Writing about TS Eliot and his
second wife, Valerie, as I did recently, has made me reflect upon the
fifty-year friendship between Eliot and Ezra Pound, and
especially about that relationship at the end of their lives. Long-lasting friendships, glimpsed in old age,
have a particular poignancy in literature, nowhere seen better than in
Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 2, where
Falstaff, Justice Shallow and Master Silence sit in a Gloucestershire orchard
reminiscing about old conquests, famous revels (‘We have heard the chimes at
midnight, Master Shallow’) and dead friends. There is something of the same
elegiac note in Pound’s recollections of Eliot, memorably caught by the poet
Robert Lowell in his sonnet, ‘Ezra Pound’:
Eliot dead, you saying,
‘Who’s left
alive to understand my jokes?
My old brother
in the arts … besides, he was a smash of a poet.
‘My old brother in the arts ….’ One could
equally think of them as brothers in arms. This is how Anthony Rudolf
sees them. Writing in Silent
Conversations (2013), and echoing Bob Dylan, he comments that
The mutual
respect of Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot is touching: Eliot’s ‘Il miglior fabbro’ and Pound’s homage; ‘… Later, on his own hearth,
a flame tended, a presence felt’. Up
there in the captain’s tower, these two great poets, fighting or not, cast long
shadows over contemporary reading (and therefore writing)) even at this late
date.
Rudolf is a poet and translator, a publisher,
critic and teacher. Pound in his time
was all these too, but a poet above all, as Rudolf is – which is why he is able
to reject, with authority, F.R. Leavis’s
claim that Pound’s only great poem is Hugh Selwyn Mauberley, by comparison with which the Cantos entirely fail to measure up:
I cannot agree
that Pound’s versification is boring and that he has no creative theme. What
about memory and language, loss and disgrace?
What indeed? It would be hard to think of
any writer of the 20th century who has contemplated his own isolation and disgrace
with a more implacable self-scrutiny than Ezra Pound:
As a lone ant from a broken ant-hill
from the
wreckage of Europe, ego scriptor. (Canto LXXVI)
While Pound was incarcerated for twelve
years in Washington’s
Government Hospital for the Insane (though never tried for treason, let
alone convicted) Eliot led the campaign for his release, along with Robert
Frost and Archibald MacLeish. His Nobel Prizewinner status helped. When Pound
was finally allowed back to Italy, despairing at the failure of his life’s work
(‘my errors and wrecks lie about me’, Canto
CXVI) it was Eliot who sent letters – ‘Dear Old Ez …’ - reassuring him his work was not a ‘botch’ (Pound’s
word). And after Eliot’s death it was Valerie who publicly thanked Pound for
having been ‘a wondrous necessary man’ to her husband.
They never lost faith in each other. As Peter
Ackroyd has said:
In many ways
they had both been so much alike: the nervous, magpie-like intelligence, the
pedagogical aspirations, the Yankee toughness combined with the shuddering
sensitivity. They had both lived through the great period of modern literature
and had survived its passing: they were in a sense foreigners, out of joint
with their time.
I was
introduced to Pound’s poetry by Basil Bunting, who
had known Pound well in the 1920s and 1930s at Rapallo (Pound’s Italian base;
here in the years before the Second World War he presided over a literary court
in exile). Bunting was Poet in Residence at Durham , when I was a
student there. I got to know him well, and he talked much about Pound, trying to
teach me the lessons Pound had taught him about how to write well. At this
time, too, I made other friends who had known Pound and who continued to admire
him as a poet, acknowledging the honesty with which he faced up to his disgrace:
Pull down thy vanity
Thou art a
beaten dog beneath the hail,
A swollen magpie
in a fitful sun,
Half black half
white
Nor knowst’ou
wing from tail
Pull down thy
vanity
How mean thy hates
Fostered in
falsity,
Pull down thy vanity …. (Canto
LXXXI)
Not everyone, however, in the early 1970s was
prepared to forgive Pound. Tucked into my copy of Pound’s Selected Prose 1909-1965 (edited by William Cookson and
published in 1973) I found recently a TLS
review I’d kept of the book: the writer - still anonymous in those days -
launches an atrabilious attack on Pound.
Denouncing him as ‘a notorious traitor’, he asserts that ‘Behind
everything that Pound wrote is a set of hideous delusions’, dismisses the Cantos as ‘drivel’, and cites with
approval Maurice
Bowra’s conclusion that “Pound after all the fuss and trouble, is nothing
but a bore, and an American bore.”
This amounts to an attempt to write Pound
out of the history of Modernism, indeed out of history altogether – a man beneath
contempt and beneath consideration. So it is important to spell out again just
one of the reasons Pound still matters: without him there would have been no Waste Land. When I first met Basil
Bunting, he was reading The Invisible
Poet: T.S. Eliot, and he began our conversation by asking if I knew this
book by Hugh Kenner. ‘No,’ I confessed, ‘but I am reading The New Poetic: Yeats to Eliot by CK
Stead.’ Would I recommend it, asked Bunting. Yes, I said firmly – and I
have been reading and recommending Stead ever since. Here’s a comment from Book
Self (2008) where Stead explains the immediate impact of Valerie Eliot’s book:
One thing that
became clear was that Eliot had not been exaggerating when he gave generous
credit to Pound for rescuing the poem. Pound’s work on it had pulled The Waste Land together and determined
its dominant tone and colour.
Giving credit where credit is due. And
Pound’s final word on Eliot?
Let him rest in
peace. I can only repeat, but with the urgency of 50 years ago: READ HIM.
Adrian Barlow
[Notes:
· Robert Lowell’s poem, ‘Ezra
Pound’ can be found in Robert Lowell’s
Poems (ed. Jonathan Raban; London, Faber & Faber, 1974) p.133.
· Anthony Rudolf, Silent Conversations (London: Seagull Books, 2013, pp.218, 220. You can read my review of this book, which originally appeared in the English Association Newsletter (Winter 2013, No.204), here. The ‘Captain’s tower’ echoes Bob Dylan’s ‘Desolation Row’: ‘And Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot / Fighting in the Captain’s Tower...'
· The anonymous TLS review from which I quote was entitled ‘Fragments of cracker’ and was published 16 March 1973, p.292.
· Peter Ackroyd’s comment on Eliot and Pound comes from his biography T.S. Eliot (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1984) p.330.
· For an account of Pound’s incarceration in St Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington DC, I recommend the opening chapter of Eustace Mullins, This Difficult Individual: Ezra Pound (1961) which can be accessed online.
· Quotations, as indicated, from Ezra Pound, The Cantos, (4th collected edition; London: Faber & Faber, 1987)
· C.K. Stead’s comments on Pound, Eliot and The Waste Land , quoted here, are in Book Self (New Zealand: Auckland University Press, 2008), p.5
· Valerie Eliot’s borrowed description of Pound as ‘a wondrous necessary man’ (originally Beatrice’s description of de Flores in Middleton’s The Changeling) is included in her Acknowledgements to The Waste Land: a Facsimile and Transcript (London: Faber & Faber, 1971) p.xxxi
· Pound’s last published word on Eliot (first published as ‘For T.S.E.’ in The Sewanee Review, Winter 1966) is reprinted as the final item in Ezra Pound Selected Prose 1909-1965 (ed. William Cookson; London: Faber & Faber, 1973, p.434
· Anthony Rudolf, Silent Conversations (London: Seagull Books, 2013, pp.218, 220. You can read my review of this book, which originally appeared in the English Association Newsletter (Winter 2013, No.204), here. The ‘Captain’s tower’ echoes Bob Dylan’s ‘Desolation Row’: ‘And Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot / Fighting in the Captain’s Tower...'
· The anonymous TLS review from which I quote was entitled ‘Fragments of cracker’ and was published 16 March 1973, p.292.
· Peter Ackroyd’s comment on Eliot and Pound comes from his biography T.S. Eliot (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1984) p.330.
· For an account of Pound’s incarceration in St Elizabeth’s Hospital, Washington DC, I recommend the opening chapter of Eustace Mullins, This Difficult Individual: Ezra Pound (1961) which can be accessed online.
· Quotations, as indicated, from Ezra Pound, The Cantos, (4th collected edition; London: Faber & Faber, 1987)
· C.K. Stead’s comments on Pound, Eliot and The Waste Land , quoted here, are in Book Self (New Zealand: Auckland University Press, 2008), p.5
· Valerie Eliot’s borrowed description of Pound as ‘a wondrous necessary man’ (originally Beatrice’s description of de Flores in Middleton’s The Changeling) is included in her Acknowledgements to The Waste Land: a Facsimile and Transcript (London: Faber & Faber, 1971) p.xxxi
· Pound’s last published word on Eliot (first published as ‘For T.S.E.’ in The Sewanee Review, Winter 1966) is reprinted as the final item in Ezra Pound Selected Prose 1909-1965 (ed. William Cookson; London: Faber & Faber, 1973, p.434
In THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE IMAGINATION, Guy Davenport says that it was above all Archibald MacLeish who, 'for all practical purposes, alone' got Pound out of the asylum. Eliot lent his name, willingly, to the effort. Frost did so too, more grumpily, when Davenport, acting as MacLeish's messenger, took the piece of paper for him to sign. Davenport's book (do you know it?) contains several good and helpful essays about Pound's poetry and I've also found Kenner's eccentric THE POUND ERA useful in getting to grips with at least parts of THE CANTOS. They're tough, and uneven, and pesky, the Cantos, but as Bunting (how fascinating to know Mr Bunting) says, it's unwise to try and go round them.
ReplyDeletePhilip, Many thanks for this comment. I have not read Guy Davenport’s book, but I am happy to accept that MacLeish rather than Eliot was the prime mover (by virtue of his senior status within US legal and governmental circles) in securing Pound’s release in 1958; so I should now say that in this, he had Eliot’s strong support. Indeed, back in 1945 it had been Eliot who had initiated the campaign for Pound’s release when he approached MacLeish to ask whether he could use his influence to prevent Pound’s case from coming to trial. Perhaps Hugh Kenner put it best - even if, as you say, somewhat eccentrically - (in The Pound Era, 1971) when he wrote, ‘No one man needs the credit. Moving a government is like moving a brontosaur, whose centres of consciousness are distributed through innumerable ganglia.'
DeleteThe essayist and now forgotten poet, Richard Church, wrote – and I have to quote from memory – that, “we should not waste our time turning over the junk yard that is Pound’s poetry.”! Such statements of course alert us to the strong possibility that works so denigrated are probably worth seeking out. However, I sometimes wonder if there is not some danger of the critics becoming the equivalent of the Jewish Midrashim: poring over the Tanach (Old Testament) in the belief that every sentence must have a meaning. There are lines in both Eliot and Pound that may forever remain enigmatic (and Cardinal Newman admitted that – in looking over some of his early writings – he had no idea what was in his mind when he wrote certain passages).
ReplyDeleteHelp comes from an unlikely source: Leszek Kołakowski’s Metaphysical Horror:
“We must never assume that the great philosophers simply spin their web of abstraction for its own sake; there are always important reasons for even their most abstruse constructions, even if those reasons are not always understood by the philosophers themselves.”
So with Eliot and Pound: there is a gravitas to their work which is in stark contrast to some contemporary poets who strain for originality but end up in the graveyard of pretentiousness.
Thanks for wwriting
ReplyDelete