Whatever it may be, IT exists or not, and the synthesis is only brought about by an aesthetical judgment. In other words, by creation, forming, in-forming. Webb in the same book says this on Stevens:
If the early Stevens is reminiscent of Nietzsche's proclamation of the death of God and his effort to revive in an atheistic framework a pagan sense of the sacred, the later Stevens is more reminiscent of the dialectical tension between cataphatic and apophatic theology. Being and nothingness are two of the most prominent motifs in the later poems, and in Stevens' use they are actually two aspects of one reality. Being is in all things, yet never contained in them; and although it is evanescent in them, it is only in them that it can be apprehended. Consequently to approach it in poetry, one must use both positive analogies and their negations. (82)
Construction and deconstruction working at the same time, in the same stroke; thus is the destiny of poetry. (Ain't it?)
