Zaleski 1

T.S. Eliots Use of the Objective Correlative

By Scott Zaleski
University of Delaware 13
8 May 2013

T.S. Eliot was once quoted saying, It is obvious that we can no more explain a passion to a
person who has never experienced it than we can explain light to the blind. Those deep emotions and
sensory experiences inside of a poem were what Eliot held most dear to him. Eliot was a man
completely enamored and fascinated with emotions and how he could accurately portray them to his
readers. To do so, Eliot often turned to the idea of the objective correlative, which to him was less static
and more dynamic than any other literary device. The objective correlative was described by Eliot
himself as a sort of inanimate or animal-like object that could help reveal the internal state of a character
in a piece of literature. In several of his works, Eliot explored this theory of the objective correlative,
specifically after 1917. From his dramatic monologues to his examination of the lead character in
Shakespeares Hamlet, Eliot showed how this precise literary device is most crucial in a piece of work.
In this essay, I will argue how in two of his works, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Hamlet and
his Problems, Eliot shows the importance of the objected correlative and how influential it was in his
illustrious career.
Eliot described the objective correlative as, a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which
shall be the formula of that particular emotion; such that when the external facts, which must terminate
in sensory experience, are given, the emotion is immediately evoked (1921). Before one can accurately
argue this sort of premise, the differentiation between the object correlative and other similar literary
devices is necessary to explore. Though similar in many ways, the objective correlative and the more
Zaleski 2

common idea of a metaphor carry some subtle differences that make them almost seem like foils for one
another. A more concise way to separate the two is to say that metaphors tend to be more distant, while
the objective correlative is more inclined to create a more closely assembled reaction. Metaphors create
a more stagnant response in the reader, since they do not often generate a deep emotional response. For
example, a simple metaphor to describe the state of complete and utter loneliness would be, he was an
eagle depraved of its wings. This sort of metaphor can only affect the reader to a certain degree,
because while the audience can understand that the speaker is missing a piece of himself, they do not
know to what extent, therefore they cannot truly connect to the metaphor. However, with the objective
correlative, that line could possibly be re-written as, he silently shrieks towards the desolate bridge. In
this sense, the loneliness and the sadness inside this character is almost immediately understood. There
was nothing in the statement that explicitly said that the man was alone, yet it was nonetheless
comprehended to mean the same thing. Although the lines of metaphor and objective correlative can be
difficult to observe at times, the distinguishing nature of the objective correlative as an indirect
description of an inner emotional state can be, at times, undeniable.
In perhaps one of his most renowned works, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, Eliot helps to
initiate his readers into the beginnings of his experience with the objective correlative. Throughout the
poem, Eliot has a way of invoking a specific sort of emotion with each line. Half-deserted streets, in
line 4 and restless nights, in line 6 instantly convey this sense of a sleepless misery. Eliot does not
blatantly declare that the speaker is a lonely man filled with a great sense of grief, but rather, he
illustrates it through the objects around him. The narrator is not presenting his emotions here, but rather,
he is representing them. With each carefully composed line that describe waves that have blown
black, the speaker is indirectly summoning a precise feeling inside of the reader, which is not
understood, but felt. The endless possibility of Eliots words, coupled with their ambiguity, is what
Zaleski 3

makes the objective correlative so unique and appealing. In just the second line of the poem the reader is
exposed to, When the evening is spread out against the sky / Like a patient etherized upon a table
(Eliot, 2-3). The vagueness is instantly stimulating, because there is no direct connection between the
two compared objects. The line itself can be interpreted many ways externally, but the emotions
gathered from the line are very real and in that regard, very similar. Though the reader may not be able
to make a direct connection to the evening and the patient, the feeling of unconsciousness, helplessness
and confusion are all embedded in their internal state. The feeling induced by an etherized patient is one
of complete vulnerability and that emotion is triggered into the mind of the reader, regardless of whether
or not the substance of the line is completely understood.
Related to the etherized patient, Eliot incites similar sensations with, And when I am
formulated, sprawling on a pin / When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall (Eliot, 57-8). The direct
relationship between the speaker and being pinned to the wall is somewhat unclear and once again,
indistinct. However, using the objective correlative, the speaker shows how his main intention is not for
the reader to understand, but to feel. Eliot is calling upon the reader to feel the vulnerable and painful
nature of being pinned, rather than understanding as to why. Comprehension is always secondary to the
emotion that is being called upon, which is seen when Prufrock references a desire to squeeze the
universe into a ball (Eliot, 92). There is an element that shows a desire of power and control in that
phrase and while there is no explanation on where to displace those emotions, they are still emotions that
are summoned.
One of the main reasons the objective correlative is so important is when these specific lines are
read, the internal connection is instantly made. Using a simile or a metaphor in these instances would
not do it justice, because they would create a sense of disconnect between the speaker and the reader.
The reader can understand a metaphors meaning, but the feeling associated with that meaning could be
Zaleski 4

lost in translation. Eliot easily could have used like or as or compared the speaker to a creature that
felt slighted, but it would not directly produce the feeling of jealousy, sickness and confusion as the
objective correlative of, the yellow fog that rubs its back upon the window-panes (1917). Concrete
metaphors and a more supreme understanding of each line would be damaging to the piece, for it would
make the reader more prepared and more emotionally stable than that of J. Alfred Prufrock. For
example, if the lines read more closely with I felt alone as a sunken boat, would a reader not have an
uncertain or vague idea of to what extent those emotions were felt?
There is an argument to be made that the objective correlative in The Love Song of J. Alfred
Prufrock, helps to move the poem further in the only way that it can progress. Though the piece is
labeled as a dramatic monologue, the rules of the genre are not completely fulfilled. The criteria for a
dramatic monologue usually entails a speaker who may or may not be the poet themselves, who interacts
with the audience, that remains silent. The third criterion is to express character development or growth
within the speaker, themselves. However, in Prufrock, the third criteria of growth within the speaker
seems to be absent from the poem. Dramatic monologues, such as Tennysons Ulysses, usually show an
enhancement of character or growth in personality in the narrator, yet The Love Song of J. Alfred
Prufrock, appears to fail miserably. The character of Prufrock seems to be the same person at the start of
the poem as he was at the end. The only real progression lies in the way we understand the narrator,
which is where the aspect of the objective correlative comes into play and truly shows its importance.
Though we may not understand the exact reasoning behind the narrators actions, we are completely
able to comprehend his internal state because the feelings that Eliot invokes in the reader mirror those of
Prufrock. While there is never a concrete understanding of why he is stuck in such a dormant life, the
reader is able to understand the concept of how he is feeling in that life. By the end of the poem, when
Eliots reference to mermaids act as an objective correlative of the horrible realization of being
Zaleski 5

shipwrecked, it is clear to the reader exactly how the narrator feels. He feels too fragile to move; for fear
that hell break. He feels lost in this giant world, surrounded by a sea of loneliness. These emotions are
easily inferred by the progressive objective correlative in the poem. Thus the third criterion of the
dramatic monologue is fulfilled, solely due to the development of the unspoken connection between the
speaker and his audience.
With The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, Eliot showed the development of the objective
correlative which he later mastered in, The Waste Land. He uses this tool to create a whole new level
of connection to the reader. The objective correlate hits the reader on an entirely different level than
most of the other literary devices, such as metaphor or simile. Instead of having the narrator compare an
X with a Y, Eliot opts for just the X, thus allowing that single entity to mirror an exact, distinct emotion
internally. I should have been a pair of ragged claws / Scuttling across the floors of silent seas (Eliot,
73-4). Without the objective correlative, there is no way to truly capture the feeling of loneliness and
abandonment. To continue that idea one step further, the lacking of that feeling takes the most powerful
component away from the poem, which is forming an expressive bond with the narrator. Though Eliot
was still tinkering with the idea of the theory, Prufrock showed how he wanted to stray from the norm to
form something that was bigger than just a comparison or understanding, but rather an expressive way to
render the authors feelings within the reader.
To see just how important this idea was in shaping his work, one not look any further than
Eliots first collection of poems from 1907 to 1910. Though the poems are still structurally sound, there
is a noticeable disconnect, which prevents the reader from completely engaging the poem. One poem,
such as Song, written in 1907, is laced with many skillfully described lines of nature, yet it is also
dominated by words that are unable to be experienced within the reader. He uses personification with
the gentle fingers of the breeze and metaphor with the wild roses in your wreath, yet there is no
Zaleski 6

objective correlative to be found. The poem then, as it foretells, reads more like a song and not
something that the reader can use to experience memory or a specific emotion. The human elements in
nature are there, but there is nothing present that helps the reader understand how this beauty around the
speaker makes him feel. Even the roses that are abundant around this woman just articulate the external
qualities, while failing to express the speakers internal emotion.
Years later, Eliot would dive deeper into this idea of the correlative with his paper, Hamlet and
his Problems. As he himself points out, Hamlet is dominated by an emotion which is inexpressible,
because it is in excess of the facts as they appear It is thus a feeling which he cannot understand; he
cannot objectify it, and it therefore remains to poison life and obstruct action (Eliot, 1921). In contrast
to Shakespeares other works, Eliot claims there is a noticeable lack of objective correlative in Hamlet
that significantly weakens not just the title character, but the play as a whole. For example, Eliot
specifically singles out a scene in Shakespeares Macbeth. When the Lady Macbeth painfully
reminiscences of all the murders while sleepwalking, she describes her internal struggle solely through
vivid images that she recreates. Heres the smell of the blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not
sweeten this little hand. Oh, Oh, Oh! (Shakespeare, Act V-1). The sensory experiences that the Lady
conjures make it clear to the audience the full extent of her pain. The blood that will never wash away
represents the feeling of constant pain and anguish and that emotion is instantaneously induced
internally.
On the other side of the spectrum, claims Eliot, is Prince Hamlet whose emotion the reader
cannot fully identify without an objective correlative. Eliot argues that Hamlet masks his emotions
behind repetition and a fanciful way with words that unfortunately carry no substance. This, as a result,
disengages the character to a certain degree. The Prince of Denmarks lack of connection to the external,
disallows any chance for one to understand the internal. Without an objective correlative, or a means of
Zaleski 7

connecting ones internal feelings to that of an inanimate object, there is a dissociation problem where
the reader cannot truly understand Hamlet, because he does not truly understand himself. Eliot points to
Hamlets famous soliloquies in the play as proof that Hamlet disguises his feelings in vague,
unanswerable questions such as what dreams may come, while concealing any true motive with
indistinct puns which entirely delay the action of the long play. While Lady Macbeths internal struggle
is immediately evoked in the minds of the audience with objective correlatives of her constant washing
of her hands and her descriptions of the amount of blood she has seen, Hamlet tends to repeat vague
questions like to be or not to be which do not allow the audience to form an emotional response with
him (Shakespeare, 3-1).
Eliot appeared to have such a fixation with Hamlet, more than likely due to a regret that a
character so fascinating and similar to his own creations was not able to be fleshed out in an appropriate
manner. One could also make the assumption that Eliot was in a personal competition with the English
author. While Eliot utilizes every opportunity to praise Shakespeare, he is unable to let go of the fact that
Hamlet became a much bigger project than the famous playwright was able to handle. Whether Eliot
thought he could have written the story better using his objective correlative is a question that deserves
to be pondered. In comparison to works where he felt Shakespeare shined, such as Antony and
Cleopatra, Eliot believed that Hamlet spent too much time avoiding the crisis at hand, which was the
guilt associated with Hamlets mother. Without an external object to displace these strong, deeply-
rooted feelings, the play suffered traumatically. Eliot argued that the if the play did not waste so much
time on elongated soliloquies that delayed the action and focused more on the Princes internal struggle,
the play would have been done justice.
Eliots case is seen more clearly in Hamlets soliloquy in Act 2, Scene 2, where he cites, now I
am alone, and rambles on that he is pigeon liverd and lack gall (Shakespeare, 555-83). These
Zaleski 8

generalities do initially suggest that this man is upset, that he is misunderstood, but the connection is
stifled there. The reader simply cannot gauge to the extent of his loneliness or possibly form an
emotional attachment to his cowardly feelings. Eliot would have preferred Shakespeare utilize the
literary device and help the audience express empathy for Hamlet. With a simple allusion to the sight of
his ghostly father or the invisible blood that forever lie on his Mothers unfaithful hands, the audience
would be able to incite a similar emotional response that would make the characters plight and his
subsequent fall much more personal and effectively lasting.
Eliot was not alone in his frustration with the character of Hamlet in Shakespeare. Paul
McCombe in his essay, Toward an Objective Correlative, sided with Eliot in his assessment that
Hamlets internal quarrel was never properly drawn out. McCombe, looking at those who attempted to
bring the play to life through theatre or film, wrote that, the important point is that Eliot raises
questions about Hamlet's motivation and the source of his desire, questions which continue to bewilder
anyone who produces the play (McCombe, 1997). However, McCombe notes that when Shakespeares
interpretation was being performed, the objective correlative is seen more clearly. What Shakespeare
was unable to do with words, a film or a theatre can do with visual images that affect the senses more
definitively, an idea of which Eliot would have agreed.
Eliot once wrote, more people have thought Hamlet a work of art because they found it
interesting, than have found it interesting because it is a work of art. It is the Mona Lisa of literature
(Eliot, 1921). Eliot was well-known for his experience in the art world, specifically painting. The idea of
visual imagery, no matter how it was conveyed, was an idea held very dear to Eliot. The objective
correlative in literature is words that affect the senses. Line by line, Eliot wants to convey words that
you can see, feel or experience in every single way. This is perhaps why he compares the Mona Lisa to a
popular play which he felt was not up to par. Similar to the painting, Hamlet is unable to be understood.
Zaleski 9

It is aesthetically pleasing, but there is no substance that the audience can connect with (DeLaura,
2012). The ambiguity of Da Vincis Mona Lisa, with her faint smile and dull colors, leave the
spectator unattached and remote. The painting, just like the play, grabs our attention only to let us down
in its problematic nature of being unable to be comprehended or relatable.
While there are endless possibilities for the objective correlative in many of Hamlets excerpts of
private dialogue, it is avoided to the point where the reader can barely sympathize with the suicidal
prince. However, there were many opponents to Eliots way of thinking. Often lambasted as too
complex or impractical, the objective correlative was not as admired as Eliot would have preferred.
Part of the debate arises from the ambiguous nature of the phrase: is it to be read as an adjective
followed by a noun, or as a noun followed by an adjective? (Cowley, 1975). This argument stands on
weak feet, however, since it carries the same problem Eliot has already addressed. The most important
aspect of the objective correlative should be placed on its meaning and connection with a certain
emotion; by merely focusing on the words, the reader loses out on the importance of the feeling. It
would be easy to assume that Eliot was quite clear in the sense that the objective correlative simply
relates to the correlation between the object and the emotion it invokes.
Without looking too closely at semantics of the issues, other writers, like David L. Stevenson in
his essay, An Objective Correlative for T.S. Eliots Hamlet, explain the larger issues with the Eliots
analysis of Hamlet. Stevenson writes:
Shakespeare wrote the play, as we now have it, with full awareness of its peculiar
structure. Further, one might hazard without great risk that the lack of events and actions in the
play to act as objective correlatives for Hamlets feelings was a deliberate, a necessary result of
Shakespeares sense of the inherent design of the play.
Zaleski 10

However, Stevensons analysis is not without flaws of its own. It would be plausible to assume
that it would be seemingly impossible attempt to convey intense emotion through lack of action. Unlike
Stevenson, Eliot applies a more conceivable answer that, We find Shakespeares Hamlet not in the
action, not in any quotations that we might select, so much as in an unmistakable tone which is
unmistakably not in the earlier play (Eliot, 1921). Eliot noted in Hamlet and his Problems, that there
is noticeable evidence that Shakespeare simply revised previous versions, such as Thomas Kyds Ur-
Hamlet, while also recycling lines from their respected soliloquies. Furthermore, Eliot continues to
attack Shakespeares motive. In Kyds version, Hamlet clearly feigns his madness to instigate his plot of
revenge. Yet Shakespeares Hamlet is more of an ambiguous man, who is too focused on the world and
people around him to understand himself. In summarization of these problems, it is clear that Eliot
would have been correct on his attack on Shakespeare, because the playwright instilled an entirely new
psyche in a character that was built for another version of the play.
The two works I have chosen to study Eliots objective correlative even have a correlation of
their own, as his fascination with Hamlet was first seen in The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. Eliot
writes in the aforementioned poem, No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be" (Eliot, 111).
This certainly seems like a logical starting point in Eliots analysis of the Shakespearean prince. Eliot
appears to be torn on the character of Hamlet, for on one hand he is aware of the many problems the
character presents, yet he is undeniably fascinated by him. Eliot, in a sense, is using the objective
correlative through Hamlet in his love song. By addressing the idea of Hamlet, he is invoking this
feeling of a lost, misunderstood man, like Prufrock. On a deeper level, Eliot is also addressing the
problems of Hamlet through the correlative. His main problems with Hamlet, that he goes into detail
with the 1921 essay is that Hamlet is unable to make an emotional connection. Hamlet is a thoughtful
man who lacks action and an objectifying way to relate to him, which is exactly the way Prufrock feels.
Zaleski 11

Eliot is using, what in his eyes, is the incorrect way that Shakespeare portrayed his leading man as an
objective correlative for the way Eliots own man, Prufrock, internally feels. In this regard, Eliot is
succeeding through Shakespeares failure. Eliot uses Hamlet as an objective correlative to show how
Prufrocks innate madness, his troubled relationship with women and his confusion, while also showing
how he was unable to explain his emotions or actions that were caused.
In conclusion, Eliots use of the objective correlative is one of the main reasons his work has had
such a lasting effect on his readers. He was once quoted saying, the objective correlative must satisfy
the reader or theatrical onlooker that it is the equivalent of the author's feeling (1921). This quasi-
symbiotic relationship between the author and his subjects was an important aspect to his poetry. Eliot
realized that poetry is one of the most personal forms of literature that can be expressed and the proper
way to write it involves a play on the readers emotions to match that of the poets. Eliot was aware of
the ability to transform a simple line into much more using variations of the objective correlative. The
idea that the only proper way to express emotion through an inanimate object is something that changed
the way Eliots career progressed. While a simile and metaphor can describe or be used as a symbol, the
objective correlative can transfer emotions. The objective correlative does not allude to, but rather,
evokes or awakens a certain feeling inside of the reader which makes it inherently different and entirely
more intimate than other literary devices. When an author can summon an exact emotional response
within the reader through an objectification process, the objective correlative has succeeded, just like
T.S. Eliot.




Zaleski 12

Annotated Bibliography
Cowley, J.E. A Source of T.S. Eliots Objective Correlative. Review of English Studies
(1975) XXVI (103): 320-321. 4 May 2013.
Cowleys assessment of the objective correlative was an important aspect in my paper that was
important to gloss over. The objective correlative is widely considered to be a term that causes bouts of
confusion. Cowley went into great detail upon how the term was ambiguous in its parts of speech with,
If its a noun an objective becomes virtually indistinguishable from an object(Cowley, 1975).
However, the article seemed to spend an excessive amount of time confusing the reader even more with
its assessment on the befuddled nature of the objective correlative.
In my paper, I made the argument that the confusion was less significant than Cowley made it out to be.
The main aspect of the objective correlative is to create an emotion response and not focus too heavily
on the means that the speaker gets that across. The main argument I made from Cowleys essay is that
the title of the literary device is explicitly stated, since it revolves around the correlation of an emotion
through an object.
DeLaura, David. J. Pater and Eliot: The Origin of the Objective Correlative. Modern
Language Quarterly. Vol. 26, 3. 426-31. mlq.dukejournals.org. 5 May 2013.
The DeLaura article was very useful in discovering the essence of Eliot in his analysis of the objective
correlative. The author delved deep into the artful side of Eliot, showing how his painting influenced his
judgment of other works of art. DeLaura glossed over many of Eliots assessments on past art, such as
DaVincis Mona Lisa, which was influential in gathering information on how Eliot compared the
famous painting to Hamlet.
In my paper, I focused on a quote DeLaura gathered from Eliot which declared, Art is an escape from
personality. The paragraph in my own work that details the comparisons between the play of Hamlet
and the painting of Mona Lisa helps to further show that quote come to fruition in Eliots work. I chose
to argue from DeLauras article that the painting of Mona Lisa mirrored the failure of Hamlet because
they both share the common trait of being pleasing to the eye, but not the senses.

Eliot, T.S. Hamlet and His Problems. The Sacred Wood. 1921. 7 April 2013.
Hamlet and his Problems is one of the most important looks into Eliots idea of the objective correlative.
In the essay from 1921, Eliot not only goes into great detail about the literary device, but does so using a
powerful example from early literature, Hamlet. When Eliot writes, The only way of expressing
emotion in the form of art is by finding an objective correlative, he is specifically referencing his
theory that the success of Shakespeares Hamlet does not exceed its flaws. Eliot truly believed that the
character of Hamlet was never thawed out to the point where the audience could truly grasp his internal
Zaleski 13

emotions. The character was too confusing and flawed for the reader to identify with him on more of an
emotional level.
In my paper, I spent a good portion focusing on why exactly Eliot felt that Hamlet was not a complete
character. I focused the central theme on how Eliot believed that, Hamlet (the man) is dominated by an
emotion which is inexpressible, because it is in excess of the facts as they appear (1921). This idea is
crucial to the overall message of my paper of the objective correlative. It appeared so often in Eliots
work and was influential throughout his career. Eliots essay on Hamlet helped complete the argument
in my thesis, because it showed a pristine example of what Eliot considered to be a failure in literature;
this failure being the lack of a properly portrayed objective correlative.

Eliot, T.S. The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. Prufrock and Other Observations. The Egoist
LTD. 1917. 1-131.
The second most important work in my paper was The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. While
not only being one of Eliots famous pieces of literature, it also features some of the most important
examples of the objective correlative.
Eliot composes this character of Alfred Prufrock and through his objective correlative, describes the
world around him and how it makes him feel. With this objective correlative, rather than tell you his
emotions, he leaves you clues, and shows you.
The idea of the objective correlative is constantly repeated with lines like a patient etherized on a
table. In my paper, I hoped to show how important these lines are in creating an instant emotional
response in the reader, unlike any other literary device could accomplish.

McCombe, John P. "Toward An Objective Correlative: The Problem Of Desire In Franco
Zeffirelli's Hamlet." Literature Film Quarterly 25.2 (1997): 125-131. MLA International Bibliography.
Web. 7 May 2013.
In this article from 1997, McCombe discusses the many interpretations of Shakespeares Hamlet.
While focusing his main article on how film and theatre adaptations have dealt with its many quirks and
problems, McCombe spends a good portion of the essay on T.S. Eliots idea of the objective correlative.
Specifically, he relates it to how Eliot suggests that Hamlet's emotions are in excess of the facts as they
appear (1997). In addition, McCombe also writes how Eliot would perceive a film version of the play,
since he believes that the objective correlative is easier to convey with visual imagery.
In my paper, I focused on how McCombe was one writer who was in agreement with Eliot over his
assessment of Shakespeare. McCombes own analysis that the desires of the main character of Hamlet
Zaleski 14

were very unclear and complex was very much in tune with Eliots perception that Hamlet is a
completely flawed character.

Stevenson, David L. An Objective Correlative for T.S. Eliots Hamlet. The Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism , Vol. 13, No. 1 (Sep., 1954), pp. 69-79. The American Society for
Aesthetics. 5 May 2013.
Stevensons article was one of the most intriguing ventures into Eliots Hamlet and his Problems,
mainly due to his disagreement. While Stevenson did agree with Eliot to an extent, he often found
himself defending Shakespeares take on his famous character. The article quickly addressed how the
objective correlative was an unpopular idea in the literature community with some reading Eliots take
on literary device and responding, I feel that English is language which I do not know (1954).
Stevenson then continued his analysis on Shakespeare while bringing up the idea that perhaps
Shakespeare wrote the play with a different intention than Eliot presumed.
In my own work, I hoped to defend Eliots stance on Hamlet, while simultaneously questioning
Stevensons. In his article, he suggests possible areas for objective correlative that I believed to have
many flaws. My argument suggests that Stevenson did not fully understand the concept of the objective
correlative, based on his suggestions that Shakespeare wrote the play with full awareness of its
peculiar structure. In my paper, I go into detail on how Shakespeares odd organization was one of its
major flaws in not conveying a true desire in Hamlet, which solidifies Eliots theory on the matter.

Works Consulted
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet (The New Folger Library Shakespeare). Simon & Schuster; New Folger
Edition, 2003.

Tennyson, Alfred Lord. Ulysses. Poetry X. Ed. Jough Dempsey. 17 Nov 2003. 08 May. 2013
<http://poetry.poetryx.com/poems/1847/>.