Hi - I don't think that it necessarily is, Dr Ravikumar. Inasmuch as we are taken back to an earlier time when we, as a species, ascribed feelings and thoughts to everything around us, let's say the trees - but deemed them to be feelings of the tree god(s) - one might interpret PF as a device we should have abandoned as we stepped into our collective "adulthood".

Depending on one's nature and strengths in writing, one may find PF very useful for getting one's point across. Despite our "advancement" we still see PF everywhere around us - recent automobile ads show "creatures" made of rocks, rubble and tree branches that try to attack the auto, which is superior, being made by superior beings -

and it is frequently used in popular culture.  Do you think perhaps that usage casts PF in a retrograde or diminished light?

Dear Dr, I think this really depends on how you define a poet.  Most people who currently write poetry, or have written poetry, are unlikely to have their work studied in the appropriate departments in English, Hindi or any other language. They may have  books published, read publicly etc, but would they have persons such as yourself study them?  Regards, Mark

No,it is not defect. Pathetic fallacy is a kind of personification that gives human emotions to inanimate objects of nature for example referring to weather features reflecting a mood. It is easier for the readers to relate to the abstract emotions when they observe it in their natural surroundings. The use of pathetic fallacy encourages the readers to develop a perspective that is creative. The pathetic  fallacy tells the truth by presenting the world as experienced by a man under the influence of powerful emotion. This device can tell us much about the inner life of another.

Mark Govier - can you tell me how your statement is relevant to the question?

D.E.Morant/ Mr. Mark Govier, with regards to your question on relevance, I have modified my statement.Thank you anyway.