What was Pound's general pupose in littering his poetry, especially the Cantos, with fairly obscure references, foreign phrases and dropped names? I wonder how this tendency gels with Imagist rule no. 1: "To use the language of common speech, but to employ the exact word, not the nearly-exact, nor the merely decorative word." I would argue that Pound's reluctance to let go of the mythical references of which he was so fond, combined with a high-toned diction, ultimately restricted his ability to produce resonant poetry. Pound deserves great credit for his part in the Imagist movement, but he was not the most accomplished practitioner. I don't think this is entirely the poet's fault. We are all products of our times. T.S. Eliot's poetry sprung from the same classical groundings, as evidenced be _The Waste Land_ and _Prufrock_, among other examples. But Eliot also knew how to cut to the quick of the human condition with the language of common speech: "I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled." So even if Pound was "il miglior fabbro" (another reference), Eliot was a better poet. Now this is not to say that Pound did not have his successes and that he always leaned on his litany of references to achieve his effect. I simply maintain that he was perhaps too much a die-hard intellectual to really produce poetry that matched his own Imagist standards. I welcome your comments. Brennen Lukas Annandale, Virginia > >But Pound's writing, line by line, is perfectly clear. The references, >foreign phrases, can be cleared up with a gloss, or one can skip them to >begin with. _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail