Although I'm not nearly anything of an expert on this topic, I did write an
article about Pound and his system of rules. Go to:
 
http://people.a2000.nl/avanarum/
 
and select articles. The one I'm talking about is called. The Serious
Artist, and I'm very curious what you think, so let me know...
 
Arwin
 
>To all on the list:
>
>   I've noticed that a lot of discussion on the list tends to be about
>the Cantos so  if I may I'd like to re-direct things momentarily and
>raise the subject of Imagism/ Vorticism.
>
>      I am curious about current opinion regarding Pound's approach to
>the "image" (or his 1914 re-definition of it as a "vortex") as opposed
>to the often-encountered notion of Imagism being merely a bunch of
>pretty pictures with no potential as far as the composition of serious
>poetry is concerned.
>
>    I've read whatever books I could get my hands on relating to the
>subject (though there were a couple I couldn't locate) and of course
>there is no lack of books on the London years in general and the
>development through E.P's early volumes (e.g. Witemeyer, De Nagy,
>Schneidau, Grieve). I am interested in what list members think about the
>topic. Do people feel that it has been covered adequately? Has it been
>done to death or is there room for reconsideration, particularly as
>regards its potential as a system of guidelines for (current) aspiring
>writers? Is it still valid or is it merely a curiosity of literary
>history?
>
>                         Thanks in advance,
>
>                                      Jason Monios
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com