---------- >From: Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: atomic troll >Date: Mon, Nov 15, 2004, 9:14 PM > > Nicht, mine herr. > You will never crack the four walls that way to > reduce and self-delusively improve on McLuhan's > LAWS OF THE MEDIA to show how Roger-doger advanced > beyond him you are. The five parts of rhetoric are > an entirely different phenom. which will continue > to hold you at bay, a counter troll, so to squeak, > to whisk away your android mom. > > Fee,fie,foo,fum, methinks I smell a Canadium. > > In the mean time, I think we have provided the list > with some valuable points of view on an important > Eliot/Pound question. > > You need to read the last few lines of John Dryden's > Macflecnoe to discover whose mantel you really think you > are wearing the theall and end all. > > This is the way the atomic troll goes, not with pop but a poof. > > Barfs to you. > Peter > Troll catcher. > -----Original Message----- > From: Chapman > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: 2004-Nov-15 6:40 AM > Subject: atomic troll > > 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