Sonnet 17: Who Will Believe My Verse in Time to Come

Sonnet 17 closes the procreation sequence by admitting that poetry alone cannot do what it needs to do — and that a child alone cannot either.

Sonnet 17 (Full Poem)

Who will believe my verse in time to come,
If it were filled with your most high deserts?
Though yet, heaven knows, it is but as a tomb
Which hides your life and shows not half your parts.

If I could write the beauty of your eyes,
And in fresh numbers number all your graces,
The age to come would say, “This poet lies;
Such heavenly touches ne’er touched earthly faces.”

So should my papers, yellow’d with their age,
Be scorn’d, like old men of less truth than tongue,
And your true rights be term’d a poet’s rage
And stretched metre of an antique song:

But were some child of yours alive that time,
You should live twice, in it and in my rhyme.

---

At a Glance

Here are the key facts about Sonnet 17 for quick reference.

---

Why It Still Matters

Seventeen sonnets. Seventeen variations of the same argument: reproduce, or beauty dies. The youth has not moved. And now, in the closing poem of the sequence, Shakespeare admits for the first time that his own instrument — the poem — is not enough.

The first twelve lines of Sonnet 17 are a sustained act of self-undermining. The verse is a tomb. Future readers will call it a lie. The yellowed papers will be dismissed as an old man’s exaggeration. Everything the speaker has been building across the procreation sequence is here declared insufficient.

But the poem does not end in defeat. The couplet proposes a solution — and the solution is not one thing but two, held together: the child and the rhyme, biology and art, neither adequate alone. “You should live twice, in it and in my rhyme.” Twice. Not once through the child, not once through the poem, but twice through both together. Each one corroborates the other. The child proves the poem told the truth; the poem gives the child’s beauty a language.

This negotiated double solution is Sonnet 17’s most original move, and it prepares the ground for Sonnet 18’s decisive pivot — the poem that drops the child entirely and bets everything on the verse.

---

Key Themes

Sonnet 17 closes the procreation argument by examining — with unusual honesty — what the argument has been resting on and what it lacks.

The Inadequacy of Poetry as Testimony. The poem opens not with praise but with doubt about praise: who will believe the verse in time to come? This is a remarkable opening for the seventeenth poem in a sequence. After sixteen sonnets of argument and imagery, the speaker stands back and asks whether any of it will be credited. The admission that the verse is “but as a tomb / Which hides your life and shows not half your parts” is the sequence’s most honest statement about what poetry can and cannot do. A tomb marks a presence; it does not restore one. Even the best poem is a marker, not the thing itself.

The Imagined Future Reader as Sceptic. The poem’s second quatrain introduces an imagined reader — the sceptical future audience who will call the poet a liar. This is an unusual rhetorical move: Shakespeare populates his poem with its own critics before they have had a chance to speak. “Such heavenly touches ne’er touched earthly faces” is what the future reader will say, and the complaint is philosophically interesting — the youth’s beauty is so exceptional that accurately describing it will sound like exaggeration. The poem that tells the truth will be disbelieved; the poem that moderates the truth will fail to capture it. There is no winning position for the poet if the youth does not provide living corroboration.

The Child as Corroborating Witness. The couplet’s solution reframes the child’s role. In the earlier procreation sonnets, a child was the vehicle of beauty’s continuation — the heir who carries forward what the father possessed. In Sonnet 17, the child is a witness. Its function is evidentiary: it proves to future readers that the poet’s description was accurate. The child’s face — bearing the father’s features — testifies to what the poem claims. Without that testimony, the poem stands alone against scepticism. With it, art and biology together make a case that neither could make independently.

---

Key Literary Devices

The poem works through three interlocking images, each one a different way of thinking about the problem of preserving beauty across time.

The Tomb Metaphor. “It is but as a tomb / Which hides your life and shows not half your parts” — the tomb is one of the sequence’s most recurring figures, but here it is applied not to the youth’s fate but to the poem itself. The verse is a tomb: it marks the site of something that was alive but does not restore the life. It shows the shape of what was there — the outline, the inscription — but not the substance. This is a more damaging self-criticism than anything in the earlier sonnets. The speaker is not saying the poem is bad; he is saying that even the best poem is a monument to an absence.

The Yellowed Papers. “My papers, yellow’d with their age, / Be scorn’d, like old men of less truth than tongue” — the image of the ageing manuscript introduces time as the poem’s own enemy. The papers that carry the verse will themselves decay and grow suspect. “Old men of less truth than tongue” — those who talk more than they know, whose testimony is discounted because of their age and tendency to embroider. The yellowed papers become this kind of witness: old, possibly unreliable, associated with a past that the future cannot verify. The poem imagines its own future discrediting.

“Stretched Metre of an Antique Song.” The phrase compounds the image of yellowed papers. Not only will the verse look old; it will sound old — its style marking it as the work of a previous era, its praise appearing “stretched,” inflated, artificially extended beyond what truth requires. Shakespeare is imagining how his own work will appear to readers who cannot calibrate its praise against the reality it describes. The antique song cannot prove itself; it requires a living witness.

“Twice.” The single most important word in the couplet, and perhaps in the entire procreation sequence. “You should live twice, in it and in my rhyme” — not once, not continuously, but twice. The doubling is not mere emphasis; it is the poem’s structural solution. Two separate modes of survival, each insufficient alone, together constitute something adequate. The child lives in the world; the rhyme lives in the poem. Neither is complete without the other, and together they provide the redundancy that time requires — if one fades, the other may survive; if both survive, each confirms the other.

---

Stanza by Stanza

Lines 1–4. The opening question is arresting precisely because it is self-directed: not “who will believe you” but “who will believe my verse.” The speaker makes himself the unreliable party. “Your most high deserts” — deserts meaning merits, what the youth is owed in the way of praise. The verse is filled with these merits, or would be if the speaker wrote his best — and yet, heaven knows, even his best is only a tomb. The concession — “heaven knows” — is a small oath of sincerity that makes the admission more pointed. He is not falsely modest. He genuinely believes the poem cannot do what he wants it to do. “Shows not half your parts” — parts meaning qualities, features, aspects of the person. The poem is half at best.

Lines 5–8. The conditional — “if I could write the beauty of your eyes” — introduces the hypothetical of perfect description. What if the verse were as good as it could possibly be? The result: the age to come would call the poet a liar. “Such heavenly touches ne’er touched earthly faces” — this is the future reader’s verdict, and it is delivered inside quotation marks, which gives it unusual vividness. Shakespeare hears the criticism before it is made. The youth’s beauty is so superlative that accurate description sounds like invention. The poet is trapped between honesty (which will be disbelieved) and moderation (which will fail to capture the truth).

Lines 9–12. The third quatrain extends the hypothetical into the material future. Not just that future readers will disbelieve, but that the physical medium of the poem — the papers themselves — will age into unreliability. “Yellow’d with their age” — the manuscript decays; its age becomes evidence against its claims. “Scorn’d, like old men of less truth than tongue” — the simile is sharp: old men who exaggerate, whose testimony is dismissed because the habit of exaggeration is assumed. “Your true rights be term’d a poet’s rage” — “true rights” means the praise the youth genuinely deserves; “poet’s rage” is the stock figure of the poet carried away by passion into extravagance. The youth’s actual qualities will be classified as the speaker’s distortion. “Stretched metre of an antique song” — the verse will seem both stylistically dated and substantively inflated, doubly discredited.

Lines 13–14. “But were some child of yours alive that time” — the conditional is gentle, almost tender, after twelve lines of anxiety. The child, if present, changes everything. It is a living document, a piece of evidence that the poem’s claims were founded. “You should live twice” — the double survival is the couplet’s gift. The child carries the face into the future; the rhyme carries the description. Together they constitute what neither can constitute alone: a witnessed, verified, corroborated beauty. The final phrase — “in it and in my rhyme” — gives equal weight to both, refusing to privilege art over biology or biology over art. The procreation sequence ends not with a hierarchy but with a partnership.

---

Analysis

Sonnet 17 is the strangest closing poem in the procreation sequence because it is the most self-defeating. After sixteen sonnets of sustained argument — accusing, projecting, indicting, mediating, philosophising, declaring war — the speaker arrives at the last poem and admits that his primary weapon is inadequate. The verse is a tomb. The yellowed papers will be scorned. The poet’s rage will displace the truth. Everything the sequence has been doing is here declared insufficient.

This admission is not rhetorical modesty. It is the poem’s honest assessment of what the preceding sixteen sonnets have actually produced: documents that, in the future, will stand alone against scepticism without the youth there to confirm them. The imagined future reader is the sequence’s most uncomfortable invention — a person who will read everything Shakespeare has written and dismiss it as exaggeration. The reader whom Shakespeare is most afraid of is the reader of his own poems.

The couplet’s solution — the child and the rhyme together — is not the triumphant conclusion that the sequence’s rhetoric might lead one to expect. It is a practical arrangement between two inadequate options. Neither the child nor the poem is sufficient; together they are just enough. “Twice” is the right word not because it means more than once but because it means two separate modes of survival operating in parallel, each one covering the other’s weakness.

This is what makes Sonnet 17 the necessary predecessor to Sonnet 18. In Sonnet 17, poetry requires the child to validate it. The speaker cannot trust his own verse. One poem later, in Sonnet 18, the child has vanished entirely — “Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?” makes no mention of reproduction — and the verse stands alone, confident in itself, claiming permanent life for the youth without biological assistance. The difference between the two poems is the difference between uncertainty and conviction. Sonnet 17 is where the uncertainty is admitted in full. Sonnet 18 is where it is overcome — or at least where Shakespeare chooses to proceed as if it has been.

The sequence’s final procreation argument is therefore not a conclusion but a transition. It closes one argument by exposing its limits and opens the space for a different and bolder one. What follows in Sonnet 18 is possible only because Sonnet 17 was honest enough to say: this, alone, is not enough.

---

Related Sonnets

Three sonnets speak directly to the concerns of Sonnet 17.

Sonnet 15: The earlier pivot point, where the speaker first declares war on time and claims to engraft the youth new in verse. Sonnet 15’s confidence — “I engraft you new” — is precisely what Sonnet 17 withdraws: the verse alone, it turns out, cannot be trusted. The two poems together show the arc of the speaker’s confidence across the final procreation sonnets: declaration in Sonnet 15, doubt in Sonnet 17, resolution in Sonnet 18.

Sonnet 18: The immediate successor and the poem that resolves Sonnet 17’s uncertainty by dropping it. Where Sonnet 17 says the verse requires the child to be believed, Sonnet 18 says the verse is sufficient: “So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see, / So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.” No child, no corroboration, no conditional. Reading the two sonnets consecutively is the single most illuminating experience the sequence offers about how Shakespeare’s thinking changed.

Sonnet 55: The most confident of all the poetry-as-immortality sonnets, and therefore the furthest from Sonnet 17’s anxiety. “Not marble, nor the gilded monuments / Of princes shall outlive this powerful rhyme” — the verse is permanent; everything else is temporary. Sonnet 17 is the shadow that Sonnet 55 refuses to acknowledge, the self-doubt that the later, more confident poem has entirely set aside.

Share This Page