It is conventional for people now to have lives rather than a life, but it is not always clear whose lives they are. He wanted readers to ask questions like: what is the poet trying to persuade us вЂ“ and himself вЂ“ of? What is he intending to say, and how, if at all, has he succeeded? What are вЂthe ideas his mind was working uponвЂ™? What is the story being told? Literature, unlike propaganda, was writing in which people were in at least two minds about what mattered to them, but still meant what they said. He didnвЂ™t want us to think of poetry as a privileged use of words exempt from ordinary considerations. he must invent a way of hinting at it by metaphors, which are then called imagesвЂ™ вЂ“ he promoted what he called вЂargufyingвЂ™ in poetry, вЂthe kind of arguing we do in ordinary life, usually to get our own wayвЂ™. Against what he took to be the prevailing modern orthodoxy of Symbolist poetry вЂ“ вЂthe main rule is that a poet must never say what he wants to say directly. it might be a good thing to try to show the clash of different philosophies, and social comedy, and quote lines of poetry by people quite different from you that you have thought especially good.вЂ™ These were the things which Empson consistently admired in poetry, and which he wrote about with such eloquence and intemperance in what had begun to seem even to him a long war against the doctrinaire in literature. Replying in 1934 to a Japanese poet who had asked for advice about writing вЂmodernвЂ™ poetry, William Empson recommended вЂverse with a variety of sorts of feeling in it.

Survival heroes ver heroes vs hustlers