Russians! No. William is _matto_ over his Russians. They are

THE LITTLE REVIEW

THE MAGAZINE THAT IS READ BY THOSE

WHO WRITE THE OTHERS

Margaret Anderson, Publisher

OCTOBER, 1917

Poems of Po Chu-I translated by Arthur Waley

Cantelman’s Spring-Mate Wyndham Lewis

Imaginary Letters, V. Ezra Pound

Exasperations Margaret Anderson

Improvisations William Carlos Williams

Editorial on Solicitous Doubt Ezra Pound

Style and American Literature Maxwell Bodenheim

Barbara Roscorla’s Child Arthur Symons

The Reader Critic

Announcements

Copyright, 1917, by Margaret Anderson.

MARGARET ANDERSON, Editor

EZRA POUND, Foreign Editor

24 WEST SIXTEENTH STREET, NEW YORK

15 cents a copy $1.50 a year

Entered as second-class matter at P. O., New York, N. Y.

THE LITTLE REVIEW

VOL. IV. OCTOBER 1917 No. 6.

POEMS OF PO CHU-I

(772-846 a. d.)

Translated by Arthur Waley

The Harper of Chao

The singers have hushed their notes of clear song;

The red sleeves of the dancers are motionless.

Hugging his lute, the old harper of Chao

Rocks and sways as he touches the five chords.

The loud notes swell and scatter abroad:

“Sa, sa”, like wind blowing the rain.

The soft notes dying almost to nothing:

“Ch’ieh, ch’ieh”, like the voice of ghosts talking.

Now as glad as the magpie’s lucky song:

Again bitter as the gibbon’s ominous cry.

His ten fingers have no fixed note;

Up and down—“_kung_”, “_chih_” and “_yu_”.[1]

And those who sit and listen to the tune he plays

Of soul and body lose the mastery.

And those who pass that way as he plays the tune

Suddenly stop and cannot raise their feet.

Alas, alas that the ears of common men

Should love the modern and not love the old!

Thus it is that the harp in the green window

Day by day is covered deeper with dust.

On the Way to Hangchow: Anchored on the River at Night

Little sleeping and much grieving, the traveller

Rises at midnight and looks back toward home.

The sands are bright with moonlight that joins the shores;

The sail is white with dew that has covered the boat.

Nearing the sea, the river grows broader and broader:

Approaching autumn, the nights longer and longer

Thirty times we have slept amid mists and waves,

And still we have not reached Hangchow!

Immortality

Boundless, the great sea!

Straight down,—no bottom: sideways,—no border.

Of cloudy waves and misty billows down in the uttermost depths

Men have fabled, in the midst there stand three sacred hills.

On the hills thick growing,—herbs that banish death.

Wings grow on those who eat them and they turn into heavenly _hsien_.

The Lord of Ch’in[2] and Wu of Han[3] believed in these stories;

And magic-workers year by year were sent to gather the herbs.

The Blessed Islands, now and of old, what but an empty tale?

The misty waters spread before them and they knew not where to seek.

Boundless, the great sea!

Dauntless, the mighty wind!

Their eyes search but cannot see the shores of the Blessed Islands.

They cannot find the Blessed Isles and yet they dare not go back;

Youths and maidens that began the quest grew gray on board the boat.

They found that the writings of Hsü Fu were all boasts and lies;

To the Great Unity and Lofty Principle they had raised their prayers in

vain.

Do you not see

The graves on the top of Black Horse Hill and the tombs at Mo-ling?[4]

What is left but the sighing wind blowing in the tangled grass?

Yes, and what is more,

The Dark and Primal Master of Sagas in his five thousand words

Never spoke of herbs: never spoke of _hsien_,

Nor spoke of climbing in broad daylight up to the blue of heaven.

The Two Red Towers

(A Satire Against Clericalism)

The Two Red Towers

North and South rise facing each other.

I beg to ask, to whom do they belong?

To the two princes of the period Cheng Yüan.[5]

The two princes blew on their flutes and drew down fairies from the sky;

Who carried them off through the Five Clouds, soaring away to Heaven.

Their halls and houses, that they could not take with them,

Were turned into Temples, planted in the Dust of the World.

In the tiring-rooms and dancers’ towers all is silent and still;

Only the willows like dancers’ arms, and the pond like a mirror.

At twilight when the flowers are falling, when things are sad and

hushed,

One does not hear songs and flutes, but only chimes and bells.

The Imperial Patent on the Temple doors is written in letters of gold;

For nuns’ quarters and monks’ cells ample space is allowed.

For green moss and bright moonlight—plenty of room provided;

In a hovel opposite is a sick man who has hardly room to lie down!

I remember once when at P’ing-yang they were building a great man’s

house:

How it swallowed up the housing space of thousands of ordinary men.

The Immortals[6] are leaving us, two by two, and their houses are turned

into Temples;

I begin to fear that the whole world will become a vast convent!

On Board Ship: Reading Yuan Chen’s Poems

I take your poems in my hand and read them beside the candle;

The poems are finished: the candle is low: dawn not yet come.

With sore eyes by the guttering candle still I sit in the dark,

Listening to the waves that strike the ship driven by a head-wind.

Arriving at Hsün-Yang[7]

A bend of the river brings into view two triumphal arches;

This is the gate in the western wall of the suburbs of Hsün-yang.

I have still to travel in my solitary boat three or four leagues—

By misty waters and rainy sands, while the yellow dusk thickens.

We are almost come to Hsün-yang; how my thoughts are stirred

As we pass to the south of Yü-liang’s Tower and the east of P’en port.

The forest trees are leafless and withered,—after the mountain rain;

The roofs of the houses are hidden low among the river mists.

The horses, fed on water-grass, are too weak to carry their load;

The cottage walls of wattle and thatch let the wind blow on one’s bed.

In the distance I see red-wheeled coaches driving from the town-gate;

They have taken the trouble, these civil people to meet their new

Prefect!

After Getting Drunk, Becoming Sober in the Night

Our party scattered at yellow dusk and I came home to bed;

I woke at midnight and went for a walk, leaning heavily on a friend.

As I lay on my pillow my vinous complexion, soothed by sleep, grew

sober;

In front of the tower the ocean moon, accompanying the tide, had risen.

The swallows, about to return to the beams, went back to roost again;

The candle at my window, just going out, suddenly revived its light.

All the time till dawn came, still my thoughts were muddled;

And in my ears something sounded like the music of flutes and strings.

Last Poem

They have put my bed beside this unpainted screen;

They have shifted my stove in front of the blue curtain.

I listen to my grandchildren reading to me from a book;

I watch the servants heating up the soup.

I move my pencil, answering the poems of friends;

I feel in my pockets and pull out the medicine money.

When this superintendance of trifling affairs is done

I lie back on my pillows and sleep with my face to the South.

----------

[1] Notes of the scale.

[2] The ‘First Emperor’, B. C. 259-210.

[3] The Emperor Wu, B. C. 156-87.

[4] The burial places of these two Emperors.

[5] 785-805 A. D.

[6] The Emperor’s relatives.

[7] He was banished to this place in 815 with the rank of

Sub-prefect.

CANTELMAN’S SPRING-MATE

Wyndham Lewis

Cantelman walked in the strenuous fields, steam rising from them as

though from an exertion, dissecting the daisies specked in the small

wood, the primroses on the banks, the marshy lakes, and all God’s

creatures. The heat of a heavy premature Summer was cooking the little

narrow belt of earth-air, causing everything innocently to burst its

skin, bask abjectly and profoundly. Everything was enchanted with itself

and with everything else. The horses considered the mares immensely

appetising masses of quivering shiny flesh: was there not something of

“je ne sais quoi” about a mare, that no other beast’s better half

possessed? The birds with their little gnarled feet, and beaks made for

fishing worms out of the mould, or the river, would have considered

Shelley’s references to the skylark—or any other poet’s paeans to their

species—as lamentably inadequate to describe the beauty of birds! The

female bird, for her particular part, reflected that, in spite of the

ineptitude of her sweetheart’s latest song, which he insisted on

deafening her with, never seemed to tire of, and was so persuaded that

she liked as much as he did himself, and although outwardly she remained

strictly critical and vicious: that all the same and nevertheless,

chock, chock, peep, peep, he was a fluffy object from which certain

satisfaction could be derived! And both the male and the female

reflected together as they stood a foot or so apart looking at each

other with one eye, and at the landscape with the other, that of all

nourishment the red earthworm was the juiciest and sweetest! The sow, as

she watched her hog, with his splenetic energy, and guttural

articulation, a sound between content and complaint, not noticing the

untidy habits of both of them, gave a sharp grunt of sex-hunger, and

jerked rapidly towards him. The only jarring note in this vast mutual

admiration society was the fact that many of its members showed their

fondness for their neighbour in an embarrassing way: that is they killed

and ate them. But the weaker were so used to dying violent deaths and

being eaten that they worried very little about it.=The West was gushing

up a harmless volcano of fire, obviously intended as an immense dreamy

nightcap.

Cantelman in the midst of his cogitation on surrounding life, surprised

his faithless and unfriendly brain in the act of turning over an object

which humiliated his meditation. He found that he was wondering whether

at his return through the village lying between him and the Camp, he

would see the girl he had passed there three hours before. At that time

he had not begun his philosophizing, and without interference from

conscience, he had noticed the redness of her cheeks, the animal fulness

of the child-bearing hips, with an eye as innocent as the bird or the

beast. He laughed without shame or pleasure, lit his pipe and turned

back towards the village.=His fieldboots were covered with dust: his

head was wet with perspiration and he carried his cap, in unmilitary

fashion, in his hand. In a week he was leaving for the Front, for the

first time. So his thoughts and sensations all had, as a philosophic

background, the prospect of death. The Infantry, and his commission,

implied death or mutilation unless he were very lucky. He had not a high

opinion of his luck. He was pretty miserable at the thought, in a

deliberate, unemotional way. But as he realised this he again laughed, a

similar sound to that that the girl had caused.=For what was he unhappy

about? He wanted to remain amongst his fellow insects and beasts, which

were so beautiful, did he then: Well well! On the other hand, who was it

that told him to do anything else? After all, supposing the values they

attached to each other of “beautiful”, “interesting”, “divine”, were

unjustified in many cases on cooler observation:—nevertheless birds

_were_ more beautiful than pigs: and if pigs were absurd and ugly,

rather than handsome, and possibly chivalrous, as they imagined

themselves; then equally the odour of the violet was pleasant, and there

was nothing offensive about most trees. The newspapers were the things

that stank most on earth, and human beings anywhere were the most ugly

and offensive of the brutes because of the confusion caused by their

consciousness. Had it not been for that unmaterial gift that some

bungling or wild hand had bestowed, our sisters and brothers would be no

worse than dogs and sheep. That they could not reconcile their little

meagre stream of sublimity with the needs of animal life should not be

railed at. Well then, should not the sad human amalgam, all it did, all

it willed, all it demanded, be thrown over, for the fake and confusion

that it was, and should not such as possessed a greater quantity of that

wine of reason, retire, metaphorically, to the wilderness, and sit

forever in a formal and gentle elation, refusing to be disturbed?=Should

such allow himself to be disturbed by the quarrels of jews, the

desperate perplexities, resulting in desperate dice throws, of

politicians, the crack-jaw and unreasoning tumult?

On the other hand, Cantelman had a little more human, as well as a

little more divine, than those usually on his left and right, and he had

had, not so long ago, conspicuous hopes that such a conjuncture might

produce a new human chemistry. But he must repudiate the human entirely,

if that were to be brought off. His present occupation, the trampling

boots upon his feet, the belt that crossed his back and breast, was his

sacrifice, his compliment to, the animal.

He then began dissecting his laugh, comparing it to the pig’s grunt and

the bird’s cough. He laughed again several times in order to listen to

it.

At the village he met the girl, this time with a second girl. He stared

at her “in such a funny way” that she laughed. He once more laughed, the

same sound as before, and bid her good evening. She immediately became

civil. Enquiries about the village, and the best way back to camp across

the marsh, put in as nimble and at the same time rustic a form as he

could contrive, lay the first tentative brick of what might become the

dwelling of a friend, a sweetheart, a ghost, anything in the absurd

world! He asked her to come and show him a short cut she had indicated.

“I _couldn’t_! My mother’s waiting for _me_!” in a rush of expostulation

and semi-affected alarm. However, she concluded, in a minute or two,

that she could.

He wished that she had been some Anne Garland, the lady whose lips were

always flying open like a door with a defective latch. He had made

Anne’s acquaintance under distressing circumstances.

On his arrival at Gideon brook, the mighty brand-new camp on the edge of

the marsh, he found that his colleague in charge of the advance party

had got him a bed-space in a room with four officers of another

regiment. It had seemed impossible that there were any duller men than

those in the mess of his particular battalion: but it was a dullness he

had become accustomed to.

He saw his four new companions with a sinking of the heart, and steady

gnawing anger at such concentration of furious foolishness.

Cantelman did not know their names, and he hated them in order as

follows:

A. he hated because he found him a sturdy, shortish young man with a

bull-like stoop and energetic rush in his walk, with flat feet spread

out to left to right, and slightly bowed legs. This physique was

enhanced by his leggings: and not improved, though hidden, in his

slacks. He had a swarthy and vivacious face, with a sort of semitic

cunning and insolence painted on it. His cheeks had a broad carmine

flush on general sallowness. The mind painted on this face for the

perusal of whoever had the art of such lettering, was as vulgar stuff,

in Cantelman’s judgement, as could be found. To _see_ this face

constantly was like _hearing_ perpetually a cheap and foolish music. A.

was an officer, but naturally not a gentleman.

B. he disliked, because, being lean and fresh-coloured, with glasses, he

stank, to Cantelman’s peculiar nose, of Jack London, Summer Numbers of

magazines, bad flabby Suburban Tennis, flabby clerkship in inert, though

still prosperous, city offices. He brought a demoralizing dullness into

the room with him, with a brisk punctiliousness, several inches higher

from the ground than A.

C. he resented for the sullen stupidity with which he moved about, the

fat having settled at the bottom of his cheeks, and pulled the corners

of his mouth down, from sheer stagnation. His accent dragged the

listener through the larger slums of Scotland, harrowing him with the

bestial cheerlessness of morose religion and poverty. The man was

certainly, from every point of view, social prestige, character,

intelligence, far less suited to hold a commission than most of the

privates in his platoon.

D. reproduced the characteristics of the other three, in different

quantities: his only personal contribution being a senile sing-song

voice, from the North, and a blond beam, or partially toothless grin,

for a face.

This was the society into the midst of which Cantelman had been dropped

on his arrival at Gideon brook, ten days previous to this. They had all

looked up, (for it was always _all_, they having the inseparability of

their kind) with friendly welcome, as brother officers should. He

avoided their eyes, and sat amongst them for a few days, reading the

_Trumpet-Major_, belonging to B. He had even seemed to snatch Hardy away

from B. as though B. had no business to possess such books. Then they

avoided his eye as though an animal disguised as an officer and

gentleman like themselves had got into their room, for whom, therein,

the _Trumpet-Major_ and nothing else exercised fascination. He came

among them suddenly, and not appearing to see them, settled down into a

morbid intercourse with a romantic abstraction. The Trumpet-Major, it is

true, was a soldier, that is why he was there. But he was an imaginary

one, and imbedded in the passionate affairs of the village of a

mock-county, and distant time. Cantelman bit the flesh at the side of

his thumbs, as he surveyed the Yeomanry Cavalry revelling in the absent

farmer’s house, and the infantile Farnese Hercules, with the

boastfulness of the Red, explaining to his military companions the

condescensions of his infatuation. Anne Garland stood in the moonlight,

and Loveday hesitated to reveal his rival, weighing a rough chivalry

against self-interest.

Cantelman eventually decamped with the _Trumpet-Major_, taking him

across to Havre, and B. never saw his book again. Cantelman had also

tried to take a book away from A. (a book incompatible with A’s vulgar

physique). But A. had snatched it back, and mounted guard surlily and

cunningly over it.

In his present rustic encounter, then, he was influenced in his feelings

towards his first shepherdess by memories of Wessex heroines, and the

something more that being the daughter of a landscape-painter would

give. Anne, imbued with the delicacy of the Mill, filled his mind to the

injury of this crude marsh-plant. But he had his programme. Since he was

forced back, by his logic and body, among the madness of natural things,

he would live up to his part.

The young woman had, or had given herself, the unlikely name of Stella.

In the narrow road where they got away from the village, Cantelman put

his arm around Stella’s waist and immediately experienced all the

sensations that he had been divining in the creatures around him; the

horse, the bird and the pig. The way in which Stella’s hips stood out,

the solid blood-heated expanse on which his hand lay, had the amplitude

and flatness of a mare. Her lips had at once no practical significance,

but only the aesthetic blandishment of a bull-like flower. With the

gesture of a fabulous Faust he drew her against him, and kissed her with

a crafty gentleness.

Cantelman turned up that evening in his quarters in a state of baffling

good-humour. He took up the _Trumpet-Major_ and was soon surrounded by

the breathing and scratching of his roommates, reading and writing. He

chuckled somewhere where Hardy was funny. At this human noise the others

fixed their eyes on him in sour alarm. He gave another, this time

gratuitous, chuckle. They returned with disgust at his habits, his

peculiarity, to what he considered their maid-servant’s fiction and

correspondence. Oh Christ, what abysms! Oh Christ, what abysms!

Cantelman shook noisily in the wicker chair like a dog or a fly-blown

old gentleman.

Once more on the following evening he was out in the fields, and once

more his thoughts were engaged in recapitulations.=The miraculous

camouflage of Nature did not deceive this observer. He saw everywhere

the gun-pits and the “nests of death”. Each puff of green leaves he knew

was in some way as harmful as the burst of a shell. Decay and ruins, it

is true, were soon covered up, but there was yet that parallel, and the

sight of things smashed and corruption. In the factory town ten miles

away to the right, whose smoke could be seen, life was just as dangerous

for the poor, and as uncomfortable, as for the soldier in his trench.

The hypocrisy of Nature and the hypocrisy of War were the same. The only

safety in life was for the man with the soft job. But that fellow was

not conforming to life’s conditions. He was life’s paid man, and had the

mark of the sneak. He was making too much of life, and too much out of

it. He, Cantelman, did not want to owe anything to life, or enter into

league or understanding with her! The thing was either to go out of

existence: or, failing that, remain in it unreconciled, indifferent to

Nature’s threat, consorting openly with her enemies, making a war within

her war upon her servants. In short, the spectacle of the handsome

English spring produced nothing but ideas of defiance in Cantelman’s

mind.

As to Stella, she was a sort of Whizbang. With a treachery worthy of a

Hun, Nature tempted him towards her. He was drugged with delicious

appetites. Very well! He would hoist the unseen power with his own

petard. He would throw back Stella where she was discharged from (if it

were allowable, now, to change her into a bomb) first having relieved

himself of this humiliating gnawing and yearning in his blood.

As to Stella, considered as an unconscious agent, all women were

contaminated with Nature’s hostile power and might be treated as spies

or enemies. The only time they could be trusted, or were likely to stand

up to Nature and show their teeth, was as mothers. So he approached

Stella with as much falsity as he could master.

At their third meeting he brought her a ring. Her melting gratitude was

immediately ligotted with long arms, full of the contradictory and

offending fire of the spring. On the warm earth consent flowed up into

her body from all the veins of the landscape. The nightingale sang

ceaselessly in the small wood at the top of the field where they lay. He

grinned up towards it, and once more turned to the devouring of his

mate. He felt that he was raiding the bowels of Nature: not fecundating

the Aspasias of our flimsy flesh, or assuaging, or competing with, the

nightingale. Cantelman was proud that he could remain deliberate and

aloof, and gaze bravely, like a minute insect, up at the immense and

melancholy night, with all its mad nightingales, piously folded small

brown wings in a million nests, night-working stars, and misty useless

watchmen. They got up at last: she went furtively back to her home.

Cantelman on his way to camp had a smile of severe satisfaction on his

face. It did not occur to him that his action might be supremely

unimportant as far as Stella was concerned. He had not even asked

himself if, had he not been there that night, someone else might or

might not have been there in his place. He was also convinced that the

laurels were his, and that Nature had come off badly. He was still

convinced of this when he received six weeks afterwards, in France, a

long appeal from Stella, telling him that she was going to have a child.

She received no answer to that nor any subsequent letter. They came to

Cantelman with great regularity in the trenches; he read them all

through from beginning to end, without comment of any sort. And when he

beat a German’s brains out, it was with the same impartial malignity

that he had displayed in the English night with his Spring-mate. Only he

considered there too that he was in some way outwitting Nature; he had

no adequate realization of the extent to which, evidently, the death of

a Hun was to the advantage of the animal world.

IMAGINARY LETTERS

V

(Walter Villerant to Mrs. Bland Burn)

Ezra Pound

My Dear Lydia:

Russians! No. William is _matto_ over his Russians. They are all in the

beginning of _Fumée_—all the Russians. Turgenev has done it: a vaporous,

circumambient ideologue, inefficient, fundamentally and katachrestically

and unendingly futile set of barbarians. Old Goff says of savages: “I

like savages. They do nothing that is of the least use, they do nothing

the least intelligent, they do nothing of the least interest. They are

bored. They have ceremonies. The malice of boredom: the medicine man

makes them dance in a ring for hours in order to _degust_ their

stupidity, _per assagiarlo_, to bask in the spectacle of a vacuity worse

than his own.”

I mistrust this liking for Russians; having passed years in one

barbarous country I can not be expected to take interest in another. All

that is worth anything is the product of metropoles. Swill out these

nationalist movements. Ireland is a suburb of Liverpool. And Russia! The

aged Findell comes back in ecstasy, saying “It is just like America.”

That also bores me. They say Frankfurt-am-Main is just like America.

Paris is not like America. London is not like America. Venice is not

like America. Perugia is not like America. _They are not the least like

each other._ No place where the dew of civilization has fallen is “just

like” anywhere else. Verona and Pavia are different. Poictiers is

different. Arles is a place to itself.

Dostoevsky takes seven chapters to finish with an imbecile’s worries

about a boil on the end of his nose. Dostoevsky is an eminent writer.

Let us thank the gods he existed. I do not read Dostoevsky. Several

young writers have impressed me as men of genius, by reason of tricks

and qualities borrowed from Dostoevsky. At length when the craze is

over, I shall have to read Dostoevsky. And so on.... I have also read

Samuel Butler. And Poetry? As the eminently cultured female, Elis writes

me that her little cousin will have nothing to do with it. Rubbish! Her

little cousin will read Li Po, and listen to the rondels of Froissart. I

know, for I tried her.

Elis has imbibed a complete catalogue, with dates, names of authors,

chief works, “influence” of A, B, C, on M, N, O, etc., etc., with

biographies of the writers, and “periods”. Buncomb! Her cousin, who

knows “nothing at all”, is ten times better educated. No? She “doesn’t

like poetry”. _Anglice_: she doesn’t like Swinburne. It is not the least

the same thing. And she is worried by most of Dowson, etc.

Elis appeals to me as possessing “manner” or “prestige”, i. e.

professorial aspects, to coerce the rebellious infant.

She says I used to read Swinburne “so splendidly”. Damn it all! I

believe this to be true. The “first fine”, etc. “The hounds of swat are

on the wobbles wip wop”. Magnificent sound. Now as a matter of fact I

tried to read A. C. S. to the small cousin and broke down lamentably.

The constant influx of “wrong words” put me out of it altogether.

And Browning is full of jejune remarks about God. And only parts of

Landor are left us. And Elis says the girl will be no use to me

whatsoever. (Neither she may, perhaps. But who is any use to me? Hackett

I see once a month in a state of exhaustion, i. e. H. in a state of

exhaustion). He makes two negative but intelligent remarks, and departs

before the conversation develops. Your spouse is afar from us both. We

are surrounded by live stock.

I enjoy certain animal contacts ... without malice. I have a “nice

disposition”. I pat them like so many retrievers ... _ebbene?_ I live as

a man among herds ... for which I have a considerate, or at least

considerable, if misplaced, affection. “Herds” is possibly a misnomer. A

litter of pups that amuses me. I am not prey to William’s hostilities

... save that I dislike ill-natured animals.

As for poetry: : : how the devil _can_ anyone like it ... given, I mean,

the sort of thing usually purveyed under that label?

The girl asked me the only sane question I have ever had asked me about

it.

“But is there no one like Bach? No one where one can get all of it?”

That staves in my stratified culture.

The Odyssey? But she does not—naturally, she does not read greek. She is

“wholly uneducated”. That is to say I find her reading Voltaire and

Henry James with placidity.

And Dante? But she does not read italian. Nor latin. And besides, Dante!

One needs a whole apparatus criticus to sift out his good from his bad;

the appalling syntax from the magnificence of the passion. Miss Mitford

said “Dante is gothic.” Out of the mouths of prudes and imbeciles!

Gothic, involved, and magnificent, and a master of nearly all forms of

expression. And what, pray, is one to reply to a person who after having

read _Maison Tellier_, refuses to stand “The fifth chariot of the pole,

already upturning, when I who had etc., ... turning as Pyramus whom when

the mulberry had been tasted ... not otherwise than as etc.” The

quotation is inexact, but I can not be expected to carry english

translations of Dante about with me in a suit case. Dante is a sealed

book to our virgin, and likewise Catullus, and Villon is difficult

french ... and Sappho ... perhaps a little Swinburnian? _Ille mi par

esse_ ... is possibly better than the Aeolic original; harder in

outline. (If this bores you, give it to Elis). Chaucer writes in a

forgotten language. One must read earlier authors first if one is to run

through him with ease as with pleasure. What the devil is left us? What

argument for a person too sincere to give way to the current mania for

assenting to culture? The fanaticism of certain people who believe they

ought to “read poetry” and “be acquainted with” art. A person, I mean,

who has taken naturally to good prose; who is so little concerned with

appearing educated that she does not know whether Shelley is a dead poet

or still living, ditto, Keats. It is quite oriental. Ramdath told me a

tale from the Mahabharata, but it was only when I found it in the

Mahabharata that I discovered it had not happened to Ramdath’s

grandpapa. If people would forget a bit more, we might have a real love

of poetry. Imagine on what delightful terms the living would compete

with their forbears if the doriphory of death were once, for even a week

or so, removed from the “brows” or “works” of the “standard” authors. No

more Job and Stock’s “Works of the Poets”, series including Mrs. Hemans,

Proctor and Cowper 7/6, 5/, 2/6, hymn-book padded leather with gilding,

real cloth _with_ gilding, plain covers. The great Victorian age has

done even better. Culture, utility!! I found in lodgings a tin

biscuit-box, an adornment. It represented a bundle of books, of equal

size, bound in leather, a series, the spiritual legacy of an era,

education, popularity. The titles of the tin books were as follows:

History of England.

Pilgrim’s Progress.

Burns.

Pickwick Papers.

Robinson Crusoe.

Gulliver’s Travels.

Self-Help.

Shakespeare.

Is it any wonder we have Gosse cautioning us against De Maupassant’s

account of Swinburne, and saying that De M’s unbridled fancy gave great

offence when it reached the recluse at Putney. Or dribbling, i. e. Gosse

dribbling along about “events at the Art Club which were _widely

discussed at the time_” (italics mine) when he might have said simply

“Algernon got drunk and stove in all the hats in the cloak-room”.

Yours,

WALTER VILLERANT.

EXASPERATIONS

Margaret Anderson

Carl Van Vechten has an article about Mary Garden in _The Bellman_ which

he prefaces with the aesthetic discovery that in her art Mary Garden

leaves nothing to accident. Oh subtle critical mind!... Mr. Van Vechten

should write art notes for _The New York Times_,—which I believe he has

done. I remember once, in a discussion on music, I asked him furiously

whether he knew anything about the subject, only to learn that he had

been a _Times_ music critic for years—which is quite as it should be.

* * * * *

I understand that _The Seven Arts_ is about to suspend publication

because of the withdrawal of its chief patron, Mrs. Rankine, on account

of an irreconcilable disagreement between her and the editorial body

concerning a war policy. There are intelligent people, I hear, who are

prepared to defend her action. But there is no conceivably intelligent

defense for such an action. It is simply another case of the proverbial

and astounding American “nerve”. In the case of a magazine of the Arts

it is a truly colossal nerve. How dare Mrs. Rankine or any other patron

take the responsibility of the several thousand readers who subscribed

to _The Seven Arts_ because they wished to read what its editors had to

say? Whether they agreed or not with what was said has nothing to do

with it. It is even conceivable that some of them may have enjoyed

reading what they did not agree with, or that some of them (ghastly but

possible) approved of the _Seven Arts_ attitude toward the war. Only one

thing is certain: that none of those subscribers read the magazine

because of anything Mrs. Rankine contributed to its pages.

But a certain type of American mind is capable of anything. This moral

nation is now facing the issue of prohibition. If the prohibitionists

are successful great vineyards in California will be burned. To burn a

vineyard!—is it conceivable? A vineyard is a beautiful thing....

* * * * *

For months, everywhere I have looked for life I have found death—except

in two cases: once in the instance of death itself, and once in the

spectacle of an old woman.

The first was an “absurd and unmerited exile,” impossible to bear; and

it gave me forever, though I could not be there, the picture of a woman

with a high thin nose lying in a coffin,—part of that beauty which alone

is indestructible. The second was Sarah Bernhardt in an act of

_Camille_,—a thing immortal beyond any words that I can find.

IMPROVISATIONS

William Carlos Williams

I

Fools have big wombs. For the rest?—here is pennyroyal if one knows to

use it. But time is only another liar, so go along the wall a little

further: if blackberries prove bitter there’ll be mushrooms, fairy-ring

mushrooms, in the grass, sweetest of all fungi.

II

For what it’s worth: Jacob Louslinger, white haired, stinking, dirty

bearded, cross eyed, stammer tongued, broken voiced, bent backed, ball

kneed, cave bellied, mucous faced—deathling,—found lying in the weeds

“up there by the cemetery”. “Looks to me as if he’d been bumming around

the meadows for a couple of weeks”. Shoes twisted into incredible

lilies: out at toes, heels, tops, sides, soles. Meadow flower! ha,

mallow! at last I have you. (Rot dead marigolds—an acre at a time! Gold,

are you?) Ha, clouds will touch world’s edge and the great pink mallow

stand singly in the wet, topping reeds and—a closet full of clothes and

good shoes and my-thirty-year’s- master’s- daughter’s two cows for me to

care for and a winter room with a fire in it—. I would rather feed pigs

in Moonachie and chew calamus root and break crab’s claws at an open

fire: age’s lust loose!

III

Talk as you will, say: “No woman wants to bother with children in this

country”;—speak of your Amsterdam and the whitest aprons and brightest

door-knobs in Christendom. And I’ll answer you: “Gleaming door-knobs and

scrubbed entries have heard the songs of the housemaids at sun-up

and—housemaids are wishes. Whose? Ha! the dark canals are whistling,

whistling for who will cross to the other side. If I remain with hands

in pocket leaning upon my lamp-post—why,—I bring curses to a hag’s lips

and her daughter on her arm knows better than I can tell you; best to

blush and out with it than back beaten after.

EDITORIAL ON SOLICITOUS DOUBT

Ezra Pound

Various people have expressed certain doubts as to whether ... The

Little Review ... etc....

Good people, be at rest: the price of The Little Review will never be

raised for present subscribers or for those who subscribe before January

1, 1918. After that we can make no promises. The quality will not

decline; if we give “twice as much of it” the new readers will have to

pay more. If we had given you only Mr. Yeats’s fourteen poems we would

already have given you more literature than is to be found in the “four

big” magazines since the beginning of our present volume.

Next month you will have a whole play by Lady Gregory. Mr. Lewis, after

having been in some heavy fighting is now in hospital, and that leisure

has made sure the supply of his prose for some time. I have now at my

elbow the first eighty-eight pages of the best book Ford Madox Hueffer

has written. Why “the best book”? Five years ago Mr. Hueffer read me

this manuscript, an unfinished work for which there was presumably “no

market”. I read the typescript which was brought me last evening; so

familiar is the text that I can scarcely convince myself that it is five

years since I heard the even voice of the author pronouncing it. I do

not think my memory is particularly good, I think there must be some

quality in a man’s style and matter if it is to stay fresh in another

man’s mind for so long. Mr. Hueffer’s Women and Men will run in The

Little Review from January 1918 to May 1919 inclusive, unless interfered

with by force majeur. Perhaps it is not his best book.

Lest there be any confusion about Olivers, Madoxes, Madox Browns,

Francis Hueffers, etc. Ford Madox Hueffer is the author of various

novels, and of The Heart of the Country, The Soul of London, Ancient

Lights, Collected Poems, of On Heaven, the first successful long poem in

English vers libre, after Whitman. This poem appeared in Poetry for June

1914, and has certainly as much claim to permanence as, say, Meredith’s

Love in the Valley.

Beside his own achievement, Mr. Hueffer has done one definite service to

English letters. This service is unquestioned, and recognition of it

does not rest upon any personal liking or disliking of Mr. Hueffer’s

doctrines of writing. In 1908 he founded The English Review; for a year

and a half he edited that magazine and during that time he printed work

not only by the great men of letters, Anatole France, Thomas Hardy,

Swinburne, Henry James, not only by men of public reputation like Wells,

and Conrad and Bennett, but also by about all the younger men who have

since made good. For example by Lewis (in 1909), and by other now

well-known young men who have both made good and declined since that

date. His editorship of the review marks a very definite period; at the

end of it, as its glory was literary, not commercial, it was bought by

certain jews, who thought Mr. Hueffer a damn fool (possibly because of

his devotion to literature), and who gave the editorship into other

hands. Comparison of current numbers of The English Review with the

first numbers issued from 84 Holland Park Avenue, will give any thinking

person all the data he wants in deciding between the folly of Hueffer

and the folly of manufacturing, political hebrews. In fact, if a crime

against literature could bring any shame upon that class of person, this

family would go into penitence, which needless to say they will not. But

the careful historian of literature will record and remember their

shame. The files of the review being stored in the British Museum, the

data will continue available. There will be no faking the records.

The Little Review is now the first effort to do comparatively what The

English Review did during its first year and a half: that is, to

maintain the rights and position of literature, I do not say in contempt

of the public, but in spite of the curious system of trade and traders

which has grown up with the purpose or result of interposing itself

between literature and the public.

We act in spite of the public’s utter impotence to get good literature

for itself, and in despite of the efforts of the “trade” to satiate the

public with a substitute, to still their appetite for literature by

providing them, at a cheaper rate and more conveniently, with a

swallowable substitute.

Whereanent a very successful journalist has said to me: We, i. e. we

journalists, are like mediums. People go to a spiritist séance and hear

what they want to hear. It is the same with a leading article: we write

so that the reader will find what he wants to find.

That is the root of the matter; there is good journalism and bad

journalism, and journalism that “looks” like “literature” and literature

etc....

But the root of the difference is that in journalism the reader finds

what he is looking for, what he, the reader wants; whereas in literature

he must find at least a part of what the author intended.

That is why “the first impression of a work of genius” is “nearly always

disagreeable”, at least to the “average man”. The public loathe the

violence done to their self-conceit whenever an author conveys to them

an idea that is his, not their own.

This difference is lasting and profound. Even in the vaguest of poetry,

or the vaguest music, where in a sense the receiver may, or must, make

half the beauty he is to receive, there is always something of the

author or composer which must be transmitted.

In journalism, or the “bad art” which is but journalism thinly

disguised, there is no such strain on the public.

I am now at the end of my space. Of Remy de Gourmont’s feeling toward

such a magazine as we are now making I will write in the December

number.

STYLE AND AMERICAN LITERATURE

Maxwell Bodenheim

American literature is divided into three plaintive continents: clear

cold psychological data; sentimental unbeautiful lying; and social

propaganda. The first is a photograph; the second, a pretty vase; and

the third, a decorated sledge-hammer.

The American Writer earnestly strives to accomplish something; he starts

out with a fixed and lofty objective which ranges from a “portrayal of

the soul of the masses” and an exposure of the iniquities of the present

social system, to “an unfolding of the poetry that lies in simple

people”. He seizes upon ideas that have been current coin in Europe for

the past century, writes them much worse than they were originally

written, and is hailed as a genius. His characters are marvels of

realism—stop any milkman on the corner and he will talk exactly as

Dreiser’s Witla talks, and act just as ordinary human beings in the

“Arcadia Residence Hotel” or Winklehofer’s Alley would act. He writes on

the theory that human beings lack eyes and cannot see the conditions

about them, but must be carefully told in lengths of four hundred pages

that a grafting politician is looting a city, that a man can immerse

himself in moneymaking and lose his soul, that working-people are

unjustly treated, that women are asserting their economic independence,

and that society people drink and have gossamer-morals. If he is

striving to educate people who are inclined to argue pro and con about

these subtle matters, he could become a far more effective elementary

teacher by compiling with his fellow-writers an encyclopedia which could

be printed in serial form, or by having his work made into text books

for schools and colleges. Since his aim is really the spreading of

information about human beings, descriptive and psychological, his prose

style is always simple, strong and clear, as the phrase goes, and he

leaves imagination and beautiful word-mosaics to weak-kneed poets, who

believe in making lyrical, elaborate lies about human beings and life in

a desperate effort to escape the simple, strong and clear nightmares of

conditions and sights about them. But what am I saying? Modern American

poets have also become realistic in a different way. It has become a

rigid shibboleth among American poets of the present day, that writing

about a rose or a sunset inevitably proves that a man is a minor poet,

and that steam-cranes, shoe-string peddlars, farm-hands, the Panama

Canal, ice-wagon drivers and machinists are the only fit subjects for a

spirited poet. And so the most sincere of the present landslide of

American poets write about these subjects in a bold and true manner,

providing a sort of unadorned kindergarten which your soul is supposed

to attend. And the least sincere among them sing of realistic sights,

but seem a little ashamed of their content, hiding it with

picture-puzzle styles, which you piece together only to discover that

they lead to very simple meanings.

Then there is another class of contemporary American poets, who strive

hard to achieve subtle meanings, not realizing that only literary style

is subtle, and that meanings are all on about the same intangible level.

These poets write poems that seem experiments in differential calculus,

until you suddenly discover that they are in reality many simple

concepts mixed in a temporarily baffling fashion. In their plaintive

search for originality of thought and emotion American writers achieve

only twisted echoes of old-world literature, for the simple reason that

outside of scientific research and pure philosophy ideas are eunuchs

drained by centuries, and dressed in variations of old costumes. Any

modern writer with a little research can discover that some old Hindoo

or Chinaman or European said exactly what he is saying, and in a far

more imaginative and beautiful way. But literary style alone remains a

comparatively untouched region, because the great majority of writers,

since the beginning of the Christian era, have always been clutched by

some great burning message which they fancied the world needed or by

some new situation in which human beings would act differently than they

ever before acted, or by some important moral that required hundreds of

pages for illustration. When they abandoned these important kingships it

was either to lose themselves in aimless tears, to become vaguely

exuberant, or to shrewdly analyze the mob-desires of their days and

settle down to careful entertaining. In all of these aims, literary

style became chief-cook-and-bottle-washer—an obedient servant, who was

thoroughly whipped if he ever became rebellious, and achieved moments of

sheer word-beauty, which failed to illuminate the aim of the writer, or

which momentarily crystalized the writer’s formless rhapsodies.

Therefore absolutely new and beautiful word-designs are possible, since

words alone, unconnected with great messages or sentimental

self-portrayals, have been practically ignored by writers of the

Christian Era.

When American writers become thoroughly decadent, and are not ashamed to

frolic ardently with words, writing in a passionate surge in which

imagination becomes a tipsy priest, marrying words and meaning, and

waltzing arm in arm down the road with them, beauty in American

literature will have its inception. One critic claims that this

situation is impossible, because of the complacent democracy of this

country, in which every country bumpkin and rich man with a large

library considers himself an infallible judge of literary values, among

other questions of art. Because of this he believes that only those

writers who deal in elementary social instruction or sentimental

commonplaces, can secure a hearing. But even if a small aristocracy were

in control of the literary situation here, beautiful books would have to

be distributed free of charge and would gain very little in circulation,

because the average American is an unmellowed self-confident nondescript

who considers culture to be for sale at bargain-prices. Each European

country has had centuries in which to condense into that quiet

sophistication which demands in fiction and poetry other intangible food

than economic sermons or descriptions of the surface facts of its daily

life, or sentimental ecstasies, while the American is still a little

growing boy, interested only in literary marble-games. The American

political situation has nothing to do with this—if we changed to a

kingdom or an economic utopia tomorrow the American citizen would still

purchase tons of Gouverneur Morris and Edna Ferber, and would still

wistfully and wearily try to wade through occasional volumes from

writers who have been recommended to him as “highbrows”.

BARBARA ROSCORLA’S CHILD

A Play in One Act

Arthur Symons

CHARACTERS:

PETER ROSCORLA, aged 40

DR. TREVITHICK

SISTER AGATHA, a Nurse

ASENATH, an old woman who has been Peter Roscorla’s nurse.

The Little Review, October 1917 (Vol. 4, No. 6) · 第 1 / 3 段