The Absurdity of The Flea

The title character of John Donne’s “The Flea” is an overarching metaphor for the lovers and their actions. Initially, the speaker attempts to woo his partner with logic. If “in this flea… two bloods mingled be…” (4), and the flea “pamper’d swells with one blood made of two…” (8), then the mixing of bodily fluids without the catalyst – sex – would be the same and “cannot be said / A sin, a shame, or loss of maidenhead…” (6). The speaker suggests that love and sex are trivialities as insignificant as a blood-sucking flea. Since the woman does not buy this argument and threatens to kill the flea, Donne’s persona suggests that there are “three lives in one flea…” (10), his persona, the lover, and, naturally, the flea; therefore, killing the flea would result in “three sins in killing three…” (18).

Whether it is intended or not, the attempt to convince a woman that sex is perfectly acceptable by using the metaphor of a flea is humorous. The sense in the speaker’s logic is overshadowed by the absurdity of the metaphor. What woman would want the “loss of maidenhead” (6) or herself to be compared to a blood-sucking and unpleasant creature? It seems the speaker is pulling excuses from the air and is excessively desperate. While it is absurd, it is a breath of fresh air from the Petrarchan lover who watches from afar without actually pursuing the woman.