Louis,
    You write, "I don't even feel the sort of rhetorical insinuation
demonstrated in Charles's text, to exist in Pound's prose, which for the
most part eagerly embraces the "plain reader" in an effort to educate
him/her.
    I agree with your assessment of Pound's prose, but what are you
insinuating about mine? I thought I was making myself clear to you and
others reading this list whether I asked rhetorical questions or not. I was
trying to characterize a state of mind which has been prejudiced by a past
propaganda which is no longer useful for anything except as red herring but
was never true as propaganda usually is not.  Your remark, "Charles, you
remind me...of how a lot of Wagner's family descendants were Hitler
enthusiasts" was insinuating. But then I consider you may have some
all-American preconceptions of your own. Incidently, Wagner and also his
family as well as Hitler and Himmler were all fond of the Grail legend. I am
too, and I personally don't feel the least guilty about it. Even Steven
Spielberg likes it.
    You are right about Pound's rhetoric. He didn't insinuate. He spoke out
clearly and without restraint like in his letter to the Alumni Secretary of
the University of Pennsylvania.

    "P.S. All the U. of P. or your god damn college or any other god damn
American college does or will do for a man of letters is ask him to go away
without breaking the silence."

What do you bet there are still those who would prefer the silence or at
least the familiar conditioned responses?  But if you are planning to teach
a course on Pound why don't you start with that letter and see where it will
take you and the class by the end of the semester?  You might also begin
with a statement from Heidegger's essay "The Origin of the Work of Art". He
wrote (forget for a moment his biography)

    "To be sure, people speak of immortal works of art and of art as an
eternal value. Speaking this way means using that language which does not
trouble with precision in all essential matters, for fear that in the end to
be precise would call for-thinking. And is there any greater fear today than
that of thinking? Does this talk of immortal works and the eternal value of
art have any content or substance? Or are these merely the half-baked
cliches of an age when great art, together with its nature, has departed
from among men?"

Respectively submitted,
CDM