What do Shakespeare, thermodynamics and biochemistry have in common? The somewhat surprising answer is Love. But little did the Bard realise that his Sonnets expressed the consequences and feelings generated by complex scientific reactions which the brain then sends out to the body with amazing consequences.
Sex and Shakespeare will never be the same again
Dr. Michael Londesborough MBE is the expert who takes us on a fascinating journey that explores the nature of romance and explains what we feel and why we behave as we do when it comes to matters of the heart, an organ that has very little to do with romance at all. His presentation, The Chemistry of Love at the Prague Fringe is very much in the style of a Ted Talk Although packed with a wealth of scientific information, it remains accessible at all times. It’s well illustrated with numerous projections that show the molecular structures that control or instigate our behaviour. There’s much talk of monoamine neurotransmitters such as dopamine, norepinephrine and serotonin along with a host of other stuff that for chemists is probably old hat but to the rest of us sounds very impressive.
The real sense of awe and wonder comes when we start to discover what these things can do and the effects they can have. A delightful story about voles serves as an example. Amongst all the varieties of voles in the world, why is that only the prairie vole is monogamous? Apparently it’s because of a minute difference between them and the rest of the species.The female has more oxytocin receptors that are densely packed in her reward system and critically the male’s gene for the vasopressin receptor has a longer segment. The result is that they bond for life.
Shakespeare never mentioned a vole in any of his writings, but he observed the outcomes of molecular behaviour in humans without realising it. In Sonnet 129 he illustrates the feeling of guilt or remorse on having committed an act of lust. No sooner is the deed done, and certainly by the next morning, there is a message is sent out saying, “I wish I hadn’t done that”. Or as the Bard put it, “Th' expense of spirit in a waste of shame/Is lust in action… /Enjoyed no sooner but despisèd straight”. Londesborough goes on to give more examples of other reactions in different situations which Shakespeare accurately describes.
It all makes for a highly informative and entertaining hour. The only shortcoming is perhaps in what is left out. The talk is concerned only with heterosexual behaviour and some acknowledgement of alternatives would not be out of place given Shakespeare’s possible bisexuality and his dedication in the sonnets to the ‘Fair Youth’
That aside, Londesborough’s words ensure that sex and Shakespeare will never be the same again.
