Sonnet 118
Robert Stonehouse
118
Like as to make our appetites more keene
With eager compounds we our pallat vrge,
As to preuent our malladies vnseene,
We sicken to shun sicknesse when we purge.
Euen so being full of your nere cloying sweetnesse,
To bitter sawces did I frame my feeding;
And sicke of wel-fare found a kind of meetnesse,
To be diseas'd ere that there was true needing.
Thus pollicie in loue t'anticipate
The ills that were,not grew to faults assured,
And brought to medicine a healthfull state
Which rancke of goodnesse would by ill be cured.
But thence I learne and find the lesson true,
Drugs poyson him that so fell sicke of you.
Like as to make our appetites more keen
With eager compounds we our palate urge;
As to prevent our maladies unseen
We sicken to shun sickness when we purge;
Even so, being full of your near-cloying sweetness,
To bitter sauces did I frame my feeding
And, sick of welfare, found a kind of meetness
To be diseased ere that there was true needing.
Thus policy in love t'anticipate
The ills that were not grew to faults assured,
And brought to medicine a healthful state
Which rank of goodness would by ill be cured.
But thence I learn, and find the lesson true,
Drugs poison him that so fell sick of you.
--
Robert Stonehouse
To mail me, replace invalid with uk. Inconvenience regretted
Robert Stonehouse
<ew...@bcs.org.invalid> wrote:
> 118
>Like as to make our appetites more keen
Just as, to whet our appetites,
>With eager compounds we our palate urge;
we sharpen our palates with piquant sauces,
>As to prevent our maladies unseen
or as, to avoid diseases we are not yet aware of,
>We sicken to shun sickness when we purge;
we make ourselves ill with purgatives, as a physic to
prevent illness,
>Even so, being full of your near-cloying sweetness,
in just that way, when filled and almost satiated with the
sweetness of your company,
>To bitter sauces did I frame my feeding
I restructured my diet in the direction of bitter
condiments
>And, sick of welfare, found a kind of meetness
and, tired of being well, thought it in a way appropriate
>To be diseased ere that there was true needing.
to make myself ill before I had to be.
>Thus policy in love t'anticipate
So my scheming in courtly love, to cut off in advance
>The ills that were not grew to faults assured,
troubles that had not appeared, joined itself to evils that
were certain
>And brought to medicine a healthful state
and took a healthy constitution off to medical treatment
>Which rank of goodness would by ill be cured.
to have its excessive flourishing corrected by bad things.
> But thence I learn, and find the lesson true,
But what I find out from this, and what turns out true, is
that
> Drugs poison him that so fell sick of you.
medicines are poisonous to someone like me, whose disease is
you.
Two metaphors run through the poem, one medical and the
other culinary. It is worth while not to mix them up. They
are introduced plainly and separately in lines 1-4.
There was a view that sharp sauces (horse-radish, Worcester,
mustard and the rest) were only needed because of the
degeneracy of civilised humans. Natural-living people would
not use them.
In line 5, by respelling without reference to modern
editions, I have picked up Benson's 'near' instead of the
ne'er (never) favoured by all modern editors. I argue in its
support that 'never cloying' actually contradicts the
meaning of the rest of the sentence. 'Near cloying' allows
for the speaker's fear of cloying without actually stating
it as a fact: that agrees with the rest of the sentence.
Whoever did the punctuation of the Quarto text seems to have
been confused by the rather tricky construction of the lines
and sentences. The comma in the middle of line 10 is the
most obvious problem. I have tried to punctuate so as to
make things clearer.
Willedever
> >With eager compounds we our palate urge;
> we sharpen our palates with piquant sauces,
I think "piquant" is an equivalent there only in its archaic sense of
"stinging" or "bitter." The modern meaning of 'piquant' is "pleasantly
sharp," which does not appear to work so well. A judgment call. The
Poet is saying that his dining, away from the addressee, is unpleasant.
"Eager" suggests acidity, or vinegar, as you probably know.
> >And, sick of welfare, found a kind of meetness
> and, tired of being well, thought it in a way appropriate
Better might be "faring well" as the equivalent for "welfare." The
phrase "faring well" goes along with the dining metaphor.
> >Thus policy in love t'anticipate
> So my scheming in courtly love, to cut off in advance
I'd say romantic love, rather than courtly. Again, a judgment call.
> >And brought to medicine a healthful state
> and took a healthy constitution off to medical treatment
> >Which rank of goodness would by ill be cured.
> to have its excessive flourishing corrected by bad things.
I don't think he meant excessive.
> In line 5, by respelling without reference to modern
> editions, I have picked up Benson's 'near' instead of the
> ne'er (never) favoured by all modern editors. I argue in its
> support that 'never cloying' actually contradicts the
> meaning of the rest of the sentence. 'Near cloying' allows
> for the speaker's fear of cloying without actually stating
> it as a fact: that agrees with the rest of the sentence.
I'm sure you're right there. It's "near." Any implication of "never"
would only be a pun, if intended at all.
> Whoever did the punctuation of the Quarto text seems to have
> been confused by the rather tricky construction of the lines
> and sentences. The comma in the middle of line 10 is the
> most obvious problem. I have tried to punctuate so as to
> make things clearer.
The comma should probably be after the word "not" rather than before.
Willedever
~~~~~
The same way we make our appetites keener
When, with sour substances, we stimulate our palates,
And, the way we prevent maladies we might have without knowing it,
We make ourselves sick, to avoid illness, when we purge;
Even so, since I felt full of your near-cloying sweetness,
I turned to feeding on bitter dishes,
And, sick of faring well, I found a kind of justice
To be ill before I really needed to be.
So, this policy I adopted in my love, of anticipating
Ills that didn't yet exist, grew into confirmed faults in myself,
And brought to my "medical" condition a "healthful" state,
Where the height of goodness would be, by illness, cured.
But from what I've done I've learned, and found the lesson true,
The treatment has poisoned he who fell "sick," in the way I did, of
you.
~~~~~
S 118 is a fine handling of the cliche about a cure being worse than a
disease.
The Poet felt sated with the sweetness of the addressee, and turned to
someone who proved bitter. Instead of being "cured," however, he ended
up feeling poisoned. It was a wrong move, but he feels it served him
right ("meetness.")
One could possibly take it that the Sonnet suggests Fair Youth versus
Dark Lady, as the sweet versus the bitter. And S 118 has some verbal
correspondence with S 147.
gk...@vcn.bc.ca
know?
Nothing much. The speaker is still trying to explain away his
philanderings any which way he can.
One word description of the poem: Homeopathy.
Sonnet sub-group: "I did you wrong" (along with 117).
***************************************************
The story so far:
So after one hundred-and-eighteen sonnets, what do we know?
The addressee or referent of the first one
hundred-and-eighteen sonnets is probably the same person (although it
has been speculated that perhaps the speaker of the first seventeen
poems is different). At any rate, we are assuming that the same
person is the addressee of these sonnets.
We still don't know what the relationship is between
the speaker and the addressee. It is clearly an intense,
emotional/romantic relationship. Whether it is sexual is uncertain.
The speaker says the addressee is physically
attractive. The description of that beauty is in terms that
would seem more suitable to a woman than a man. (1 - 7, 9,
13, 17-19, especially 20, 41, 54)
The speaker has known the addressee for three years. (104)
The speaker cannot tell what the addressee is thinking by
looking at the addressee's face. (93)
The speaker says that the addressee is narcissistic.
(1 - 4, 6)
The speaker may be chiding the addressee's sexual
habits. (1 - 4, 6, 9, 40 - 42, 58, 61, 69, 96)
The speaker suggests that, while they may acknowledge the
addressee's physical good looks, some unnamed others have a critical
opinion of some aspect of the addressee's character, morals and/or
behaviour. (69, 96) However, the speaker defends the addressee
against this criticism/slander (70). Yet, the speaker himself seems to
suspect that the addressee, in some way, is not behaving as he should.
But it is difficult to tell this by simply looking at he addressee's
fair appearance. (93, 95)
The addressee is male. (3, 9, 16, 19-20, 26, 33, 39, 41, 63,
67 - 68, 101)
The speaker is male. (20, 32)
The addressee is of marriageable age, meaning (I
think) that he would be in the 17 - 26 age range. (1 - 4, 6,
8 - 13, 16, 17)
The speaker is older than the addressee. (62 - 63)
The speaker is old. (73)
After an undefined time into the relationship, the speaker
still refers to the addressee as "sweet boy", which raises the
question of how old the addressee actually is. (But this may simply be
a poetic device wherein the speaker is trying to indicate that, to
him, the addressee has not gotten older.) (108)
The speaker claims he has no interest in sexual
relations with the addressee. (20)
The addressee is sexually interested in women. (41)
The speaker is sexually interested in women. (41)
Women are sexually attracted to the addressee. (3, 16, 20,
41,)
The speaker has a wife or mistress. (40 - 42).
A snag appears in the relationship between the
speaker and addressee. (33, 34)
The snag that appeared in the relationship between
the speaker and addressee seems to concern something that
the addressee did to the speaker which caused the speaker
shame. The addressee, however, is contrite, and the speaker
has forgiven him. (34)
While it's not certain, the snag that appeared in
the relationship between the speaker and the addressee
probably concerns a love stolen from the speaker by the
addressee. (35)
It seems that the addressee *has* stolen a lover
from the speaker (40 - 42), but the speaker forgives him.
(40, 42)
The speaker expresses concern that he might lose the
affections/attention of the addressee. (48, 90-93).
The speaker tells the addressee he loves him more today than
yesterday, but not as much as tomorrow. (115)
The speaker has a very humble opinion of himself, and is
prepared to excuse almost any behaviour of the addressee (35, 49,
57-58, 87-89).
It's still uncertain what class the speaker and addressee
belong to. Some have argued that Sonnet 25 indicates that the speaker
is not a member of the nobility, while others argue that it indicates
that he is a member of the nobility. Some readers have also suggested
that certain words and phrases used in the sonnets indicate that the
addressee is of noble birth. (37, 40)
The speaker's life involved travel that took him
away from the addressee. Possibly, the travel involved
service for the addressee (27 - 28, 39, 43 - 45, 47, 50 - 51, 61).
The speaker and addressee were separated during the summer (97) and
the spring (98).
By the time of Sonnet 52, whenever it is, the speaker
doesn't seem to be seeing the addressee very often (52). There also
seems to have been a lapse wherein the speaker did not write about the
addressee (100 - 101).
The speaker seems to find it necessary to explain away a
charge of lessening affection or waywardness after being absent from
the addressee (109).
The speaker has indulged in wayward behaviour vis-a-vis the
addressee in the past, but says he will not to do it again (110).
The speaker claims his past waywardness was just a test of the
addressee's love (117).
The speaker is ashamed about something in his life and asks
for the addressee's pity (111). The speaker was involved in some sort
of public scandal, but is only concerned with what the addressee
thinks of him (112).
Note that we still don't know where the speaker or
the addressee live.
There seems to have been a lull in the speaker/addressee's
emotional relationship. (56)
The speaker has a picture of the addressee which he enjoys
looking at. (47)
The speaker is preoccupied at night by images of the
addressee. (27 - 28, 43, 61)
The speaker is unaware of anything except the addressee. (113
- 114)
The poet says he is in disgrace for some reason, and
that he is a self-described outcast of some sort, and that
he feels sorry for himself and envious of others, a feeling
that is dispelled when he thinks of his relationship with
the addressee. (29)
The speaker thinks the addressee is too good for him. (87)
For some reason, the speaker thinks that the
addressee will be dishonoured by publicly associating with
the speaker. (36, 71 - 72)
The speaker tells us that his sad memories are
dispelled when he thinks of the addressee. (30)
The speaker's feelings for the addressee are so strong that
they leave the speaker tongue-tied about those feelings in the
presence of the addressee. (23)
The speaker expresses humility about his ability to
express, in writing, his feelings for the addressee. (26,
32, 38, 102) Yet, the speaker also says his writings contain that
which is best in him. (73 - 74).
The speaker says that he is poor, despised and,
possibly, physically disabled. (37, 89)
The speaker distinguishes himself from "the rich". (52)
However, while the speaker says he is poor in Sonnet 37, he
then says, in Sonnet 48, that he owns jewels. (48)
The speaker so identifies with the addressee, that
any and all of the speaker's faults and shortcomings are
resolved in the positive attributes of the addressee. (37, 62)
The speaker says he sees, in the addressee, the
embodiment of former deceased loves. (31)
The speaker says all good things are but shadows of the
addressee. (53)
The speaker says the addressee has a pleasant
speaking voice and enjoys listening to sad music. (8)
The speaker says the addressee has a gracious and
kind presence. (10)
The speaker seems to think that the addressee has
some sort of love for the speaker. (10, 25, 34, 36, 39, 41, 61, 73)
The speaker seems to have some sort of affectionate
feelings for the addressee, calling him such things as
"love", "dear my love", "master-mistress of my passion", "Lord of my
love" & "sweet love". (13, 19, 20-33, 40, 54, 57-58, 66, 76)
The speaker seems to have believed in a religious theory of
the resurrection of the dead. (55)
The speaker is an aesthetic snob. (11)
The speaker may believe in astrology. (15)
The speaker rides a horse. (50 - 51)
The speaker, at least at times, was disillusioned with his
world. (66 - 68)
The speaker seems to think that the writers of antiquity were
better able to describe beauty than his contemporaries. (106)
The addressee has been given a blank book in which to record
his thoughts. The book is possibly from the speaker. (77)
Other poets are using the addressee for their subject matter.
(78)
The speaker is concerned about losing his place with the
addressee to some other male poet. (79)
The speaker considers his ability as a poet to be inferior to
the ability of the male rival poet. (80)
The speaker is jealous of the attention the addressee is
paying to the rival poets. (82)
After intially being confounded by the rival poet, the speaker
is once again writing poetry. (86)
The addressee is fond of praise, which lessens him in the eyes
of the speaker. (84)
The speaker initially thinks that having children is
a better method than a painting or a poem for the addressee
to preserve himself. (16, 17) However, the speaker comes to
say that he can preserve the beauty of the addressee in his
poetry. (18 - 19, 54 -55, 60, 63 - 65, 81, 100 -101, 104, 107)
The addressee seems to have been critical of the speaker in
some way concerning his descriptions of the addressee. (83)
The speaker believes he can preserve the best part of himself
in his writings. (74)
The speaker, having posed a problem for the
addressee, is offering a solution to that problem - namely
that the addressee should have children - specifically, a
son. (1-14, 16, 17). (But let's remember that it's only the
speaker's assertion that beautiful people have some sort of
obligation to the world to propagate or preserve their
beauty.)
While seeming to chastise the addressee for his
narcissistic failure to preserve or propagate his beauty,
the speaker is, at the same time, acknowledging that beauty,
and so is flattering the addressee.
Sonnet groupings (a tentative listing of the sonnets
read so far and how they might be grouped):
Get married, young man: 1 - 14, 16 - 17.
Forever young: 15, 18 - 19, 54 - 55, 60, 63 - 65, 77, 81, 100 - 101,
104, 107.
You are so beautiful: 20 - 21, 53, 59, 82 - 84, 99, 105 - 106.
We two are one: 22, 25, 31, 37, 39, 42, 62, 96, 109 - 110.
Words fail me: 23, 26, 32, 38, 78 - 80, 85 - 86, 102 - 103, 108.
You're in my heart: 24, 46 - 47.
Missin' you: 27 - 28, 43 - 45, 50 - 51, 97 - 98.
You lift me up: 29 - 30, 52.
Can't stop thinkin' 'bout you: 75 - 76, 113 - 114.
You done me wrong: 33 - 34, 40 - 41.
Anything you do is alright with me: 35, 49, 57 - 58, 89.
I am unworthy: 36, 71 - 72, 87 - 88, 111 - 112.
Am I losing you?: 48, 56, 61, 90 - 95.
What's a nice person like you doin' in a place like this?: 66 - 70.
When I'm gone: 73 - 74.
I did you wrong: 117 - 118.
? - 115, 116.
One word descriptions of the sonnets:
01) Introduction; 02) Siege; 03) Mirror; 04) Usury; 05) Perfume;
06) Money-lending; 07) Sun; 08) Music; 09) Widow; 10) Self-hate;
11) Snob; 12) Breed; 13) Endless; 14) Astrology;
15) Transience; 16) Lines; 17) Memorial; 18) Summer;
19) Permanence; 20) Pricked; 21) True; 22) Hearts;
23) Tongue-tied; 24) Eyes; 25) Constancy; 26) Humility;
27) Travel; 28) Exhausted; 29) Fulfillment; 30) Remembrance;
31) Reincarnation; 32) Modesty; 33) Stained; 34) Disgrace;
35) Thief; 36) Blots; 37) Transference; 38) Muse;
39) Separation; 40) Theft; 41) False; 42) Loss; 43) Bright;
44) Thought;45) Elements; 46) Dispute; 47) Amity; 48) Guard;
49) Justify; 50) Weary; 51) Return; 52) Rare; 53) Shadows;
54) Distill; 55) Forever; 56) Lull; 57) Slave; 58) Slavery;
59) Unique; 60) Time; 61) Nightmare; 62) Identification;
63) Preservation; 64) Inevitability; 65) Possibility;
66) Disillusioned; 67) Memento; 68) Souvenir; 69) Weeds;
70) Target; 71) Forget; 72) Nameless; 73) Soon; 74) Essence;
75) Dilemma; 76) Repetition; 77) Book; 78) Inspiration;
79) Borrowings; 80) Compare; 81) Entombed; 82) Variety;
83) Shortcoming; 84) Unparalleled; 85) Actions; 86) Dumbstruck;
87) Released; 88) Forsworn; 89) Transference; 90) Now; 91) Best;
92) Lifelong; 93) Unreadable; 94) Unmoveable; 95) Disguise;
96) Appearance; 97) Absence; 98) Image; 99) Thieves;
100) Neglect; 101) Excuse; 102) Temperance; 103) Incomparable;
104) Three; 105) Constant; 106) Antiquity; 107) Prophecy;
108) Eternal; 109) Permanent; 110) Remorse; 111) Pity;
112) Indifferent; 113) Blind; 114) Illusion; 115) More;
116) Love; 117) Test; 118) Homeopathy;
- Gary
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Willedever
gk...@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
> One word description of the poem: Homeopathy.
Homeopathy?? Are you sure you didn't mean allopathy?
Paul Crowley
news:37g9d2d5jnpctecda...@4ax.com...
Do you really think that this is a poem about
horse-radish, Worcester sauce and mustard?
> In line 5, by respelling without reference to modern
> editions, I have picked up Benson's 'near' instead of the
> ne'er (never) favoured by all modern editors. I argue in its
> support that 'never cloying' actually contradicts the
> meaning of the rest of the sentence. 'Near cloying' allows
> for the speaker's fear of cloying without actually stating
> it as a fact: that agrees with the rest of the sentence.
Firstly, the poet plainly intended ambiguity -- a
rather large element in most sonnets that your
'system' must pretend does not exist. (I can see
you as the Commissar for Politically Correct
Poetry laying down an edict making all ambiguity
-- or its possibility -- illegal.)
Secondly, this line is manifestly sarcastic. And
yet again, your 'system' must disallow all non-
standard tones (following the ancient Stratfordian
sonnet-reading tradition -- bear it in mind for
another edict under your future rule).
> Whoever did the punctuation of the Quarto text seems to have
> been confused by the rather tricky construction of the lines
> and sentences. The comma in the middle of line 10 is the
> most obvious problem. I have tried to punctuate so as to
> make things clearer.
Hey, it's only Shakespeare and some sonnet
that he wrote.
Obviously, you will know much better than
the poet what he intended. That's what
'scholarship' is for.
Paul.
bookburn
"Paul Crowley" <slkwuoiut...@slkjlskjoioue.com> wrote in
message news:eb_Cg.12546$j7.3...@news.indigo.ie...
> "Robert Stonehouse" <ew...@bcs.org.invalid> wrote in message
> news:37g9d2d5jnpctecda...@4ax.com...
>
> that he wrote.
>
> Obviously, you will know much better than
> the poet what he intended. That's what
> 'scholarship' is for.
>
>
> Paul.
Not fair. Robert's position has pretty consistently been that of
"close reading," and it's you who are over the top on "intention" of
the author as Oxford-Elizabeth-Raleigh commentary. Here's what I
find on "intentional fallacy" and "close reading" that seem to
apply. The terms are closely related in criticism, so I assume you
already know about this.
(quote)
Intentional Fallacy
The INTENTIONAL FALLACY is a term used by two important New Critics,
Wimsatt and Beardsley, to describe what they considered the error of
assuming a text means what its author intended it to mean.
For Wimsatt and Beardsley, meaning was to be determined solely from
CLOSE READING of a text: since we have no way of knowing what an
author (at least a dead one) meant to say, we can only assume that
the meaning of a text must be derived from reading it closely.
(unquote)
As I understand it, textual criticism came about early on as a
corrective to interpreting bible scriptures willy-nilly. The New
Criticism movement was about being scientifically objective enough
to at least begin with a clear text and record, and explicate all
the possibilities before applying other critical methods. Here's an
outline of it.
(quote)
New Criticism Tends to Emphasize:
The text as an AUTOLETIC artifact, something complete with in
itself, written for its own sake, unified in its form and not
dependent on its relation to the author's life or intent, history,
or anything else.
The formal and technical properties of work of art.
New Critical Assumptions:
The critic's job is to help us appreciate the technique and form of
art and the mastery of the artist.
That the "Western tradition" is an unbroken, internally consistent
set of artistic conventions and traditions going back to ancient
Greece and continuing up to this day, and that good art participates
in and extends these traditions. Similarly, criticism's job is to
uphold these traditions and protect them from encroachments from
commercialism, political posturing, and VULGARITY.
That there are a finite number of good texts (a notion now often
tied to "the canon" of texts traditionally taught). The closer that
a text comes to achieving an ideal unity, where each element
contributes to an overall effect, the more worthy it is of
discussion.
Studying literature is an intrinsically edifying process. It hones
the sensibilities and discrimination of students and sets them apart
from the unreflective masses.
That "cream rises," and works of genius will eventually be
"vindicated by posterity."
That there is a firm and fast distinction between "high" art and
popular art.
That good art reflects unchanging, universal human issues,
experiences, and values.
Technical definitions and analyses are vital to understanding
literature. The text's relationship to a world that extends beyond
it is of little interest.
(unquote)
bookburn
Paul Crowley
You snipped Robert's point -- the one to
which I was objecting. Now restored:
>>> Whoever did the punctuation of the Quarto text seems to have
>>> been confused by the rather tricky construction of the lines
>>> and sentences. The comma in the middle of line 10 is the
>>> most obvious problem. I have tried to punctuate so as to
>>> make things clearer.
>> Obviously, you will know much better than
>> the poet what he intended. That's what
>> 'scholarship' is for.
>
> Not fair. Robert's position has pretty consistently been that of "close reading,"
No. It's not. Or it's: "If I don't like what I find
(or if I can't understand it) then I feel entirely
free to change it to something I do like . . . "
No other historical texts are treated in such a
cavalier manner by anyone. Robert's kind of
approach (which is routine among Strats as
regards the Sonnets) is "scholarly insanity" --
and that is exactly how it would be regarded if
the name of the poet was not "Shake-speare".
> and it's you who are over the top on "intention" of the author as Oxford-Elizabeth-Raleigh
> commentary.
In reading any historical (or any other) text
we seek to find (and hopefully establish) the
author's intention.
> Here's what I find on "intentional fallacy" and "close reading" that seem to apply. The terms
> are closely related in criticism, so I assume you already know about this.
I take care to never read any of the junk that
has emerged from the 'schools' of the 'New
Criticism'. It's never a problem, since virtually
every paragraph is unreadable.
I THINK what the people you quote are saying
is that it is a fallacy to think we can ever find
an author's intention. If so, the argument works
only on some remote, abstract or metaphysical
level, and ordinary mortals reading ordinary texts
never need to concern themselves with its likes.
I certainly don't.
> (quote)
>
> Intentional Fallacy
>
> The INTENTIONAL FALLACY is a term used by two important New Critics, Wimsatt and Beardsley, to
> describe what they considered the error of assuming a text means what its author intended it
> to mean.
>
> For Wimsatt and Beardsley, meaning was to be determined solely from CLOSE READING of a text:
< New Crit drivel snipped>
Paul.
gk...@vcn.bc.ca
wrote:
>
>gk...@vcn.bc.ca wrote:
>
>> One word description of the poem: Homeopathy.
>
>Homeopathy?? Are you sure you didn't mean allopathy?
>
Hmmmm. I was basing 'homeopathy' on lines 3 & 4:
As, to prevent our maladies unseen,
We sicken to shun sickness when we purge;
But that idea isn't really sustained by what the speaker says
next. To counteract the "sweetness" of the addressee, he turns to
"bitter sauces". He says his "healthful state which rank of goodness"
could be cured by "ill".
So 'allopathy' might be more appropriate.