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:
"R.Gancie/C.Parcelli" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:57:52 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (87 lines)
Tim,

Actually, I did mean obligation "of" the reader. The obligation is not to the
text/poem per se but to that which the text addresses. If the text addresses
something like game theory which it is agreed is fundamental to the culture in
which the potential reader is operating, it seems that an obligation to understand
its rudiments falls upon the reader as much as the poet. Then, as with Pound, there
is the discovery of new elements. With game theory the new element has the salutory
effect of being extraordinarily relevant and utile. More than occasionally I get a
response thanking me for steering the reader to some scientific taxonomy that
proves culturally, historically and/or epistemologically illuminating. This is the
up side of the didacticism of the Cantos. They were an extraordinary teaching tool
for me both contextuallly and structurally.

Yes, I also like to find a dramatic context for illustration. Occasionalyy dramatic
dialogue can be simply the unedited or edited conversation of principles. There is
also considerable drama in unalloyed theory especially if you find juxtaposable
materials. Building a dialectic with primary materials of all stripes whether
mathematical, philosophical/historical, philosophical/methodological,
epistemological etc. I find to be the most exhilarating, demanding and interesting
way to work. Thus my sense of the dramatic encompasses more than you're implying,
but there is ample demonstration of all of these techniques in my work as well as
Pound's. I would also grant that these form the least accessible and animated
passages for the reader who has not familiarized himself with the sources. Carlo
Parcelli

I again apologize in advance for any grammatical or spelling errors in my
email.

Tim Romano wrote:

> Carlo Parcelli wrote:
>
> >My use of the notion of "arcane" was meant to be in contra-distinction to
> >yours.
>
> Understood. I meant to give an example of something that was both arcane
> and, paradoxically, all too relevant. With the example of "statistical
> probabilities", following upon your example of Nash, the point I hoped to
> make was that the poet who would use these mathematical facts of
> contemporary life as the subject of an epic poem would do better to devise
> a way of presenting the subject *dramatically*. Rather than holding up the
> "raw and undigested" technicalities themselves, such as by embedding the
> mathematical formulae into the work, or by alluding to Nash (for sake of
> example) or quoting from his works, the poet should attempt to show their
> *effects*.  This is, of course, merely an opinion of mine. I happen to
> think Pound is at his best when he finds a way to dramatize.
>
> >[...] with the rise of hundreds of scientific and technical specialties not
> >to mention specialties outside of these two general disciplines we have
> >"arcana",
> >if you will, which profoundly effect the utility of our everyday lives. In
> >large
> >part Pound sought, mistakenly, a return to a culture not as reliant on
> >'specialties.'
>
> Not sure I would put it exactly that way, but yes, Pound sought to return
> to a culture organized around crafts and trades where the principle of
> *individual workmanship* still had meaning.  I doubt he would have thought
> too highly of the work of someone who measured the probabilities of 50-year
> weather patterns to arrive at a trading price for puts and calls on
> degree-day insurance policies and weather derivatives.
>
> >I [...] sought to put myself in the center of the concern for the everyday
> >arcana that
> >is science and technology. Your email seems to suggest that to engage this
> >arcana
> >in its original forms violates some sort of communication with the poetry
> >reader.
> >Let's leave aside the obligation of the reader because, generally, this is one
> >'obligation' the reader has no intention of meeting.
>
> Isn't there a typo above? Didn't you mean to write "obligation *to* the
> reader..." ? Or did you?  "Of" or "to" -- is the crux of the
> issue.  Thinking of the poet's obligation *to* the reader, I wrote that the
> poet must subordinate exposition to drama.  Not because difficult
> "technical" subjects are not valid subjects for poetry -- the effects of
> science and technology upon our lives is, of course, a valid subject for
> poetry-- but should readers *of poetry* find themselves reading a primer on
> statistical methods?  Poems and primers both may instruct; poem must also
> *delight*.
> Or do you have in mind a modern equivalent to, say, those ancient poems,
> little more than mnemonic devices really, that seek to fix in the memory
> arcane (yet relevant!) lore on the medicinal powers of plants and stones?
>
> Tim Romano

ATOM RSS1 RSS2