This study of symbolic language in literature and religion is wide-ranging, but not systematic in a way that I, at least, could keep in mind. Consequently, as I ranged along with Wheelwright, I frequently felt a bit lost, unsure of what the big picture was and where in it we stood. The key to it all, which was the chief reason of my interest in the book, would seem to be Wheelwright's claim that truly poetic language, through the creation of new meaning, is a mode of apprehending, even of creating, new being (cf. 70-71). However, it seems to me that the attempt to deliver on that claim, concentrated in the final four pages of the chapter, "Expressive Statement and Truth," amounted to little more than an argument that poetic truth is based on a kind of willing suspension of disbelief in order to participate in the world of a poem and entertain claims of or about that world as true in that world's own terms. Still, the chapter ends with this fine statement: "The ground-bass of poetic truth is the truth, contextual but real, of man's possible redemption through the fullest imaginative response" (205). For all Wheelwright's provocative turns of phrase, though, I had hoped for something more robust, along the lines of an account of poetic truth as what arises when we assent to let a poem (or other poetic utterance) act to "true" our imagination and our world into conformity with the poem's insight - a tri-polar participation, then. Maybe that's for me to write.