EPOUND-L Archives

- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine

EPOUND-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
derek hardy <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:40:30 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (133 lines)
How about we don't view the Cantos as any sort of system other than
something providing real beauty and fun myself and Paul Traynor walking home
in rural Dorset, drunk, reciting Bunting w(hich we do on a daily basis ) an
that is to do with culture and how that mattered in Peru (Macchu Picchu) but
also in some where else.  What about Zukofsky?
Charlatan? Poet? I know (


>From: Peter Bi <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: - Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine
>    <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Hell is all right angles (Indentation in the Cantos (was One
>            week only))
>Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 16:16:26 -0700
>
>Since we are here talking about TeX and Springer-Verlag, please let me
>mention the famous Uncertainty Principle in quantum physics. In textbook,
>it
>is explained as a rule that one can't measure a particle's position and
>velocity at the same time. It also brings strange logics to our thinking.
>For example, if one observed a particle at specific space, could one
>logically conclude that this particle did EXIST at that position just
>before
>the observation ?  Many physicists, including most of the founders of
>quantum physics, may say no. A particle has a realty ONLY IF a human being
>observed it, touched it or made an experiment to detect it.
>
>Maybe we can view the Cantos as a quantum system. If a reader wants a
>"thing", he/she can go to Cantos and observe it.  It doesn't matter which
>way to express it as fas as the reader can get it. Actually we may assume
>that Pound thinks the best way to experss "big things", in his limited life
>time, was to construct a frame letting readers to find the "things"
>themselves. BTW, Zen can't be expressed by human languages.
>
>
>Peter Bi
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tim Romano" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 4:35 AM
>Subject: Re: Hell is all right angles (Indentation in the Cantos (was One
>week only))
>
>
> > Gavin,
> > What evidence do you have to show that the way the Cantos appear on the
> > page reflects Pound's intentions, and is not merely a compromise he was
> > willing to make given the nature of the publishing industry? (You may
>want
> > to read or reread _ABC of Reading_.) One could make valid aesthetic
> > arguments for or against a long unbroken line; one must take care not to
> > raise mere publishing convention to the level of aesthetic authority.
> > Calling me a philistine for raising the issue doesn't advance the
> > discussion or support your position.
> > Tim Romano
> >
> > At 03:26 AM 9/26/01 -0700, Gavin Francis wrote:
> > >And while we're at it why not clean up some of those smerary lines in
>some of
> > >Matisse's intaglii, soften some of those sharp corners in Picasso and
>Braque,
> > >and best of all, get rid of some of those pesky Chinese ideograms in
>the
> > >Cantos
> > >that nobody can understand anyway--because let's face it--there's just
>nothing
> > >like a good solid rectangular block of nice, tightly kerned good old
> > >Times-Roman. I'm certain that's what Pound had in mind.
> > >
> > >And you're right--you should let sleeping logs die--you posited this
>same
> > >argument a year or so ago. And people who still use Tex are still
>blockheads.
> > >
> > >Gavin
> > >
> > >Tim Romano wrote:
> > >
> > > > Tim,
> > > > Any reason why you eschewed CSS?  One could wrap each line-segment
>in
>a
> > > > <div> and specify the indentations in style, using custom classes:
> > > >
> > > > .in1 {
> > > > text-indent: 6em;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > .in2 {
> > > > text-indent: 9em;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > That would get rid of the phalanx of non-breaking spaces.
> > > >
> > > > On a literary note: I'm not yet convinced that the indentations are
> > > > actually called for. They seem to be Pound's concession to the
>original
> > > > typesetters, given the narrowness of the page he could reasonably
>expect a
> > > > publisher to offer, a concession that he might not have made had the
>page
> > > > widths been more ample. Inasmuch as the HTML "page" is like an
>opened
>book
> > > > that has no binding crease, HTML offers twice the page-width, in a
>manner
> > > > of speaking. Under modern circumstances, Pound might like to see his
>lines
> > > > unbroken on the virtual page.
> > > >
> > > > We took this subject up briefly a few months ago, and I'd like to
>hear
>more
> > > > from those who disagree with me on this.
> > > >
> > > > Tim Romano
> > > >
> > > > At 07:55 PM 9/23/01 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:
> > > > >I have a mouldy old website that I haven't maintained in years,
> > > > >but it has a scrapbook thingie that rolls interesting
> > > > >quotations and meta-quotations through once every week.  This
> > > > >week there's a piece of Canto CV featuring a fairly aggressive
> > > > >attempt to get the indentation right in HTML.  Go to
> > > > >http://www.textuality.com/ and hit the "Worth reading" link.
> > > > >  -Tim
> >


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

ATOM RSS1 RSS2