Marlowe Vs. Ralegh

        Christopher Marlowe's poem "The Passionate Shepherd to His Love" conveys an idealistic perspective of earthly existence. In it, spring lasts forever and lovers can experience the beauty of nature for all of eternity. It is as if Marlowe attempted to describe what life would have been like in the Garden of Eden had Adam and Eve not catalyzed the fall of man. Sir Walter Ralegh's response however, reminds us that the paradise described by Marlowe no longer exists because the world is fickle and does not stop transforming--- seasons change and people die. Marlowe's character of the Shepherd invites his love to live with him in his pastures, but Ralegh's character of the Nymph rationally explains that everything that he loves about nature will not last forever. While Marlowe and the Shepherd view the world through rose colored glasses, Ralegh and the Nymph know that nothing lasts forever, including love.
           I originally wanted to uncover the histories of these two British authors in order to explain why there is such a contrasting view on life between them, however, I found that both of them lived lives of intense trials and tribulations. Ralegh for example, was despised by others as a "rapacious monopolist," and his political affirmations eventually lead to his executon. Marlowe was a spy against English Catholics, but was later "branded with atheism, sedition, and homosexuality." He was then stabbed to death at an inn. I suppose the only conclusion to draw from this is that Marlowe and Ralegh were just able to maintain separate outlooks on life despite their mutual suffering.