Same Leads Way to Individuality
"It is identity that makes individuality possible: poems are made out of the same images, just as poems in English are made out of the same language" (Frye 283).
So Frye is saying that through some kind of identity, an individuality for a poem can be reached. Does that mean it has to identify with a certain kind or type of poem from the past, or does it mean just similar themes and images? How can haboring similiarity foster individuality? Does this similiarity(s) help with intertextual criticisim? I guess it would because in order to compare the two or use one to criticize another, they would have to have some similiarities.
I am confused by this quote. Is he trying to say that all poems pick from a pretty much fixed set of images, symbols, and even topics, but it is the arrangement of these things that makes a poem unique, gives it it's very own identity?
I think that Frye means that the same image can bring about many different poems. For example, poets may write about a rose. However, the way they describe it would make the poets unique. There is one concept, but the interpretations bring about the individuality. It would allow for intertextuality.