CR wrote, quoting Craig Raine,
"The poet articulates the inexpressible -- and makes the culture more articulate and, therefore, more sensible to subtle feeling . . . Every artist starts with his emotions and his autobiography -- and addresses the task of transcending mere subjectivity. Self-expression isn't the sole aim. The aim is to create an intelligible work of art."
Sometimes the "aim of the poet", at least initially, may be much more personal than Raine is admitting. Consider this quote from TSE in his 1953 essay, "The Three Voices of Poetry" - p98-99:
"In a poem which is neither didactic nor narrative, and not animated by any other social purpose, the poet may be concerned solely with expressing in verse - using all his resources of words, with their history, their connotations, their music - this obscure impulse. He does not know what he has to say until he has said it; and in the effort to say it he is not concerned with making other people understand anything. He is not concerned, at this stage, with other people at all: only with finding the right words or, anyhow, the least wrong words. He is not concerned whether anybody else will ever listen to them or not, or whether anybody else will ever understand them if he does. He is oppressed by a burden which he must bring to birth in order to obtain relief. Or, to change the figure of speech, he is haunted by a demon, a demon against which he feels powerless, because in its first manifestation it has no face, no name, nothing; and the words, the poem he makes, are a kind of form of exorcism of this demon. In other words again, he is going to all that trouble, not in order to communicate with anyone, but to gain relief from acute discomfort; and when the words are finally arranged in the right way - or in what he comes to accept as the best arrangement he can find - he may experience a moment of exhaustion, of appeasement, of absolution, and of something very near annihilation, which is in itself indescribable. And then he can say to the poem: 'Go away! Find a place for your self in a book - and don't expect me to take any further interest in you.' "
-- Tom --
"[T]he poet is occupied with frontiers of consciousness beyond which words fail,
though meanings still exist."
'The Music of Poetry' (1942)
In 'The Social Function of Poetry' (1945)...
Eliot revisits the site of this second 'psychological' objective correlative.
Listing various functions of poetry, Eliot mentions
'the expression of something we have experienced but have no words for,
which enlarges our consciousness or refines our sensibility'.
This is the core of his argument in this essay --
that, without expression, our emotions will atrophy.
The poet's role is to find objective expression for the purely subjective.
The poet articulates the inexpressible -- and makes the culture more articulate
and, therefore, more sensible to subtle feeling.
This is quite different from the idea of the objective correlative as restricted to drama.
Put like this,
the objective correlative looks more intelligible
-- a refinement of the idea of impersonality in art.
Every artist starts with his emotions and his autobiography
-- and addresses the task of transcending mere subjectivity.
Self-expression isn't the sole aim. The aim is to create an intelligible work of art.
The two functions of the objective correlative
-- to make emotion manifest for a theatre audience;
to articulate one's inexplicable feelings --
are conjoined a little uncomfortably, like unidentical Siamese twins.
Craig Raine, T.S. ELIOT, pp. 134-135
quite a lucid exposition
--- On Mon, 12/29/08, Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]>