This paper aims to uncover the paradoxical response Larkin has in reaction to his transcendental desire. In spite of his longing to flee from the general public, he seems not simply to neglect them. It is remarkable that his transcendental desire tends toward esthetic pleasure. Larkin deals with the ordinary mainly in a subjective view. He is no longer concerned about the meanings and values of love and work. This tendency of his is likely to be relate with the vulgarity of the modern world. In "Self the Man" marriage is regarded as a means only of fulfilling sexual desire. However, his genuine desire is to achieve a noble and permanent feelings of pleasure rather than simply a momentary delight such as comes from sex. This is shown in "High Windows." Nevertheless, he ironically hesitates to accept the true long-term feelings when it seems they are available. This explains the reason he is only satisfied with enumerating the facts regarding why he cannot discontinue work, in "Toads" and "Toads Revisited." In these poems, while he wants to be unfettered by work, he finds it difficult to evade the fact that people generally feel a call to their work. Under this context, we can understand his intention to deny the sublimated pleasure he has taken in nature and solitary places such as a church quite empty, as indicated in "Absences," "Here," and "Church Going." He evidently doesn`t ignore the fact that the average person is not highly concerned about such pleasure. His feeling guilty for his transcendental desire reminds is of the paradoxical attitude which Coleridge poses toward poets in "Kubla Khan. "Here, Coleridge guiltily protects himself against the charge of committing himself personally to the creation of such a miraculous dome in the air. We can comprehend this self-contradiction of his as an intimation that poets share the values of logic and morality with other people. The theoretical inconsistency exposed in Larkin`s poetry can also be assumed to be caused by his paradoxical attitude from his readers, he approaches them with the ordinary materials and communal morality. This attitude of Larkin seems to be not far from that of Romantic poets who adulated his readers by dealing with common things and people. Of course, his attention to his readers is for his own benefit, not for their own. It is not too much to say that it is nothing but an esthetic device to give identity to his poetry. This opinion can be proven by the fact that other characters he positively seek out integration with in his poems, are deficient in reality. However, despite of this perceived weakness, we should admit that few poets can write works of such high tone with common materials as can Larkin.