본 논문은 존 키츠와 W.B. 예이츠가 잃어버린 대상을 재구성하고 현실과 이상 사이의 관계를 변증법으로 재창조하는 방식을 탐구한다. 키츠는 ｢그리스 항아리에 부치는 송시｣와 ｢나이팅게일에게 부치는 송가｣에서 이상적인 세계를 매혹적이면서도 도달할 수 없는 꿈의 풍경으로 묘사한다. 하지만 화자는 결국 고통스러운 현실로 되돌려진다. ｢이사벨라, 혹은 바질 화분｣에서 키츠는 이사벨라가 잃어버린 대상을 이상화하고 그녀의 자아와 우울증적 동일시를 함으로써 일시적이지만 그 대상을 되살리는 모습을 그린다. 한편 예이츠는 ｢청금석 부조｣, ｢쿨 호수의 야생 백조｣, ｢서커스단 동물들의 탈주｣에서 불완전성을 시적 상징으로 변환함으로써 현실과 이상 사이의 긴장을 그려낸다. 예이츠에게 부재는 창조적 힘으로 작용하여 현실을 재구성하면서도 상상력이 현실이나 자아를 대체하지 않는다. 존재와 부재, 상상과 현실의 상호작용은 두 시인이 이러한 이중 영역을 조화시키려는 탐구의 핵심이다.

몰개성은 경험의 진실을 가져오기 위해 예술가의 입장에서 행하는 실천 이다. 그러한 진실한 경험은 현실과 아름다움을 모두 포함한다. ‘실재적’인 능력 안에 서 우리는 몰개성의 경험이 충만함과 전체성을 가져온다면 몰개성의 미적 상태가 더 큰 이해를 암시한다는 것을 알 수 있다. T. S. 엘리엇, W. B. 예이츠와 존 키츠는 인 간 삶의 모든 의미를 ‘결집’하여 예술로 만듦으로써 ‘감수성의 메커니즘’을 고안하여 예술을 창조했다. 이 위대한 시인들에게 몰개성화의 과정은 궁극적으로 현상과 현실이 구별되는 방식에 기반을 둔다. 따라서 엘리엇은 일상의 경험을 단편, 무정부 상태 및 불규칙성과 동일시하지만 예이츠는 일상의 수준에서 나타나는 동일한 경험을 대립적 으로 본다. 한편 키츠는 탐닉이 최대 상태의 일상의 사건들과 상황들로 일상을 위치시 킨다. 전체성의 출현이 연기되는 분명한 현상에 대한 해결책으로 엘리엇, 예이츠, 키츠 는 경험의 진리를 실현하기 위한 확실한 조치인 ‘몰개성,’ ‘존재의 통일,’ ‘부정적 능 력’을 제시한다.

예이츠의 첫 시집 교차로(1889)는 낭만주의 전통에 기반을 두고 있다. 이는 시의 바탕을 이루는 낭만주의 시인들, 블레이크, 셸리에 대한 예이츠의 공감과 탐구의 반영이라고 볼 수 있다. 현실세계와 거리가 동떨어지는 경향이 있지만, 세련되고 복합적인 사상들이 형성되기 전의 젊은 시간에서만 생산될 수 있는 예술을 위한 예술, 시 자체를 향한 순수한 시 정신을 표현하고 있다. 이 논문에서는 블레이크, 워드워드, 키츠와 연결할 수 있는 예이츠의 시에 맞추고 시 작품을 구체적으로 비교한 다. 특히, 낭만주의 시와 구별되는 예이츠 특유의 독특한 시적 개성과 시를 현대적인 감각으로 발전시킨 예이츠의 시적 능력을 탐색하는 데에 중점을 두고 있다.

Yeats and Keats differently introduced their notions of time circulation and eternal life. One expressed limitations of human which could be overcome by art. And the other introduced time flowing in harmony and peace. And in one poem, we can see something lively such as young people, birds, trees, salmon-falls, and in the other poem we can find laziness and leisure. However, there is some similarity in that they introduce the subjects of circulation of life and eternal life. Yeats shows the passage of time by the Great Wheel or gyre which develops in the course of formation, fullness, decline. And Keats also presents the passage of time by using the phrases such as “swell the gourd,” “plum the hazel shell,” “warm day will never cease.” These symbolize swelling and continuance of time. So we can find the way how time is flowing in their poems. In Yeats's “Sailing to Byzantium,” time travels from a youth to an old age, and in “To Autumn,” time travels from summer to autumn. In this circulation Yeats's immortality can be reached by the media of art. And Keats gets it by the circulation of seasons. So one continues to voyage with eagerness for Byzantium in which he could find his everlasting life through the mosaic of 15th century, and the other comfortably waits for next seasons. Two poets respectively develop their poems in different ways, but they finally achieve the same subjects of ever-lasting life in the passage of time. In conclusion, Yeats pursued immortality by separating spirit from the body, because the flesh would be decayed. On the other hand, Keats thought that the immortality could be acquired by being one with time. Unlike Yeats's “Sailing to Byzantium”, Keats's “To Autumn” has a tendency to keep harmony and reconciliation, instead of confrontation. Therefore, autumn enjoys “sitting,” and “asleep” without haste.

Generally speaking, W. B. Yeats's early poetry has been thought as romantic and dreamy and criticized as a negative poetic example. But students would rather like to read these poems than his later philosophical poems. Maybe these early poems are more attractive to them because the dim yearning, homesickness and mysticism evoke their young emotion. But I think there is a more important element to attract reader's interest, that is the physical sense. The sense - sensory feeling gives a kind of elasticity of energy to Yeats's early poems. Without this sense, these poems would have degraded as those of dim exclamation about lost love or escape from the world. To study Yeats's sense we need to research some other poets who could affect young Yeats, and compare them: Keats and Hopkins. There are many good examples of sensory feeling in their poems. Thus I see a kind of affective relationship between them and realize this sensory feeling is a very important element of English poetry which we hardly find in Korean poems.

The paper defines two key terms of the last century: Deconstruction and Decreation. Emphasis is put on the second term, as it is useful to understand how Stevens composed his poetry and what he wanted to say about form and content in poetry in a modern context. In his essay "The Relations between Poetry and Painting" he talks about the term Decreation, which means the modern sensibility and mind that eye reality. Stevens' definition of decreation seems to fit well in some of Yeats's poems, the fact of which proves that it can be applied to modern poetry in general, as it has gone through the same soil and climate. Picasso exemplifies and consolidates the usefulness of the terms decreation and deconstruction. Stevens has made one term current and useful for deepening the understanding and appreciation of modern and contemporary poetry, and possibly modern and contemporary art.

There were so many similarities between Yeats's and Keats's poetry of the Goddess's poetic theme. They were eager to search for “Immortal Rose” or “Intellectual Beauty” as the Goddess; Keats said that “Beauty is truth, Truth Beauty󰠏󰠏that is all.” From this perspective, Yeats and Keats became pilgrims for the Goddess who is called Binah in Cabala. They wanted to be a Binah's priests in their works. They went on a pilgrimage of long and old mythological tales for “Immortal Rose”. For example, Yeats wrote “The Wandering of Oisin” where he wished to meet “Immortal Rose” as Goddess image. Oisin (as Yeats) went to the world of Ireland Goddess called to Tin-na-nOg (It means eternal Youth Country). As Yeats did, Keats searched for Cynthia (Goddess of the Moon) or Moneta as Saturn's priestess, too. During their pilgrimage, knowing goddess as the Mother of the universe, they were confronted with a tragic situation and continually agonized in their souls. They had to overcome the tragic boundaries between the Goddess of the Universe and themselves. The “Unity of Being” can be identified with ‘androgyny’ which is similar to God's trinity in gnostic thoughts. At last, Yeats and Keats saw the Goddess as their “Anti-selves”, and they achieved the “Unity of Being” through the long and uncomfortable journey. Yeats had a gnostic vision. His poetry owes much to a symbolism derived from the Rosicrucianism. His main idea of all works was attempting to meet the Goddess. Yeats believed in God's trinity(Man, women, son or daughter) and believed in the androgyny of God. From this concept of androgyny of God, a gnostic searched for the hidden God called Binah (Mother of God) as well as Saturn. It is Yeats's main idea that God is androgynous. This thought came from Christian Gnosticism based on the diagram of “Tree of Life” in Cabalah. Also, Keats's main idea of poetry was his searching for the lover who was also the Goddess. Even though Keats didn't write about Cabalism, he wrote that he wished to become a pagan while writing Endymion. Keats might suggest that pagan mean a gnostic. It was suggested that Yeats's and Keats's souls were triumphed by the action of Cuchulain and Hyperion. As Yeats described arriving in Byzantium, Keats's poetic career won the heaven which was the Goddess's bower. Although Keats's life was shorter than Yeats's and he had not written about Cabala, many similarities are discovered between them.