What's your opinion of Ezra Pound's Cantos. Setting aside his own judgment, that they were a complete failure and a waste of time, and even ignoring the high praise and scathing criticism he received for them from his contemporaries, do you think they're worth slogging through just for those few pearls that people have plumbed from their depths?
Also, just for context, my friend and I are trying to decide on a New Year's Resolution-type of reading goal. Last year we got through À la recherche by early March.
>>7474227
Also, sorry for that apostrophe. I swear I didn't mean to type that.
I've read most of his poetry, but not the Cantos. Based on the quality of his versification and his mind, I decided not to read the Cantos.
Take that for what it's worth, I guess. Many people who have read them say it was worth the time. But then, anybody who has read all of Finnegans Wake will probably tell you the same thing. Or the Bible. It's hard for people to judge how well-spent their time was. The people who feel their time is being wasted never go all the way through.
>>7474227
They are obscure, difficult and long. Apparently they are good if you can understand them. I couldn't.
There is enough great poetry out there that I don't mind missing out on the cantos.
I enjoy T.S. Eliot, which is similar in style to pound (from what I hear).
>>7474244
>sorry for that apostrophe
I wish it was that simple.
>>7474227
Have you already read Social Credit?
>>7474265
no. Why?
>>7474387
It informed a lot of EP's opinions about economics and will help you understand what he's on about in the Cantos
I think most highly of Pound, but gosh he was an unlikeable person.
In pic related, he slams Shakespeare and Milton, and criticises readers with less than 5 languages as being lazy.
Plus, he was an anti-Semite and all that.
>>7474227
I started the Cantos about a week ago. Even with the Terrell companion it is unbelievably slow going.
I think I might shelve it for a while to be honest. I don't want to spend too much of my holiday time slaving over a work this demanding.
Don't even think of approaching this one without that companion. You will barely scratch the surface without it.
>>7474996
not to mention a narcissist, a fascist, and a womanizing piece of shit
>>7475160
>a womanizing piece of shit
stop being such a white knight
the only guy ive met who read them them in full was a professor so take that how you will
>>7475263
>only white knights think it's morally reprehensible to have countless mistresses
I think it's immoral when women do it, too.
But I guess it's unthinkable that anyone should have a Victorian opinion on sexuality in [current year].
>>7476892
I'm laughing my ass of at all this butthurt over Pound being so based
>>7474996
Is there any point reading the second half of ABC if I haven't read the relevant writers?
>>7477009
Any1?
>>7477307
If you search warosu there was a thread about it. Might be of help.
>>7474249
He isn't really though.
>>7474227
I did not find that they were worth it (I have read maybe a third). The best ones can be found online. Seach for "And Kung walked forth", "Let those I love try to forgive what I have made", and "What thou lovest best shall not bereft from thee".
His best work is his loose translations of chinese (Cathay, not the confucian ones), latin and egyptian poems. I even prefer Lustra (or was it Personae?) to the Cantos.
>>7477002
>lol I cant believe these people are getting so bumblasted that someone is a bad person
>I can tell they're anally ailing because they posted their opinion
the emotion is more like disgust, friend
>>7476847
Found the virgin.
>>7477832
>anally ailing
:>
>>7474996
>he was an anti-Semite
>a bad thing
>>7475081
I'm not thinking of reading it all in one go. I was planning on going maybe one or two Cantos a day. But I guess I probably should get the companion study if I want to have any critical apparatus to go with it.
>>7474996
He doesn't slam Shakespeare, he just says he wasn't as good as Chaucer (because Pound was infatuated with medievalism). He has sort of a point about Milton and is definitely write about learning languages.
>>7479321
>he wasn't as good as Chaucer
>>7479330
>As to the relative merits of Chaucer and Shakespeare, English opinion has been bamboozled for centuries by a love of the stage, the glamour of the theatre, the love of bombastic rhetoric and of sentimentalizing over actors and actresses; these, plus the national laziness and unwillingness to make the least effort, have completely obscured values.
>Chaucer had a deeper knowledge of life than Shakespeare. Let the reader contradict that after reading both authors, if he chooses to do so.
>>7474390
Wow. Someone who knows that of which they speak. I doff my sombrero lad.
>>7479321
>is definitely write
>>7474996
>anti-semitism is a pejorative
tip top kek
