Abstract This essay focuses on the different representations of the sea in the poetry of Keats and Byron. Keats, as we know from his letters, was constantly measuring himself against Byron and trying to overcome a feeling of inferiority in relation to ‘his Lordship’. He considered Byron as rather a poseur, self-consciously cutting a figure on the stage of life, obsessed with external detail and recording the facts as he interpreted them. Byron’s poetic description of the shipwreck ‘Trinidada’ in Canto II of Don Juan is an example of the dependence of poetic effect on authentic details he culled from contemporary accounts of shipwrecks. For his part Keats was convinced of the ‘truth of the imagination’ and, as far as he was concerned, describing what he saw in his imagination was the harder task than a straight recording of facts. Although the sea allowed him freedom to roam in his imagination and consider the truth of things he was reluctant to see too deeply ‘beyond our bourn’ and enter the disconcerting sphere of ‘cold analytical philosophy’. The essay also focuses on the ‘process of composition’ in the work of both poets.

中文翻译：

---

济慈和拜伦诗歌中的海景与“想象的真相”

摘要 本文重点探讨济慈和拜伦诗歌中对大海的不同表现。正如我们从他的信件中所知，济慈不断地与拜伦进行比较，并试图克服与“陛下”相关的自卑感。他认为拜伦是一个装腔作势的人，自觉地在生活舞台上刻画人物，痴迷于外部细节，并在解释时记录事实。拜伦在唐璜的 Canto II 中对沉船“特立尼达”的诗意描述是诗歌效果依赖于他从当代沉船描述中挑选出来的真实细节的一个例子。就济慈而言，他坚信“想象的真实”，对他而言，描述他在想象中看到的东西比直接记录事实更难。尽管大海让他可以自由地在想象中漫游并思考事物的真相，但他不愿意太深入地“超越我们的本性”并进入“冷酷的分析哲学”的令人不安的领域。这篇文章还关注两位诗人作品中的“创作过程”。