EPOUND-L Archives

- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine

EPOUND-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
En Lin Wei <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 26 Jun 2000 23:13:48 PDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (96 lines)
"charles moyer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
>OK, I see what you mean. How could Nietzsche and I ever have thought that
>God wrote in bad Greek? We must have been deluding ourselves.

Well, I wasn't really sure whether you believed it or not.  (Or whether N.
believed it).  Literally.  Frankly I thought it might be just a little joke.
  I poked fun at it, but did not intend offense.

>Thank you for
>correcting us.

In a genuine dialectical process, there is no such thing as "correcting"; no
such thing as blame toward the person or persons one is conversing with.
Each person merely puts forward a statement which will be succeeded at some
point by a greater, wider and more expansive viewpoint, a viewpoint which
will encompass all that is valid and soundly reasoned.  I agree with Hegel
on this much at least:  The Truth is the Whole.


>And you're also right about N's   typos. He had only himself
>to blame. It would have been hypocritical and foolish of him to make a
>perfect superman and then blame this guy for his own errors. For how can
>the perfect make a mistake? Right?
>

This remark reminds me somewhat of Voltaire, and an adapted version of his
aphorism, which said something like:

"If the Ubermensch did not exist, man would have to invent him."

What I find most interesting in the original saying is the word, "IF."

>Wei, I'm curious. Assuming we all did finally agree with you and gave you
>the assignment, what would you do with Pound's works?

Agree with me about what exactly?  Agree with which specific statement I
have made?  Presumably you might agree with some statements I have made, and
disagree with others.  And who is "we"?  I assume each individual person
might disagree with me on some points and agree with me on others.

>I assume you would
>not want to destroy them, not after we have seen all those filmclips of the
>Nazis  burning books.

You assume correctly.  However, while we are on the subject of censorship
and Pound, is Pound the only major modern author who has sanctioned and
agreed with censorship?  Did he ever denounce or disagree with the Nazi book
burning you mention?  Of course, he did not want his own works censored. (He
complained, we know, to Mussolini that one of his publishers censored a
passage critical of Rothschild in the Cantos; however did he ever complain
to Mussolini about the Italian fascist censorship policies? I don't think
so). When the issue of censorship comes up in relation to Pound, I always
wonder why he appeared so fond of Qin Shihuangdi, the first emperor of
China, who buried hundreds of scholars alive.   A rather strange figure for
a poet to eulogize.  Even the current communist leadership in China (not
known for their leniency when it comes to freedom of expression) condemn Qin
Shihuangdi for having gone too far.

>But would you have a government warning label put on
>them?

Not necessary.  Are you concerned that someone might want to put such a
warning on his works.  Has anyone tried to ban Pound's work during the
post-war era?   I don't know of anyone who would take such an idea
seriously.  Do you?

>Or would you make it a requirement to
>swear some type of oath in order to gain access?

In China's largest library (in Beijing) you have to fill out forms to read
various books which might be deemed subversive.  For instance, you can read
Trotsky (in French translation only), if you fill out the proper form.
Anyone who wants to should be allowed to read anything they like in a
society which claims to be modern.  Let people themselves make their own
judgments about what they want to read.

I am a bit surprised that you consider the following notion:  When a person
puts forward arguments about a work which could cast it in an unfavorable
light, that means the person wants to censor or ban the work.  If that were
the case, and such people had their way, we would be able to read precious
little.  A more interesting question for this list might be "What was
Pound's attitude toward the censorship of works he did not approve of . . .
, or When Pound gave his support to dictators and strong men (even in his
late years he expressed fondness for Franco) how did he feel about their
censorship policies?

Regards,

Wei


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2