Jennifer Formichelli wrote:
>>> have no further context outside of themselves, unlike novels.
>> the poems
>> I don't understand what goes into your thinking here. More, please?
> I regret my phrasing here; what I meant to say was that the characters,
> or the figures--say Prufrock & Sweeney-- have no further context (as
> they do in novels, where characters are created, which is not always so
> in poems; certainly not Eliot's). However, poems, with the exception of
> allusions contained within them, or historical figures of which they
> partake (Pound, Dante, for instance) don't offer further context. Ricks
> discusses this in his writings on Prufrock in T. S. Eliot and
> Prejudice, better than I can.
I'm sorry, Jennifer. I don't get it. Emma Bovary exists in her novel;
Sweeney exists in his poem. I know either the characters nor the works
are identical, but I don't understand the nature of the difference you
posit. Shall I look in the index for JAP or Sweeney for CR's ideas?