"Defined it" ...These things do evolve. PRINTED ON PAPER IS NOT THE SAME AS CARVED IN STONE. p. ----- Original Message ----- From: Nancy Gish To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 5:40 AM Subject: Re: TS Eliot: The Metaphysical Poets Well, one might, but that is not how Eliot defines it. N >>> Chokh Raj <[log in to unmask]> 05/04/10 9:39 AM >>> One might say this of the "telescoping of images and multiplied associations", I suppose. Thanks, CR --- On Tue, 5/4/10, Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Er... the objective > correlative? > P. > > > >>> Chokh Raj 05/03/10 11:54 AM > >>> > > > > Apropos the Metaphysical poets, of their poetic > virtues, > Eliot takes > > > note of, in particular, a certain > "telescoping of images and > > > multiplied associations", and > a "heterogeneity of material > compelled > > > into > unity by the operation of the poet's > mind" -- a "put[ting] > the > > > material together again in a new unity". > > > > > > > In fine, > > > > > > "When > a poet's mind is perfectly equipped for its > work, it is > > > > constantly amalgamating disparate > experience; the ordinary > man's > > > experience is chaotic, irregular, fragmentary. > The > latter falls in > > > love, or reads Spinoza, and these two > experiences have nothing to do > > > with each other, or with > the noise of the typewriter or the smell of > > > cooking; > in the mind of the poet these experiences > are always forming > > > > new wholes. " -- T.S. Eliot, > 'The Metaphysical > Poets' > > http://personal.centenary.edu/~dhavird/TSEMetaPoets.html > > > refreshing the memory -- > > > > CR