Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay will explore the reasons for the international appeal of Ezra Pound and his importance in the creation of "Global Poetics."What, in his writing, especially his poetry, makes him a transnational figure not only translated into Russian, French, German, Japanese, Chinese and Greek, but appealing to writers in a variety of cultures?What makes his work influential for other, often foreign writers, and what can we as readers identify as his international style?How, in short, does he articulate a global poetics?Throughout his work, beginning with The Spirit of Romance (1910), Pound was a comparatist but his ideas and examples constantly absorb multiple poetics and poetic forms, whether Troubadour poets, Renaissance Italian writers or Confucius.He is our first global poet, translingual, translational and transnational which this essay will demonstrate through his use of global history, languages and imagery.The roots of Pound's global poetics may be in his cultural cosmopolitanism incorporating imagery, content and form from other literatures into his writing.He develops a transcultural vision that valorizes the dislocation and displacement of voices, as much sources and texts.Three texts that highlight this practice are Cathay, essay "The Chinese Written Character As a Medium for Poetry, and Guide to Kulchur".Pound, I shall argue, not only introduces global poetics but a new vocabulary for Global Modernism.In his prose and poetry, borders, boundaries and separations disappear which force us as readers to become transnational and even translocational responders to his texts.In his "A Draft of Three Cantos" (1917), Pound parallels Confucius with Dante.The effort to link the two in terms of content and form is an early expression of the global poetics elaborated more fully in The Cantos which will be at the center of this discussion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".