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.

As long as convicted prisoner is a citizen of the nation, his/her fundamental human rights must be guaranteed to the maximum extent in accordance with the constitutional spirit within the range of not becoming a barrier to accomplish a legitimate penological purpose. When we put too much emphasis on protection of human rights of prisoners insomuch as to disturb and violate the correctional order and regulations, however, it would not only cause life and physical safety of both prisoner and correctional officer to be threatened but to make eligible prisoners unable to return to society through correctional and reformative activities, which are basic and valid penological objectives, and also correctional institute unable to detain an offender in custody that is a premise of imprisonment. Therefore, it is required to accomplish the ultimate penological goals so much as to make convict return to society, while the state should guarantee human rights of prisoners, and, at the same time, firmly establish correctional orders. But there are contradictory relationships between protection of convict rights and establishment of correctional orders, so that problems have risen in due course from the perspective of how to achieve harmonization between the two. Then, it would not be too much to say that to maintain discipline and order in correctional institution up to an appropriate level is the most basic premise for penological practices. In this sense, it can be said that to establish correctional orders in a firm manner is essential for penological practices. If discipline and order is exceedingly strict in observance, however, convict will merely become an object to be controlled, thus that it would be not only difficult to achieve certain expected effects of correctional goals but to bring about worries to infringe human rights because of unwanted limitation of fundamental rights of individuals. So then, it is thought that to set up balanced relations between human rights protection and establishment of correctional order by harmonizing tensive relationships in between is an important task in contemporary correctional practices. In any case, limitation of fundamental human rights of convict, however, should not cross boundary that has been set in order to maintain an orderly prison life having secured physical custody of convict.