Although I'm not nearly anything of an expert on this topic, I did write an article about Pound and his system of rules. Go to: http://people.a2000.nl/avanarum/ and select articles. The one I'm talking about is called. The Serious Artist, and I'm very curious what you think, so let me know... Arwin >To all on the list: > > I've noticed that a lot of discussion on the list tends to be about >the Cantos so if I may I'd like to re-direct things momentarily and >raise the subject of Imagism/ Vorticism. > > I am curious about current opinion regarding Pound's approach to >the "image" (or his 1914 re-definition of it as a "vortex") as opposed >to the often-encountered notion of Imagism being merely a bunch of >pretty pictures with no potential as far as the composition of serious >poetry is concerned. > > I've read whatever books I could get my hands on relating to the >subject (though there were a couple I couldn't locate) and of course >there is no lack of books on the London years in general and the >development through E.P's early volumes (e.g. Witemeyer, De Nagy, >Schneidau, Grieve). I am interested in what list members think about the >topic. Do people feel that it has been covered adequately? Has it been >done to death or is there room for reconsideration, particularly as >regards its potential as a system of guidelines for (current) aspiring >writers? Is it still valid or is it merely a curiosity of literary >history? > > Thanks in advance, > > Jason Monios > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com