A Lustful Seduction in To His Coy Mistress

Seduction most commonly refers to the use of sexual desire in order to persuade an object of affection to change their behavior and meet the desire of their seducer. Andrew Marvell’s ever so passionate poem, “To His Coy Mistress”, entirely implies the motive to bed a young lady (531). The question raised however, is just what is the attitude of the speaker towards his mistress? Is he acting out of love or lust? And who indeed is the narrator? Could it possibly be Andrew Marvell or an imaginary character that readers can be swept away into the magical enchantment of his lyrical poetry?

The foremost indication as to who the narrator may be is in the title. The title is: To Coy His Mistress, not: To Coy My Mistress. For in that case, the word “my” in the title would portray that Marvell was writing a personal piece, and as it is known, it is not. Perhaps it was Marvell’s intent to satisfy readers by creating an immortal imaginary lover as the protagonist. Therefore, allowing readers to be in awe of his magnificent language and take pleasure in the intentions behind it (531). But just what are those intentions?

Is this dominant male’s intention toward the mistress out of love or lust? What the narrator does clearly portray to the audience is that this is a straight forward poem. The male says that, if immortal, he would with pleasure spend all the time on heavens and earth wooing his mistress. But, time is not immortal and nor are they, that he suggest she willingly give herself to him and fulfill his seize the day urgency (531). Using clever literary devices and enchanting imagery the scene is set for him to go forth with his seduction.

The persuasive seduction begins in the narrators high remarks of his mistress,

An hundred years should go to praise

Thine eyes, and on thy forehead gaze,

Two hundred to adore each breast,

Bust thirty thousand to the rest.

An age at least to every part,

And the last age should show your heart. (13-18)

Such a whimsically beautiful description, could only be written out of love, correct? If he loved her for all of her entirety why would he write the following stanza?

For, Lady, you deserve this state,

Nor would I love at lower rate. (19-20)

It is here that it can begin to be questioned if he truly means all he declares? If he speaks so highly of his mistress why would he not love her at any lower rate and love her for all that she is?