Peter, Bush looks at the Athenaeum review to support his guess about the advice Eliot is said to have offered for the Ur-Cantos. He discusses the Bay Street Hymn Book, the object revealing the 'master-plan' of Pound and Eliot to advance their poetic modernism, fact and history being of immediate concern due to their responses to Joyce's 'Telemachus' chapter and hence the prearranged focus for 'Three Cantos' and 'Gerontion.' Doesn't Gerontion mean 'little old man?' Thanks for the other info. Just to be clear, McLuhan's thesis was that Eliot operated with a four part structure, "literal/analogical/allegorical/anagogical", Pound's fifth was drama? cheers, Chris. -----Original Message----- From: - Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Peter Montgomery Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 3:51 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: trolling From: Chapman I am curious about your interest in Pound's dramatic sensibility. I have been thinking about his relationship to Browning, the Ur- cantos and the various stories of influence. Ronald Bush describes a delicate moment in the advent of the Ur-Cantos where Pound is thought to hear Eliot's advice concerning the presence of Pound's personality in that poem. Eliot is thought, in abt. 1919, just prior to the Ur-Cantos revision from their 1915 'Poetry' incarnation into that year's 'Quia Pauper Amavi' state, to counsel Pound to excise a 'redundant' passage of quibbling with Browning in their private, Sordell-ian 'brother's speech.' ===================================== As to Pound's sense of drama,I must demure. My understanding of the Eliot side of the Pound/Eliot tussle is a bit more secure. For the Pound side I am very dependent on a paper given by my mentor, Marshall McLuhan, as the 4th Annual Pound Lecture in the Humanities at 7:30 pm on April 25, 1978 at the University of Idaho. It seems a somewhat definitive piece to me. Basically McLuhan, whose Phd from Cambridge was on Nash/Education, identified Pound as having a commitment to the 5 part structure of rhetoric. Eliot under the influence of Dante and Lancelot Andrewes would seem to be much more a four part man, given the four levels of exegesis (differently name, sometimes as literal/analogical/ allegoriacl/anagogical). If Pound was a rhetorician, then he had a sense of the drama of a rhetorical presentation That is a VERY crude summary of McLuhan's thesis. I'm just not qualified to comment further on Pound. Ten years of graduate committment to Eliot more-or-less blotted P. out of my mind. All that having been said, I think I can, without violating McLuhan's copyright (for which I explicitly -from his estate- do not have permission), present you with three relevant quotes from Eliot, made by McLuhan, and in this order, which speak reasonably closely to your point: from AFTER STRANGE GODS (Faber, 1934, 41-42): But Confucius has become the philosopher of the rebellious Protestant. And I cannot but feel that in some respects Irving Babbitt, with the noblest intentions, has merely made matters worse instead of better. The name of Irving Babbitt instantly suggests that of Ezra Pound (his peer in cosmopolitanism) and that of I.A. Richards: it would seem that Confucius is the spiritual adviser of the highly educated and fastidious, in contrast to the dark gods of Mexico. Mr. Pound presents the closest counterpart to Irving Babbitt. Extremely quick-witted and very learned, he is attracted to the Middle Ages, apparently, by everything except that which gives them their significance. His powerful and narrow post-Protestant prejudice peeps out from the most unexpected places: one can hardly read the erudite notes and commentary to his edition of Guido Cavalcanti without suspecting that he finds Guido much more sympathetic than Dante, and on grounds which have little to do with their respective merits as poets: namely, that Guido was very likely a heretic, if not a sceptic - as evidenced partly by his possibly having held some pneumatic philosophy and theory of corpuscular action which I am unable to understand. Mr. Pound, like Babbitt, is an individualist, and still more a libertarian. ========== If that raises your criticial hackles, you can bet it did Pound's and it is refected in the vollies they exchanged for sometime on in NEW after the volume came out. ======================= The next, which McLuhan described as a theory of communication which the two poets shard, and perhaps an assuager if you didn't like the former, is from a review of QUIA PAUPER AMAVI "The Method of Mr. Pound" in THE ATHENEUM (Oct 24/1919: 1065): The historical method is, of course, the one which suits Mr. Pound's temperament; it is also a conscious and consistent application of a procedure suggested by Browning, which Mr. Pound applies more consciously and consistently than Browning did. Most poets grasp their own time, the life of the world as it stirs before their eyes, at one convulsion or not at all. But they have no method for closing in upon it. Mr. Pound proceeds by acquiring the entire past; and when the entire past is acquired, the constituents fall into place and the present is revealed. Such a method involves immense capacities of learning and of dominating one's learning, and the peculiarity of expressing oneself through historical masks. Mr. Pound has a unique gift for expression through some phase of past life. This is not archaeology or pedantry, but one method, and a very high method, of poetry. It is a method which allows of no arrest, for the poet imposes upon himself, necessarily, the condition of continually changing his mask; hic et ubique, then we'll shift our ground. ====================== The last is from Eliot's "The Metaphysical Poets" SELECTED ESSAYS (Faber 1932:289). McLuhan saw this as a follow on from the previous: It is not a permanent necessity that poets should be interested in philosophy, or in any other subject. We can only say that it appears likely that poets in our civilization, as it exists at present, must be difficult. Our civilization comprehends great variety and complexity, and this variety and complexity, playing upon a refined sensibility, must produce various and complex results. The poet must become more and more comprehensive, more allusive, more indirect, in order to force, to dislocate if necessary, language into his meaning. ======================================= You might wish to put your question about Eliot's quibble over the Ur Canto to the Eliot list. It is not one into which I have run. As to the dogmatic Trad. & In. Tal, reflective of the boldness of early years, while I agree with the principle of depersonal- isation in general, there are so many place in Eliot's own work where it might be said to be violated, and that includes TWL, that I think it is a mistake to see it as completely exclusive of personal inrerventions. The "I" voice in "The Fire Sermon" is primarily universal, but given that it was written against the background of Eliot's own breakdown, apparently conditioned by his marriage to his supposedly neurotic muse, Vivien( or ne), one could read the emotion in it as autobiographical. On the other hand, I think the theory of time ventured in the same essay is right on the mark, and any critic ignores it to his peril as the cliche goes. Hope that helps, Peter