Billy,
    The commonality you find between P and E seems to be in their use of
image which you see as ideogrammatic, but what image is not ideogrammatic by
your definition? And what artist or writer does not use images? In what
other ways if any are P and E similar? They seem to be totally different as
day from night to my impoverished mind. But how would you answer Pound
himself?

    "You can prove nothing by analogy.... It is only after long experience
that most men are able to define a thing in terms of its own genius,
painting as painting, writing as writing."  ABC OF READING

CDM

p.s Please do not lament. I have great numbers to keep me company. We, the
people, do admire you intellectuals, and have been known to shed much blood
for your high ideals. But I must admit I have spent more time on "Mauberley"
than "Potemkin".
----------
>From: William Marshall <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Eisenstein and Pound
>Date: Fri, Oct 20, 2000, 4:23 AM
>

> I can only lament the impoverishment of a mind that has nothing more to say
> than "nonsense" to something he obviously knows nothing about.
>
> Billy Marshall Stoneking
>
>
>
> Date:    Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:19:25 -0700
> From:    charles moyer <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Eisenstein and Pound
>
> nonsense
>