Should I read the Cantos?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Ezra Pound. I have the book, it's REALLY LONG, and I don't do as much reading as I used to/would like. What do you think? I paid quite a bit for it 3 years ago or so.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 05:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Anthony said I should ask Josh Kortbein.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 05:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Pound was a great editor and a terrible arrogant almost totally graceless poet. Being the only person in the world who's well-read enough to understand your poetry = DUD.

Douglas (Douglas), Friday, 10 January 2003 06:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Andrew Thames writes esoteric, Pound-like poetry?

Leee (Leee), Friday, 10 January 2003 07:49 (twenty-two years ago)

NO.

Ess Kay (esskay), Friday, 10 January 2003 07:57 (twenty-two years ago)

i think that there are moments of great and lasting beauty.

anthony easton (anthony), Friday, 10 January 2003 08:25 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't even write poetry. I'm heading towards NO (I asked Ess about this a while ago in Rotorua) and wishing a bit that I hadn't written my name on the first page, so it'd be worth more. I've just started two books in the last 2 days, "Requiem for a Dream" by Hubert Selby Jr. and "Lolita" by Vladimir Nabokov... which should I press on with? I think "Lolita".

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 10:48 (twenty-two years ago)

"Press on", fuck. I've never said that before. Maybe I'll just read the first 20 or so and see how I'm thinking then.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 10:50 (twenty-two years ago)

in 20 years you will be tremendously famous and beloved, and the book will be worth more bcz you DID write yr name

as a whole this book is surely a colossal dud, but he did have as good an ear as anyone for fantastic individual lines and images

mark s (mark s), Friday, 10 January 2003 10:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Start reading it, and if you don't like it, give it up and read something else.

jel -- (jel), Friday, 10 January 2003 10:56 (twenty-two years ago)

That's what I just said I'd do! Good advice.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 10:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I know, I read the thread after I posted, I often do that! But like I gave you a second opinion!

jel -- (jel), Friday, 10 January 2003 11:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, I wasn't being sarcastic, that is good advice. I do the same thing w/posts, usually SOMEONE'S got to it first. And good for them.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 11:09 (twenty-two years ago)

"as a whole this book is surely a colossal dud, but he did have as good an ear as anyone for fantastic individual lines and images"

mark, we agree 100%!! (Leaving aside problem of having an ear for images, obviously).

Andrew life's too short. If I had the chance to re-live my life my (thankfully brief) Pound obsession would be the first thing to go.

Instead read a selection of his shorter early work (including his totally inaccurate but often magical translations, esp Cathay).

ArfArf, Friday, 10 January 2003 11:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd say stick with the Nabokov and the Selby (a very seriously underrated writer, I think) and forget the Pound, but then I don't much like poetry.

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 10 January 2003 13:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Actually yeah, Selby grabbed me pretty quickly, I love a good prose style. So did Nabokov but I was ready for it. I'll take "Requiem" w/me this weekend.

Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Friday, 10 January 2003 13:52 (twenty-two years ago)

This is weird: I just had a dream lately--it must have been last night--about giving someone a copy of Ezra Pound's Translations so they could read his translations from the Chinese.

I found The Cantos delightful when I was 13, but I found just about everything "avant-garde" delightful at that time, more for the idea of the thing, than for the actual thing. I was, of course, very impressed with myself for reading it at such a young age. I think that, as much as anything else, I loved the rust colored cover, and its starkness; the way the poem looked visually; and the smell of the pages.

It's ironic that Pound, who said that music atrophies when it gets too far away from dance and poetry atrophies when it gets too far away from music, went on to write a very long poem with very little swing to it. There are some worthwhile passages in it, but overall it tends to just become a jumble, especially toward the later Cantos. Anyway, I can't particularly recommend it.

Rockist Scientist, Friday, 10 January 2003 15:09 (twenty-two years ago)

Although one of those very very last Cantos is very beautiful, the one that features the word "m'amour".

Since you already have the book, I'd recommend at least skimming through the different sections, and reading a few to figure out what his strategies and whatnot are, assuming you're interested in that sort of thing.

Chris P (Chris P), Friday, 10 January 2003 17:31 (twenty-two years ago)


>>> as a whole this book is surely a colossal dud, but he did have as good an ear as anyone for fantastic individual lines and images

Evidence for this? I'm not convinced. 'A good ear', yes, probably (but also... a bad one?); but 'as good an ear as anyone'?

the pinefox, Friday, 10 January 2003 17:51 (twenty-two years ago)

A book's reputation might get you to begin reading it, but it should not keep you reading it past the first 30 pages. If it isn't speaking to you by then, I strongly suggest you set it aside. Plowing ahead is generally going to be a waste of time, no matter how great anyone else says it is.

Sometimes you can revisit a book you put aside as unreadable or not worth your while and find it beguiles you on a second (or third) look. The only way that will work out is if you waited long enough that your life experience has pushed you into an altogether different set of mind.

Aimless, Friday, 10 January 2003 18:10 (twenty-two years ago)

haha i produce as evidence everything else written by anyone ever!!

it is inscribed on this handy and portable interweb microdot => .

mark s (mark s), Friday, 10 January 2003 18:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Don't bother... Ezra Pound was a bit of an insufferable putz (not to mention fascist and xenophobe). I read this in college and all I got from it was why the postmoderns rebelled against him.

Aaron W (Aaron W), Friday, 10 January 2003 18:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Aaron W, it seems to me that a lot of postmoderns take a similar approach (formally speaking) and claim him as an ancestor, albeit a problematic one. I don't know where you are drawing the lines for postmodern poetry, but Charles Olson, Robert Creeley, Robert Duncan and Allen Ginsberg all have positive things to say about him. A little later, you have Charles Bernstein working out his ambivalence in "Pounding Fascism."

Rockist Scientist, Friday, 10 January 2003 19:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Pound was a fairly enthusiastic fascist, but then again Knut Hamsun said admiring things about the Nazis, too, and that doesn't make Hunger or Pan into fascist propaganda. Pound's flaws as a poet have only a tangential relationship to his politics and they definitely predate 'Ezra and Benito's Excellent Fascist Adventure'.

Just read 'em and see 'em for what they are.

Aimless, Friday, 10 January 2003 22:39 (twenty-two years ago)

His last Cantos are heartbreaking because he recognizes the evil he committed and begs forgiveness :
That I lost my center
fighting the world.
The dreams clash
and are shattered—
and that I tried to make a paradiso
terrestre.
(notes for canto CXX)

anthony easton (anthony), Friday, 10 January 2003 22:45 (twenty-two years ago)

What thou lovest well remains,
the rest is dross
What thou lov'st well shall not be reft from thee
What thou lov'st well is thy true heritage
Whose world, or mine or theirs
or is it of none?
First came the seen, then thus the palpable
from Canto LXXXI

anthony easton (anthony), Friday, 10 January 2003 22:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Rockist-- The way it was taught to me (and I'm obviously not claiming any sort of expertise!), the postmoderns you mentioned were concerned with exploding the formalism of Pound and Elliott. They certainly were indebted to them (look no further than "postmodernism" vs. "modernism"), but in terms of aesthetics they stood in opposition. I see Pound sitting in his room and steadfastly, over the course of decades, trying to write poems that encompass all things vs. the postmoderns trying to work fast and loose capturing a specific time or moment (to much better effect, in my mind at least).

I find Pound's poetry as fascist in terms of method as his politics. Yeats, Owen, cummings, Frost, Williams, Sandburg and Stein all did a lot for me.

This all of course represents more the state of mind I was in when I had to read the Cantos than my actual hate/love for the poetry, mind you! God bless universities. Heh.

So yeah, go ahead and read them. What do I know?

Aaron W (Aaron W), Friday, 10 January 2003 23:03 (twenty-two years ago)

ok roughly 50 of the cantos are facsit, coming from his belief that usury was evil. 100 arent, in form or content, and the last 50 tryo to make time and place as much as anything else.

anthony easton (anthony), Friday, 10 January 2003 23:23 (twenty-two years ago)

if pound was a formalist he was a very rubbish formalist

mark s (mark s), Friday, 10 January 2003 23:49 (twenty-two years ago)

i mean a formalist in the sense of using form like a willing slattern, pushing his poets cock into her willing flesh.

anthony easton (anthony), Friday, 10 January 2003 23:55 (twenty-two years ago)

(haha "translations")

someone should really do a v.severe edit of the cantos (haha il miglior fabbro). search : dolan's "yeah, the man wrote one nice haiku" line.

Ess Kay (esskay), Saturday, 11 January 2003 00:22 (twenty-two years ago)

the postmoderns trying to work fast and loose capturing a specific time or moment

This sounds like Imagism to me! Anyway, you have Charles Olson writing The Maximus Poems, which pretty clearly takes the Cantos as something of a model. The same can be said for Robert Duncan's "Passages" (or, for example, "Santa Cruz Propositions" from Ground Work: Before the War. (I have tossed a lot of this stuff, so I don't have as many examples at hand as I did before.) After his conversion to Buddhism, Ginsberg talks about Pound's Cantos as nearly life-long graph of one person's mind, and sees it as close to what he is trying to do. (Or that's what he said anyway.) Zukofsky's A would be another example of a poem in the tradition of the Cantos, unless you want to class him with the modernist generation.

I kind of see postmodern poetry as a continuation of the less mainstream (or even canonical, at the time postmodernism would have begun) elements of modernist poetry. There's an old essay on the subject by David Antin that I liked (though I think I also have tossed the book it was in). As Jerome Rothenberg and David Antin tell it, the initial poets identified as postmodern were at least partly breaking with a narrowed sense of what the modernist canon was, where, say, Eliot's sonnets were okay, but something like the Cantos were out.

Personally, at this point, I think that largely abandoning traditional meter and rhyme robbed poetry of its sensual power; and anything new that was added (e.g., in terms of range of what could be discussed) didn't really make up for that loss. Though there are exceptions.

anthony, I do like some of those last Cantos, but it's kind of too little too late (not too little too late as an apology, but too little too late as a compensation for the near unreadability of so much of the other Cantos).

Rockist Scientist, Saturday, 11 January 2003 00:50 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.