Culture
Mirra Andreeva’s tennis rise looked inevitable. Then Conchita Martinez sped it up
INDIAN WELLS, Calif. — Conchita Martinez, one of the queen bees of tennis, had done just about everything there was to do in the sport.
She had won Wimbledon. She had coached Garbine Muguruza to win Wimbledon. She had won five Federation Cup titles as part of Spain’s women’s national team, going on to captain the team and then to run the entire tournament, by which time it was known as the Billie Jean King Cup. She found time to captain the men’s national team in the Davis Cup, too.
But last spring, a new type of opportunity arrived: molding a teenager with the chance to be a generational talent. Did she want to coach Mirra Andreeva, the Russian already making waves on the WTA Tour at 16?
Muguruza was in her early twenties when Martinez helped guide her to the Wimbledon title in 2017. There’s only so much a coach can do at that point. Coaching a teenager is a chance to help define their tennis for the better, perhaps forever. It’s also coaching a teenager … yikes!
Not really. A year later, Andreeva, 17, is the toast of tennis. She is the ascendant player on the WTA Tour, on a 10-match winning streak that brought her a debut WTA 1,000 title in Dubai, UAE, and took her into the top 10 of the rankings for the first time. Coco Gauff did not win one of those titles, one rung below a Grand Slam, until she was 19.
She has beaten all comers in that streak: Iga Swiatek, the world No. 2 and the dominant player in the sport the past three years, was demolished in Dubai. Andreeva beat Elena Rybakina there too, and when she played the 2022 Wimbledon champion again at Indian Wells on Tuesday night, it wasn’t even competitive. Andreeva produced a 6-1, 6-2 masterclass.
Thursday afternoon brought tighter competition against Elina Svitolina, a former world No. 2, but the same result: 7-5, 6-3 to the young Russian. Andreeva didn’t just win. She confused and beguiled an opponent 13 years her senior, moving Svitolina around the court, interspersing drop shots with power and angles in a way that teenagers rarely do. They are supposed to be one- or two-dimensional in their first years, and then develop an arsenal.
And then came Friday, a rematch with an extra-motivated Swiatek, still smarting from the loss last month in Dubai and trying to win a tournament for the first time since the French Open last year. She blasted her way into their semifinal with her usual brutal efficiency. Surely this was too tall a task for Andreeva, especially as she kept slipping behind in her service games, setting up moment after moment when Swiatek’s opponents so often crumble.
Andreeva did the opposite of that, in a flurry of those flat, cross-court and down-the-line backhands that Swiatek couldn’t touch. Or she hung in rallies until Swiatek’s impatience got the better of her and the former world No. 1 sent forehands wide and backhands into the net. Swiatek had inroads in nearly all of Andreeva’s service games, but she rarely took them to break points. Soon, she was swatting balls in anger and snapping at her coaches. Andreeva, cool and collected and courageous when it counted most, was marching into the final, having won fewer points and been under more pressure.
“I don’t know why I felt so much confidence,’ Andreeva said in her post-match news conference.
That may have something to do with the 52-year-old Spanish woman sitting in Andreeva’s box, often with a resting grin-face as she watches her latest charge. Andreeva said Wednesday that she was always smaller than her competition growing up — at 5ft 9in (175cm), she isn’t anymore — and that forced her to find ways to win without overwhelming power. She learned to use her legs, to counterpunch and to spin the ball in all directions. Those attributes propelled her during her breakout tournaments, the 2023 Madrid Open and the 2024 Australian Open, where she put top players to the sword and puzzled lost positions into winning ones.
Martinez, Andreeva said, has taken those skills to a different, more aggressive level. Now she uses her tricks on offense as well as defense.
“Conchita is helping me to not be defensive all the time, when I have a chance to step in and try to be aggressive and to go for my shots,” she said in her news conference after beating Svitolina. “It’s working pretty good.”
It is. In 2025, Andreeva is winning a lower proportion of return points than she did in 2024, according to data collated by Tennis Abstract. She’s making fewer of her first serves. But she is winning a higher proportion of points behind those serves — 69 percent vs. 64 — and her dominance ratio, which divides the percentage of return points won by the percentage of serve points lost, has increased from 1.14 to 1.22 despite her drop-off on return. She is dictating more than she is being dictated to.
Beyond the results, Martinez has evolved into an Obi-Wan Kenobi to Andreeva’s Luke Skywalker, but only sort of. Skywalker never really tried to prank Kenobi as Andreeva often does Martinez, including Wednesday afternoon, when her coach was attempting to have a quasi-serious conversation with a journalist.
Cue the goofy faces and poses about 15 feet behind said journalist, attempting to mess with Martinez’s game face. Mission accomplished. Then off went a giggling Andreeva, simultaneously embarrassed and thrilled to have one of the legends of the sport kvelling about her.
Oh, to be 17 and have it all happening for you, in ways that sometimes even Andreeva does not understand.
“I don’t know why people are supporting me this much because honestly, when I was playing in U.S., my results were not great,” she said in her post-match news conference after easing past Rybakina. Andreeva lost in the first round in her only previous appearance here last year and lost in the second round in her two U.S. Open appearances.
“People are so energetic,” she said. “It kind of lights me up.”
Once that happens, watch out. Here comes a drop shot on an angle, followed by a whistling topspin lob. Or another searing, flat backhand diving onto the knot of the singles sideline and shooting off the court. Or, and perhaps most often, there’s her forehand squash-shot slice, which converts a position of stress into one of control.
In Andreeva, Martinez has found a near perfect muse, a player who aspires to play with the creativity that Martinez had, with her own style of quiet determination and passion. Andreeva barely had a slice a year ago. Now, she can use it for defensive or offensive shots. Martinez wants her to develop a heavier forehand with more spin to make it more difficult for an opponent to get the ball back. She’s working with her to play around with different trajectories, “instead of just hitting flat from nowhere.”
She wants her to have choices and is trying to teach her how to make the good ones.
“She’s not making a lot of stupid decisions on the court,” Martinez said. “It’s about having the good choices, waiting for the right ball, to compete against any player.”
Mirra Andreeva has added attacking shots to her game in recent months. (Clive Brunskill / Getty Images)
Coach-player relationships can be overrated in tennis, a sport where there are few chances for a real tactical discussion and no timeouts. Plenty of players run through coaches like toilet paper, jettisoning them at the first patch of poor results.
There are some relationships, though, that evolve into so much more than discussions about forehands and backhands, serves and returns. Carlos Alcaraz has one of those with Juan Carlos Ferrero, Martinez’s compatriot and a former world No. 1. Ferrero has guided Alcaraz for seven years, since he was 14.
Andreeva and Martinez have some way to go to catch up with them, but they are off to a good start. They are living similar versions of the same life in different eras. Martinez was just 16 when she made the fourth round of the French Open, in her third professional tournament. The next year, she reached the quarterfinals at Roland Garros and finished the year as the world No. 7. She and her compatriot, Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, captured the imagination of the sport, a creative and passionate yin to the brutalist, machine-like yang of Steffi Graf.
Martinez knows what it’s like to be on the verge of the world discovering you, and then to make that leap from tennis being an exercise in what is fresh and fearless to a world of expectation. First, they ask, “How did you do that?” Then it becomes: “Why didn’t you do that?”
“Tennis forces you to grow up quickly but she maintains that playfulness in there, she likes to joke around,” she said. “I am very much like that too. I like to joke around. I like to bother her. She likes to bother me.”
Andreeva is a student of the game’s history. She passes evenings in bed watching old tennis matches on YouTube. She knew all about Conchita Martinez. During her first months on the tour, though, she didn’t realize that Martinez was the woman who kept smiling and nodding to her at various tournaments.
When she finally did, she couldn’t believe that Martinez knew who she was, or that she would take the time to be cordial to her. Then, after she split with her coach and Muguruza retired, Andreeva’s management team floated Martinez as a potential match.
Andreeva knew the resume. Wimbledon champion, coach of a Wimbledon champion. Good enough for her.
They had several talks to feel each other out, which was more Martinez taking the measure of this teenage girl born in Siberia, raised in Sochi, Russia, and who moved to the south of France to traipse the tennis world. She needed to make sure that Andreeva was ready to be serious, that she was hiring a coach and not a babysitter.
She quickly realized that Andreeva is mature beyond her years. She eats right, she rests, she listens to adults older and smarter than she is. She could look someone in the eye and have a serious conversation in three languages, soon to be a fourth as she picks up Spanish.
“She’s a sponge,” Martinez said.
Conchita Martinez has accelerated Andreeva’s rise to the top of tennis. (Robert Prange / Getty Images)
They tried a tournament together and Andreeva said she immediately felt comfortable with Martinez. “Super great,” is how she described their chemistry.
“She told me that it was the same for her, so thank God it’s not just me,” she said the other day in a news conference, with her trademark grin and twinkle in her eyes. “I completely trust her with everything. I think she knows everything that’s going on in my life. I don’t know if it’s good or bad, but, no, it’s just like this.”
When they first started, Martinez worried that Andreeva might not be enough of a teenager, rather than too much of one. On the practice courts in France or in Barcelona, where Martinez lives, Andreeva would hit 10 great shots in a row, miss on the 11th and drama would ensue.
Martinez told her to give herself a break, maybe focus on the 10 good ones instead of the last miss. And when she hit a great shot, she needed to learn to acknowledge it, to enjoy it and be proud of what she has accomplished.
“I always tell her, ‘Wow, amazing’,” she said. “You need to have fun with those things. Amazing drop shots, amazing angle. Wow, great, don’t take it for granted. Enjoy that.”
There has been plenty to enjoy lately. Andreeva’s ranking was hovering around 40 when Martinez came on the scene. She finished last year making the final of the Ningbo Open in China, where she lost against Daria Kasatkina from a winning position and broke down in tears at the trophy ceremony. Then she made the fourth round of the Australian Open, went 1-1 in Qatar and 6-0 in Dubai. Until very recently, she was the only teenager in the WTA top 100.
While the tennis world had long expected Andreeva’s ascendancy, the steepness and immediacy of this year’s trajectory has been a surprise. Not for Martinez. She couldn’t make much of an impact last year, because she started with Andreeva in the middle of the season, but the off-season let the Russian get the full Martinez treatment. They combined fitness and weight training with their goals to achieve a certain style of play.
Now comes the task of maintaining the work ethic that has lifted Andreeva to her lofty heights so quickly. People think getting to the top 10 is the hard part. It isn’t, Martinez said.
“It’s not getting there, it’s staying there — year after year, dealing with the pressure of defending those points and staying in a good frame of mind. And doing it all over and all over again,“ Martinez said.
She has shown few signs of doing anything else. Even after she got steamrollered in the second set against Swiatek, she told herself to run and fight for every point, to not worry how she got balls back but to get them back, however she could. When it was over, and Andreeva was 7-6(1), 1-6, 6-3 winner, Andreeva gave a nod to Martinez, a two-time finalist at Indian Wells, and a little ribbing, too.
“My coach lost in the finals,” she said. “I’m going to try to do better than her.”
Nothing would please Martinez more.
(Top photo: Jay Calderon / The Desert Sun via Imagn Images)
Culture
Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden
Let’s memorize a poem! Not because it’s good for us or because we think we should, but because it’s fun, a mental challenge with a solid aesthetic reward. You can amuse yourself, impress your friends and maybe discover that your way of thinking about the world — or even, as you’ll see, the universe — has shifted a bit.
Over the next five days, we’ll look closely at a great poem by one of our favorite poets, and we’ll have games, readings and lots of encouragement to help you learn it by heart. Some of you know how this works: Last year more Times readers than we could count memorized a jaunty 18-line recap of an all-night ferry ride. (If you missed that adventure, it’s not too late to embark. The ticket is still valid.)
This time, we’re training our telescopes on W.H. Auden’s “The More Loving One” — a clever, compact meditation on love, disappointment and the night sky.
Here’s the first of its four stanzas, read for us by Matthew McConaughey:
The More Loving One
Looking up at the stars, I know quite well
That, for all they care, I can go to hell,
But on earth indifference is the least
We have to dread from man or beast.
Matthew McConaughey, actor and poet
In four short lines we get a brisk, cynical tour of the universe: hell and the heavens, people and animals, coldness and cruelty. Commonplace observations — that the stars are distant; that life can be dangerous — are wound into a charming, provocative insight. The tone is conversational, mixing decorum and mild profanity in a manner that makes it a pleasure to keep reading.
Here’s Tracy K. Smith, a former U.S. poet laureate, with the second stanza:
How should we like it were stars to burn
With a passion for us we could not return?
If equal affection cannot be,
Let the more loving one be me.
Tracy K. Smith, poet
These lines abruptly shift the focus from astronomy to love, from the universal to the personal. Imagine how it would feel if the stars had massive, unrequited crushes on us! The speaker, couching his skepticism in a coy, hypothetical question, seems certain that we wouldn’t like this at all.
This certainty leads him to a remarkable confession, a moment of startling vulnerability. The poem’s title, “The More Loving One,” is restated with sweet, disarming frankness. Our friend is wearing his heart on his well-tailored sleeve.
The poem could end right there: two stanzas, point and counterpoint, about how we appreciate the stars in spite of their indifference because we would rather love than be loved.
But the third stanza takes it all back. Here’s Alison Bechdel reading it:
Admirer as I think I am
Of stars that do not give a damn,
I cannot, now I see them, say
I missed one terribly all day.
Alison Bechdel, graphic novelist
The speaker downgrades his foolish devotion to qualified admiration. No sooner has he established himself as “the more loving one” than he gives us — and perhaps himself — reason to doubt his ardor. He likes the stars fine, he guesses, but not so much as to think about them when they aren’t around.
The fourth and final stanza, read by Yiyun Li, takes this disenchantment even further:
Were all stars to disappear or die,
I should learn to look at an empty sky
And feel its total dark sublime,
Though this might take me a little time.
Yiyun Li, author
Wounded defiance gives way to a more rueful, resigned state of mind. If the universe were to snuff out its lights entirely, the speaker reckons he would find beauty in the void. A starless sky would make him just as happy.
Though perhaps, like so many spurned lovers before and after, he protests a little too much. Every fan of popular music knows that a song about how you don’t care that your baby left you is usually saying the opposite.
The last line puts a brave face on heartbreak.
So there you have it. In just 16 lines, this poem manages to be somber and funny, transparent and elusive. But there’s more to it than that. There is, for one thing, a voice — a thinking, feeling person behind those lines.
When he wrote “The More Loving One,” in the 1950s, Wystan Hugh Auden was among the most beloved writers in the English-speaking world. Before this week is over there will be more to say about Auden, but like most poets he would have preferred that we give our primary attention to the poem.
Its structure is straightforward and ingenious. Each of the four stanzas is virtually a poem unto itself — a complete thought expressed in one or two sentences tied up in a neat pair of couplets. Every quatrain is a concise, witty observation: what literary scholars call an epigram.
This makes the work of memorization seem less daunting. We can take “The More Loving One” one epigram at a time, marvelling at how the four add up to something stranger, deeper and more complex than might first appear.
So let’s go back to the beginning and try to memorize that insouciant, knowing first stanza. Below you’ll find a game we made to get you started. Give it a shot, and come back tomorrow for more!
Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.
Question 1/6
Looking up at the stars, I know quite well That, for all they care, I can go to hell,
Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.
Your first task: Learn the first four lines!
Let’s start with the first couplet. Fill in the rhyming words.
Monday
Love, the cosmos and everything in between, all in 16 lines.
Tuesday (Available tomorrow)
What’s love got to do with it?
Wednesday (Available April 22)
How to write about love? Be a little heartsick (and the best poet of your time).
Thursday (Available April 23)
Are we alone in the universe? Does it matter?
Friday (Available April 24)
You did it! You’re a star.
Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.
Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.
Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.
Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.
Culture
Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books
Literature
‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot
Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?
“Romola” was Eliot’s fourth novel, published between “The Mill on the Floss” (1860) and “Middlemarch” (1870-71). If my friends and I didn’t get this particular memo, and “Romola” is familiar to every Eliot fan but us, please skip the following.
“Romola” isn’t some fluky misfire better left unmentioned in light of Eliot’s greater work. It’s her only historical novel, set in Florence during the Italian Renaissance. It embraces big subjects like power, religion, art and social upheaval, but it’s not dry or overly intellectual. Its central character is a gifted, freethinking young woman named Romola, who enters a marriage so disastrous as to make Anna Karenina’s look relatively good.
It probably matters that many of Eliot’s other books have been adapted into movies or TV series, with actors like Hugh Dancy, Ben Kingsley, Emily Watson and Rufus Sewell. The BBC may be doing even more than we thought to keep classic literature alive. (In 1924, “Romola” was made into a silent movie starring Lillian Gish. It doesn’t seem to have made much difference.)
Anthony Trollope, among others, loved “Romola.” He did, however, warn Eliot against aiming over her readers’ heads, which may help explain its obscurity.
All I can say, really, is that it’s a mystery why some great books stay with us and others don’t.
‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips
This was an Oprah Book of the Week, which probably disqualifies it from B-side status, but it’s not nearly as well known as Phillips’s debut story collection, “Black Tickets” (1979), or her most recent novel, “Night Watch” (2023), which won her a long-overdue Pulitzer Prize.
Phillips has no parallel in her use of potent, stylized language to shine a light into the darkest of corners. In “Quiet Dell,” her only true-crime novel, she’s at the height of her powers, which are particularly apparent when she aims her language laser at horrific events that actually occurred. Her gift for transforming skeevy little lives into what I can only call “Blade Runner” mythology is consistently stunning.
Consider this passage from the opening chapter of “Quiet Dell”:
“Up high the bells are ringing for everyone alive. There are silver and gold and glass bells you can see through, and sleigh bells a hundred years old. My grandmother said there was a whisper for each one dead that year, and a feather drifting for each one waiting to be born.”
The book is full of language like that — and of complex, often chillingly perverse characters. It’s a dark, underrecognized beauty.
‘Solaris’ (1961) by Stanislaw Lem
You could argue that, in America, at least, the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem didn’t produce any A-side novels. You could just as easily argue that that makes all his novels both A-side and B-side.
It’s science fiction. All right?
I love science and speculative fiction, but I know a lot of literary types who take pride in their utter lack of interest in it. I always urge those people to read “Solaris,” which might change their opinions about a vast number of popular books they dismiss as trivial. As far as I know, no one has yet taken me up on that.
“Solaris” involves the crew of a space station continuing the study of an aquatic planet that has long defied analysis by the astrophysicists of Earth. Part of what sets the book apart from a lot of other science-fiction novels is Lem’s respect for enigma. He doesn’t offer contrived explanations in an attempt to seduce readers into suspending disbelief. The crew members start to experience … manifestations? … drawn from their lives and memories. If the planet has any intentions, however, they remain mysterious. All anyone can tell is that their desires and their fears, some of which are summoned from their subconsciousness, are being received and reflected back to them so vividly that it becomes difficult to tell the real from the projected. “Solaris” has the peculiar distinction of having been made into not one but two bad movies. Read the book instead.
‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders
If one of the most significant living American writers had become hypervisible with his 2017 novel, “Lincoln in the Bardo,” we’d go back and read his earlier work, wouldn’t we? Yes, and we may very well have already done so with the story collections “Tenth of December” (2013) and “Pastoralia” (2000). But what if we hadn’t yet read Saunders’s 2013 novella, “Fox 8,” about an unusually intelligent fox who, by listening to a family from outside their windows at night, has learned to understand, and write, in fox-English?: “One day, walking neer one of your Yuman houses, smelling all the interest with snout, I herd, from inside, the most amazing sound. Turns out, what that sound is, was: the Yuman voice, making werds. They sounded grate! They sounded like prety music! I listened to those music werds until the sun went down.”
Once Saunders became more visible to more of us, we’d want to read a book that ventures into the consciousness of a different species (novels tend to be about human beings), that maps the differences and the overlaps in human and animal consciousness, explores the effects of language on consciousness and is great fun.
We’d all have read it by now — right?
‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf
You could argue that Woolf didn’t have any B-sides, and yet it’s hard to deny that more people have read “Mrs. Dalloway” (1925) and “To the Lighthouse” (1927) than have read “The Voyage Out” (1915) or “Monday or Tuesday” (1921). Those, along with “Orlando” (1928) and “The Waves” (1931), are Woolf’s most prominent novels.
Four momentous novels is a considerable number for any writer, even a great one. That said, “Between the Acts,” her last novel, really should be considered the fifth of her significant books. The phrase “embarrassment of riches” comes to mind.
Five great novels by the same author is a lot for any reader to take on. Our reading time is finite. We won’t live long enough to read all the important books, no matter how old we get to be. I don’t expect many readers to be as devoted to Woolf as are the cohort of us who consider her to have been some sort of dark saint of literature and will snatch up any relic we can find. Fanatics like me will have read “Between the Acts” as well as “The Voyage Out,” “Monday or Tuesday” and “Flush” (1933), the story of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s cocker spaniel. Speaking for myself, I don’t blame anyone who hasn’t gotten to those.
I merely want to add “Between the Acts” to the A-side, lest anyone who’s either new to Woolf or a tourist in Woolf-landia fail to rank it along with the other four contenders.
As briefly as possible: It focuses on an annual village pageant that attempts to convey all of English history in a single evening. The pageant itself interweaves subtly, brilliantly, with the lives of the villagers playing the parts.
It’s one of Woolf’s most lusciously lyrical novels. And it’s a crash course, of sorts, in her genius for conjuring worlds in which the molehill matters as much as the mountain, never mind their differences in size.
It’s also the most accessible of her greatest books. It could work for some as an entry point, in more or less the way William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” (1930) can be the starter book before you go on to “The Sound and the Fury” (1929) or “Absalom, Absalom!” (1936).
As noted, there’s too much for us to read. We do the best we can.
More in Literature
See the rest of the issue
Culture
6 Poems You Should Know by Heart
Literature
‘Prayer’ (1985) by Galway Kinnell
Whatever happens. Whatever
what is is is what
I want. Only that. But that.
“I typically say Kinnell’s words at the start of my day, as I’m pedaling a traffic-laden path to my office,” says Major Jackson, 57, the author of six books of poetry, including “Razzle Dazzle” (2023). “The poem encourages a calm acceptance of the day’s events but also wants us to embrace the misapprehension and oblivion of life, to avoid probing too deeply for answers to inscrutable questions. I admire what Kinnell does with only 14 words; the repetition of ‘what,’ ‘that’ and ‘is’ would seem to limit the poem’s sentiment but, paradoxically, the poem opens widely to contain all manner of human experience. The three ‘is’es in the middle line give it a symmetry that makes its message feel part of a natural order, and even more convincing. Thanks to the skillful punctuation, pauses and staccato rhythm, a tonal quality of interior reflection emerges. Much like a haiku, it continues after its last words, lingering like the last note played on a piano that slowly fades.”
“Just as I was entering young adulthood, probably slow to claim romantic feelings, a girlfriend copied out a poem by Pablo Neruda and slipped it into an envelope with red lipstick kisses all over it. In turn, I recited this poem. It took me the remainder of that winter to memorize its lines,” says Jackson. “The poem captures the pitch of longing that defines love at its most intense. The speaker in Shakespeare’s most famous sonnet believes the poem creates the beloved, ‘So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, / So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.’ (Sonnet 18). In Rilke’s expressive declarations of yearning, the beloved remains elusive. Wherever the speaker looks or travels, she marks his world by her absence. I find this deeply moving.”
“Clifton faced many obstacles, including cancer, a kidney transplant and the loss of her husband and two of her children. Through it all, she crafted a long career as a pre-eminent American poet,” says Jackson. “Her poem ‘won’t you celebrate with me’ is a war cry, an invitation to share in her victories against life’s persistent challenges. The poem is meaningful to all who have had to stare down death in a hospital or had to bereave the passing of close relations. But, even for those who have yet to mourn life’s vicissitudes, the poem is instructive in cultivating resilience and a persevering attitude. I keep coming back to the image of the speaker’s hands and the spirit of steadying oneself in the face of unspeakable storms. She asks in a perfectly attuned gorgeously metrical line, ‘what did i see to be except myself?’”
‘Sonnet 94’ (1609) by William Shakespeare
They that have power to hurt and will do none,
That do not do the thing they most do show,
Who, moving others, are themselves as stone,
Unmovèd, cold, and to temptation slow,
They rightly do inherit heaven’s graces
And husband nature’s riches from expense;
They are the lords and owners of their faces,
Others but stewards of their excellence.
The summer’s flower is to the summer sweet,
Though to itself it only live and die;
But if that flower with base infection meet,
The basest weed outbraves his dignity.
For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.
“It’s one of the moments of Western consciousness,” says Frederick Seidel, 90, the author of more than a dozen collections of poetry, including “So What” (2024). “Shakespeare knows and says what he knows.”
“It trombones magnificent, unbearable sorrow,” says Seidel.
“It’s smartass and bitter and bright,” says Seidel.
These interviews have been edited and condensed.
More in Literature
See the rest of the issue
-
Sports3 minutes agoQuick final pit stop helps Alex Palou win Long Beach Grand Prix
-
World15 minutes agoWho is Rumen Radev, the former pilot who wants to give Bulgaria wings?
-
News45 minutes agoTehran says ‘no plans’ for new talks after US seizes Iranian cargo ship
-
New York2 hours agoInside the NYC Power Stations That Keep Trains Moving — or Bring Them to a Halt
-
Detroit, MI3 hours agoDetroit Pistons already facing must-win Game 2 vs Orlando Magic
-
San Francisco, CA3 hours agoGiants Head Home to San Francisco After Shutout Loss
-
Dallas, TX3 hours agoNew video of Lake Dallas explosion draws focus on order decades ago to remove old plastic pipes
-
Miami, FL3 hours ago
Ty Simpson considered staying in college for $6.5 million offer from Miami