Evidence for what? That Pound wrote beautiful poetry? You only accept
'evidence' on your terms. Your approach is very rigid. Many people have
now tried to point this out to you. You have invested a great deal of
time in your Pound studies. No one can reasonably expect you to give up
your working thesis. You ask me for detail. I am not a scholar. I work
70 or 80 hours a week selling books. As you know I am also a poet who
uses many of the techniques of the Cantos. Years ago when my reading was
fresh in my mind, I delighted in dealing with the minutiae of Pound's
work. That is one of the glorious things about Pound and modernism. But
even then my time for study was very limited. Even if I had the time, I
am now more interested in Pound's technique than in recalling the many
references in the Cantos. Also, the subject matter of my own writing is
quite foreign to Pound's as you well know. The material of my own work,
mainly involving the epistemology of science, monopolizes most of my
reading time and then of course there is the writing. If you will secure
me the requisite funds I will close my bookstore. This will afford me
the time to study Pound in detail again as well as pursue my own writing
though I must say doing your kind of exegesis would make me feel more
like a forensic pathologist than a poet. However, I would very much
appreciate not having to haul 60 boxes of books out of an attic on a 98
degree day. You would be my Malatesta, my John Quinn. Short of this I
can only do what my weary body and rotting mind will allow. Your errors
about Pound are not in the detail and will find no resolution there. For
a poet like myself, you quite simply have no feel for Pound's poetry and
in a very real sense I think you are polluting the Pound waters. CP

En Lin Wei wrote:
>
> Carlo wrote:
> <<
> <<  Subject: Re: The inadequacy of the apolitical Confucius
> thesis--Confucianism &
>          Fascism
>
> Yes. I too am addressing questions only of Pound's Poetry and not
> personal inadequacy. The inadequacy actually refers to your excesses of
> exegesis. Pound's understanding of Confucius would not be your
> understanding hence the inadequacy of your argument through the excesses
> of your approach to the Cantos. Your 'excesses' are many . . . .>>  >>
>
> >>
> >>
>
> Inadequacy means "not enough", or something "lacking", while "excess" means
> "too much."
>
> That seems contradictory to me.
>
> What I have noted in some of your recent posts is a lack of specific
> reference to any of the points I am making or to the "excess" of evidence I
> am presenting.
>
> Is this because:
>
> 1)  You do not wish to present any evidence to counter the quotations FROM
> EZRA POUND which I present?
>
> 2)  You sense that there is something which might be wrong with the evidence
> I am presenting, but have not yet figured out how you might counter it?
>
> 3)  You choose, at present, not to think about the specifics?
>
> Or some other reason?
>
> Since this is an Ezra Pound discussion list, it would seem appropriate to
> discuss Ezra Pound's words, his writings, his poetry, his biography, his
> times, or the implications of his work for world culture.  Rather than
> assert that  such and such a  presentation is inadequate or  excessive, it
> would be useful to present your own evidence to confront the argument you
> wish to refute or question.
>
> This particular strand began when you asked me if I thought Pearlman's
> thesis ---regarding the role of Confucius in Pound's work--- was correct.
> You presented some very excellent and thoughtful quotes from Pearlman, and I
> replied with other quotes from Pound and other scholars who have written on
> Confucianism.   I response to my reply you have only asserted that my
> approach is inadequate.  EVIDENCE, PLEASE.
>
> Regards,
>
> Wei
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com