*Must* we have antithetical duets? Unfortunately for that, then, I must
agree with you in one point: It is true that an artist must be judged by the
best work that he or she (or they, perhaps) has (have) done.
 
But, some of the most stupid things I've ever heard said about poetry in
general--and also specifically about EP--came from the Lang-Po' people. I am
with Carlo Parcelli and Joe Brennan on this one; and Carlo's a better poet
than many and many and many a published, established poet, and a good number
that are in the Anthologies of "The Academy", and I don't expect to find a
Lang-Po' Boy who can hold a candle to his work. On the performance side, I
found the delivery of those that I have heard to be whiny, self-indulgent,
weak, unconsidered, and lacking in vitality. Mincing a bit at times, but
without a _Fern Hill_ lilt. Pompous. Bad diction, bad elocution, bad
pronunciation, bad cadencing, lacking in expressiveness. Flat,
unimpassioned, unimaginative. Self-indulgent but without the hard work that
that requires to be anything better. Absent of the love of words and words'
meanings that are so tangible in Bunting, Pound, Zukofsky, etc., but willing
jargonizers when prefacing their _minimae opera_ or commenting
post-[auto]po-ee-tus. But I willingly concede that Your Mileage May Vary.
 
(Perhaps I've saved this duet with a little dissonance?)   ;-)
 
Chris Booth
 
> ----------
> From:         Richard Caddel
> Reply To:     Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine
> Sent:         Monday, November 29, 1999 5:10 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Reading Poetry Aloud
>
        . . . .
 
> Because this list seems to consist mainly of duets, I'd better find
> something to object to, perhaps it's this: I wouldn't be so quick to
> slam all of LangPo as performers: I've heard those who are superb
> controllers of line, pitch and measure on their own account. That
> there are turkeys in this wide and diverse "group" (as all others)
> ain't the point: that somehow, despite the widespread neglect of the
> study of poetry-read-aloud, individuals still hit into the old stream,
> well that's noteworthy.
>
> My two pet hates on the poetry reading circuit are the Mutterer, and
> the Preacherman: they operate right across the spectrum, but neither
> of these two have learned a thing from the lineage I associate with
> Pound. When, by mistake, I find myself listening to either of these
> ear-dead slackers, I leave. Life's short.
>
> RC
>