Pawel:
Check out Zukofsky's _A_, his magnum opus. You will find it most
satisfyingly dificult, given your preferences. [BTW, has anyone here ever
heard A-24 performed? It is quite remarkable. And the only TRULY fugal
writing that I have encountered in poetry (connecting this thread back to
the ongoing discussion of form in the _Cantos_...); perhaps only Zukofsky
would have the nerve--and the virtuosity--to attempt polyphonic _poetry_;
language is so different a medium, and is processed so differently by the
hearer....]
Dr. Conte's suggestions were excellent. [My $0.02 follow.] The _Man and
Poet_ series from the National Poetry Foundation (University of Maine) is
good to know about, and the Zukofsky book in that series is "a good place to
look first." An excellent introduction to Zukofsky.
Next, Hugh Kenner's _Pound Era_ and Guy Davenport's _The Geography of the
Imagination_--these are basic to any general introduction to 20th century
poets, etc. Davenport speaks at some length about Zukofsky through his book.
[And if you look into Davenport's fiction you will find it too is difficult
and rich.*]
###
Since you like reading difficult poets, you will enjoy David Jones as well
(for example, the _Anathemata_). Basil Bunting is another poet you will
probably be interested in. Bunting's _Collected Poems_ are available in
paperback from Oxford University Press--a gem. There is also a book in the
_Man and Poet_ series on Bunting. Another poet you may wish to explore is
Charles Olson (for example, _The Maximus Poems_).
Are you familiar with William Carlos William's _Paterson_?...It is not easy.
;-) (There is also a book in the _Man and Poet_ series on Williams.)
James Joyce: _Ulysses_ and _Finnegan's Wake_. These are notorious for being
difficult--although Joyce was not an Objectivist; however, _Ulysses_ may not
meet your difficulty requirement: Pound said something to the effect that
"any blockhead" could follow it.
Also, you will find much of interest in the journals _Sagetrieb_ and
_Agenda_.
Chris Booth
p.s.: My apologies to the list if this seems too aside; I feel that this is
relevant enough to an interest in Pound to be acceptable posted generally;
Pound is not only Pound, but also his influence on others. He always wanted
to be the nucleus of that tempest in a teapot, and a discussion of Pound is
ALWAYS necessarily a discussion of other things as well. Polumetis and
catalytic was EP ever.
*Two poets that Davenport speaks of that are also difficult are Ronald
Johnson (for example, _Ark_) and Jonathan Williams (I have _An Ear in
Bartram's Tree_, and there are some treasures in there--perhaps not as
difficult as some of the others herementioned?).
{All of the books that I have mentioned here can be found at
http://www.amazon.com; the two journals of course, not.}
> ----------
> From: Pawel Karwowski
> Reply To: Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 1998 5:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Zukofsky & objectivists
>
> Hello .
> Can I ask somebody to recommend me basic set of books about
> Mr Zukofsky and Objectivism . / about 3 or 4 for now / .
> I study creative writing in Cracow and I found in Carpenter's
> E. P . biography very interesting statement that objectivist were
> not willing to recognize to many poets / exept Ezra , Homer ,
> Dante and few others / .
> Thats perfectly how I feel right now . Mr Zukofsky verses were
> described as " uncomprehensible " - and that I greeted with joy ,
> because I like poetry which is difficult .
> Zukofsky was not translated into my language yet .
>
> Pawel Karwowski
> student of UJ
>
> P.S. I buy books via Internet and in Amazon bookstore / which
> is a part of Netscape browser /bookmarks/shopping / there is
> 24 positions a little bit to much for me .
>
> ---
> Free and Private email from Supernews(TM) <http://www.supernews.com>
>
|
