“Words, when well chosen, have so great a Force in them, that a Description often gives us more lively Ideas than the Sight of Things themselves. The Reader finds a Scene drawn in stronger Colours, and painted more to the Life in his Imagination, by the help of Words, than by an actual Survey of the Scene which they describe. In this Case the Poet seems to get the better of Nature; he takes, indeed, the Landskip after her, but gives it more vigorous Touches, heightens its Beauty, and so enlivens the whole Piece, that the Images which flow from the Objects themselves appear weak and faint, in Comparison of those that come from the Expressions. The Reason, probably, may be, because in the Survey of any Object we have only so much of it painted on the Imagination, as comes in at the Eye; but in its Description, the Poet gives us as Free a View of it as he pleases, and discovers to us several Parts, that either we did not attend to, or that lay out of our Sight when we first beheld it. As we look on any Object, our Idea of it is, perhaps, made up of two or three simple Ideas; but when the Poet represents it, he may either give us a more complex Idea of it, or only raise in us such Ideas as are most apt to affect the Imagination.”
Joseph Addison in “Secondary Pleasures of the Imagination: Consideration Limited to Literature” No. 416
I really like the idea that what we see and comprehend is “made up,” or attended, by “two or three simple Ideas.” It would be worthwhile to ponder what combinations of simple ideas make up our views of things, and by what means we have acquired those simple ideas we use as the building blocks of our thoughts and impressions.
I also like the notion that literature is useful for introducing complexity to our viewpoints because it taps into our imaginations and has the ability to focus our attention on aspects and ideas that we typically would not pay attention to or notice.
craig morehead 