Although written centuries apart and under completely different social conditions, Plato's Phaedrus and many of William Shakespeare's sonnets share distinct similarities . The most obvious and superficial correlation is that each describes a relationship (sexual or otherwise, depending on your reading of Shakespeare) between a young boy and an older man. The type of bond described in Phaedrus falls into the category of Ancient Greek pederasty: put simply, pederasty was a mutually beneficial relationship between an older man and a younger boy, in which the boy is intellectually guided by the man in return of sexual obedience. While it may seem outlandish today, this practice was surprisingly common among Athenian scholars such as Plato and his colleagues. While the relationship Shakespeare described is not considered pederasty, it is important to note that in its own way it involved an older, cultured man and a young boy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Setting aside the fact that both pieces partially revolve around same-sex relationships, a second similarity emerges. Both Shakespeare and Plato use the image of the mirror (or "glass," in Shakespeare) to help portray their relationships. While this may initially seem like a positive and romantic comparison, further analysis of each work reveals that this concept can also have harmful implications. In Sonnet XXII, Shakespeare begins, “My mirror will not convince me that I am old, till youth and you are of the same date” (10). Here, the narrator essentially states that, although his mirror shows his age, he feels young because his beloved is young. This feeling can be commonly found in the most contemporary artistic professions of love, from Frank Sinatra's "You Make Me Feel So Young" to The Cure's "Lovesong" ("you make me feel like I am young again whenever I'm alone with you". However, in this sonnet, Shakespeare goes even further with the analogy. He suggests that the reason he feels so young is not just because of the age of his beloved, or for the strength of their love, but because they actually exchanged hearts. Now he really has the heart of a little boy, "[how] can I be older than you?" he asks, obviously rhetorically (10). So, in this case, the older lover is made young not only because the beloved's youth rubs off on him, but because the beloved has actually given a part of himself to the beloved. lover. The final couplet of the sonnet concludes with Shakespeare proclaiming the permanence of this exchange of hearts, saying "[t]hou hast given me thine, not to give it again" (11). Shakespeare insinuates that he and his lover will be bound together forever. The lines that separate the lover from the beloved begin to blur; if one has the other's heart, then is he really himself? Or is he simply a combination of the two beings, two souls living in one body? Through this use of the poetic metaphor of the mirror, Shakespeare begins the dissolution of any sense of separation between lover and beloved which continues in many other sonnets about this particular beloved sonnet XXIV, where Shakespeare states that his “true image” of the beloved resides in the “shop of his bosom” (11). By stating that the only true representation of his beloved is not in the boy himself, but in him, Shakespeare takes the lack of separation between the two a step further. Although it is not explicitly mentioned in the sonneta further possibility, one could hypothesize that the same phenomenon occurs in reverse: the only true image of the poet-lover exists in his beloved. Therefore, neither is complete without the other. Furthermore, the final word of the poem, “heart,” seems to intentionally recall the mention of hearts in Sonnet XXII. Perhaps it is a subtle reminder that the two lovers still possess each other's hearts. The lack of separation between lover and beloved reaches its most complete and problematic state in sonnet XLII. Shakespeare begins the poem in a state of grief over his belief that his boyfriend and his mistress have also become lovers. But, in the fifth line, he decides to “excuse” their actions (19). His reasoning for this seemingly strange forgiveness is that the boy loves the woman only because he himself loves her, and the woman "suffer[s]" the boy only so that he will "approve" of her (19). While one might view this part of the poem as evidence of extreme narcissism, a more nuanced reading, reminiscent of the previous two sonnets discussed in this article, supports a different conclusion. It seems that, in Shakespeare's mind, he and the boy have become so intrinsically linked that they even harbor the same desires, not only for each other, but also for other individuals outside of their relationship. The final couplet again evokes a sense of narcissism, which may well be present, but it also contains a clear statement of the unity of the lover and the beloved in the phrase: "I and my friend are one" (19). While this idea has obviously been insinuated before, Shakespeare never expressed it in such clear terms. But with maximum unity comes problems: Shakespeare is certainly jealous of the boy's relationships (real or otherwise) with the woman. This sense of jealousy is felt in the previous sonnet, XLI, in which the narrator accuses the boy of committing “wrongs,” “backsliding,” and “being false” (18, 19). It therefore seems that the fact that lovers are mirror images of each other can lead to problems in the relationship, as well as a potential identity crisis. The boy, after all, seems to desire the woman only because Shakespeare does, not because he himself is truly interested in her. In the Phaedrus, Plato uses the mirror metaphor in ways that converge and diverge from Shakespeare's use. When he evokes the mirror, it is in Socrates' second speech, when the philosopher is discussing a boy's emerging desire for an older man. The boy can “see himself in his mistress as in a mirror” (255d). Therefore, the boy's love for the man allows him to see part of himself in the man, just as Shakespeare is able to see his lover's youth in himself in Sonnet XXII. Plato also states that "the image of love...dwells within him [the boy]" (255d). So, not only can the boy see himself in the man, but he can also see the man in himself. This is quite similar to the scenario in Sonnet XXIV, in which Shakespeare holds a metaphorical painting of his mistress. Here Plato uses the image of the mirror to show how a man and a boy in an ideal pederastic relationship are intrinsically intertwined. Despite these similarities, there is an important difference in how this metaphor is implemented. Unlike what happens in Shakespeare, the two are united even before their relationship fully begins. Although the boy sees himself in his mistress, he is at first “not conscious of the fact” (255d). The boy is deeply confused about what is happening; he is “in love” but does not know “with whom” (255d). Perhaps this change is due to the change of perspective: Shakespeare's sonnets are from the man's point of view, while this part of Plato's work describes the emotions of.