Aldous Huxley states that, “the most richly satisfying essays are those which make the best not of one, not of two, but of all three worlds in which it is possible for the essay to exist.”(90). These three worlds, are what he describes as the three-poles, or frame of references, in which we can study the variability within an essay. Huxley then explains the type of essayists that live within each world.

First there are the personal essayists, “who write fragments of reflective autobiography and who look at the world through the keyhole of anecdote and description.”(88). Then there are the objective essayists, “who do not speak directly of themselves, but turn their attention outward to some literary or scientific or political theme.”(88). And finally, there are abstract-universal essayists, “who never condescend to be personal and who hardly deign to take notice of the particular facts, from which their generalizations were originally drawn.”(88)

Within Delft, Albert Goldbarth writes his essay within each world described by Huxley. Goldbarth introduces his essay through and objective pole. He does this by introducing Leeuwenhoek. By analyzing his contributions to the Microscope, the lens, and the discovery of bacteria, Goldbarth submerges into a scientific examination of the flea. One clear example of this is found in the following quote. Goldbarth states,

“The link between fleas and female hormonal roungs is most amazingly seen in the life of that very excellent specialist, the European rabbit-flea. It clusters on the female rabbit … Every stage in the rabbit-flea’s cycle – ovulating, the ripening of eggs – is triggered by hormone cues in the host-doe’s blood as she becomes pregnant.” (254)

Goldbarth then goes on to explain the history of the flea; how it once was the smallest visible object, our relationship to them, and even the sexual references to flea’s, such as “she’s itching for it” and even the “flearotica” tales.

This objective pole (and the sexuality of fleas), branches to the personal world, where Goldbarth mentions Cynthia. This pole incorporates a “reflective” style of writing, where the author takes a glimpse at a moment of his life. Goldbarth states that flea’s have only pestered him once by sharing fleas with them.

“So I picked fleas of her, chasing them with a fox hunt ardor, suffering my own pink frieze of bites around the ankles as necessary dues, and thanking the otherwise damnable cat for its smuggling-in of what seemed to be, in my godawful moon-eyed and drooly infatuee’s vision, a bevy of cupid’s helpers, each with its requisite arrow.” (255)

Finally, the author leaves us with the abstract-universal, when he mentions “Cupid” in the sentence above. Then, as the essay progresses he brings up Cupid again.

“Cupid, it turns out, is vexed when an ambrosia-lubricated convocation of the deities turns sleepy under Morpheus’s intervening, instead of orgiastic. He shoots an arrow, the arrow turns into a swarm of fleas, and before you know it, divine thighs and mammaries undulate winsomely from divine togas, with three days and nights of mad coupling resulting.” (261)

This is a story that is not personal, nor does it take note of the facts and the history/science behind things. Instead, it is used to describe something by generalizing it. It uses a description of why things happen without putting facts behind it. These three poles are woven together throughout the story in order to present the sexuality in three different perspectives. I believe that this is a glimpse at the trajectory that Goldbarth is aiming for when he combines these three worlds into one essay.