Universality and the Particular Essay -- Poetry Literature Authors Wri

Universality and the Particular â€Å"History,† Gilman writes, â€Å"is, or should be, the story of our racial life† (Gilman 216). Eliot is a bit less succinct, but perhaps he could be most pithily summed up as saying: â€Å"The business of the poet is not to find new emotions, but to use the ordinary ones and, in working them up into poetry, to express feelings which are not in actual emotions at all† (Eliot 1919, 23). It is not immediately evident what either author means by these statements, however, they both contain the core of the argument. Both authors have their individual aims and intents with their writings, however, in spite of the differences, their arguments find more common ground than disagreement. Their terminology is certainly different, but they see the purpose and aims of literature as by and large the same. Literature, according to Gilman, originated as the â€Å"legitimate child of oral tradition, a product of natural brain activity† (218). Implicit in this, and made explicit elsewhere, is that literature is inherently a form of communication. And, â€Å"since our very life depends on some communication,† Gilman indicates very strongly that literature, both in its ancestry and in its current incarnation, provides an extremely important role in our existence† (218). She elaborates on this notion of communication, however, and specifies that a â€Å"passionate interest in other people’s lives†¦is the most vital art† (218). To her, the expression of the â€Å"great field of human life† is the task of all literature and is crucial to the very existence of society (218). We can presume that there is some bias in her argument, as people tend to think highly of their chosen craft. The essential element, however, is Gilman’s focus on t h... ...e essentially expansionist, forcing the borders outwards to include women in literature. Eliot, on the other hand, seems to be moving inward and examining and rejecting a certain type of reader, a certain type of poet. However, both, ultimately see literature as capturing the entirety of the human existence. The mechanism for doing so in their arguments differ greatly, but the intent and the final goals are the same. Where one speaks of the human soul, the other speaks of impersonality and mean the same thing. Works Cited Eliot, T.S. â€Å"The Impersonality of Poetry.† Issues in Contemporary Critical Theory: A Casebook. Ed. Peter Barry. London: Macmillan, 1987. 23. Eliot, T.S. â€Å"Hamlet and His Problems.† Hamlet. Ed. Cyrus Hoy. New York: W.W. Norton, 1963. 180-184. Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. The Yellow Wallpaper and Other Writings. New York: Bantam, 1989.