/554519/sonnet

(accessed July , ).

3 A “signifier” (signifiant): the orm which the sign

takes; and the “signified” (signifié): the concept it repre-

sents. Daniel Chandler,” Semiotics or Beginners,” Aberys-

twyth University, http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Docu-

ments/S4B/sem02.html (accessed July , ).

4 From a presentation in the early s by Gilman

Louie, ormer was o In-Q-el.

5 Match. Tis term is used in heuristics and usability

studies: “Te system should speak the users’ language,

with words, phrases and concepts amiliar to the user,

rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world

conventions, making inormation appear in a natural and

logical order.”Jakob Nielsen, http://www.useit.com/papers/

heuristic/heuristic_list.html (accessed July , ).

6 Harold Bloom, Te Art of Reading Poetry (New York:

Harper Perennial, ), i-iv.

7 William M. Bevington, “ , Part One: A

Visualization-based axonomy or Inormation Represen-

tation; Introduction and Overview” (New Nork: Parsons

Institute or Inormation Mapping, ); William M.

Bevington, “PIIMPaper oI, Part One: A Visualization

based axonomy or Inormation Representation: Intro


27/29







duction and Overview” (New York: Parsons Institute or

Inormation Mapping, ) http://piim.newschool.edu/_

media/pds/PIIM-PAPER _01-Pt3_Bevington-William.

pd.

8 “Wherein it is demonstratiuely prooued, and by ex-ample confirmed, that the English toongwill receiue eight

seuerall kinds o numbers, proper to it sele, which are all

in this booke set orth, and were neuer beore this time by

any man attempted.” Tomas Campion, Te Art of English

Poesie, http://extra.shu.ac.uk/emls/iemls/resour/mirrors/

rbear/poesie.html (accessed July , ).

9 Helen Hennessy Vendler, Te Art of Shakespeare’s

Sonnets (Cambridge, : Belknap o Harvard University,

).

10

Ibid., xvii. xvii.

11 Ibid., xiv.

12 Ibid., xv.

13 Ibid., xvi.

14 Ibid., xiii.

15 Vendler, Te Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets, –.

16 Vendler, Te Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets, .

17 Ibid, .

18 Kathererine Duncan Jones, ed., Te Arden Shake-

speare: Shakespeare’s Sonnets (Te Arden Shakespeare,

), .

19 Bernhard en Brink, Five Lectures on Shakespeare,

trans. Julia Franklin (London: George Bell and Sons,

), .


21 Harold Bloom, Te Art of Reading Poetry (New

York: Harper Perennial, ), .


23 Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine, ed. Shake-

speare’s Sonnets and Poems ( Folger Shakespear Library,

Washington Square Press, New York etc., , ), .

24 Stanley Wells, ed. Te Oxford Shakespeare, Te

Complete Sonnets and Poems ( Oxord University Press,New York, , reprinted ), .


26 Ibid, .

27 Stephen Booth, ed. Shakespeare’s Sonnets ( Yale

University Press, , reprinted ), .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bloom, Harold. Te Best Poems of the English Lan- guage. New York: Harper Collins, .

Bloom, Harold. Te Art of Reading Poetry. New York:

Harper Perennial, .

Chandler, Daniel ”Semiotics or Beginners,” Aberyst-

wyth University. Last Modified January , . http://

www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/sem02.html. Ac-

cessed July 20, 2011).

Encyclopædia Britannica, “sonnet,” Encyclopedia Bri-

tannica Online. Last Modified . http://www.britan-

nica.com/EBchecked/topic/554519/sonnet. Accessed July

, .

Kai, Patricia. “How to Do a Close Reading,“ Writing

Center at Harvard University, Last Modified 1998. http://

www.as.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CloseReading.

html. Accessed July , .

Shakespeare, William. Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Edited

with Analytic Commentary by Stephen Booth. New Ha-

ven: Yale University, .

Shakespeare, William. Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Editedby Katherine Duncan Jones. London: Tomson Learning,

.

Shakespeare, William. Shakespeare’s Sonnets and Po-

ems. Edited by Barbara A. Moway and Paul Werstine. New

York: Washington Square, .


28/29







Shakespeare, William. Te Complete Sonnets and Po-

ems. Edited by Colin Burrow. London: Oxord University,

.

Shakespeare, William. Te Sonnets. Edited by Stephen

Orgel with an Introduction by John Hollander. New York:Penguin, .

Sidney, Sir Philip. Te Poems of Sir Philipp Sidney. Ed-

ited by William A. Ringler, Jr. London: Oxord University,

.

en Brink, Bernhard. Five Lectures on Shakespeare.

ranslated by Julia Franklin. London: George Bell and

Sons, .

Vendler, Helen Hennessy. and William Shakespeare.

Te Art of Shakespeare’s Sonnets. Cambridge, : Belknapo Harvard University, .

IMAGE REFERENCES

: Shakespeare Sonnet original

acsimile as included in Te Art o Shakespeare’s Son-

nets.

: A modern typesetting o Sonnet as

interpreted by Helen Vendler in Te Art o Shakespeare’s

Sonnets.

: Shakespeare Sonnet original

acsimile as included in Te Art o Shakespeare’s Sonnets.

: A modern typesetting o Sonnet as

interpreted by Helen Vendler in Te Art o Shakespeare’s

Sonnets.


29/29



ILLUSTRATION FOR NOTE 7: GRID PATTERNS (FROM VT-CAD) AND THEIR UTILITY FOR INTERRELATABILITY

distorted maps,illustrations

satellite imagery,

photographs,

symbols scaled one to another

to reflect quantities

bar charts, line graphs

stack graphs

node-and-link diagrams,

networks

spreadsheets, tree maps,

tables

ideographs, pictographs

letters, glyphs, Morse code,

braille, binary code

PICTORIALSemi-constrained

PICTORIAL

Constrained

QUANTITATIVE

Unconstrained

QUANTITATIVE

Constrained

RELATIONAL

Semi-constrained

RELATIONAL

Constrained

SYMBOLIC

Unconstrained

SYMBOLIC

Constrained

:

lines of text are organized within a

relational matrix

symbols representing words or ideas

can provide “high-level” view of mor

specific language

constrained symbols, such as text in

alignment, is used for generating

visible language