POUND LIST ADMINISTRATOR: COULD YOU PLEASE STRIKE ME FROM THE DIGEST FORMAT OF RECEIVING MESSAGES AND RETURN ME TO THE INDIVIDUAL MESSAGE FORMAT??? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Automatic digest processor" <[log in to unmask]> To: "Recipients of EPOUND-L digests" <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2000 12:02 AM Subject: EPOUND-L Digest - 23 Jan 2000 to 24 Jan 2000 (#2000-23) > There are 8 messages totalling 615 lines in this issue. > > Topics of the day: > > 1. Eliot: closure (2) > 2. "The Pound era": source? (3) > 3. Fw: Re: Futurism > 4. Pound and the Physiocrats > 5. Haiku and renga > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 20:07:49 -1000 > From: Jonathan Morse <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Eliot: closure > > At 08:12 PM 1/23/00 -0500, Bill Freind wrote: > > >I'm surprised by the implicit argument about "important work." Are you really > >suggesting there are any publishing executives who are losing sleep > because a hack > >like Jewel sells 250,000 books, while a good chunk of (for example) Ron > Silliman's > >work is out of print? "Important work," however defined, doesn't keep > >HarperCollins in business. Hell, it barely kept New Directions afloat. > > I think we may be talking past each other here. I wasn't imputing motives > to anyone in the publishing industry; I was just calling attention to the > cash register. Scribners has a cash cow in the works of Fitzgerald and > Hemingway, and it doesn't want to lose that income to other publishers. Of > course Scribners is in business to make money, and I can't imagine it > rejecting the manuscript of a potential best-seller, ephemeral though it > may be. But isn't it interesting that so much of Scribners' enduring > patrimony -- fundamental work, work that is fundamental because it has > redefined literature for succeeding generations -- was created in the 1920s? > > Interesting and maybe historically significant? > > That's all I was trying to say. > > Jonathan Morse > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:29:06 -1000 > From: Jonathan Morse <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: "The Pound era": source? > > Michael Coyle writes: > > > > [This] note is simple, but makes a big > > >difference with regard to how anyone thinks of Pound. Pound himself > *never* > > >used the phrase "The Pound Era," and would have been embarrassed had > anyone > > >else done so in his hearing. It was Hugh Kenner who coined the phrase. . > . . > > > At > > <excerpt> > > http://ikarus.pclab-phil.uni-kiel.de/daten/anglist/PoetryProject/Pound.htm > > > </excerpt>you'll find a student paper about Pound by Birte Dornhecker, > who says, "In 1922, with characteristic aplomb, Pound announced that the > 'Christian Era' was over and that the 'Pound Era' had begun." I'm pretty > sure I've also read that proclamation of Pound's in its primary source. > But (speaking of embarrassment) where? > > > Jonathan Morse > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 11:48:37 -0000 > From: James Deboo <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Futurism > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BF6660.F3214280 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Thanks. One problem is that I've not read a transcript of Pound's radio = > broadcasts...is there anywhere online where I can find them?? ( I seem = > to remember this being mentioned not so long back)?? > > James Deboo.=20 > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: Everett Lee Lady=20 > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2000 10:39 PM > Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Futurism > > > >From: James Deboo <[log in to unmask]> > >Subject: Fw: Re: Futurism > >To: [log in to unmask] > >Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 11:37:47 -1000 > > > I often wonder how different the general view of Pound might be = > =3D > >today if he'd felt himself sufficiently at home in Italy (or = > anywhere) =3D > >to abandon his US citizenship and obtain an Italian passport. > > I think he felt at home in Italy. As far as I can tell, he maintained > his U.S. citizen because being an American was extremely important to > him. It was one of the core elements of his identity and certainly of > his public persona. Much as he loved Italy, he could never have = > thought > of himself as an Italian. > > > As far as =3D > >I can tell his main reason for supporting the fascists was a desire = > to =3D > >end the war - the friends he lost in WW1 that war in, say, Hugh = > Selwyn =3D > >Mauberley, perhaps suggests that he saw the war as unnecessary and = > =3D > >wasteful, the result of a capitalist system resembling a corrupt =3D > >communist one, with absolute rulers and corporations who kept their = > =3D > >workers so much in the dark, and offered them a ready-made, =3D > >responsibility-free life in return for their money, that they didn't = > =3D > >really know what they were fighting for anyway, and he couldn't bear = > to =3D > >see everyone going back home to the same old lies all over = > again.=3D20 > > The last lines here more or less accurately summarize E.P.'s attitude > toward war in general, although this would not quite have been his way = > of > expressing it. However as to his support for Fascism, what you say is > pretty much the opposite of what was true. > > Throughout the Thirties, Pound admired Mussolini in particular and > Fascism in general, just as many of the leading intellectuals in = > Europe > did. And for that matter, so did much of the news media, including = > the > Luce publications --- TIME, LIFE, and FORTUNE. Today we think of = > Fascism > primarily in terms of its brutality, but people during the erly = > Thirties > were much more aware of the fact that Fascism had brought Italy out of > chaos and brought about a number of important practical constructive > results, such as draining the swamps and, yes, incidentally, getting > the railroad service to run in an orderly manner. Furthermore, = > Mussolini > had enormous personal charm. The Fascists had widespread support from > the Italian people, even though there were also forces which = > vehemently > opposed them. I think that Pound personally tended to come mostly in > contact with the supporters of Fascism rather than with the opponents. > > The brutality of the Fascists in Italy was quite real, but it was > mild compared to what existed in Germany and other Fascist countries. > > The attitude of most of the world toward Italian Fascism changed in = > 1935 > when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia. From that point on, much of the = > world > started looking at Italy more critically, and started become more = > aware > that although Mussolini said really good things that most people = > liked, > he was actually an opportunist whose primary interest was in > maintaining his power, and that the actual actions of the government > often did not accord very well with Mussolini's benevolent speeches. > > E.P., however, had little respect for the kind of people who were now > criticizing Mussolini. As always in his life, once he had adopted a > particular attitude, he had very little inclination to reexamine it > critically. > > Pound admired Fascism because he loved Italy. Furthermore, he saw > Mussolini as an example of the sort of strong ruler, such as = > Sigismondo > Malatesta (and, for that matter, Confucius), who he had always admired = > in > history. He was opposed to the war partly, as you say, because he was > on general principle opposed to war, but primarily because he loved > Italy, even though his primary allegiance, even during the period when > he made his radio broadcasts, was to the United States. He was in the > position of someone who sees two friends, both of which he loves > dearly, getting into what seems like a senseless fight. > > He did believe that the United States had fallen under the control of > evil forces, especially Roosevelt. His attitude toward Roosevelt was > in fact quite widespread in the United States during the Thirties. > Even during the Fifties, I often encountered people in the United > States who always referred to Roosevelt as "the son of a bitch." But > obviously Roosevelt also had many supporters who enabled him to win > elections. (There were a lot more people who despised the Republican > Party than those who despised Roosevelt, although a lot of people > despised both.) > > > The Futurists wanted a new artform- they wanted, in Pound's = > words, =3D > >to 'make it new'; and, certainly in the visual arts, their impact has = > =3D > >been enormous. The Fascists also wanted to make it new; as, I = > suppose, =3D > >did Hitler. So did Pound; and whereas he (and, of course, everyone in = > =3D > >their right mind (dramatic irony intended)) despised Hitler and = > perhaps =3D > >didn't see quite eye to eye with Mussolini on all things, he did see = > =3D > >that the utopian ideals behind Itatian Fascism, while quite =3D > >unsupportable, were also, if advanced and supported, likely to bring = > the =3D > >war to a rapid end. After all, Alan Bullock's book Hitler: a study in = > =3D > >Tyranny closes by saying that Hitler's chief aim was to destroy the = > =3D > >structure of Europe and replace it with something new, and that in = > this, =3D > >he probably succeeded.=3D20 > > Pound's attitude toward Hitler varied. At first, he disliked Hitler, > saying that he was too hysterical (which, in retrospect, is a little = > like > being opposed to nuclear bombs because they make too much noise), but > later, even after the war when the existence of the death camps became > known, he expressed an admiration for Hitler, although to the best of = > my > knowledge this admiration was expressed only in private letters to = > good > friends. (I never heard him say anything good about Hitler at St. > Elizabeths, but I never heard him condemn him either.) > > --Lee Lady > > > ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BF6660.F3214280 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> > <HTML><HEAD> > <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" = > http-equiv=3DContent-Type> > <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR> > <STYLE></STYLE> > </HEAD> > <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> > <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DAlbertaExtralight>Thanks. One problem = > is that I've=20 > not read a transcript of Pound's radio broadcasts...is there anywhere = > online=20 > where I can find them?? ( I seem to remember this being mentioned not so = > long=20 > back)??</FONT></DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DAlbertaExtralight>James Deboo. = > </FONT></DIV> > <BLOCKQUOTE=20 > style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: = > 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> > <DIV=20 > style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: = > black"><B>From:</B>=20 > <A href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]" [log in to unmask]>Everett Lee = > Lady</A>=20 > </DIV> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20 > href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]"=20 > [log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]</A> </DIV> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, January 23, 2000 = > 10:39=20 > PM</DIV> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Fw: Re: = > Futurism</DIV> > <DIV><BR></DIV>>From: James Deboo <<A=20 > = > href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask] > </A>><BR>>Subject: =20 > Fw: Re: Futurism<BR>>To: <A=20 > = > href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</A><BR>= > >Date: =20 > Sun, 23 Jan 2000 11:37:47 -1000<BR><BR>> I often = > wonder=20 > how different the general view of Pound might be =3D<BR>>today if = > he'd felt=20 > himself sufficiently at home in Italy (or anywhere) =3D<BR>>to = > abandon his US=20 > citizenship and obtain an Italian passport.<BR><BR>I think he felt at = > home in=20 > Italy. As far as I can tell, he maintained<BR>his U.S. citizen = > because=20 > being an American was extremely important to<BR>him. It was one = > of the=20 > core elements of his identity and certainly of<BR>his public = > persona. =20 > Much as he loved Italy, he could never have thought<BR>of himself as = > an=20 > Italian.<BR><BR>> As far as = > =3D<BR>>I can=20 > tell his main reason for supporting the fascists was a desire to = > =3D<BR>>end=20 > the war - the friends he lost in WW1 that war in, say, Hugh Selwyn=20 > =3D<BR>>Mauberley, perhaps suggests that he saw the war as = > unnecessary and=20 > =3D<BR>>wasteful, the result of a capitalist system resembling a = > corrupt=20 > =3D<BR>>communist one, with absolute rulers and corporations who = > kept their=20 > =3D<BR>>workers so much in the dark, and offered them a ready-made, = > > =3D<BR>>responsibility-free life in return for their money, that = > they didn't=20 > =3D<BR>>really know what they were fighting for anyway, and he = > couldn't bear=20 > to =3D<BR>>see everyone going back home to the same old lies all = > over=20 > again.=3D20<BR><BR>The last lines here more or less accurately = > summarize E.P.'s=20 > attitude<BR>toward war in general, although this would not quite have = > been his=20 > way of<BR>expressing it. However as to his support for Fascism, = > what you=20 > say is<BR>pretty much the opposite of what was true.<BR><BR>Throughout = > the=20 > Thirties, Pound admired Mussolini in particular and<BR>Fascism in = > general,=20 > just as many of the leading intellectuals in Europe<BR>did. And = > for that=20 > matter, so did much of the news media, including the<BR>Luce = > publications ---=20 > TIME, LIFE, and FORTUNE. Today we think of Fascism<BR>primarily = > in terms=20 > of its brutality, but people during the erly Thirties<BR>were much = > more aware=20 > of the fact that Fascism had brought Italy out of<BR>chaos and brought = > about a=20 > number of important practical constructive<BR>results, such as = > draining the=20 > swamps and, yes, incidentally, getting<BR>the railroad service to run = > in an=20 > orderly manner. Furthermore, Mussolini<BR>had enormous personal=20 > charm. The Fascists had widespread support from<BR>the Italian = > people,=20 > even though there were also forces which vehemently<BR>opposed = > them. I=20 > think that Pound personally tended to come mostly in<BR>contact with = > the=20 > supporters of Fascism rather than with the opponents.<BR><BR>The = > brutality of=20 > the Fascists in Italy was quite real, but it was<BR>mild compared to = > what=20 > existed in Germany and other Fascist countries.<BR><BR>The attitude of = > most of=20 > the world toward Italian Fascism changed in 1935<BR>when Mussolini = > invaded=20 > Ethiopia. From that point on, much of the world<BR>started = > looking at=20 > Italy more critically, and started become more aware<BR>that although=20 > Mussolini said really good things that most people liked,<BR>he was = > actually=20 > an opportunist whose primary interest was in<BR>maintaining his power, = > and=20 > that the actual actions of the government<BR>often did not accord very = > well=20 > with Mussolini's benevolent speeches.<BR><BR>E.P., however, had little = > respect=20 > for the kind of people who were now<BR>criticizing Mussolini. As = > always=20 > in his life, once he had adopted a<BR>particular attitude, he had very = > little=20 > inclination to reexamine it<BR>critically.<BR><BR>Pound admired = > Fascism=20 > because he loved Italy. Furthermore, he saw<BR>Mussolini as an = > example=20 > of the sort of strong ruler, such as Sigismondo<BR>Malatesta (and, for = > that=20 > matter, Confucius), who he had always admired in<BR>history. He = > was=20 > opposed to the war partly, as you say, because he was<BR>on general = > principle=20 > opposed to war, but primarily because he loved<BR>Italy, even though = > his=20 > primary allegiance, even during the period when<BR>he made his radio=20 > broadcasts, was to the United States. He was in the<BR>position = > of=20 > someone who sees two friends, both of which he loves<BR>dearly, = > getting into=20 > what seems like a senseless fight.<BR><BR>He did believe that the = > United=20 > States had fallen under the control of<BR>evil forces, especially=20 > Roosevelt. His attitude toward Roosevelt was<BR>in fact quite = > widespread=20 > in the United States during the Thirties.<BR>Even during the Fifties, = > I often=20 > encountered people in the United<BR>States who always referred to = > Roosevelt as=20 > "the son of a bitch." But<BR>obviously Roosevelt also had = > many=20 > supporters who enabled him to win<BR>elections. (There = > were a lot=20 > more people who despised the Republican<BR>Party than those who = > despised=20 > Roosevelt, although a lot of people<BR>despised=20 > both.)<BR><BR>> The Futurists wanted a new = > artform- they=20 > wanted, in Pound's words, =3D<BR>>to 'make it new'; and, certainly = > in the=20 > visual arts, their impact has =3D<BR>>been enormous. The Fascists = > also wanted=20 > to make it new; as, I suppose, =3D<BR>>did Hitler. So did Pound; = > and whereas=20 > he (and, of course, everyone in =3D<BR>>their right mind (dramatic = > irony=20 > intended)) despised Hitler and perhaps =3D<BR>>didn't see quite eye = > to eye=20 > with Mussolini on all things, he did see =3D<BR>>that the utopian = > ideals=20 > behind Itatian Fascism, while quite =3D<BR>>unsupportable, were = > also, if=20 > advanced and supported, likely to bring the =3D<BR>>war to a rapid = > end. After=20 > all, Alan Bullock's book Hitler: a study in =3D<BR>>Tyranny closes = > by saying=20 > that Hitler's chief aim was to destroy the =3D<BR>>structure of = > Europe and=20 > replace it with something new, and that in this, =3D<BR>>he = > probably=20 > succeeded.=3D20<BR><BR>Pound's attitude toward Hitler varied. At = > first, he=20 > disliked Hitler,<BR>saying that he was too hysterical (which, in = > retrospect,=20 > is a little like<BR>being opposed to nuclear bombs because they make = > too much=20 > noise), but<BR>later, even after the war when the existence of the = > death camps=20 > became<BR>known, he expressed an admiration for Hitler, although to = > the best=20 > of my<BR>knowledge this admiration was expressed only in private = > letters to=20 > good<BR>friends. (I never heard him say anything good about = > Hitler at=20 > St.<BR>Elizabeths, but I never heard him condemn him = > either.)<BR><BR>--Lee=20 > Lady<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> > > ------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BF6660.F3214280-- > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 08:01:19 -0500 > From: Bill Freind <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Eliot: closure > > Jonathan Morse wrote: > > > I think we may be talking past each other here. I wasn't imputing motives > > to anyone in the publishing industry; I was just calling attention to the > > cash register. Scribners has a cash cow in the works of Fitzgerald and > > Hemingway, and it doesn't want to lose that income to other publishers. Of > > course Scribners is in business to make money, and I can't imagine it > > rejecting the manuscript of a potential best-seller, ephemeral though it > > may be. But isn't it interesting that so much of Scribners' enduring > > patrimony -- fundamental work, work that is fundamental because it has > > redefined literature for succeeding generations -- was created in the 1920s? > > > > Interesting and maybe historically significant? > > > > That's all I was trying to say. > > Okay, now I see what you mean. That's a good point, but there are two questions > I'd ask. First, what percentage of sales do works from before 1970 comprise? > Second, what percentage of that percentage are to high schools and universities? > My sister teaches high school and has probably assigned _Gatsby_ half a dozen > times; I've taught it twice and I don't really like it all that much. So why have > I taught it? It's short, tightly written, has interesting characters and a > compelling narrative. Perfect for an intro class. I'd love to see the sales > figures on Mrs. Dalloway, Their Eyes Were Watching God, The Sound and the Fury, > Heart of Darkness, and the larger Fitzgerald and Hemingway titles. I know there > are some people in publishing out there -- maybe they could comment. > > I'm raising academia because universities and especially high schools usually > assign texts that have been suitably digested. There are exceptions (Toni Morrison > springs to mind) but contemporary lit, especially of the more adventurous sort, > doesn't get the same attention in survey classes. This, obviously, is nothing new. > > Bill Freind > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 13:46:41 +0000 > From: Tom Holland <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: "The Pound era": source? > > > Jonathan Morse wrote: > > At > > http://ikarus.pclab-phil.uni-kiel.de/daten/anglist/PoetryProject/Pound.htm > > you'll find a student paper about Pound by Birte Dornhecker, > > who says, "In 1922, with characteristic aplomb, Pound announced that the > > 'Christian Era' was over and that the 'Pound Era' had begun." I'm pretty > > sure I've also read that proclamation of Pound's in its primary source. > > But (speaking of embarrassment) where? > > In his note to the Little Review Calendar, Pound had announced > that "The Christian era came definitively to an END at > midnight of the 29-30 of October (1921) old style". Noel > Stock (on p.247 of _The Life of Ezra Pound_) adds that "the > world was now living in the first year of a new pagan age > called the Pound Era". Could that be where "Pound Era" > originated? > > Tom Holland > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 15:17:50 EST > From: Jay Anania <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: "The Pound era": source? > > In the 1922 calendar, the end of the Xtian era (1922) was followed by year 1 > p.s.U. > (post scriptum Ulysses). EP marvelled that Joyce finished ULYSSES on Pound's > birthday in 1921. > Forrest Read talks of this at very great length in his book "'76 One World > and the Cantos of Ezra Pound." > Read, p. 41: "...out of Joyce's 'retrospect' on the European mind that had > caused and tolerated World War 1 was coming the 'pro-spect' opened by the > Odyssean beginning of the Cantos." > By the way, I am a non-academic who studied Pound in college very many years > ago, under Forrest Read? Am I right in thinking that he (Read) is little > mentioned in academic circles? Why? > On another note, I would like to thank those who manage to ignore the ugly > tones of a couple of the regulars posters to the list. Except in the hands > of real masters, like EP, dense and aggressive stylings seem painfully > self-conscious (and, so, embarassing to read) and are answered best by either > silence or civility. I think EP, for all his occasional bluster, finally > respected "beautiful manners". In any case, I do. > Jay Anania > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 17:20:40 -0500 > From: "R.Gancie/C.Parcelli" <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Pound and the Physiocrats > > Does anybody know if Pound got any of his Confucious/Mencius through the > French Physiocrats? The Physiocrats are said to have introduced > Confucian thought to the Enlightenment. Under Quesnay they also > constituted an economic school of thought. Though the material I have > read has been somewhat contradictory, it appears that they stressed the > importance of the agrarian over the trade aspects of an economy. Some > commentators somewhat contradictorily point out that the Physiocrats > also stressed a laissez faire, anti-governmental approach to > mercantilism. > I'm familiar with Pound's connections to Fenollosa, Upward and his > possible reading of Pauthier (Stock) who probably reprises Quesnay and > the Physiocrats in his works, but does anyone know of a more direct > route from the Physiocrats to Pound? > The fact that they comprised an economic school would have appealed to > Pound. Their texts and translations would have been readily availble to > Pound. Their anti-government interference stance would have appealed to > the rightist, libertarian dimension of Pound's nature. The Physiocrats > thought was influential (along with Locke) as regards the American > founding fathers e.g. Adams and Jefferson. They've got everything going > for them yet I can't find any connection. Carlo Parcelli =20 > --=20 > =D0=CF=11=E0=A1=B1=1A=E1 > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:16:30 +0900 > From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCNG5CPyEhSjg7UhsoQg==?= <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Haiku and renga > > Dear Kristen, > > It is quite likely that -- > the collection of renga, which you mentioned, is _Renga: A Chain > of Poems by Octavio Paz, Jacques Roubaud, Edoardo Sanguineti > and Charles Tomlinson_ (Penguin, 1979). It was first published > in France by Editions Gallimard, 1971; with English translation > in the USA by George Braziller, 1972. Charles Tomlinson edited it. > > Best wishes, > Yoshiko Kita > > >And one more question, I have been looking for a collection of > >renga,the product of a multilingual experiment between Octavio > >Paz and some others. Does anyone know where I might find it? > > > >Thanks, > >Kristen > > ------------------------------ > > End of EPOUND-L Digest - 23 Jan 2000 to 24 Jan 2000 (#2000-23) > ************************************************************** >