- Treason, Genius, Psychiatry, and the Paradox of Confinement: Two Critical Views
We might usefully compare Torrey’s biography of Pound (1983),
with the 3-Volume study (2007-2015) by A.
David Moody. Moody approaches the same
events from the discipline of a literary critic and empathetic
biographer.
Both writers cover the whole of Pound’s life, from his birth in Hailey, Idaho, on October 30, 1885 early life in Philadelphia, including studies at the University of Pennsylvania and Hamilton College, and his relocation to Europe in 1908, living first in Venice and then London (until 1921) and Paris (1921-1924) . Famously championing new artists and poets of the time, including sculptor Henri Gaudier-Brzeska, Pound actively championed the Imagist movement to strip poetry of decorative excess and later helped shape Vorticism, where the core idea described life and culture in the early 20th century was best expressed through geometric abstraction, hard‑edged forms, and a sense of dynamic energy concentrated at a “vortex” — a centre of force.
He mentored and promoted T.S. Eliot, W.B. Yeats,
Richard Aldington, Hilda Doolittle, Robert Frost and many others. both here and later in Paris. . Working as a
foreign editor for magazines like Poetry and The Egoist, he
discovered, mentored, and collaborated with a massive network of poets.
All this and much of what follows here is charted by both
authors.
Though Torrey paints a picture of Pound’s difficult dealings
in London with many of his associates and proteges, it is
understood by Moody that his work had simply come to a conclusion there, and new territory
was calling.
During his three years in Paris, he immersed himself in the
vibrant "Lost Generation" artistic scene and engaged in several key
activities. Pound was one of the first to recognize Ernest Hemingway's talent,
teaching him how to write concise prose and helping publish his early stories.
A key moment for modernist literature saw Pound making his radical editing of T.S.
Eliot's The Waste Land and his promotion
promote of James Joyce's work, helping secure funding and
publishers for Ulysses. Pound wrote and composed an avant-garde opera
titled Le Testament de Villon, collaborating with local musicians. He briefly
studied sculpture under the modernist artist Constantin Brâncuși and wrote
essays championing contemporary art in all its forms.
He wrote A Draft of XVI Cantos during this period,
formalising the structure of his lifelong epic poem. He frequented Gertrude
Stein’s famous salon and collaborated closely with Sylvia Beach, the owner of
the Shakespeare and Company bookstore. He interacted with the Dadaists and early
Surrealists, though he ultimately found their nihilistic philosophy too chaotic
even for his tastes. This in particular is described in Torrey’s section on
Pound’s years in Paris – not for the faint-hearted!
A change of focus, and life at a different pace came next, with his marriage and his
liaison with his mistress. Pound moved to Italy and took on a top-floor apartment with his wife, Dorothy Shakespear.
At the same time, his mistress, the American violinist Olga Rudge, lived
nearby. He fathered two children around this time: a daughter (Maria) with Olga
in 1925, and a son (Omar) with Dorothy in 1926. Both children were sent away to
be raised by others. An indication of an interesting set of priorities, one
might say.
Though in these years physically isolated from major
cultural capitals, Pound created his own provincial hub. He continued to associate
and mentor W.B. Yeats (Torrey explores
this association comprehensively, looking at the mystical, spiritualist
obsession by Yeats at this time) , Basil
Bunting of Briggflatts fame, and Louis Zukofsky ( the primary instigator and
theorist of the so-called "Objectivist" poets, a short lived
collective of poets who after several decades of obscurity would reemerge
around 1960 and become a significant influence on subsequent generations of poets
in America and abroad.) . He also inspired a young James Laughlin to found the
avant-garde publishing house, New Directions.
Pound also organised an annual series of classical concerts
in Rapallo featuring Olga Rudge. His extensive music archival research directly
contributed to the 20th-century revival
of interest in the forgotten baroque composer Antonio Vivaldi.
He spent these years working compiling on his lifelong epic.
He published A Draft of XXX Cantos (1930), followed by more volumes
throughout the decade. The sweeping local landscape, cliffs, and Italian
farmers heavily influenced the imagery of these poems.
But these years also confirmed a trajectory in his thinking
and his focus. This was embryonic all
during those post WW1 years, maybe encapsulated for example by the loss of
Henri Gaudier-Brzeska and T.E Hulme among many other young as well as creative
men, in the lines from his Hugh Selwyn
Mauberley [Part I]: (April 1920, London )
These fought, in any case,
and some believing, pro domo, in any case ...
Some quick to arm,
some for adventure,
some from fear of weakness,
some from fear of censure,
some for love of slaughter, in
imagination,
learning later ...
some in fear, learning love of
slaughter;
Died some pro patria, non dulce
non et decor” ...
walked eye-deep in hell
believing in old men’s lies,
then unbelieving
came home, home to a lie,
home to many deceits,
home to old lies and new
infamy;
usury age-old and age-thick
and liars in public places.
……
There died a myriad,
And of the best, among them,
For an old bitch gone in the
teeth,
For a botched civilization.
Pound was moving from artistic revolution to an obsession
with economics and politics.
The line ‘usury age-old and age-thick’ seals one of his absolute obsessions. Pound
became deeply disillusioned, concluding that modern warfare was entirely caused
by international banking systems and profit-driven financial greed.
In Paris, after three hedonistic years which eventually saw
him again disillusioned, the desire for an ordered – we could say Confucian - system
to fix the fractured Western world, leading him to study radical economic
alternative theories, specifically C.H. Douglas’s "Social Credit"
theory.
Pound had met Douglas in London in 1918. The theory became
the absolute foundation of his political and poetic worldview, completely
reshaping his life. Pound became convinced by Douglas's idea that money is not
wealth itself, but merely a "ticketing system" to distribute real
wealth (crops, manufacturing, art). Because
the existing economy had a shortage of cash, banks filled the gap by lending
money at high interest. Pound came to view this practice—which he called Usury
( or Usura ) —as a parasitic disease. He blamed usury for destroying high art,
keeping the working-class poor, and causing World War I , and consolidated
these ideas in Cantos written during his time in Rapallo.
Most mainstream economists rejected Social Credit. Rather
than allowing himself to look squarely at the flaws of Social Credit (as
espoused by Douglas) this rejection led Pound into his own theories. He began
to believe that a secret cabal of international bankers was actively
suppressing Douglas's ideas to maintain control over the world, a delusion that
directly fuelled his virulent anti-Semitism and his embrace of Benito
Mussolini.
Pound’s relocation to
Italy was certainly influenced by what he was learning about Benito Mussolini’s National Fascist Party (Partito
Nazionale Fascista) whose
grip on the polices and economics of the country appeared in his mind to match those theories of economic control.
Despite Pound’s attempts to link them, Italian Fascism and
Social Credit were economically incompatible. It is possible that Pound fell
victim to wishful thinking because Mussolini opposed the same international
banks that Douglas criticised.
In particular , where Douglas wanted to strip private banks
of their power to print money ‘ex-nihil’ , the PNF worked closely with
established banks and industrial monopolies. A particular divide – which is
difficult to square in Pound’s thinking - is that Social Credit is strongly
individualistic; aimed to give citizens economic freedom from the state,
whereas Italian fascism was by definition totalitarian, making individuals
completely subordinate to the state.
Both Moody and Torrey explore how Pound became increasingly
vociferous and engaged with theories of by political and monetary reform and
how this became an increasing narrowing focus on Jewish financiers for the
global banking system and global conflicts.
Both authors show how in The Cantos, Ezra Pound attempted to
synthesise Mussolini’s Italian Fascism and. Douglas’s Social Credit into a
singular, unified epic vision.
In the Jefferson-Nuevo sequence (specifically Cantos
XXXI and XLIV 1930-1934), Pound directly introduces Mussolini into the
poem, giving him the nickname "Boss". Pound portrays Mussolini as an
avant-garde artist whose raw material is the state itself. Pound praises
Mussolini for draining the Pontine Marshes and building public works. He
explicitly links this fascist state-building to Social Credit by arguing that
Mussolini is creating "real wealth" (land, food, work) rather than
the "phantom wealth" created by corrupt bankers.
And later The
Leopoldine Cantos (Cantos XLII–XLIV) and Canto XLV were written in Rapallo
during the height of the global Great Depression. Canto XLV (the
"Usura" canto) was first published individually in a periodical in February
1936. The entire group was published in the book The Fifth Decad of Cantos in
June 1937. In these Cantos, Pound praises Pietro Leopoldo, an 18th-century
Grand Duke of Tuscany, who set up a state bank (the Monte dei Paschi) that
issued cheap credit to farmers.
Usura is a murrain, usura
blunteth the needle in the
maid’s hand
and stoppeth the spinner’s
cunning. Pietro Lombardo
came not by usura
Duccio came not by usura
nor Pier della Francesca; Zuan
Bellin’ not by usura
nor was ‘La Calunnia’ painted.
Came not by usura Angelico;
came not Ambrogio Praedis,
Came no church of cut stone
signed: Adamo me fecit.
Not by usura St. Trophime
Not by usura Saint Hilaire,
Usura rusteth the chisel
It rusteth the craft and the
craftsman
It gnaweth the thread in the
loom
None learneth to weave gold in
her pattern;
By the late 1930s, Pound’s poetry became inextricably tangled with
fascist propaganda, culminating in a 1939 trip to the United States in a
delusional, failed attempt to prevent war between Italy and the U.S. All this set the stage for his active participation in
wartime fascist radio broadcasts, cementing his eventual arrest for treason.
Pound spoke on Radio Rome (EIAR), the official state
broadcaster of Benito Mussolini’s fascist government. He recorded over 100
broadcasts between January 1941 and 1943, usually airing several times a week. His speeches were highly eccentric, rambling,
and aggressive. He fiercely attacked President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston
Churchill, and the Allied war effort. The broadcasts were deeply antisemitic
and anti-capitalist.
Pound viewed himself not as a traitor, but as an American
patriot attempting to save the United States from entering a destructive war. Here is a study by Gibran van Ert ( PDF in new tab ] which includes elements of these
broadcasts.
Key Elements and Targets of the Broadcasts
Attacking the Allied Leadership: Pound
explicitly targeted U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime
Minister Winston Churchill. He referred to Roosevelt as "that brute
Rosefield", claimed the U.S. Army was a "criminal force," and
even suggested hanging President Roosevelt "if you can do it by due legal
process".
Virulent Antisemitism: In a quantitative
analysis of 110 scripts recorded by the U.S. government, powerful Jews were
mentioned in 71 scripts, and Jews in general in 35. He told British
listeners: "You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your
empire". He used terms like "Jew slime," warned that the
white race was "going toward total extinction," and urged listeners
to read the fabricated anti-Jewish text The Protocols of the Elders of
Zion.
Praising Axis Dictators: Pound explicitly
endorsed European fascism. He championed Benito Mussolini’s regime, praised
Adolf Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, and advocated for state-enforced
eugenics to "conserve the best of the race".
The "Usury" Obsession: A massive
portion of his broadcasts focused on economic history and
"usurocracy". He claimed that World War II was not a conflict of
democracy versus fascism, but a war manufactured by a global network of
international bankers and lenders who were "sucking out the vitals"
of Western civilization.
Cultural Detours: Unlike standard Axis
propagandists (such as Axis Sally or Lord Haw-Haw) who stuck to highly
structured script templates, Pound's broadcasts were chaotic. He frequently
read his own poetry (like Canto 45 against usury), discussed
the works of James Joyce and E.E. Cummings, and spoke in a strange, affected
rural American accent, using folksy slang like "God, my god, you
folks are DUMB!!!".
Because he was an American citizen broadcasting enemy
propaganda intended to demoralise U.S. troops and citizens during wartime, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) meticulously monitored, transcribed, and
recorded his transmissions. These recordings formed the entire foundation of
the government's capital case against him before he was declared unfit for
trial.
In 1943, a U.S. federal grand jury indicted Pound for
treason in absentia. Following the collapse of the Mussolini regime, Pound was
arrested by American forces in 1945 and held in The U.S. Army's Disciplinary
Training Center (DTC) in Pisa. Famously Pound was initially placed in a
reinforced, open-air 6-by-6-foot steel wire cage. It was dubbed a "death
cell", elevated off the ground, and entirely exposed to the searing
Italian summer heat, concrete dust, and freezing desert-like nights. Powerful
military floodlights blasted his cage 24 hours a day, preventing sleep. Guards
were forbidden from speaking to him. Not surprisingly Pound suffered a complete
breakdown and as a result, camp doctors intervened. He was moved out of the
cage and given his own standard military pyramid tent in the camp's medical
compound. While it provided a cot and a roof, it was still a dirt-floor army
tent surrounded by barbed wire, subject to extreme weather, and under constant
surveillance.
Ezra Pound was not tried in Italy because he was a civilian
indicted for treason against the United States, meaning only a U.S. federal
court on American soil had the proper jurisdiction to try him.
The DTC in Pisa served strictly as a secure military holding
facility while the U.S. Department of Justice prepared its legal case. This was
to take all of six months.
During those six months,
Pound’s productivity under these
suffocating conditions was extraordinary. He began frantically recording his
immediate surroundings, conversations overheard from other prisoners, guards'
movements, and his own swirling memories of pre-war Europe. Once moved to the
medical compound, the camp authorities granted him a crucial privilege. He was
allowed access to a disused typewriter in the camp’s dispensary/office. He
spent his nights typing out The Pisan Cantos at odd hours on this
unfamiliar machine. He had virtually no reference books, which might explain the
highly fragmented, stream-of-consciousness nature of the poems. He relied
almost entirely on his memory, supplemented only by a handful of texts
discovered or permitted in the camp: a pocket edition of Confucius, a Bible,
and an old poetry anthology he found in the camp latrine.
Instead of abandoning his ideas, Pound's poetry in the Pisan
Cantos has elements which are often deeply elegiac. Surrounded by barbed wire, he
looks at the sky and conceptualises the ruins of Fascism as a tragedy for Social Credit theory. He mourns Mussolini's
fall not just as a political defeat, but as the destruction of – in Pound’s
continued belief - a grand economic experiment that could have saved humanity
from the slavery of the banking system.
Key sections include the "Pull down thy vanity"
passage in Canto LXXXI, which emphasizes humility and valuing what one truly
loves over material success.
The ant’s a centaur in his dragon
world.
Pull down thy vanity, it is not
man
Made courage, or made order, or
made grace,
Pull down thy vanity, I say pull down.
Learn of the green world what can
be thy place
In scaled invention or true
artistry,
Pull down thy vanity,
Paquin pull down!
The green casque has outdone your
elegance.
Other notable moments, such as the description of birds on
wire in Canto LXXIV and the observation of a wasp in Canto LXXXIII.
…. and Brother Wasp is building a
very neat house
of four rooms, one shaped like a
squat Indian bottle
La vespa, la vespa, mud,
swallow system
so that dreaming of Bracelonde and
of Perugia
and the great fountain in the
Piazza
or of old Bulagaio's cat that with
a well timed leap
could turn the lever-shaped door
handle
It comes over me that Mr. Walls
must be a ten-strike
with the signorinas
and in the warmth after chill
sunrise
an infant, green as new grass,
has stuck its head or tip
out of Madame La Vespa's bottle
These are some highlights of his focus on the natural world
as a source of order, art, and sanity. These passages showcase his artistic,
emotional, and personal reflections during this turbulent period.
Extraordinarily, it
was in the prison camp at Pisa that he wrote these Cantos, which many
consider to be his most accomplished, to the point where he was awarded the first Bollingen Prize (1948), setting off
a heated debate in literary circles that
continues to this day. His ability to achieve this in such harsh and
unforgiving conditions indicate a steely resolve which must inform the debate
over his achievements and activities in the dozen or more years which followed.
Once the Department of Justice completed its preparations
and Pound's health stabilised at the DTC, he was flown to Washington, D.C., in
November 1945, to face trial. However, he never actually stood trial; a federal
court ultimately found him mentally unfit to face the charges, leading to his
12-year confinement at St. Elizabeths psychiatric hospital. This part of
Pound’s story brings us to some key differences of opinion between Torrey and
Moody. Both writers largely agree on the historical facts of the St. Elizabeths
hospital stay but differ profoundly in their tone, perspective, and moral
judgment of Pound's character.
The two authors approach the same events from different
disciplines: Torrey as a forensic psychiatrist and critic of psychiatric
corruption, and Moody as a literary critic and empathetic biographer.
About Torrey and Moody
Dr. E. Fuller Torrey served as a staff and ward psychiatrist at St.
Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C., from 1977 to 1985. During his nine
years there, he treated patients with severe psychiatric illnesses,
investigated the institutional impacts of deinstitutionalisation.
His younger sister
was Rhoda Torrey, who developed severe schizophrenia at age 17 in 1957. Her
lifelong struggle with mental illness and institutionalization deeply shaped
Torrey’s career, driving his prominent advocacy for better psychiatric care,
brain-based research, and assisted outpatient treatment.
Rhoda experienced a psychotic breakdown as a teenager,
hearing voices and showing severe symptoms at a time when families were falsely
blamed for causing the illness. She spent 25 years in a New York State
hospital and the rest of her life in group homes and nursing homes until
passing away in 2010 at age 70. Witnessing Rhoda's ordeal inspired
Torrey to write Surviving Schizophrenia and found
the Treatment Advocacy Center, making him a fierce critic of
deinstitutionalization without proper community support. [ See Torrey’s What
Shaped My Career at Psychiatry Online here - opens in new tab ]
Anthony David Moody (born 1932) is a
distinguished New Zealand-born academic, literary critic, and Professor
Emeritus of English and American Literature at the University
of York. He is globally recognized as one of the foremost authorities on
Modernist poetry, celebrated primarily for his monumental three-volume
biography of Ezra Pound.
Literary critics praise Moody for avoiding dense academic
jargon and instead focusing deeply on "the person in the poetry". His
work on Pound is highly regarded for its objective, unsparing approach to the
poet’s complex legacy. He aims to disentangle his literary genius from his controversial
embrace of Italian Fascism and antisemitism
Ezra Pound, Fascism, Prejudice, and Treason: Torrey and
Moody in Contrast
Their diverging treatment of Pound’s legacy from those years
in Washington from 1945 and during his time at St. Elizabeth’s is not
simply a matter of emphasis or temperament; it arises from incompatible
assumptions about Pound’s mental state, his political agency, and the motives
of those who handled his case. Nowhere is this divergence more visible than in
their treatment of Pound’s relations with Fascism, his late‑life prejudices, and
particularly, for example, his correspondence with the segregationist activist
John Kasper, and crucially, the role played by Dr Winfred Overholser in
determining Pound’s legal fate.
Moody’s approach begins with a refusal to collapse Pound’s
political entanglements into the blunt category of “Fascism.” He insists that
Pound’s engagement with Mussolini was historically specific, intellectually
motivated, and never formalised. Pound did not swear allegiance to the Fascist
Party, nor did he advocate Fascism for the United States; his loyalty, Moody
argues, remained with the American Constitution and with a Confucian ethic of
social order. The term “Fascist,” in Moody’s view, has become a moralising
epithet rather than an analytical category, one that obscures the complexity of
Pound’s economic ideas, cultural ambitions, and internationalist commitments.
Moody acknowledges Pound’s anti‑Semitism but sees it as a tragic intellectual
and moral degeneration — a process in which obsession overwhelmed judgment —
rather than as a coherent ideological programme.
Torrey’ takes an inverse approach. His thesis is that Pound
was perfectly rational, not insane, and that his political extremism was
deliberate, intentional, and lucid. For Torrey, the diagnosis of insanity was
not a clinical conclusion, but a legal and political manoeuvre engineered by Dr
Winfred Overholser to prevent a treason trial that the government feared would
be embarrassing, unpredictable, and constitutionally fraught. Pound’s anti‑Semitism,
in Torrey’s account, is not a symptom of mental disorder but evidence of
conscious extremism. His broadcasts for Rome Radio were not the ravings of a
disordered mind but the actions of a man who knew precisely what he was doing.
This divergence becomes particularly sharp in their
treatment of Pound’s relationship with John Kasper. Torrey treats the Kasper
correspondence as proof of Pound’s rational complicity in extremist politics.
Kasper, a segregationist firebrand, drew inspiration from Pound’s economic and
cultural ideas, and Pound encouraged him. It is telling, in Torrey’s view, that
although Kasper’s correspondence with Pound remains in the archives at St
Elizabeth’s, Pound’s letters have disappeared. The disappearance of these
letters becomes, in Torrey’s narrative, part of a broader pattern of
concealment that protected Pound from further incrimination. Kasper is not a
distortion of Pound’s thought but an extension of it; his activism demonstrates
the real‑world consequences of Pound’s political influence. For Torrey, this
relationship underscores the central claim: Pound was sane, dangerous, and
shielded by institutional collusion.
Moody’s reading is more biographical than forensic. He does
not deny the relationship, nor does he minimise its ugliness, but he sees
Kasper as a volatile disciple who misunderstood and weaponised fragments of
Pound’s thinking. Pound’s encouragement of Kasper is treated as evidence of
poor judgment, susceptibility to flattery, and the incoherence of his late
intellectual life. Kasper’s racial extremism is not, in Moody’s view, a direct
expression of Pound’s own political commitments but a misappropriation. The
missing letters are not treated as suspicious; they are simply lost. Moody
refuses to let a single distorted relationship define Pound’s intellectual or
moral identity.
These interpretive differences are played out in the two
writers’ assessment of the role of Winfred Overholser, superintendent of St
Elizabeths, whose diagnosis of Pound as mentally incompetent prevented a
treason trial. Torrey’s portrayal of Overholser is unsparing. He argues that
Overholser knowingly participated in a manufactured diagnosis, presenting Pound
as insane despite evidence of coherent thought and deliberate political
intention. Torrey suggests that Overholser came perilously close to perjury,
shaping his testimony to produce a desired legal outcome. The motive, in
Torrey’s account, was institutional protection: a treason trial involving a
major poet would have been a political spectacle, exposing the government to
embarrassment and raising constitutional questions about the criminalisation of
speech.
Moody’s portrayal is almost the opposite. He treats
Overholser as a clinician confronted with a difficult, obsessive, and
deteriorating patient. Pound’s mental state, in Moody’s view, was compromised
by fixation, paranoia, and moral collapse. Overholser’s diagnosis was not
political but medical; the government’s relief at avoiding a trial was
secondary. Moody does not suggest any manipulation of evidence or testimony.
The diagnosis is treated as sincere, even if later readers might debate its
accuracy.
To understand why Overholser’s decision mattered so
profoundly, we must consider the legal and political context of treason in
1945–46. Treason trials were extraordinarily rare, politically dangerous, and
constitutionally delicate. The government feared turning Pound into a martyr,
exposing wartime intelligence operations, or losing the case on First Amendment
grounds. Pound’s broadcasts, however repugnant, raised difficult questions
about the boundary between political speech and treasonous action. His stature
as a major poet made the prospect of a public trial uniquely explosive: it
would have forced the government to parade his writings and broadcasts before
the world, risking international embarrassment and cultural backlash. The
diplomatic context was equally fraught; the United States was attempting to
stabilise postwar Italy and manage the emerging Cold War. A sensational treason
trial involving Mussolini’s most famous foreign admirer would have been
geopolitically inconvenient.
In this context, psychiatric confinement offered a
politically elegant solution. It avoided the risks of conviction, acquittal,
and public spectacle. Torrey sees this as evidence of institutional collusion;
Moody sees it as the natural consequence of clinical judgment. Their
disagreement is not merely about Pound’s mental state but about the meaning of
“insanity” in the context of treason, the ethics of psychiatric testimony, and
the boundary between political extremism and mental illness.
What emerges from this comparison is a portrait of two
incompatible frameworks. Torrey’s Pound is a rational extremist shielded by a
fabricated diagnosis. Moody’s Pound is a brilliant but deteriorating mind whose
obsessions warranted clinical concern. Torrey’s Overholser is complicit;
Moody’s Overholser is conscientious. Torrey’s Kasper is incriminating; Moody’s
Kasper is misled. Torrey’s Fascism is deliberate; Moody’s Fascism is entangled.
The choice between these viewpoints shapes not only our understanding of
Pound’s prejudices and political commitments but also our interpretation of his
confinement, his legacy, and the moral complexity of his late life.
Closing Reflections
One further element complicates any assessment of Pound’s
state of mind during his years at St Elizabeths: the conditions under which he
lived. Although Pound habitually referred to the hospital as the “bughouse,”
the reality was more ambiguous. Pound was housed in Howard Hall, a secure but
relatively quiet ward reserved for “special patients” considered non‑violent
and intellectually coherent. Biographers such as Humphrey Carpenter as well as Moody and Torrey agree that Pound’s room was larger
than typical, that he had access to books and correspondence, and that he was
permitted to continue writing, translating, and receiving visitors with a
freedom not granted to ordinary inmates.¹ His daily life included walks on the
hospital grounds, conversations with staff and fellow patients, and a steady
stream of visitors from the literary, diplomatic, and journalistic worlds.²
The visiting arrangements are particularly well documented.
Pound received an exceptionally high volume of visitors — William Carlos
Williams, T.S. Eliot, Charles Olson, Allen Ginsberg, Eustace Mullins, and many others —
often for extended periods.³ Carpenter describes Pound’s room as functioning
“almost like a salon,” with visitors coming and going with minimal
supervision.⁴ William Tytell similarly notes that Pound’s social life at St Elizabeths
was “remarkably free,” and that staff treated him with a degree of deference
unusual in a federal psychiatric institution.⁵ Moody, while more cautious,
acknowledges that Pound’s confinement was “not punitive” and that his
intellectual and social routines continued largely uninterrupted.⁶
The most delicate question — whether Pound received
overnight female visitors — must be handled with care. There is no surviving
institutional documentation confirming such visits. Some memoirs and
recollections hint at unusually intimate or extended visits, but these accounts
are not corroborated by hospital records and are treated cautiously by
responsible biographers.⁷ Carpenter notes rumours of “liberties” afforded to
Pound, but does not assert them as fact; Tytell hints at the possibility of
unusually long visits but avoids explicit claims; Moody does not endorse the
idea at all.⁸ The archival record therefore supports only the broader
conclusion: Pound’s visiting privileges were exceptionally liberal, but specific
claims about overnight visitors remain part of the ambiguous folklore
surrounding his time in Howard Hall.
Taken together, these conditions reveal the paradox of
Pound’s confinement. He was legally incompetent, yet intellectually active; confined
yet socially engaged; isolated from public life, yet surrounded by a steady
stream of admirers, interlocutors, and petitioners. The hospital staff appear
to have regarded him not as a dangerous psychotic but as an eccentric
intellectual.9
One last mystery shadows Pound’s story: the absence of
Overholser’s clinical notes from the St Elizabeths archive. Their disappearance
is not, in itself, proof of conspiracy, but it is undeniably consequential.
Those notes would have recorded Pound’s daily state of mind during the years
when his political fate was being decided, when the question of sanity or
competence was not abstract but immediate. Their absence leaves a gap precisely
where the record ought to be most illuminating. Torrey reads that gap as part
of the machinery that shielded Pound from trial; Moody treats it as an archival
accident. But for the biographer, the historian, and the reader, the effect is
the same: the inner life of Pound at the moment of greatest consequence remains
partly inaccessible, partly guessed, partly inferred from fragments.
In 1921, in the brief sentences of Axiomata,
Pound wrote: “If a man isn’t willing to take some risk for his opinions,
either they are no good, or he is no good.” It is a line that Torrey seizes
upon in his concluding pages, not for its bravado but for its irony. Pound
spent the war years broadcasting opinions with extraordinary vehemence, yet
when the moment came for those opinions to be tested in the crucible of law —
when the treason indictment might have forced him to defend them publicly — he
acquiesced in a process that removed him from the courtroom and placed him
behind the gates of St Elizabeth's. Whether that acquiescence was resignation,
calculation, or exhaustion is impossible to know. But the contrast between the
youthful axiom and the elderly poet’s silence is stark. The man who once
insisted that opinions must be risked ended his life with the most
consequential of his opinions unexamined in any formal forum.
And yet the question of whether Pound remembered those words
— whether they returned to him in the long years after his release, as he sat
in Rapallo or Venice, diminished and largely mute — is not merely sentimental.
It touches the core of the interpretive divide between Torrey and Moody. Torrey
would say that Pound knew exactly what he had done: that he had risked nothing
because he understood the danger of a trial and accepted Overholser’s
intervention as a shield. Moody would say that Pound’s late silence was the
silence of a man whose mind had become tangled in obsession and remorse, no
longer capable of the clarity that the young poet demanded of himself. In
either case, the old axiom stands as a kind of moral counterpoint to the life
that followed. Pound risked much, but not in the way he once imagined; and the
trial that never happened remains the absent centre of his biography, the
moment in which his ideas might have been tested and judged, but instead were
left to drift, unresolved, into the twilight of his final years.
Selected references – Closing Reflections Section
- Humphrey
Carpenter, A Serious Character: The Life of Ezra Pound (London:
Faber & Faber, 1988), esp. pp. 752–760.
- Carpenter,
A Serious Character, pp. 754–758; Noel Stock, The Life of Ezra
Pound (New York: Pantheon, 1970), pp. 397–405.
- Carpenter,
pp. 754–760; Charles Norman, Ezra Pound (New York: Macmillan,
1960), pp. 285–290.
- Carpenter,
p. 756.
- William
Tytell, Ezra Pound: The Solitary Volcano (New York: Anchor, 1987),
pp. 330–338.
- A.
David Moody, Ezra Pound: Poet, Volume III: The Tragic Years, 1939–1972
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 210–230.
- Eustace
Mullins, This Difficult Individual, Ezra Pound (New York: Fleet,
1961), pp. 112–118 — note: Mullins is
a controversial witness.
- Carpenter,
p. 757; Tytell, pp. 334–336; Moody, pp. 215–220.
- Moody,
pp. 210–230; Carpenter, pp. 754–760.
Postscript
I found that by a
strange co-incidence, the death had been announced of Pound’s granddaughter by Olga
Rudge had died on Friday July 24th, just as I had picked up Torrey’s book and
thought about this exploration. How strange indeed, these moments are. See note here >>