Joe Brennan wrote:

>I also object to the absolutist tendency of your criticism.  and while the
>broadcasts, etc., make it easier to understand the "Fascist, anti-semitic,
>hierarchical [and] anti-democratic" aspects of Pound, they do nothing to
>help
>us to understand Pound the poet.

Tell us what you think would help us understand Pound the poet.

[I submit that the hierarchical and anti-democratic aspects of Pound's
outlook permeate the Cantos.  They are not extraneous, existing merely in
the broadcasts. If I am correct, then studying the broadcasts helps us
understand both the poet and the poem. ]

>honestly, it's a drag when one reduces
>everything about Pound to conform to the political picture one has drawn of
>him, and allows him to be nothing but "Fascist, anti-semitic, hierarchical
>[and] anti-democratic".

Draw your picture.  I would honestly like to know what your picture of Pound
is.  You have criticized my picture of Pound, but not drawn your own.

>so even though I'm repeating myself, once again I
>remind you that these qualities have not gone unnoticed by the critical
>community at large, nor have they been ignored . . .

I think the full implications of Pound's Confucianism have been ignored.
Most of the critics and poets who talk about Pound's Confucianianism simply
see Confucius as the fortune cookie philosopher, divorced from his political
and social significance in over two thousand years of history.

Through my analysis I am trying to fill a gap in current Pound studies
between those who view Pound's use of
Confucianism in purely ethical terms (with no reference to Pound's politics)
and those who try
to clarify the relation between Pound's poetry and his politics (with little
or no reference to the large Chinese
cultural-historical component of Pound's Cantos).

If I am correct about the way Pound uses Confucian materials, then the
negative qualites, the anti-democratic aspects of the Cantos, may be five to
ten times worse than most previous critics have maintained.

>the world is not endangered
>by Pound . . .

Perhaps it is; perhaps it is not.  You might be correct on that point.  But
is the world endangered by severe criticism of Ezra Pound?  I doubt that it
is.

>the right-wing is not using his work as a source of inspiration and
>small children are not being force-fed a steady diet of Poundian garbage.

If the right wing were using his work in this way, would you approve or
disapprove?

Is anyone using Pound as a source of inspiration for any purpose?  And if
so, what is the purpose?  And what is effect, ultimately, if Pound's work is
thoroughly imbued with authoritarian, anti-semitic, classist, racist,
imperialist, fascist, and other ethically objectionable features?

If reading and studying Pound leads a single poet or scholar to think that
Confucius is some cute moral philosopher who made ethically sound
judgements, I would find that problematic.

Regards,

Wei

PS  I would like to see ANYONE on this list do a reading of Pound, an
interpretation of Pound (esp. one involving his use of the Chinese
materials) which shows us the merits of his poetry, both in terms of its
method and its moral or spiritual content.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com