Different grampers too.
Hal
Today's Special
Theory of Harmony
http://www.xpressed.org/fall04/theory1.pdf
Halvard Johnson
================
[log in to unmask]
http://home.earthlink.net/~halvard/index.html
http://entropyandme.blogspot.com
http://imageswithoutwords.blogspot.com
http://www.hamiltonstone.org
http://home.earthlink.net/~halvard/vidalocabooks.html
On Apr 4, 2008, at 3:13 PM, Mark Weiss wrote:
> Is it that they are different the grammers of English and French?
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>> I was going to say something about Hal's apparent confusion of
>> semantics with syntax, in his attempt -- or was this a joke, Hal?
>> -- to deny Candice's concisely put point that English is a Germanic
>> Language. But perhaps I'd better not go there.
>>
>> <g>
>>
>> Robin
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Bircumshaw" <[log in to unmask]
>> >
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 5:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: Pound/Modernism; was draft
>>
>>
>>> There are many poets who accept modernism but have reservations
>>> about
>>> Pound. His fortunes with public acceptance were mixed, as is the
>>> case
>>> for no end of writers. He did have difficulties finding publishers
>>> for
>>> early versions of The Cantos but even among avant-garde writers
>>> there
>>> was uncertainty about them (Joyce thought The Cantos unreadable
>>> while
>>> Pound considered Finnegans Wake unintelligible. Or the other way
>>> round, I can't recall which). Yet at the outset of his career his
>>> early books were reviewed in publications like the Times Literary
>>> Supplement. It was the varied output of his most productive period,
>>> roughly 1912 -19, that gave the most impetus to other writers, it
>>> was
>>> a time too when Pound's better qualities as man were at the
>>> foremost.
>>> As for the issue of British poets and modernism, the answers (and
>>> questions) are too many for me to even want to expatiate on here:
>>> Larkin's reasons in the 1950's might not be the same as, say, Simon
>>> Armitage's today. It's worth pointing out that in North America
>>> there
>>> have been and are poets who pursue a kind of populist line that has
>>> nothing to do with modernism and there is a corresponding readership
>>> for them. There has also been, for complex historical and social
>>> reasons, a resistance in some parts of British intellectual life to
>>> anything that smacks of theory: 'No Isms Please, We're British'.
>>> My own attitude towards the Pound of The Cantos now stand at this:
>>> they is best read as if the writings of a fictional character.
>>> It's the only way I can negotiate the problems raised by the
>>> relationship between his politics and his aesthetics (which can't be
>>> brushed aside) and it makes coherent the otherwise doubtfulness of a
>>> work in which brilliance and garrulousness, musicality and stylistic
>>> disjointedness, jostle together in a heap.
>>> It also stops him invading my head: he is not a pleasant presence
>>> within.
|