Mr. Wei has written that "God is infinite and incomprehensible, but Pound's
record of, or expression of his communion with the infinite is itself
finite, and subject to human efforts to define it --- carefully and
accurately."
    I think Mr. Wei has it turned around. It is, on the contrary, Pound and
all poets who are "infinite and incomprehensible", and God who is finite and
subject to deconstruction because as Stendhal  observed "God's only excuse
is that he doesn't exsist". Fortunately then for him his system can always
be saved by continuously redefining as protestantism has done by the use of
the accepted critique on rationalism,and the "tu quoque" argument.
    The point of western literature, at least where the Calliopean is
concerned, is precisely Indo-European "pagan" mythic i.e. the myth of the
eternal return is based on what once was known to have existed and has
returned, and more specifically, the harrowing of hell by the hero on whom
the goddess has bestowed the golden bough, the  key (kelthron) to making the
passage. This is why Spengler wrote, and we can apply this to Pound with
certainty, that "Every high creator in Western history has in reality aimed,
from first to last, at something which only the few could comprehend." Not
"democratic", I agree, but then Stendhal could have as easily made his
statement apply to democracy as he did to God.
    If Heidegger is your philosopher then you should remember that he wrote,
"myth is something older than faith", and if this is the case, and I am
inclined to agree, the question of Pound's religion is a simple one of
pantheism. That it is a "religion of light" is a truism. What religion is
not?

Charles Moyer