[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Beneath Pound’sanecdote lies a rather peculiar assertion, a detour that not only affiliates the lexicon of Cavalcanti’s medievalism with that of his own modernism but locates in each alatent revolutionary principle, loosely associating the end of one epoch with the end of another.The passing reference, it turns out, is less an allusion than a sort of historical ideogram, a hybrid character forged to designate a rising series of discontinuities.Between them, Cavalcanti and Hulme first signify a disruption of linguistic forms, the interruption of a referential order built on the governing ideological homologies of their respective moments.Having decomposed the functions of language, eachnext connotes the possibility of a new poetics, Pound’s ‘accurate terms’ or whatHulme calls ‘the advance guard in language’ ( CW, p.27).It is that ‘tone of thought’ which Pound deems dangerous, seditiously corrosive in either 1290 or1912.And it is that link which completes Pound’s historical ideogram, fusingHulme and Cavalcanti into a single gesture both poetic and political.If Cavalcanti demands both a new critical lexicon and an anachronistic field of reference, Hulme implicitly presents the same problem again, of ‘Modernism and Modernism’ now,two tendencies straining against each other at the point of an epochal break.In a second moment, Pound’s acknowledgment of Hulme thus reveals a source, anencrypted reference not merely to a poetic practice but also to the critical andhistorical vocabulary enmeshed within it.In fact, Pound’s excursus on CavalcantiThe Politics of Epochality195undertakes a prolonged double reading, turning Cavalcanti into a figure that would haunt his own poetry, only to return also to the second figure that haunts histhought more quietly.Hulme is summoned forth to comment on Cavalcanti becausehe plays a functionally equivalent role in Pound’s reconstruction, but also because Cavalcanti explains Hulme, replicating the antinomies of modernism in an aliencritical vocabulary that also approximates Hulme’s own.What all of this suggests, of course, is that the complex sign ofCavalcanti/Hulme, medievalism/medievalism, retains an unexpected relevance,producing one last radical transformation.That last turn, both the formal sequel to medievalism and the historical term that displaces it, gathers the allusive elements of Pound’s Hulme and effectively reorders them.Mediated through Cavalcanti andHulme at once, medievalism begins to function as a detached historical form,intermittently renewable as a set of revolutionary effects.As such, it offers the unexpected formal core of ‘the new world about us’, remapping the Florence of1290 onto a world of revolution, trench warfare, and avant-garde experiment.Atthat moment, however, medievalism (either Cavalcanti’s or Hulme’s) becomes amodernist effect as well, the rough centerpiece of Pound’s and Hulme’s collective work.Under Pound’s idiosyncratic logic, the conversation with Hulme marks thecore of that exchange: Hulme’s moment of medievalism, of becoming silent, spursa movement in two directions.In effect, the confluence of medievalisms opens aconceptual gap in the present:Medievalism →Cavalcanti↓↑Hulme← [Revolution/Modernism]When Pound issues his call for a new lexicon, for the precise sense of terms asunderstood at that epoch, he thus asserts two contradictory imperatives.The first calls for a philological reconstruction of the medievalism of Cavalcanti.The task of reconstructing that lexicon, however, requires the supplementary lexicon of Hulme, some philosophical apparatus that doubles and estranges its own moment, devisinga mechanism to evade the intermediation of centuries.If the reading of Cavalcanti provides the missing lexicon required to chart the medieval, Hulme provides thelexicon to read Cavalcanti, closing the circuit of reference between medieval and modern.The missing term in that account is therefore not medieval at all, is not in fact named at all, except in the odd recurring gesture that transforms Cavalcanti into Paine, Marx, Lenin, Bucharin, and finally Hulme, that makes a revolutionarypractice of art.If Cavalcanti doubles the trope of medievalism, dividing the period against his poetic practice and recuperating poetics as politics, then the other side of Pound’s hybrid sign performs the same work.Methodologically, Hulme provides both the surrogate and the precondition forPound’s reading, a transit point for the work of historical translation, carrying Cavalcanti over from medieval to modern but also interpolating Hulme as anoperative set of historical terms.The invocation of Hulme as a lexicon in his own196T.E.Hulme and the Question of Modernismright not only recalls the idea of a new medievalism, but also engages the deeper core of his critical practice.In the most literal sense, of course, the central detail of Pound’s story is the fact that Hulme adds nothing to it, conspicuously contributing nothing but a pause.But in another sense, it is precisely that pause which represents Hulme’s most decisive intervention.Within the delicate complex of associationsswirling through Cavalcanti’s canzone and Pound’s meditation on it, Hulme offersthe only fixed point of reference against which other terms can be measured.And it is just this function that Pound requires: a lexicon that illuminates its epoch.Etymologically, the idea of the epoch is defined in that very hesitation: a stoppage or fixed point against which time becomes measurable [ OED, n.s.].When Pound adduces Hulme to insist on the need for a critical reconstruction of Cavalcanti’s revolutionary moment, he returns to the same term, to the much larger pauseproduced in the oscillation of modernisms and medievalisms and in the tension ofepochs.In effect, Pound’s reading performs a series of variations on a single term, moving outward from Hulme’s caesura or interruptive gap to the broader sequenceof concepts that it anchors, temporal stops culminating in the idea of the temporal stop itself, of the epoch/ epoché that marks the momentary cessation of temporal mediation.The recovery of the lexicon of an epoch depends, above all else, on the invention of a lexicon of the concept of the epoch, and for that concept Hulme offers a distinctive referential marker, performing and signifying it at once [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl milosnikstop.keep.pl
.Beneath Pound’sanecdote lies a rather peculiar assertion, a detour that not only affiliates the lexicon of Cavalcanti’s medievalism with that of his own modernism but locates in each alatent revolutionary principle, loosely associating the end of one epoch with the end of another.The passing reference, it turns out, is less an allusion than a sort of historical ideogram, a hybrid character forged to designate a rising series of discontinuities.Between them, Cavalcanti and Hulme first signify a disruption of linguistic forms, the interruption of a referential order built on the governing ideological homologies of their respective moments.Having decomposed the functions of language, eachnext connotes the possibility of a new poetics, Pound’s ‘accurate terms’ or whatHulme calls ‘the advance guard in language’ ( CW, p.27).It is that ‘tone of thought’ which Pound deems dangerous, seditiously corrosive in either 1290 or1912.And it is that link which completes Pound’s historical ideogram, fusingHulme and Cavalcanti into a single gesture both poetic and political.If Cavalcanti demands both a new critical lexicon and an anachronistic field of reference, Hulme implicitly presents the same problem again, of ‘Modernism and Modernism’ now,two tendencies straining against each other at the point of an epochal break.In a second moment, Pound’s acknowledgment of Hulme thus reveals a source, anencrypted reference not merely to a poetic practice but also to the critical andhistorical vocabulary enmeshed within it.In fact, Pound’s excursus on CavalcantiThe Politics of Epochality195undertakes a prolonged double reading, turning Cavalcanti into a figure that would haunt his own poetry, only to return also to the second figure that haunts histhought more quietly.Hulme is summoned forth to comment on Cavalcanti becausehe plays a functionally equivalent role in Pound’s reconstruction, but also because Cavalcanti explains Hulme, replicating the antinomies of modernism in an aliencritical vocabulary that also approximates Hulme’s own.What all of this suggests, of course, is that the complex sign ofCavalcanti/Hulme, medievalism/medievalism, retains an unexpected relevance,producing one last radical transformation.That last turn, both the formal sequel to medievalism and the historical term that displaces it, gathers the allusive elements of Pound’s Hulme and effectively reorders them.Mediated through Cavalcanti andHulme at once, medievalism begins to function as a detached historical form,intermittently renewable as a set of revolutionary effects.As such, it offers the unexpected formal core of ‘the new world about us’, remapping the Florence of1290 onto a world of revolution, trench warfare, and avant-garde experiment.Atthat moment, however, medievalism (either Cavalcanti’s or Hulme’s) becomes amodernist effect as well, the rough centerpiece of Pound’s and Hulme’s collective work.Under Pound’s idiosyncratic logic, the conversation with Hulme marks thecore of that exchange: Hulme’s moment of medievalism, of becoming silent, spursa movement in two directions.In effect, the confluence of medievalisms opens aconceptual gap in the present:Medievalism →Cavalcanti↓↑Hulme← [Revolution/Modernism]When Pound issues his call for a new lexicon, for the precise sense of terms asunderstood at that epoch, he thus asserts two contradictory imperatives.The first calls for a philological reconstruction of the medievalism of Cavalcanti.The task of reconstructing that lexicon, however, requires the supplementary lexicon of Hulme, some philosophical apparatus that doubles and estranges its own moment, devisinga mechanism to evade the intermediation of centuries.If the reading of Cavalcanti provides the missing lexicon required to chart the medieval, Hulme provides thelexicon to read Cavalcanti, closing the circuit of reference between medieval and modern.The missing term in that account is therefore not medieval at all, is not in fact named at all, except in the odd recurring gesture that transforms Cavalcanti into Paine, Marx, Lenin, Bucharin, and finally Hulme, that makes a revolutionarypractice of art.If Cavalcanti doubles the trope of medievalism, dividing the period against his poetic practice and recuperating poetics as politics, then the other side of Pound’s hybrid sign performs the same work.Methodologically, Hulme provides both the surrogate and the precondition forPound’s reading, a transit point for the work of historical translation, carrying Cavalcanti over from medieval to modern but also interpolating Hulme as anoperative set of historical terms.The invocation of Hulme as a lexicon in his own196T.E.Hulme and the Question of Modernismright not only recalls the idea of a new medievalism, but also engages the deeper core of his critical practice.In the most literal sense, of course, the central detail of Pound’s story is the fact that Hulme adds nothing to it, conspicuously contributing nothing but a pause.But in another sense, it is precisely that pause which represents Hulme’s most decisive intervention.Within the delicate complex of associationsswirling through Cavalcanti’s canzone and Pound’s meditation on it, Hulme offersthe only fixed point of reference against which other terms can be measured.And it is just this function that Pound requires: a lexicon that illuminates its epoch.Etymologically, the idea of the epoch is defined in that very hesitation: a stoppage or fixed point against which time becomes measurable [ OED, n.s.].When Pound adduces Hulme to insist on the need for a critical reconstruction of Cavalcanti’s revolutionary moment, he returns to the same term, to the much larger pauseproduced in the oscillation of modernisms and medievalisms and in the tension ofepochs.In effect, Pound’s reading performs a series of variations on a single term, moving outward from Hulme’s caesura or interruptive gap to the broader sequenceof concepts that it anchors, temporal stops culminating in the idea of the temporal stop itself, of the epoch/ epoché that marks the momentary cessation of temporal mediation.The recovery of the lexicon of an epoch depends, above all else, on the invention of a lexicon of the concept of the epoch, and for that concept Hulme offers a distinctive referential marker, performing and signifying it at once [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]