David,
We're not that far apart even where we may seem to be in disagreement. Note,
that I said that the polemical prose works are integral to an understanding
of _the exemplars_ in the Cantos. Understanding and appreciation and
evaluation of a poem demands more than an understanding of its allusions and
themes, of course. A poem cannot be reduced to paraphrase or explication. On
these matters, I'm sure we agree. One may fairly think of the prose works as
a key to the themes in the Cantos as they are embodied in the exemplars, but
by no means as a substitute for the poetry itself.

It is better, I think, that the the Cantos be read in the light of the
polemical works, and vice versa, than that either stand alone. To erect a
"Chinese wall" between them opens the door for critics to speak of the one
or the other in isolation, and that is likely to result in distortions.

Tim Romano

----- Original Message -----
From: "A. David Moody" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: art/action


> Tim,
> I am glad to go with you on this:
>                                                     >Pound's Cantos bring
> together
> > these two courses: his art makes absolute statements using exempla of
the
> > 'proportionally good' action. The important idea here is _proportional_.
> > Thus, when one encounters among Pound's exemplars individuals who have
> taken
> > drastic action, a fair question to ask is, What did Pound see as the
> > proportional badness, historical or contemporary, that might have
> warranted
> > such extreme measures? The wartime broadcasts and his other prose works
> shed
> > light on the badness of these times, as Pound perceived it, and, in
turn,
> > illuminate the _proportional_ goodness of the exemplars whose actions
are
> > exalted in the Cantos.
>
> But I don't go with you on this:
>                     > For that reason, I would assert that his broadcasts
> > and prose writings are integral to an understanding of the exemplars in
> the
> > Cantos.
> The evidence of this list, and of the great bulk of criticism of Pound,
> shows that if you start from the broadcasts and prose writings you never
get
> beyond them.  They are no more "integral" to an understanding of  The
Cantos
> than the dictionary is integral to an understanding of *King Lear*.
Useful,
> necessary, but outside and separate from the poem.  If you don't read the
> poem as determining its own making you just won't get it, as we mostly
> don't.
>
> David Moody
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "A. David Moody" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:55 PM
> > Subject: art/action
> >
> >
> > > Tim Romano,
> > >
> > > You moved the discussion on a step (beyond 'Censorship & Social
> > Darwinism')
> > > by observing that 'Pound was both an idea-into-action and an
> > > action-into-idea artist'.   Yes, but we need a distinction here:  the
> > poet's
> > > business is to make his poem,  and it is the poem which goes into
> action.
> > > (One could say: the poet's job is to create the 'idea', and it is the
> > 'idea'
> > > which goes into action--but 'idea' is easily mistaken to mean its mere
> > > abstract, so I prefer to say it is his making which goes into action.)
> It
> > > acts, necessarily, in and upon the minds of its readers;  its results,
> > > naturally, will be slow to show up and must change perceptions before
> they
> > > can affect public policy.  But when the poet would go into action
> > directly,
> > > as Pound did in his prose propaganda, he is not acting as poet.  And
he
> > can
> > > act contrary to his poetry, as Pound did in the worst of his Rome
radio
> > > broadcasts.  That is, he can unmake his own making.  One man in
opposite
> > > modes.  Yet the same motivation behind both.  It is a good puzzle to
> > bemuse
> > > the fixities and definites by which Pound is too readily judged.
> > >
> > > There is a note among Pound's papers in the Yale Beinecke Pound
Archive
> in
> > > which he makes the distinction between 'the two sane courses worth
> > > attention'  'for a thinking man not a scientist':  'Art which is
search
> > for
> > > an absolute statement, just as absolute as .... a conclusion of
Euclid';
> > > and 'action, say political or economic action .... the goodness or
> badness
> > > lying in proportion to what is possible in particular given
conditions'.
> > > [Taken from "Ezra Pound and Europe", ed. Richard Taylor and Claus
> > Melchior,
> > > (Rodopi, 1993) p.89]
> > >
> > > This doesn't in the least question your fully warranted statement that
> > Pound
> > > was an 'engaged' poet.  His own phrase for it was 'volitional', having
a
> > > clear aim.  The poem has its aim, its politics and all, but its way of
> > going
> > > into action is not that of political activism.
> > >
> > > And let's repeat, what several contributors have been maintaining, the
> > > politics of the poetry are one thing, and Pound's prose propaganda is
> > > something else.   To confuse the one with the other serves
obfuscation,
> > not
> > > the better understanding of either.
> > >
> > > Many thanks for your contributions to the list.
> > >
> > > David Moody
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>