So "unity" does mean "unity"; it just is not simply a notion of poetic form: it's a complex term applicable to many things and concepts. I suggest, if you want a discussion, you read my article, since to explain it would be to rewrite all that here. Simply announcing that your notion of it stands because it has been said does not follow either.
>>> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]
> 05/03/10 10:17 PM >>>
Well, of course unity is not new with the new critics or with their
immediate predecessors, and you haven't said anything to indicate what
you do think it is, so for now that "unity" does mean "unity" seems very
Nancy Gish wrote:
> Actually, it's not safe to say. It is not just the notion of an
> aesthetic unity in the sense of New Critics--who came slightly later
> and were influenced by Eliot but not these sources.
> >>> Ken Armstrong <[log in to unmask]
> 05/03/10 5:37 PM >>>
> Nancy Gish wrote:
> > What he means by this is extremely complicated, and it draws on many
> > sources. I traced the terminology through his texts over several
> > years, and the origins of his terms can be demonstrated.
> > If anyone is interested, it is in the book with Cassandra.
> I'll have to take a look. But for now, when he says "unity," it must
> be safe to say that he means "unity," telescoping and Diana's statement
> notwithstanding. And esotericisms be as they may, one cannot form a new
> whole without a unity. The "trick" is to find the unifying element.
> Ken A
> > >>> 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
> > <http://personal.centenary.edu/%7Edhavird/TSEMetaPoets.html>
> > refreshing the memory --
> > CR