to Wyatt, who, through this poem, criticised a society that believed otherwise. With Wyatt’s negative view of the court, in which he had such an active role, established one can argue for an even deeper form of satire found in his style. An admiration for the work and style of Petrarch seems at least a necessary trait for Wyatt, but an interpretation of his translations in conjunction with his other poems reveals a possible alternative. Several of the ideas expressed in Wyatt’s poetry contradict those of Petrarch’s. Where Petrarch idealises love Wyatt implies its tyrannical traits by calling it authoritative and a spender of ‘many brittle darts.’ He uses Petrarch’s romantic vernacular, but only in the aid of vulgar description. Later on during the Renaissance, the Petrarchan style became hackneyed and vulnerable to parody. Some poets turned away from a ‘honey-tongued’ tone, elaborate Petrarchan conceits, and an idealisation of the beloved. Their love poems not only mocked the imagery of the traditional Petrarch vocabulary but also deflated the attributes of the lady and ennobling effects of love. Wyatt, like these later poets though more discreet, displays at least an unconscious mockery of Petrarch’s ideals, perhaps because of their similarity to the ideals of courtly love. ‘Whoso list to hunt’ is another example of Wyatt and Petrarch’s contradictions. The poem ‘is transformed from Petrarch’s original to a more meditative ironic poem, full of self-pity, bitterness, and disenchantment.’ Wyatt’s satires, although they almost speak for themselves, require at least a touch in this analysis. They were most likely written, after he was released from prison and put under his father’s jurisdiction, as a response to the command of the Court. Wyatt had no hope of over-throwing the extreme power of the Court through his poetry, but he...
