Exhaustive . . . and exhausting. The paperbound version is just shy of two pounds! Even carrying it around is work.
And have no doubt, a lot of work went into this book. A lot.
Moody nicely finesses the traditional biographical obligation of spending too much time on the subject's family and lineage, using jump cuts to his advantage. But along about the time Pound gets to college he slows up and what we have here is a month-to-month account of Pound's life.
Put another way, what we have here is a chronicle more than a biography. Moody is very close to his subject--so much so that those coming cold to Pound (as I was) will find part of the book confusing if not downright unintelligible. The context is always Pound's immediate contacts, immediate connections, immediate relations.
It took a brass ass to sit in the archives long enough to get all of this down, and that work alone warrants the book an extra star. Hats off to Moody. He is also attuned to Pound's poetry, above all, and offers insightful readings of his work--attention to the aesthetic dimensions of artists is weirdly infrequent in modern biographies, which focus on the psychological and the sociological instead. All these are good things. Especially since Pound--at least as I know him--is best remembered as an editor and promoter of others, like James Joyce and T. S. Eliot. (Also that he sympathized with Fascists and was put in an inane asylum, but those are only foreshadowed in this volume.)
The focus on the month-to-month, year-to-year is helpful in showing how Pound was thinking through issues. Steeped in the classics, trained in a number of European languages, Pound nonetheless revolted against fin de siecle language education, which was too philological. That is to say, too focused on the precise meaning of words, losing the Romance, the psychic and spiritual dimensions of the classic works. He wanted to retrieve the beauty of the European canon, to celebrate it. And early in his career, that's exactly what he did. He favored the musical power of words over their meaning, the auditory imagination over the visual. At times, this could lead him to excess.
Critical of American Society as young and stupid, pitched at the common denominator, Pound made his way to Europe, spending most of this volume in England. There he came under the influence of Ford Maddox Ford, who began a tutelage that led Pound to focusing more on the image created by the words, that made him less poetic and more grounded. Since Moody is so close to his subject, he never seems to see the irony of this--that Pound returned to a species of philology. Around 1912, he became associated with Imagism, which focused on the spiritual and psychic understandings of a word.
There was a scientific angle to this approach: Pound thought that he was defining the individual's response to the world, which should be grounds for a new civics and ethics. His association with Imagism was short-lived, though (Amy Lowell took on its mantle) and he moved on to Wyndham Lewis's Vorticism, which was about harnessing the energy of the universe into works of art. The focus here was more on organization that the words itself--Vorticism, unsurprisingly, was influenced by Cubism. By the end of the book, Pound is between movements, grounding his work more and more in the quotidian, even as it is shaped by classical structures, particularly those of Dante, and making attempts on what he believed would be his life's work, his Cantos.
Interleaved with this artistic history is a political history. From the beginning, Pound seems to have seen himself as a genius out to remake the Western canon by bringing together its most important elements. (Oddly, he seems to have had a very conservative view of domesticity, unlike many other modernists, who challenged Victorian mores in their lives, as well: men sleeping around.) Along with this was an emphasis on the individual as the engine of history, particularly the gifted individual. This view would inform Pound's ideas about World War I--America should intervene because the world should be made for the individual, not the individual for the system, and Germany was totalitarian.
Not that Pound was either a democrat or a progressive. Although he was dependent upon a number of women--the editors of Poetry, the Egoist and Chicago's famous Little Review were all women (another irony Moody misses)--Pound chafed at the feminization of culture. He thought that society should be based upon individual geniuses spreading enlightenment and was at pains to point out the stupidity of the masses, the crowds. He did not like captialism, but also did not associate with socialism, coming, instead, to embrace Major Douglas's "Social Credit," which based the economy on the individual, not the system.
Weirdly, Moody barely mentions Nietzsche, although Pound's views seem clearly influenced by the German writer, if not from him directly then from Mencken. He also goes to lengths to absolved Pound of any belief in occultism--because he did not believe in spiritualists or mediums--but that seems overly simplistic, given the crowd with which he ran: Yeats, of course, who was very different than Ford Maddox Ford and was drawn to occult ideas; he wrote for the mystical magazine "the New Age." Certainly there were occultish--or mystical--elements to Pound's writings, something that opposed the strict materialism of science. But, again, because Moody is so close to Pound, we never get the wider context.
Indeed, personally, I would have liked Moody to make connections between Pound and the science of the day. Imagism was conceived as a kind of science. And its successor, Vorticism, was explicitly scientific, although allied with a view of science that was increasingly seen as wrong, superseded, and connected to the paranormal and pseudoscientific. What of this did Pound know? What did he intuit? What was going on?
These are the questions that Moody is unequipped to answer. A biography obviously cannot have everything, and this one already has a lot. It's tightly focused on the man much more than the life and times, critical of his literary work, but not a critical understanding of Pound as a member of the twentieth century.