Live data from Hacker News

Stuck with Pound

kirkcenter.org

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: Stuck with Pound

#21
post #3

Sturgeon's law applies to people as well as between people. That's why we invented editors. and manners. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24081265 Edit: skimming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_Pound it seems amazing that one can get from supporting social credit ("to disperse economic and political power to individuals") to capital-F Fascism and "the English were a slave race governed since Waterloo by the Ro…

There were direct connections between Futurism (the Italian artistic movement) and Fascism, and Futurism influenced Vorticism. Cancelling Pound would be no great loss for humanity.

> Cancelling Pound would be no great loss for humanity.

It would be a loss, and not just because his poetry would be lost. The point is elaborated in a good, recent article on the attempt to cancel Pound in 1946: https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/02/27/auden-on-no-platfor....

Re: Stuck with Pound

#22
The web site is inaccessible to me:

"Your access to this service has been limited. (HTTP response code 503)"

"Block Reason: Access from your area has been temporarily limited for security reasons."

Re: Stuck with Pound

#23
post #6
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going from socialism to fascism never was a long walk.

You're being downvoted but this is correct. Mussolini, arguably the inventor of modern fascism, began his political life as a socialist; to his last days, he maintained a belief in the role of the State to direct development and economic output. In many ways, the economic policies of Fascism (and Nazism later) might well be described as "socialist policies run by - and for - oligarchic capitalists".

and now you're also downvoted, but still correct.

Also at the end of WWII when Mussolini was deposed he became head of the Italian Social Republic[0], not named by accident.

The party that ended up as the parliamentary right in Italy was called Movimento Sociale Italiano[1] ("italian social movement).

One of the fascist mottos was “Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato.” (Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State).

This not not to say of course that fascism and socialism are the same, they are not, just that they shared a lot of background ideas.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Social_Republic [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Social_Movement

Re: Stuck with Pound

#26
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going from socialism to fascism never was a long walk.

> Going from socialism to fascism never was a long walk. Ideologically, it's a pretty giant gulf. Mechanically, there are some socialist models that are similar (corporatism is the key similarity there, though not all socialist models embrace corporatism in practice, and fewer do by name.) OTOH, fascism isn't a long mechanical walk from lots of modern government forms.

And yet, both Hitler and Stalin easily steered their parties from socialism to natialism in the same exact time period. As far as ideology goes, both ideas embrase the core Rousseau's tenant of submission to "General Will" and complete, totalitarian primacy of state over a person.

Of course, all government should always be suspect of overstepping it's boundaries, but I still think that countries with common law don't fall into centralized tyranny as easily.

Re: Stuck with Pound

#27
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He may as well have been cancelled, as I'm utterly unfamiliar with him. Will report back on whether I got any useful bits out of "Guide to Kulchur" and "ABC of Reading" after I've read a bit of them. The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Sunfish was certainly worth some reflection, although Pound's willingness to translate chinese poetry without knowing much chinese may show his practice (as is most of our…

ABC of Reading is a good but extremely curmudgeonly guide to poetry in English through the ages. (He would rather have written a guide to european poetry, and it shows, but his publisher (Faber?) insisted it focus on English for the sake of accessibility.) A large part of it is basically an anthology with commentary. His commentary in it (as elsewhere) is maddeningly condensed and hermetic - one senses the insight wi…

I think ABC doesn't have the friendly helping hand (but it does! he translates the first few...) because Pound is trying to imitate Aggasiz's technique, to force (though not going as far as banishing explication to the back of the book) the reader to engage with the primary texts.

I'm about 10% into Guide and it does have a bit of (pre-internet) crackpottery to it: he's veered off from Confucius into goldbuggery at the moment, and has his syntactic quirks, such as the modals wd. cd. and shd.

However, just as those latter abbreviations do make sense on their own terms (sound them out, which also explains kulchur), he is very well read, thinks for himself instead of regurgitating, and has kept my google tab incredibly busy. So I'm very likely to continue, to see where he winds up.

(A straight-up guess at this point: he wound up at fascism because he's looking for a universal system that not only explains how things are, but is also a modus vivendi, saying what people should do.

Personally, I see "Party On" as the balancing counterweight to that viewpoint. Many people in the twentieth century interpreted "Be Excellent To Each Other" to mean breaking eggs was OK as long as it was going to lead to an excellent omelette. But if one equally weights the injunction to Party On, one can't borrow uncertain utilities from the future to justify certain disutility now.

In any case, I take the scientific tack on How Things Are, which by and large is completely indifferent to What People Should Do for the simple reason that it is completely indifferent to People.)

Tangentially related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oven_of_Akhnai

Re: Stuck with Pound

#28
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were direct connections between Futurism (the Italian artistic movement) and Fascism, and Futurism influenced Vorticism. Cancelling Pound would be no great loss for humanity.

> Cancelling Pound would be no great loss for humanity. It would be a loss, and not just because his poetry would be lost. The point is elaborated in a good, recent article on the attempt to cancel Pound in 1946: https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/02/27/auden-on-no-platfor... .

I think it would be a loss, because up until today I had thought broad-mindedness was sufficient protection against fascism. In Pound we have someone who railed against provincialism and secondary sources in early work, yet wound up broadcasting pro-fascist propaganda for Mussolini.

ABC of Reading (ch 3. p 42):

> "One has to divide the readers who want to be experts from those who do not, and divide, as it were, those who want to see the world from those who merely want to know WHAT PART OF IT THEY LIVE IN."

> "When it comes to the question of poetry, a great many people don't even want to know that their own country does not occupy ALL the available surface of the planet. The idea seems in some way to insult them."

I at least will study him, to figure out how he wound up there. It appears it may have been via antisemitism, through the christian/muslim anti-interest tradition. It may have been because he thought fascists rewarded artists better than democracies. It may have been other paths. I don't know yet.

(I still think self-deprecating humour may be an antidote: fascists are Serious People doing Serious Things, and I haven't been aware of any thick anthologies of famous fascist comedies. But after today I'm no longer so sure they don't exist.)

Re: Stuck with Pound

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cancelling Pound would be no great loss for humanity. It would be a loss, and not just because his poetry would be lost. The point is elaborated in a good, recent article on the attempt to cancel Pound in 1946: https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/02/27/auden-on-no-platfor... .

I think it would be a loss, because up until today I had thought broad-mindedness was sufficient protection against fascism. In Pound we have someone who railed against provincialism and secondary sources in early work, yet wound up broadcasting pro-fascist propaganda for Mussolini. ABC of Reading (ch 3. p 42): > "One has to divide the readers who want to be experts from those who do not, and divide, as it were, thos…

Now halfway through ...Kulchur and not sure I'll do more than skim the rest. While ABC had structure, Kulchur is reminiscent of a series of blog posts put into print.

The proximal cause of his support for Fascism is obvious, on p.249:

> "Mussolini has told his people that poetry is a necessity to the state, and Carlo Delcroix is convinced that poets ought to "occupy themselves with these matters", namely credit, the nature of money, monetary issue etc."

and p.250:

> "Civilization becomes admirable when people begin to prefer a little of the best to a great deal of the pasty."

In between he's been a goldbug, railed against "international finance" (which, given his glowing reviews of Charles Coughlin, admiration of the medieval Church, and pining for the use of latin, not in the mass, but in academic publishing, all suggest he's never very far away from antisemitic dog whistles with his rants on usury), is convinced that radio has reshaped politics because it allows the sheeple to learn reality instead of the fake news, notes that the only knowledgable writers on economics are the non-economists (which goes well with his snark on LSE, less well with his rants against "cranks"), considers that the British Empire is decadent (and the US not much better: although they stayed out of the League of Nations, with Pound's approval, they've put Susan B. Anthony on a stamp, to his great disapproval), suggests that taxation is theft, and complains that neither US nor UK academia (people who chatter rather than do) are receptive to free inquiry by independent researchers, etc. all of which may be more distal causes.

In short, s/radio/social media/, give him Oakleys and an F-450[1], and he'd be right at home in 2020.

[1] we can imagine him in the cab (safely away from Dorothy, Marcella, and Olga?), stroking his goatee while telling us "[w]hat ultimately counts is the level of civilization. No decent man tortures prisoners. No clean man wd. tolerate the advertising atrocities between here and Genova. No man free of mental lice wd. tolerate the bank racket or the taxing system."

Post reply on HN