Priapus and Donne

Obscenity and Wit

The interplay between obscenity and intellect in poetry has long occupied a curious space in literary history. In comparing the epigram put in the mouth of the Roman god Priapus with John Donne's "To His Mistris Going to Bed", we uncover a shared concern with sexuality, veiled meanings, and the boundaries of acceptable expression. Yet the contrast in tone, purpose, and style between them is stark. While Priapus embraces plainness after teasing with riddles, Donne relishes ambiguity, elevating erotic content into intricate literary games. Through juxtaposing the methods and justifications of both figures, and considering Joe Nutt’s interpretation of Donne’s intent, one might ask: is Donne's poem merely a more sophisticated Priapus epigram, riddles for his friends in the Inn of Court? And can we take seriously Donne’s own ambivalent confession that to some of his elegies there belongs “shame”?

Priapus’s poem operates on a simple but effective comedic structure. It begins in the mode of classical allusion and riddle, invoking the myth of Ganymede, the coyness of the bride, and the euphemistic language of seduction. These images delay gratification and heighten the reader’s anticipation — until the final line strikes with startling bluntness: “Give entry, lad, to thy behind.” The poem closes by claiming this vulgarity is due to the god’s dull mind, but the irony is plain. The artistry of the poem’s structure belies the claim of simplicity. Rather than being a fool, Priapus is a theatrical performer of obscenity, feigning simplicity to justify transgression.

John Donne, though separated from Priapus by time, culture, and tone, engages in a related but more complex form of literary play. His erotic poems, such as "Love’s Progress" or "To His Mistris Going to Bed", are not direct appeals to sensual pleasure. As Joe Nutt observes, they are “literary games” that titillate not through flesh, but through mind. Donne toys with metaphysical conceits, legal and theological language, paradox, and hyperbole. Even while anatomizing the female body, Donne seems more concerned with rhetorical mastery than carnal conquest. These poems, as Nutt notes, are written for his peers — likely male companions in the Inn of Court — and function as intellectual amusements rather than genuine acts of seduction. This contextualization challenges any simplistic reading of Donne as lecherous or merely bawdy.

The question then arises: is Donne, in essence, another Priapus — only sharper, more witty, and writing with a quill instead of a phallus? In some respects, the answer is yes. Both figures cloak sexual content in layers of artifice, delay revelation through allusion and metaphor, and ultimately engage in a form of rhetorical seduction. Donne’s poems, especially the more licentious ones, often perform the same kind of tension between the elevated and the base. However, unlike Priapus, Donne rarely lets the mask fall. There is no final crude outburst; instead, his poetry remains suspended in ambiguity, its eroticism refracted through wit, irony, and self-awareness. Where Priapus ends with vulgarity, Donne invites interpretive play.

Donne’s own admission that “to my satyrs there belongs some fear, and to some elegies... some shame” should be taken seriously. These words reflect a poet keenly aware of the doubleness of his work. Donne is not entirely at ease with his erotic verse, particularly as he matured into a religious role. The shame he refers to is not simply social guilt but an acknowledgment of poetry’s power to transgress moral and spiritual boundaries. His poem carries both danger and delight—precisely because they destabilize the boundary between intellect and desire, between sacred and profane.

In conclusion, Donne's poem can be seen as a literary descendant of Priapus epigram, but one whose work transcends the merely obscene. While both engage in riddling and delay, Donne's poetry is ultimately more self-conscious and complex. Priapus revels in crude finality; Donne hovers in suspended ambiguity. If Priapus's epigram is obscenity cloaked in myth, Donne's poem is a metaphysical riddle cloaked in irony. Both provoke; both entertain; but only Donne's poem asks us to reflect on the costs of the game. And in both the penis speaks.