What then is love
In the rich tapestry of English Renaissance lyric poetry, few forms so vividly embody the era’s fascination with paradox, emotional ambivalence, and the interplay between artifice and sincerity as the pastoral complaint. The anonymous poem set to music by Thomas Ford—“What then is love”—exemplifies this tradition with striking economy and emotional depth. Though Ford is remembered primarily as a composer of lute songs and madrigals rather than as a poet, his musical setting of this text reveals a profound sensitivity to the poem’s intricate web of contradictions, its evocative imagery, and its oscillation between philosophical inquiry and personal lament. This essay explores the poem not only as a literary artifact but also as a catalyst for musical interpretation, examining how its historical and cultural context, thematic preoccupations, and rhetorical strategies would have shaped Ford’s compositional choices. In doing so, it illuminates the symbiotic relationship between poetry and music in the early seventeenth century—a period in which textual nuance and sonic expression were inextricably linked.
The poem opens with a question posed by Coridon, a conventional pastoral name that situates the speaker within the long-standing tradition of idealized rural shepherds who serve as mouthpieces for complex emotional and philosophical reflections. Coridon’s query—“What then is love”—is not merely rhetorical; it initiates a sustained meditation on love’s elusive, contradictory nature. The immediate cause of his distress is Phillida’s newfound coyness, a shift in her behavior that destabilizes the pastoral equilibrium and triggers Coridon’s existential reckoning. This dynamic—of a male lover bewildered by a woman’s withdrawal—was a staple of Renaissance amorous discourse, particularly in the context of courtly and Petrarchan conventions. Yet here, the pastoral setting softens the potentially misogynistic undertones of such tropes, reframing Phillida’s resistance not as cruelty but as a natural, if painful, assertion of autonomy. The poem thus participates in a broader cultural negotiation of gender and desire during a period when ideals of feminine virtue increasingly emphasized modesty and restraint.
Coridon’s response to Phillida’s change unfolds through a series of metaphors that accumulate with increasing intensity, each attempting to define love by what it is not—or, more precisely, by what it disappoints. Love is “a flattering glass to gaze upon,” suggesting vanity and illusion; “a busy jest, a serious toy,” capturing its triviality and gravity in the same breath; “a flower still budding, never blown,” evoking perpetual anticipation without fulfillment. These images are not merely decorative; they function as conceptual tools, each revealing a different facet of love’s paradoxical essence. The metaphor of the unblossomed flower, for instance, draws on botanical symbolism familiar to Renaissance readers, where the rose often represented both beauty and transience. Here, however, the emphasis is not on decay but on arrested development—a love that remains perpetually potential, never actualized. This resonates with the speaker’s own stalled courtship: his affection is met with silence, his hopes with deferral.
The poem’s second stanza deepens this sense of futility by introducing temporal instability. Love is likened to a “morning dewy rose” that flourishes only in the pre-dawn stillness, only to wither “when his beams he doth disclose”—that is, at the very moment the sun (a traditional symbol of truth or revelation) appears. The implication is that love thrives in illusion and cannot withstand the light of reality. This aligns with Renaissance Neoplatonic thought, which often distinguished between earthly, deceptive love and divine, transcendent love. Yet Coridon makes no such distinction; for him, all love is subject to this cycle of brief efflorescence and swift decay. The phrase “a self-fed, dying hope” encapsulates this paradox with devastating precision: hope sustains itself even as it consumes itself, like a flame burning its own fuel. The oxymoronic pairing of “promised bliss” and “salveless sore” further underscores love’s dual capacity to wound and to allure, to promise healing while inflicting incurable pain.
The third stanza introduces a more complex metaphor: love as a lamp that “shines to all, / Whilst in itself it doth decay.” This image evokes both generosity and self-destruction, suggesting that love’s outward radiance is purchased at the cost of inner depletion. The lamp also “seems to free whom it doth thrall,” a line that captures love’s deceptive agency—it appears to liberate the lover through its beauty or promise, yet in truth it enslaves. This duality would have resonated strongly in a culture steeped in Ovidian and Petrarchan traditions, where love was frequently portrayed as a form of voluntary servitude. The phrase “leads our pathless thoughts astray” extends this idea into the cognitive realm, portraying love as a force that disrupts rational order, replacing clarity with confusion.
Yet the stanza concludes with a surprising turn: love is “the spring of wintered hearts, / Parched by the summer’s heat before.” Here, the seasonal metaphor inverts expectations. Winter typically signifies emotional coldness, but in this context, it describes hearts already exhausted by the excesses of passion (“summer’s heat”). Love, paradoxically, becomes a source of renewal for those who have been scorched by prior experience. This suggests that love, despite its dangers, retains a redemptive potential—even if that potential is fragile and contingent. The final line—“Faint hope to kindly warmth converts”—hints at transformation, however tentative. It is this flicker of possibility, however faint, that may explain why Coridon continues to sing at all.
Throughout the poem, the refrain “Heigh ho, heigh ho, chill love no more” functions as both a lament and a resolution. The interjection “heigh ho” was a conventional pastoral exclamation of weariness or resignation, often used in folk songs and ballads. Its repetition here creates a rhythmic anchor, a sonic embodiment of the speaker’s cyclical despair. The imperative “chill love no more” is ambiguous: it could be a command to himself (“I will no longer cool my love”) or a plea to love itself (“cease to chill me”). Grammatically, the verb “chill” suggests a cooling or numbing effect—love, rather than warming the heart, has rendered it cold. Thus, the refrain encapsulates the poem’s central irony: love, which should kindle warmth, instead induces emotional frost. The repetition of the refrain after each stanza reinforces the inescapability of this condition, as though Coridon is trapped in a loop of reflection and resignation.
This textual architecture—three stanzas of metaphysical inquiry followed by a recurring refrain—would have offered Thomas Ford a rich canvas for musical interpretation. Ford, active in the early seventeenth century, was part of a generation of English composers who bridged the late Renaissance and early Baroque sensibilities. Though less celebrated than contemporaries like John Dowland or Thomas Morley, Ford was a skilled craftsman of the lute song and the consort song, forms that prized textual clarity and expressive nuance. His setting of “What then is love” (likely composed for voice and viols, possibly with lute accompaniment) would have responded acutely to the poem’s emotional contours and rhetorical shifts.
One can imagine Ford using harmonic language to underscore the poem’s paradoxes. The opening question—“What then is love”—might be set with a rising melodic line, suggesting inquiry, only to descend into a minor mode as the answer unfolds in images of disillusionment. The phrase “a serious toy” could be rendered with rhythmic playfulness undercut by dissonance, capturing the tension between levity and gravity. The image of the dewy rose might inspire a delicate, florid melodic line in the upper voice, mimicking the fragility of petals, only to collapse into stark homophony at “quickly dies,” emphasizing finality.
The refrain, with its folk-like simplicity, would likely be set in a more syllabic, chant-like manner, allowing the words to carry the emotional weight without elaborate ornamentation. The repetition of “heigh ho” invites a sighing melodic contour—perhaps a descending minor third, a gesture commonly associated with lament in Renaissance music. The phrase “chill love no more” might be harmonized with a Picardy third or a modal shift, introducing a fleeting moment of warmth that quickly recedes, mirroring the poem’s ambiguous hope.
Ford’s compositional choices would also reflect the poem’s structural symmetry. Each stanza presents a self-contained meditation, and Ford might have mirrored this with recurring harmonic progressions or motivic cells that return in varied forms, creating a sense of unity amidst variation. The viols, with their capacity for sustained, mournful tones, could echo the speaker’s internal monologue, while the lute’s plucked articulation might mimic the fragility of the rose or the flickering of the lamp.
Beyond technical considerations, Ford’s setting would have been shaped by the cultural expectations of the time. The English madrigal, though influenced by Italian models, often retained a more restrained emotional palette, favoring wit and textual fidelity over overt drama. Ford’s music likely honored this tradition, using subtle inflections rather than grand gestures to convey Coridon’s turmoil. At the same time, the rise of affective theory in early Baroque aesthetics—the idea that music should move the passions—would have encouraged Ford to align specific musical devices with the poem’s emotional states: suspension for longing, chromaticism for pain, rhythmic fragmentation for confusion.
Philosophically, the poem engages with a long-standing debate about love’s nature—whether it is a divine force, a natural impulse, or a social construct. Coridon’s metaphors suggest a deeply skeptical view: love is not transcendent but ephemeral, not rational but delusional. This aligns with certain strands of Renaissance humanism that emphasized human fallibility and the limits of earthly experience. Yet the poem stops short of outright cynicism. The very act of articulating love’s contradictions—of giving them lyrical form—implies a residual belief in the power of expression, if not in love itself. Music, in Ford’s hands, becomes the medium through which this ambivalence is not resolved but held in balance.
In conclusion, “What then is love” stands as a masterful example of Renaissance poetic craftsmanship, weaving together pastoral convention, philosophical inquiry, and emotional authenticity. Its metaphors are not merely ornamental but constitutive of its meaning, each revealing a different dimension of love’s paradoxical essence. Thomas Ford’s musical setting—though lost to us in its original notation in this hypothetical exercise—would have responded to these textual features with sensitivity and ingenuity, using the resources of early seventeenth-century English polyphony to amplify the poem’s emotional and intellectual resonance. Together, text and music would have created a unified artwork in which poetry and sound collaborate to explore one of the most enduring questions of human experience. The refrain “heigh ho, chill love no more” thus becomes not just a personal lament but a cultural refrain—a sigh echoed across centuries, in both words and notes, by all who have loved and lost, and dared to ask what it all meant.