Instead of pray and let God to do things, Pound did move forward (and this is why he is GREAT). I mean, the Confucius. Hongguang Bi ----- Original Message ----- From: "charles moyer" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:54 PM Subject: Re: Pound & Politics > Beautifully done, Tom. I feel exactly the same way about Pound, and I > would expect there are others who share a similar honest interest and fair > assessment. Furthermore, you demonstrate that over the years you have become > truly familiar with the man and his works. This is one of the best postings > I have seen on this list. It is one which was worth waiting for. > Have you any thoughts about Pound's association with Mencken, and how > relevant both these loveable curmudgeons are to today's "boobism"? > > Charles > > ---------- > >From: Tom White <[log in to unmask]> > >To: [log in to unmask] > >Subject: Pound & Politics > >Date: Mon, Jan 20, 2003, 10:59 PM > > > > > Tom W. NJ > > I'll bite. I'm in so sense a scholar, rather, like you, just a reader of > > Pound. Off and on, since 1950. Don't think the Cantos have ever been issued > > WITH notes (and I hope they never are), but there are great books explaining > > the "village explainer," easily found in the bibliographies. Hope you are a > > subscriber to Paideuma. > > > > To cut to the political question. It is all really about the money system. > > Pound had become convinced the money system was a devilish racket. He never > > wavered from this view, elaborated since by disciple Eustace Mullins and > > others, and very much the opinion of the Austrian school of Economics and of > > its leading American intellectual light, the late Murray N. Rothbard. The > > jury on this is in: the system IS a devilish racket, but we are stuck with > > it until it somehow transits to some other system. God's own guess as to the > > how and when of that. > > > > The Jewish question. Pound angrily pushed (he was not a saint) the routine > > European distaste for the "alien" to the absurd degree visible in his Rome > > radio talks, but in a calmer moment he said race prejudice is a sign of > > intellectual defeat. He didn't hate Jews as people, or so I think, but he > > hated the "Semitic" mind or ethos, which scholars tell me is on view in the > > Talmud and of course is derivable from some of the morally dimmer passages > > in the OT. He caste it up against the "Mediterranean" ethos, the Greek gods > > if you will. He told an Italian nun who asked if he was a religious man that > > he believed in the Greek gods, to which she answered (as I recall), "E tutti > > religione," which I trust means "It's all religion." > > > > The curious thing is how it doth appear the world is now at last catching up > > with Pound. What he was objecting to was the left, socialist, atheist ethos > > of non-observant or apostate Jews (which was oddly the mirror image of the > > money worshiping Jews, à la Rothschild), what one writer, talking of the > > Russian Rev. of 1917, has lately called "Lenin's willing executioners," > > mimicking the accusation by a Jewish writer that Germans and especially > > German Catholics were Hitler's. But among the things now being revealed is > > the extent to which the "big" and "Zionist" Jews themselves did not exert > > maximum effort (this is the mild statement) to rescue their fellows in > > Europe. We are not at the end of revelations on this. Accusations are now > > being made by dissident Israeli intellectuals that the largely clueless > > European Jews were deliberately sacrificed by the Zionist "organizing > > brains," to gain international clout as super-victims, the very clout that > > Finkelstein (http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/) has now exposed as heavily > > fraudulent. > > > > None of this is to excuse Pound's faults, but the thing is more complicated > > than most people are willing to see. The Net is opening it all up, and > > nothing is finished yet. Pound will continue to be execrated by the same > > people who think America should police the globe, take on the Arabs > > wholesale, and contain China and Russia and North Korea and all the rest of > > the Johnny-pop-ups. Belligerent idiocy seems to be the distinguishing > > characteristic of our Maximum Leaders. > > > > Enough. I've let myself be a bit carried away. You can't talk about Pound > > with the average American school graduate. But there are a lot of people > > around who agree with you on his poetry, and a lot, though fewer, who agree > > that his hatred of the money system and the big money people (Jews figuring > > prominently but not solely in the roster< say, "Rockefeller") was as > > justified as any hatred can be, which, speaking in Christian-Catholic terms, > > is never as to people but always as to "structures of sin." > > > > I think Pound was horribly wrong in thinking the "State," the "Muss," or > > anyone else of that ilk, could bring money and/or cultural salvation. But > > his case presents a mile-high obstacle to the long-run continuation of the > > present system. I believe as Alfred North Whitehead wrote, that ultimately > > poets are the rulers of the world. Of course it remains to be seen if we get > > by the current threat to the human race and are ever able again to settle > > down to the study of letters and the practice of creative peace, that is, > > return to questions of truth and beauty. Let us pray. Tom White > > > >> From: Tom Walsh <[log in to unmask]> > >> Reply-To: - Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine > >> <[log in to unmask]> > >> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:19:48 -0500 > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Intro > >> > >> Listserver, > >> > >> Thanks for this opportunity to share thoughts and discussions with > >> experts in Pound. I hope I've used the correct email address. Although > >> I've been a programmer for 25 years, for some reason, I've always had > >> problems with listservs, and their complexity (at least what I perceive > >> to be complexity!) > >> > >> I know what follows is redundant. I know you've all probably read this > >> series of statements more than several times. As a background, I've read > >> Pound since college, and have always had the same problem. Whenever a > >> member of the previous generation spots the name "Pound", they, more or > >> less, call me a traitor to America. I know about Pound's background, how > >> he sided with Italy and its regime, how he broadcasted political > >> messages, both anti-Semite and anti-Allies, and how he was arrested, > >> tried as insane, apologized and was locked away, where he worked on the > >> last part of the Cantos. The fact that his work won a post-War award > >> must have shocked the world. However, it doesn't shock me. His lines > >> remain brilliant. > >> > >> But, a true artist should be regarded as devoid of his past, as the > >> Revisionists said, right? My mind's heart always stops when I read his > >> powerful lines, dripping in myths, supported by ancient names and > >> languages, bringing English to an airy arena, with literary splendor. > >> His poetry is untouchable, striking, fresh, and always refreshing in its > >> use of tones and words. And, of course, I haven't touched on who he > >> influenced, which is every poet since his time. > >> > >> Can the list advise on the dichotomy between his politics and his > >> poetry? Also, I'm currently trying to locate one book, which contains > >> both the Cantos and annotations to the Cantos. Do you have any > >> suggestions? > >> > >> Thanks, again, for this opportunity to address you. > >> Tom NJ