The thread on Pound's appearance on undergraduate/graduate syllabi, I think, has both missed and hit the mark variously. I myself am a well-seasoned vet of both undergrad. and grad. classes in Modern lit. Only in one of these classes (at U of Toronto--a huge department with dozens of courses offered each term) has Pound received significant time. I think the reason, though, has less to do with supposed objections to politics/morals than with much more mundane fact: Pound is hard, and given the increasingly "survey" nature of both introductory and advanced courses because of the demolition of "the canon," I believe many teachers find it irresponsible to devote large blocks of time to ANY writer/work. And more, this seems rarely to be what students demand. As for observations that few in their 20s and 30s have ever heard of Pound, I would offer that few of any age have heard of anyone we might consider important. Certainly, when I began my BA, and even when I was half-way through, even though I attended an "excellent" high school, I hadn't heard of Pound, Stevens, H.D., Lawrence, Pynchon, etc. This situation, I fear, is likely to get worse (from my perspective, at least): at the institution where I took my Ph.D., poetry classes increasingly seem "appreciative" or writer-oriented. Modernists retire (or die) and are replaced by Post-colonialists, Chicano/Chicana experts, and other "fashionable" scholars, but I suspect it has always been thus. By the by, for those who have complained about the hideous state of Pound scholarship, I offer this self-plug: dissertation: An Intention to Say Something: Chinese Written Characters and the Visual in Ezra Pound's _Cantos_ and Critics (1996) article forthcoming in _Paideuma_: Three Functions and Some Forgery: (Mis)uses of Visual Poetics in Pound s Cantos Jon Ausubel