POUND LIST ADMINISTRATOR:
COULD YOU PLEASE STRIKE ME FROM THE DIGEST FORMAT OF RECEIVING MESSAGES AND
RETURN ME TO THE INDIVIDUAL MESSAGE FORMAT???
----- Original Message -----
From: "Automatic digest processor" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Recipients of EPOUND-L digests" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2000 12:02 AM
Subject: EPOUND-L Digest - 23 Jan 2000 to 24 Jan 2000 (#2000-23)
> There are 8 messages totalling 615 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. Eliot: closure (2)
> 2. "The Pound era": source? (3)
> 3. Fw: Re: Futurism
> 4. Pound and the Physiocrats
> 5. Haiku and renga
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 20:07:49 -1000
> From: Jonathan Morse <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Eliot: closure
>
> At 08:12 PM 1/23/00 -0500, Bill Freind wrote:
>
> >I'm surprised by the implicit argument about "important work." Are you
really
> >suggesting there are any publishing executives who are losing sleep
> because a hack
> >like Jewel sells 250,000 books, while a good chunk of (for example) Ron
> Silliman's
> >work is out of print? "Important work," however defined, doesn't keep
> >HarperCollins in business. Hell, it barely kept New Directions afloat.
>
> I think we may be talking past each other here. I wasn't imputing motives
> to anyone in the publishing industry; I was just calling attention to the
> cash register. Scribners has a cash cow in the works of Fitzgerald and
> Hemingway, and it doesn't want to lose that income to other publishers. Of
> course Scribners is in business to make money, and I can't imagine it
> rejecting the manuscript of a potential best-seller, ephemeral though it
> may be. But isn't it interesting that so much of Scribners' enduring
> patrimony -- fundamental work, work that is fundamental because it has
> redefined literature for succeeding generations -- was created in the
1920s?
>
> Interesting and maybe historically significant?
>
> That's all I was trying to say.
>
> Jonathan Morse
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:29:06 -1000
> From: Jonathan Morse <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: "The Pound era": source?
>
> Michael Coyle writes:
>
>
> > [This] note is simple, but makes a big
>
> >difference with regard to how anyone thinks of Pound. Pound himself
> *never*
>
> >used the phrase "The Pound Era," and would have been embarrassed had
> anyone
>
> >else done so in his hearing. It was Hugh Kenner who coined the phrase. .
> . .
>
>
> At
>
> <excerpt>
>
> http://ikarus.pclab-phil.uni-kiel.de/daten/anglist/PoetryProject/Pound.htm
>
>
> </excerpt>you'll find a student paper about Pound by Birte Dornhecker,
> who says, "In 1922, with characteristic aplomb, Pound announced that the
> 'Christian Era' was over and that the 'Pound Era' had begun." I'm pretty
> sure I've also read that proclamation of Pound's in its primary source.
> But (speaking of embarrassment) where?
>
>
> Jonathan Morse
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 11:48:37 -0000
> From: James Deboo <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Futurism
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BF6660.F3214280
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Thanks. One problem is that I've not read a transcript of Pound's radio =
> broadcasts...is there anywhere online where I can find them?? ( I seem =
> to remember this being mentioned not so long back)??
>
> James Deboo.=20
> ----- Original Message -----=20
> From: Everett Lee Lady=20
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2000 10:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Futurism
>
>
> >From: James Deboo <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: Fw: Re: Futurism
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 11:37:47 -1000
>
> > I often wonder how different the general view of Pound might be =
> =3D
> >today if he'd felt himself sufficiently at home in Italy (or =
> anywhere) =3D
> >to abandon his US citizenship and obtain an Italian passport.
>
> I think he felt at home in Italy. As far as I can tell, he maintained
> his U.S. citizen because being an American was extremely important to
> him. It was one of the core elements of his identity and certainly of
> his public persona. Much as he loved Italy, he could never have =
> thought
> of himself as an Italian.
>
> > As far as =3D
> >I can tell his main reason for supporting the fascists was a desire =
> to =3D
> >end the war - the friends he lost in WW1 that war in, say, Hugh =
> Selwyn =3D
> >Mauberley, perhaps suggests that he saw the war as unnecessary and =
> =3D
> >wasteful, the result of a capitalist system resembling a corrupt =3D
> >communist one, with absolute rulers and corporations who kept their =
> =3D
> >workers so much in the dark, and offered them a ready-made, =3D
> >responsibility-free life in return for their money, that they didn't =
> =3D
> >really know what they were fighting for anyway, and he couldn't bear =
> to =3D
> >see everyone going back home to the same old lies all over =
> again.=3D20
>
> The last lines here more or less accurately summarize E.P.'s attitude
> toward war in general, although this would not quite have been his way =
> of
> expressing it. However as to his support for Fascism, what you say is
> pretty much the opposite of what was true.
>
> Throughout the Thirties, Pound admired Mussolini in particular and
> Fascism in general, just as many of the leading intellectuals in =
> Europe
> did. And for that matter, so did much of the news media, including =
> the
> Luce publications --- TIME, LIFE, and FORTUNE. Today we think of =
> Fascism
> primarily in terms of its brutality, but people during the erly =
> Thirties
> were much more aware of the fact that Fascism had brought Italy out of
> chaos and brought about a number of important practical constructive
> results, such as draining the swamps and, yes, incidentally, getting
> the railroad service to run in an orderly manner. Furthermore, =
> Mussolini
> had enormous personal charm. The Fascists had widespread support from
> the Italian people, even though there were also forces which =
> vehemently
> opposed them. I think that Pound personally tended to come mostly in
> contact with the supporters of Fascism rather than with the opponents.
>
> The brutality of the Fascists in Italy was quite real, but it was
> mild compared to what existed in Germany and other Fascist countries.
>
> The attitude of most of the world toward Italian Fascism changed in =
> 1935
> when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia. From that point on, much of the =
> world
> started looking at Italy more critically, and started become more =
> aware
> that although Mussolini said really good things that most people =
> liked,
> he was actually an opportunist whose primary interest was in
> maintaining his power, and that the actual actions of the government
> often did not accord very well with Mussolini's benevolent speeches.
>
> E.P., however, had little respect for the kind of people who were now
> criticizing Mussolini. As always in his life, once he had adopted a
> particular attitude, he had very little inclination to reexamine it
> critically.
>
> Pound admired Fascism because he loved Italy. Furthermore, he saw
> Mussolini as an example of the sort of strong ruler, such as =
> Sigismondo
> Malatesta (and, for that matter, Confucius), who he had always admired =
> in
> history. He was opposed to the war partly, as you say, because he was
> on general principle opposed to war, but primarily because he loved
> Italy, even though his primary allegiance, even during the period when
> he made his radio broadcasts, was to the United States. He was in the
> position of someone who sees two friends, both of which he loves
> dearly, getting into what seems like a senseless fight.
>
> He did believe that the United States had fallen under the control of
> evil forces, especially Roosevelt. His attitude toward Roosevelt was
> in fact quite widespread in the United States during the Thirties.
> Even during the Fifties, I often encountered people in the United
> States who always referred to Roosevelt as "the son of a bitch." But
> obviously Roosevelt also had many supporters who enabled him to win
> elections. (There were a lot more people who despised the Republican
> Party than those who despised Roosevelt, although a lot of people
> despised both.)
>
> > The Futurists wanted a new artform- they wanted, in Pound's =
> words, =3D
> >to 'make it new'; and, certainly in the visual arts, their impact has =
> =3D
> >been enormous. The Fascists also wanted to make it new; as, I =
> suppose, =3D
> >did Hitler. So did Pound; and whereas he (and, of course, everyone in =
> =3D
> >their right mind (dramatic irony intended)) despised Hitler and =
> perhaps =3D
> >didn't see quite eye to eye with Mussolini on all things, he did see =
> =3D
> >that the utopian ideals behind Itatian Fascism, while quite =3D
> >unsupportable, were also, if advanced and supported, likely to bring =
> the =3D
> >war to a rapid end. After all, Alan Bullock's book Hitler: a study in =
> =3D
> >Tyranny closes by saying that Hitler's chief aim was to destroy the =
> =3D
> >structure of Europe and replace it with something new, and that in =
> this, =3D
> >he probably succeeded.=3D20
>
> Pound's attitude toward Hitler varied. At first, he disliked Hitler,
> saying that he was too hysterical (which, in retrospect, is a little =
> like
> being opposed to nuclear bombs because they make too much noise), but
> later, even after the war when the existence of the death camps became
> known, he expressed an admiration for Hitler, although to the best of =
> my
> knowledge this admiration was expressed only in private letters to =
> good
> friends. (I never heard him say anything good about Hitler at St.
> Elizabeths, but I never heard him condemn him either.)
>
> --Lee Lady
>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BF6660.F3214280
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
> http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DAlbertaExtralight>Thanks. One problem =
> is that I've=20
> not read a transcript of Pound's radio broadcasts...is there anywhere =
> online=20
> where I can find them?? ( I seem to remember this being mentioned not so =
> long=20
> back)??</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DAlbertaExtralight>James Deboo. =
> </FONT></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE=20
> style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
> 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
> <DIV=20
> style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
> black"><B>From:</B>=20
> <A href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]" [log in to unmask]>Everett Lee =
> Lady</A>=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]"=20
> [log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]</A> </DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, January 23, 2000 =
> 10:39=20
> PM</DIV>
> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Fw: Re: =
> Futurism</DIV>
> <DIV><BR></DIV>>From: James Deboo <<A=20
> =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
> </A>><BR>>Subject: =20
> Fw: Re: Futurism<BR>>To: <A=20
> =
> href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A><BR>=
> >Date: =20
> Sun, 23 Jan 2000 11:37:47 -1000<BR><BR>> I often =
> wonder=20
> how different the general view of Pound might be =3D<BR>>today if =
> he'd felt=20
> himself sufficiently at home in Italy (or anywhere) =3D<BR>>to =
> abandon his US=20
> citizenship and obtain an Italian passport.<BR><BR>I think he felt at =
> home in=20
> Italy. As far as I can tell, he maintained<BR>his U.S. citizen =
> because=20
> being an American was extremely important to<BR>him. It was one =
> of the=20
> core elements of his identity and certainly of<BR>his public =
> persona. =20
> Much as he loved Italy, he could never have thought<BR>of himself as =
> an=20
> Italian.<BR><BR>> As far as =
> =3D<BR>>I can=20
> tell his main reason for supporting the fascists was a desire to =
> =3D<BR>>end=20
> the war - the friends he lost in WW1 that war in, say, Hugh Selwyn=20
> =3D<BR>>Mauberley, perhaps suggests that he saw the war as =
> unnecessary and=20
> =3D<BR>>wasteful, the result of a capitalist system resembling a =
> corrupt=20
> =3D<BR>>communist one, with absolute rulers and corporations who =
> kept their=20
> =3D<BR>>workers so much in the dark, and offered them a ready-made, =
>
> =3D<BR>>responsibility-free life in return for their money, that =
> they didn't=20
> =3D<BR>>really know what they were fighting for anyway, and he =
> couldn't bear=20
> to =3D<BR>>see everyone going back home to the same old lies all =
> over=20
> again.=3D20<BR><BR>The last lines here more or less accurately =
> summarize E.P.'s=20
> attitude<BR>toward war in general, although this would not quite have =
> been his=20
> way of<BR>expressing it. However as to his support for Fascism, =
> what you=20
> say is<BR>pretty much the opposite of what was true.<BR><BR>Throughout =
> the=20
> Thirties, Pound admired Mussolini in particular and<BR>Fascism in =
> general,=20
> just as many of the leading intellectuals in Europe<BR>did. And =
> for that=20
> matter, so did much of the news media, including the<BR>Luce =
> publications ---=20
> TIME, LIFE, and FORTUNE. Today we think of Fascism<BR>primarily =
> in terms=20
> of its brutality, but people during the erly Thirties<BR>were much =
> more aware=20
> of the fact that Fascism had brought Italy out of<BR>chaos and brought =
> about a=20
> number of important practical constructive<BR>results, such as =
> draining the=20
> swamps and, yes, incidentally, getting<BR>the railroad service to run =
> in an=20
> orderly manner. Furthermore, Mussolini<BR>had enormous personal=20
> charm. The Fascists had widespread support from<BR>the Italian =
> people,=20
> even though there were also forces which vehemently<BR>opposed =
> them. I=20
> think that Pound personally tended to come mostly in<BR>contact with =
> the=20
> supporters of Fascism rather than with the opponents.<BR><BR>The =
> brutality of=20
> the Fascists in Italy was quite real, but it was<BR>mild compared to =
> what=20
> existed in Germany and other Fascist countries.<BR><BR>The attitude of =
> most of=20
> the world toward Italian Fascism changed in 1935<BR>when Mussolini =
> invaded=20
> Ethiopia. From that point on, much of the world<BR>started =
> looking at=20
> Italy more critically, and started become more aware<BR>that although=20
> Mussolini said really good things that most people liked,<BR>he was =
> actually=20
> an opportunist whose primary interest was in<BR>maintaining his power, =
> and=20
> that the actual actions of the government<BR>often did not accord very =
> well=20
> with Mussolini's benevolent speeches.<BR><BR>E.P., however, had little =
> respect=20
> for the kind of people who were now<BR>criticizing Mussolini. As =
> always=20
> in his life, once he had adopted a<BR>particular attitude, he had very =
> little=20
> inclination to reexamine it<BR>critically.<BR><BR>Pound admired =
> Fascism=20
> because he loved Italy. Furthermore, he saw<BR>Mussolini as an =
> example=20
> of the sort of strong ruler, such as Sigismondo<BR>Malatesta (and, for =
> that=20
> matter, Confucius), who he had always admired in<BR>history. He =
> was=20
> opposed to the war partly, as you say, because he was<BR>on general =
> principle=20
> opposed to war, but primarily because he loved<BR>Italy, even though =
> his=20
> primary allegiance, even during the period when<BR>he made his radio=20
> broadcasts, was to the United States. He was in the<BR>position =
> of=20
> someone who sees two friends, both of which he loves<BR>dearly, =
> getting into=20
> what seems like a senseless fight.<BR><BR>He did believe that the =
> United=20
> States had fallen under the control of<BR>evil forces, especially=20
> Roosevelt. His attitude toward Roosevelt was<BR>in fact quite =
> widespread=20
> in the United States during the Thirties.<BR>Even during the Fifties, =
> I often=20
> encountered people in the United<BR>States who always referred to =
> Roosevelt as=20
> "the son of a bitch." But<BR>obviously Roosevelt also had =
> many=20
> supporters who enabled him to win<BR>elections. (There =
> were a lot=20
> more people who despised the Republican<BR>Party than those who =
> despised=20
> Roosevelt, although a lot of people<BR>despised=20
> both.)<BR><BR>> The Futurists wanted a new =
> artform- they=20
> wanted, in Pound's words, =3D<BR>>to 'make it new'; and, certainly =
> in the=20
> visual arts, their impact has =3D<BR>>been enormous. The Fascists =
> also wanted=20
> to make it new; as, I suppose, =3D<BR>>did Hitler. So did Pound; =
> and whereas=20
> he (and, of course, everyone in =3D<BR>>their right mind (dramatic =
> irony=20
> intended)) despised Hitler and perhaps =3D<BR>>didn't see quite eye =
> to eye=20
> with Mussolini on all things, he did see =3D<BR>>that the utopian =
> ideals=20
> behind Itatian Fascism, while quite =3D<BR>>unsupportable, were =
> also, if=20
> advanced and supported, likely to bring the =3D<BR>>war to a rapid =
> end. After=20
> all, Alan Bullock's book Hitler: a study in =3D<BR>>Tyranny closes =
> by saying=20
> that Hitler's chief aim was to destroy the =3D<BR>>structure of =
> Europe and=20
> replace it with something new, and that in this, =3D<BR>>he =
> probably=20
> succeeded.=3D20<BR><BR>Pound's attitude toward Hitler varied. At =
> first, he=20
> disliked Hitler,<BR>saying that he was too hysterical (which, in =
> retrospect,=20
> is a little like<BR>being opposed to nuclear bombs because they make =
> too much=20
> noise), but<BR>later, even after the war when the existence of the =
> death camps=20
> became<BR>known, he expressed an admiration for Hitler, although to =
> the best=20
> of my<BR>knowledge this admiration was expressed only in private =
> letters to=20
> good<BR>friends. (I never heard him say anything good about =
> Hitler at=20
> St.<BR>Elizabeths, but I never heard him condemn him =
> either.)<BR><BR>--Lee=20
> Lady<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BF6660.F3214280--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 08:01:19 -0500
> From: Bill Freind <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Eliot: closure
>
> Jonathan Morse wrote:
>
> > I think we may be talking past each other here. I wasn't imputing
motives
> > to anyone in the publishing industry; I was just calling attention to
the
> > cash register. Scribners has a cash cow in the works of Fitzgerald and
> > Hemingway, and it doesn't want to lose that income to other publishers.
Of
> > course Scribners is in business to make money, and I can't imagine it
> > rejecting the manuscript of a potential best-seller, ephemeral though it
> > may be. But isn't it interesting that so much of Scribners' enduring
> > patrimony -- fundamental work, work that is fundamental because it has
> > redefined literature for succeeding generations -- was created in the
1920s?
> >
> > Interesting and maybe historically significant?
> >
> > That's all I was trying to say.
>
> Okay, now I see what you mean. That's a good point, but there are two
questions
> I'd ask. First, what percentage of sales do works from before 1970
comprise?
> Second, what percentage of that percentage are to high schools and
universities?
> My sister teaches high school and has probably assigned _Gatsby_ half a
dozen
> times; I've taught it twice and I don't really like it all that much. So
why have
> I taught it? It's short, tightly written, has interesting characters and a
> compelling narrative. Perfect for an intro class. I'd love to see the
sales
> figures on Mrs. Dalloway, Their Eyes Were Watching God, The Sound and the
Fury,
> Heart of Darkness, and the larger Fitzgerald and Hemingway titles. I know
there
> are some people in publishing out there -- maybe they could comment.
>
> I'm raising academia because universities and especially high schools
usually
> assign texts that have been suitably digested. There are exceptions (Toni
Morrison
> springs to mind) but contemporary lit, especially of the more adventurous
sort,
> doesn't get the same attention in survey classes. This, obviously, is
nothing new.
>
> Bill Freind
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 13:46:41 +0000
> From: Tom Holland <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: "The Pound era": source?
>
> > Jonathan Morse wrote:
> > At
> >
http://ikarus.pclab-phil.uni-kiel.de/daten/anglist/PoetryProject/Pound.htm
> > you'll find a student paper about Pound by Birte Dornhecker,
> > who says, "In 1922, with characteristic aplomb, Pound announced that the
> > 'Christian Era' was over and that the 'Pound Era' had begun." I'm pretty
> > sure I've also read that proclamation of Pound's in its primary source.
> > But (speaking of embarrassment) where?
>
> In his note to the Little Review Calendar, Pound had announced
> that "The Christian era came definitively to an END at
> midnight of the 29-30 of October (1921) old style". Noel
> Stock (on p.247 of _The Life of Ezra Pound_) adds that "the
> world was now living in the first year of a new pagan age
> called the Pound Era". Could that be where "Pound Era"
> originated?
>
> Tom Holland
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 15:17:50 EST
> From: Jay Anania <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: "The Pound era": source?
>
> In the 1922 calendar, the end of the Xtian era (1922) was followed by year
1
> p.s.U.
> (post scriptum Ulysses). EP marvelled that Joyce finished ULYSSES on
Pound's
> birthday in 1921.
> Forrest Read talks of this at very great length in his book "'76 One World
> and the Cantos of Ezra Pound."
> Read, p. 41: "...out of Joyce's 'retrospect' on the European mind that had
> caused and tolerated World War 1 was coming the 'pro-spect' opened by the
> Odyssean beginning of the Cantos."
> By the way, I am a non-academic who studied Pound in college very many
years
> ago, under Forrest Read? Am I right in thinking that he (Read) is little
> mentioned in academic circles? Why?
> On another note, I would like to thank those who manage to ignore the ugly
> tones of a couple of the regulars posters to the list. Except in the
hands
> of real masters, like EP, dense and aggressive stylings seem painfully
> self-conscious (and, so, embarassing to read) and are answered best by
either
> silence or civility. I think EP, for all his occasional bluster, finally
> respected "beautiful manners". In any case, I do.
> Jay Anania
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 17:20:40 -0500
> From: "R.Gancie/C.Parcelli" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Pound and the Physiocrats
>
> Does anybody know if Pound got any of his Confucious/Mencius through the
> French Physiocrats? The Physiocrats are said to have introduced
> Confucian thought to the Enlightenment. Under Quesnay they also
> constituted an economic school of thought. Though the material I have
> read has been somewhat contradictory, it appears that they stressed the
> importance of the agrarian over the trade aspects of an economy. Some
> commentators somewhat contradictorily point out that the Physiocrats
> also stressed a laissez faire, anti-governmental approach to
> mercantilism.
> I'm familiar with Pound's connections to Fenollosa, Upward and his
> possible reading of Pauthier (Stock) who probably reprises Quesnay and
> the Physiocrats in his works, but does anyone know of a more direct
> route from the Physiocrats to Pound?
> The fact that they comprised an economic school would have appealed to
> Pound. Their texts and translations would have been readily availble to
> Pound. Their anti-government interference stance would have appealed to
> the rightist, libertarian dimension of Pound's nature. The Physiocrats
> thought was influential (along with Locke) as regards the American
> founding fathers e.g. Adams and Jefferson. They've got everything going
> for them yet I can't find any connection. Carlo Parcelli =20
> --=20
> =D0=CF=11=E0=A1=B1=1A=E1
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:16:30 +0900
> From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCNG5CPyEhSjg7UhsoQg==?= <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Haiku and renga
>
> Dear Kristen,
>
> It is quite likely that --
> the collection of renga, which you mentioned, is _Renga: A Chain
> of Poems by Octavio Paz, Jacques Roubaud, Edoardo Sanguineti
> and Charles Tomlinson_ (Penguin, 1979). It was first published
> in France by Editions Gallimard, 1971; with English translation
> in the USA by George Braziller, 1972. Charles Tomlinson edited it.
>
> Best wishes,
> Yoshiko Kita
>
> >And one more question, I have been looking for a collection of
> >renga,the product of a multilingual experiment between Octavio
> >Paz and some others. Does anyone know where I might find it?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Kristen
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of EPOUND-L Digest - 23 Jan 2000 to 24 Jan 2000 (#2000-23)
> **************************************************************
>
|
