Larkin the "transcendant anti-Romantic"

I would have to say I'm more drawn to the idea of Larkin as a dark writer looking for that trancendent experience. Given the comments in "Church Going" regarding the narrator looking for a religious experience in a supposedly religious area, I'd like to think that there is a desire to have that feeling. Otherwise, why bother with the search? It'd be much easier to buy him as a cynical person who has no faith in finding connections to anything. He seems to share this idea in "Talking in Bed" when he mentions the idea of isolation even in the most intimate of settings. However, if that is truly the case, the why write about any intimate relationship at all? Larkin's endeavors to prove how apathetic he is only seem to say the opposite. In "Talking in Bed" he writes that the more time that passes, the more isolated people become to each other when in fact it should be the exact opposite. While this could be a perception of Larkin's real-life experiences, he could also use this as a defense of remaining alone. If all relationships are built on lies and false feelings, then the is no point in pursuing a relationship or trying to establish a connection with anyone. The more someone disparages an idea, the more that person is likely to eventually believe what they're saying. The same can also be said in "Church Going" when Larkin seems to go out of his way to downplay the importance of religion, while the narrator consistently searches for the trancendence found in religion. In degrading those who classify themselves as religious, the narrator can pretend to be unaffected by his lack of religious insight. The narrator here behaves much the same way in "Talking in Bed;" both serve as a form of self-defense. For these reasons, I regard Larkin as more of a moody writer in search of a belief in the Romantic ideals.