> Richard Seddon wrote:
> Dear List
> I just came across this quote in the Robert Creeley section of "Understanding The Black Mountain Poets" by Edward Halsey Foster. (page 110)
> Concerning Creeley's book of poems, "Pieces", Foster says:
> "The book coheres in much the same way as *Mabel: A Story*: things are held together not by narrative structure but by one sensibility expressing its multifold nature." (Pound fans should note the word 'cohere' :>) )
I'm not quite sure which way the bait is cast here? :-)
Are you thinking of the following from Canto CXVI (pp. 815-17)
I have brought the great ball of crystal
who can lift it?
Can you enter the great acorn of light?
But the beauty is not in the madness
Tho' my errors and wrecks lie about me.
And I am not a demigod.
I cannot make it cohere
but about that terzo
again is all "paradiso"
a nice quiet paradise
over the shambles,
and some climbing
before the take-off,
to "see again,"
the verb is "see," not "walk on"
i.e. it coheres all right
even if my notes do not cohere,
a little rightness,
to exercise his hell
and my paradiso,
Charity I have had sometimes,
I cannot make it flow thru.
A little light, like a rushlight
to lead back to splendour.
Or are you suggesting that the Cantos lack both narrative and "one
sensibility expressing its multifold nature"?
Though for me the Cantos _do_ cohere, though the shape they cut in time
articulates a "world view" to which I am profoundly opposed. My "tastes"
in literature were in their essence all shaped before the landing of
U.S. troops in the Dominican Repbulic, which event changed, or began a
process which changed, everything for me. Hence I find myself in such
fundamental disagreement with the very premises that inform the work of
Milton, Pope, Austen, Dickens, James, & Pound, and yet they remain the
writers that I most return to.
Anyhow, the last word of the preceding passages, "splendour," certainly
applies to the Cantos as a whole.