[lit-ideas] Re: Fwd: Re: Pound's treason

  • From: Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:50:53 +0000

This is correct, although if one were to look at history T S Eliot was 
anti-Semitic of the very traditional sort (generated by his Christian beliefs), 
while the period in which Pound developed in views (see e.g. “con usura”) is 
marked by different strains.


From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Omar Kusturica
Sent: 14 February 2015 11:39
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Fwd: Re: Pound's treason

I've refreshed my memory somewhat... anti-semitism does not seem to be visible 
in Pound's poems, but it is found in the poetry of his friend, T.S. Eliott:


On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Ed Farrell 
<ewf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ewf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

On Feb 13, 2015, at 11:32 PM, David Ritchie 
<profdritchie@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:profdritchie@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

On Feb 13, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Edward Farrell wrote:


I think Mike Geary is basically correct, but it is a nuanced issue.  Let's take 
my example of the bridge one more time (but not as industrial product in 
Marxist terms), and look at your intent in making the bridge: you made it so 
the terrorists to whom you sold the nuclear weapons have a ready means of 
delivering the bomb to a populated area.  So now, insofar as your artifact is 
related to its creator, it is thoroughly immoral--the product of a criminal, 
and made for a criminal purpose to boot. Yet after you've been caught and 
incarcerated and the terrorists thwarted in their purpose, the bridge remains, 
and can be used to carry innocent citizens to and fro, and no one will much 
object because the bridge is not, as you put it, "the very expression of 
personality" of its creator so most needn't associate it with you when they 
drive over it anyway.

Pound wrote these lines in his younger days:

 I have heard a wee wind searching

Unusually, I'm going to anticipate JLS:

1) Can't call a wind wee because wee was originally a reference to weight 
It makes no difference since he is referring to the Wee Wind 16, which is made 
by Airstream and since air stream is air in motion 'wee wind' is perfectly 
acceptable under any circumstances regardless of your or JLS's objections.
Also, a pound is a weight therefore even in the Scottish usage wee is simply a 
circular reference to Ezra Pound.

2) Pound wasn't Scottish, so saying "wee" is twee or twaddle, or something of 
that ilk
Nothing of the sort; the pound is great currency among Scots and of course 
there's no American pound as we know; Pound is therefore as Scottish as haggis 
whether for a penny or a pound, regardless of what you or JLS may say.

3) Sassoon was also put in the madhouse when some other judgement would have 
been awkward
4) My last post of the day isn't "the Last Post"
5) To quote Eddie Izzard on fascists, inbreeding and degeneration, "I have no 
6) As Monty Python on Australian philosophy put it, "There is no rule six." 

David Ritchie
nearby the ex-governor in
Portland, Oregon
Ed Farrell

Other related posts: