"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" Vs. "To His Coy Mistress"

“To His Coy Mistress” by Andrew Marvell and “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” by T.S. Eliot both address the ideologies of “time”. “Time” is defined as “the indefinite continued progress of existence and events in the past, present, and future regarded as a whole” by the New Oxford American Dictionary. Ironically, neither Andrew Marvell nor T.S. Eliot symbolize “time” as that proclamation. In “To His Coy Mistress”, the speaker begins by describing the “desirable” world that men and women would dream of but later contradicts himself by stating that time doesn’t last forever. The speaker connotes that seizing the moment is necessary as a way of expressing his and his mistress’ love towards each other. In opposition to “To His Coy Mistress” but more along the lines of the New Oxford American Dictionary, “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” suggests that time is endless and that anything and everything can be experienced within one lifetime. Thus, the ethic that seizing the moment is essential as specified by Andrew Marvell is challenged by T.S. Eliot’s idea that an everlasting “time” presents itself to be available.