Undoubtedly the whole purpose of Ginsberg's visit to Pound was to pay
tribute to the poet. That in itself might have been an act to rile those who
view Pound as an anathema to decency. But it should not be hard to affirm
what Pound said during the visit for not only was Ginsberg there to hear it
but also Michael Reck, his six-year old son, the English poet and critic
Peter Russell, and Olga Rudge. Some of these witnesses are still living I
believe.
    Besides that, when I saw Ginsberg at the Rolling Thunder Review in
Rochester, N.Y. on Nov. 17, 1975 I broached the subject to him and during
our discussion I found no reason to doubt what AG told me. However I would
contend that lying is a grotesque sickness worse than many others.

CDM

----------
>From: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Looking for magazine article: Ginsberg visits Pound, 1967
>Date: Sat, Feb 17, 2001, 6:31 AM
>

> In a message dated 2/17/01 9:01:56 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> << What possible reason would Ginsberg have had to lie about this? Or is this
> just to keep up the constantly chipping paint job on Ezra? >>
>
> I didn't say he lied.  I simply report that Forrest Read didn't believe EP
> said that.  Unfortunately, Read is no longer around to explain his disbelief.
>  If I had to speculate as to why AG would make up this story (if, in fact, he
> did) I would guess that he thought it might put into the great poet's legacy
> a way for younger poets to embrace him whole. I don't know.  From what I
> remember of Read, his Pound would not apologize, such apology being an
> admission of guilt, sort of like a plea bargain.  I think Read thought the
> telling word was  'suburban', as this seemed to reduce the grotesque sickness
> of anti-semitism to a kind of bland snobbery, a reduction neither he (Read)
> nor Pound would accept.  Again, I don't know.
> Jay Anania
>