Little Dramatic?

Wow. Although Astrophil and Stella is packed with beautiful language and historical references, it is far from original and frankly, makes me want to slap the guy. I understand that he is considered a pioneer in the field of poetry and from his writing I would assume he was passionate about his work. However, Sidney himself refers to writing poetry as his "unelected vocation"... meaning something that he was almost forced into doing as a result of his exile from court. Whether this particular poem is somehow tied in with Sidney's own experience with unrequited love is a mute point in my mind. If you look at the poem for what it is, an example of early sonnet form, it is good. And if I try to remove my distaste for Astrophil's pining and sometimes whiney voice, it is everything that a sonnet from that time period ought to be.
And that's where I run into problems. Sidney writes about "Nature" (1:10, 3:14, 7:1, 9:2, 10:4, just to name a few), he uses "Love" (7:13, 14:4) as a noun, compares his love's eyes to the sun, draws on Greek mythology, et cetera. There are many more examples of how this poem is typical for an early and traditional sonnet... English or Italian. Granted it has a different rhyme scheme than the original Italian sonnets, but that does little to help it's case of "invention" for me. Astrophil is obviously speaking from the heart, but does not achieve this through any new or non-conventional form.
I think it is human nature to look for new ways to express ourselves and I appreciate that Sidney is trying to do this, but before him there was Sir Thomas Wyatt, and before him there was Petrarch, and before him there was Lentini and even he only "rediscovered" the sonnet form.