on to women, love, g-d, sex, soul, mind, and body, Keats and Pope have taken different outlooks on many similar issues. Keats has given the reader a more intense feeling of desire and lust, then Pope. However, when myth and love collide Alexander Pope has answered with his tale of g-d's, angels and afterlife. As an empirical narcissistic person, I have romanticized about the romances Keats has described. His inner thoughts are more clear, then those of Pope. Additionally, Pope is more morbid and in a way sour about his shortcomings in life. Which are expressed significantly in many of Pope's images. For instance, "poetic eyes" is used by Pope on line 124. This image can be expressed as a better way for the reader to see that life imitates art! Now, viewing both works in detail has brought out an arousal of insecurity and misunderstood quality. However, each has distinguished its own identity by its style. Referring back to the comparison of Pope and Keats styles can be quite an enhancement upon the cerebral context in each poem. Pope has strictly concerned himself with literary merit, and ghostly apparitions of old tales that haunt all writers of the possibility for brilliance. Keats however, has staked his claim as a romantic idealist of love and thought. Mind, body and soul are key factors in both of these works. Heaven is portrayed as a savior to man, and an unforsaken goal for others. Spirituality reigns deep within the hearts of both Keats and Pope. Consequence is not an issue, but the ability to repent through words of wisdom is. This is what keeps Keats and Pope sane(As well as many other writers, including myself). With wisdom comes age, and with desire comes lust. Therefore, romantic poets need to be preserved for their tremendous ability to stretch the common ability to comprehend all of life's trials and tribulations as seen here in all its glo...
