ListofFigures
1.1 ‘TheFayumFragments’,fromH.T.Wharton, Sappho:Memoir,Text, SelectedRenderings,andaLiteralTranslation,3rdedn(London:JohnLane, 1895),p.180.©TheBritishLibraryBoard,11340.aaa.11.24
1.2PhotographofP.Oxy.I7in TheOxyrhynchusPapyri,PartI(1898),Plate II.TheBodleianLibraries,UniversityofOxford,R.TextGR.1-1,facingp.11.32
1.3Sappho,P.Oxy.III424,containingpartofFragment3Lobel-Page,from TheOxyrhynchusPapyri,PartIII(1903),p.71.TheBodleianLibraries, UniversityofOxford,R.TextGr.1-3,p.71.33
2.1ExtractfromHermannDiels, DieFragmentederVorsokratiker (Berlin: Weidmann.,1912),I.77.TheBodleianLibraries,UniversityofOxford, shelfmark,N.i.499a,p.89.61
3.1PlanoftheBritishMuseum,ground floor, c.1905.AntiquaPrint Gallery/AlamyStockPhoto.82
3.2MarblestelefoundatSigeum.2.28m.BritishMuseum(1816,0610.107). ©TheTrusteesoftheBritishMuseum.84
3.3InscribedRomanburialchestintheformofanaltar,dedicatedtoAtimetus. BritishMuseum(1817,0208.2).©TheTrusteesoftheBritishMuseum.88
4.1TheoldElginRoom, c.1920,includingthe ‘Poseidon’ torsowithadjusted plastercast.©TheTrusteesoftheBritishMuseum.121
4.2Torsoofamale figureM(‘Poseidon’),fromtheWestPedimentofthe Parthenon.BritishMuseum(1816,0610.103).©TheTrusteesofthe BritishMuseum.122
4.3TheDuveenGallery,1980s:WikimediaCommons https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Duveen_Gallery_(1980s).jpg.123
4.4BernardAshmole’ s ‘HighandOver’:Blackandwhitephotograph.Historic EnglandArchive.125
4.5RodinwithhiscollectionofantiquitiesinMeudon, c.1910.Blackand whitePhotograph.GettyImages/HultonArchive.131
4.6AugusteRodin, Iris,MessengeroftheGods (c.1895).Bronze,82.7cm. MuséeRodin,(S.1068):akg-images/ErichLessing.132
4.7MarblestatuefromtheWestPedimentoftheParthenon, figureN(‘Iris’). 135cm.BritishMuseum(1816,0610.96).©TheTrusteesofthe BritishMuseum.133
4.8Gaudier-Brzeska’ssketchofFiguresLandMfromtheEastPedimentofthe Parthenon.Graphiteonpaper,23 14cm.MuséeNationald’ArtModerne, Paris(AM3376D(23)).Photograph©CentrePompidou,MNAM-CCI, Dist.RMN-GrandPalais/HélèneMauri.137
4.9HeadofahorseinSelene’schariotfromtheeastpedimentanddetail fromsouthmetope.Graphiteonpaper,23 14cm.MuséeNational138 d’ArtModerne,Paris(AM3376D(22)).Photograph©Centre Pompidou,MNAM-CCI,Dist.RMN-GrandPalais/HélèneMauri.
4.10HeadandlegofahorsefromtheParthenonfrieze.Graphiteonpaper, 23 14cm.MuséeNationald’ArtModerne,Paris(AM3376D(41asup)). Photograph©CentrePompidou,MNAM-CCI,Dist.RMN-Grand Palais/HélèneMauri.139
4.11GaudierBrzeska, TorsoI 1914.Marbleonstonebase,252 98 77mm. TateGallery,London,transferredfromtheVictoria&AlbertMuseumin 1983.Photograph:Tate.141
4.12 TorsoIII (c.1913–14),SeravezzaandSicilianmarble,27.3 8.9 8.9cm. ImagecourtesyoftheRuthandElmerWellinMuseumofArt,Hamilton College,ClintonNY(2005.6.1).GiftofElizabethPound,wifeof OmarS.Pound,Classof1951.Photograph:JohnBentham.142
4.13JacobEpstein, MarbleArms (1923).Marble,94cm.Blackandwhite photograph:HansWild,TheNewArtGallery,Walsall.©Theestateof SirJacobEpstein/Tate.147
4.14FromA.H.Smith, AGuidetotheSculpturesoftheParthenoninthe BritishMuseum,revisedbyC.H.Smith(London:TrusteesoftheBritish Museum,1908),p.117.148
5.1ConstantinBrâncuși Torso (Coapsă),1909–10.Whitemarble,24.4cm. MuzeuldeArtă dinCraiova/TheArtMuseumofCraiova. ©SuccessionBrancusi – Allrightsreserved.ADAGP,ParisandDACS, London2023.155
5.2Fromthe ‘H.D.Scrapbook’.H.D.Papers.AmericanLiteratureCollection, BeineckeRareBookandManuscriptLibrary,YaleUniversity,YCALMSS24; usedbypermissionofPollingerLimitedonbehalfoftheEstateof HildaDoolittle.160
5.3TheCalf-Bearer(Moschophoros)andtheKritiosBoyshortlyafter exhumationontheAcropolis, c.1865.Albumensilverprintfromglass negative.MetropolitanMuseumofArt,GilmanCollection,Giftof TheHowardGilmanFoundation,2005.162
5.4The ‘PeplosKore’ , c.530 ,discoveredinfourpiecesin1886.Parian marble,1.2m.AcropolisMuseum(679).©AcropolisMuseum.Photograph: YiannisKoulelis,2018.163
5.5Twomale kouroi (‘KleobisandBiton’).DelphiMuseum(467,1524(statues); 980,4672(plinths)).GettyImages/EducationImages.165
5.6JacobEpstein, GirlwithaDove (1906–7).Pencildrawing.TheNewArt Gallery,Walsall,Garman-RyanCollection(1973.065.GR).©Theestateof SirJacobEpstein/Tate.166
5.7 ‘TheHornsofConsecration’,Knossos.Photograph: Anterovium/Shutterstock.com.CopyrightHellenicMinistryof CultureandSports(N.3028/2002).178
5.8Stairsfromthe ‘PianoNobile’ toanimaginarythirdstorey.Photograph: LouiseA.Hitchcock.CopyrightHellenicMinistryofCultureandSports (N.3028/2002).179
5.9NorthEntrancebefore ‘reconstitution’,fromEvans,ThePalaceofMinos, Vol.III,p.159.©AshmoleanMuseum/MaryEvans.180
5.10TheWestPorticooftheNorthEntranceafterreconstruction.Photograph: AntonStarikov/AlamyStockPhoto.CopyrightHellenicMinistryof CultureandSports(N.3028/2002).180
AbbreviationsandNoteontheText
APAnthologiaPalatina
CantosEzraPound, TheCantos,London:Faber&Faber,1986; referencestothiseditionaregivenintheformofCanto number/pagenumber.
CILCorpusInscriptionumLatinarum,Berlin1863–.
CPH.D.:CollectedPoems, 1912–1944,L.L.Martz,ed.,NewYork: NewDirections,1983.
Eliot, CPTheCompleteProseofT.S.Eliot:TheCriticalEdition, R.Schuchard,gen.ed.,BaltimoreMD:JohnsHopkins UniversityPress,2021,8vols.
EPHPEzraPoundtoHisParents:Letters1895–1929,M.deRachewiltz, A.D.MoodyandJ.Moody,eds,Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press,2010.
IMH
T.S.Eliot, InventionsoftheMarchHare: Poems1909–1917, C.Ricks,ed.,London:Faber&Faber,1996.
InstigationsInstigationsofEzraPound:TogetherwithanEssayonthe ChineseWrittenCharacterbyErnestFenollosa,NewYork:Boni &Liveright,1920.
LSJ
Liddell,H.G.,R.ScottandH.S.Jones, AGreek-EnglishLexicon, 9threvisededn,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Paige TheLettersofEzraPound:1907–41,D.D.Paige,ed.,London: Faber&Faber,1951.
Pound, Gaudier-Brzeska EzraPound, Gaudier-Brzeska:AMemoir,LondonandNew York:JohnLane,1916.
Pound, LETheLiteraryEssaysofEzraPound,editedwithaninstructionby T.S.Eliot,NewYork:NewDirections,1954.
Pound, SPSelectedPoems:EzraPound,editedwithanintroductionby T.S.Eliot,London:Faber&Faber1928,reprinted1948.
Pound, SPrEzraPound:SelectedProse,1906–1965,W.Cookson,ed., London:Faber&Faber,1973.
PTSEThePoemsofT.S.Eliot,C.RicksandJ.McCue,eds,London: Faber&Faber,2015,2vols.
Lobel-PageLobel,E.andD.Page,eds. PoetarumLesbiorumFragmenta, Oxford:ClarendonPress.
P.Oxy. TheOxyrhynchusPapyri.
TranslationsfromAncientGreek,Latin,andGermanaremyownunlessotherwisestated.
Introduction
ItallbeganwiththeGreekfragments
H.D., EndtoTorment
Half-formedstatues,lacunosepoetry,novelswithnoclearbeginningorend:the fragmentissointegraltotheliteraryandvisualculturesofmodernismthatit bordersoncliché.Scholarsofmodernismtendtoexplaintheturntofragmentary modesintheperiodroughlycoveringthe firsthalfofthetwentiethcenturyasa directresponsetothepressuresofmodernity.InJohnTytell’swords,thefragment became ‘oneofthecallingcardsofmodernism’,largelybecauseitcorrespondedto ‘anewsenseoftheuniversethatbegantoemergeasthenineteenthcentury ended ’.¹Theeconomiesofindustrializationmadeanonymouscrowdsafactof dailylife.Newtechnologies – fromthetypewritertothemachinegun – meantthat themodernistfragmentwas ‘symptomatic’,asMarjoriePerloffputsit, ‘ofwhatwe mightcallthenewtechnopoeticsofthetwentiethcentury’.²When,inthefall-out oftheFirstWorldWar, ‘abotchedcivilization’ seemedtoseveranyreliable continuitieswiththevaluesofthepast,thefragmentedexperienceofmodernity foundastarkcorrelationinthebrokenorabsentbodiesthatbecameavisceral partofeverydayexperience.³
Thefragmentisclearlyentangledinthe modernity ofmodernism,then.Butfor thewidecircleofmodernistswhospenttheirtime ‘pawingovertheancientsand semi-ancients ’,asEzraPoundputit,thefragmentwasnotonlyamarkerof presentexperience:itwasastarkfactoftheremainsofthepast.⁴ Asthe PostclassicismsCollectivehasemphasized,ourrelationshiptoantiquityispredicatedon ‘aconstitutiverelationshiptoloss’ . ⁵ Recentstudieshaveestimatedthatas littleas1–5%oftheliteratureofGreeceandRomebefore200 hassurvived,and the figureformaterialcultureislikelytobeevensmaller.⁶ Fromthevantagepoint ofmodernity,theclassicalpast – despiteitslong-standingconnectionswithan
¹Tytell(1981),3.²Perloff(1986),115.
³Frisby(1985);Childs(1986),chapter3;Perloff(1986);Schwartz(1988);Haslam(2002);Mellor (2011);Weinstein(2014);Kern(2017);Bruns(2018);Varley-Winter(2018).Poundlamentedthe ‘botchedcivilization’ whichledtothewarin HughSelwynMauberley V.4=Pound(1920),13.
⁴‘ARetrospect’:Pound, LE 11.
⁵ PostclassicismsCollective(2020),129.Forthepracticeoffragmenthuntingasessentialtoclassical scholarship,seeMost(1997)withMost(1998),(2011);Derda,Hilder,andKwapisz(2017);Lamari, Montanari,andNovokhato(2020);Mastellari(2021);GinelliandLupi(2021).
⁶ Netz(2020),550–1,557–9;GibsonandWhitton(2023).
FragmentaryModernism:TheClassicalFragmentinLiteraryandVisualCultures,c.1896–c.1936.NoraGoldschmidt, OxfordUniversityPress.©NoraGoldschmidt2023.DOI:10.1093/oso/9780192863409.003.0001
aestheticperfectiondependent ‘onthepropertiesofharmoniouspartscoheringin acontinuouswhole’⁷– ispermanentlydamagedanddislocated,extractedin piecesfromaliencontextsordugupfromthegroundindisjointedshards.
FragmentaryModernism beginsfromthecrucialobservationthattheperiod whichsawsomeofthemostradicalexperimentsinfragmentationinmodernist artandwritingalsowitnessedaseriesofbreakthroughsinthediscoveryand disseminationofGraeco-Romanartandliteratureinfragments.Aroundtheturn ofthecentury,arevolutionintheunderstandingoftheGreekandRomanpast broughtunprecedentedquantitiesofnewfragmentstolightbeyondtheclosed boundariesofclassicalscholarship.AstreamofancientGreektextsondamaged papyrus – includingfragmentsofthelyricpoetSapphowhichhadlainunreadfor thousandsofyears – wereunleashedontopublicconsciousnessinwhathistorians ofpapyrologyhavecalleda ‘mediacircus’ . ⁸ Meanwhile,thenewarchaeology, madewidelyaccessiblethroughrapiddevelopmentsinphotography,wasunearthingfragmentsofmaterialculturefromArchaicandpre-Hellenicperiodsofakind previouslyunseen. ⁹ TeamsofphilologistsfromGermany,France,Britain,andthe USAweremakingcollectionsoftextualfragmentsavailableinaccessibleformats, andinthemodernmuseum – increasinglythesiteofconsumptionofancientart andartefacts – afundamentalshiftinhistoricpracticesofrestorationputthe fragmentonopendisplayasthekeyvisualmarkerofantiquity.
Developmentslikethesewerefoundationalforthemodernistfragment. ApapyrusscrapofSappho,oranArchaictorsorecentlyunearthedfromthe ground,providedstartingpointsfornewartisticproduction.Butthedirectionof receptionalsoworkedtheotherway.Newformsofartandwriting – andthe prominencetheygavetothefragment – startedtomodifythewaysinwhichthe ancientmaterialitselfwasperceivedandpresented.Asphilologists,papyrologists, archaeologists,andmuseumcuratorsabsorbedthenewmodernistaestheticofthe fragment,theytooincreasinglyemphasizedthefragmentarystatusoftheirmaterial,suggesting,liketheirmodernistcontemporaries,thatwithantiquityaswith modernitycompletionwasnotalwayspossibleorevendesired.Recentlydiscoveredtextsandobjectsinfragmentsweretherebynotonlyendowedwiththe thrillofthenewbecausetheyhadbeenfreshlydugupfromtheirlongslumbers underground;theywerealso ‘ new ’ byassociationwiththemodernaestheticofthe fragmentthatwasfastbecomingthecharacteristicmarkeroftheavant-garde. Co-optedintonewdevelopmentsinartandwriting,thefragmentsofthepast wereinvestedwithaborrowedmodernity,asthemodernistfragmentcameto shapetheverymaterialonwhichitwasbased.
OneofthethingsIhopetoshowinthisbookisthatwhathasbeencalledthe ‘apotheosisofthefragment’ inthe firsthalfofthetwentiethcenturywasnot
⁷ Tytell(1981),4;cf.Fitzgerald(2022). ⁸ Montserrat(2007),28. ⁹ Barber(1990).
peculiartomodernism:itwasajointculturalproductionsharedbetweenmodernists andclassicalscholarsengagedinbringingthefragmentsofantiquitytolightin modernity.¹⁰ Theresulthasimportantimplicationsbothfortheunderstandingof modernismandforthestudyofantiquity.Ontheonehand,itallowsusto acknowledgethat,forallitsmodernity,theappearanceofthefragmentinthe literaryandvisualculturesofmodernismwasnotonlyahyper-modernphenomenon;itwas,inimportantways,afunctionofclassicalreception,predicatedona networkofinteractionswithancienttextsandobjectsandtheworkofthescholars whodecipheredanddisseminatedthem.Atthesametime,itisimportanttoface headontheextenttowhichmodernism’sinterventioninclassicalscholarshiphas shapedthereceptionofthefragmentbythosewhocontinuetostudyandcirculate theremainsofantiquity.Surroundedbywhitespaceonthepageordenudedof supplementaryrestorationinthecontemporarymuseum,thefragmenthas becometheprivilegedforminwhichweconsumeantiquityinmodernity.
Acknowledgingthemediatingroleofmodernisminthatconstructioniscrucial notjusttounderstandingthemodernistfragment,butthewaysinwhichwestill engagewithanddisseminatethefragmentsofthepast.
Thegenerativedialoguesbetweenmodernismandclassicalscholarshipthat Iargueforheremightseemcounter-intuitive,notleastbecausethetwoarenas areoftenseenasirreparablyseparatedbywhatStevenYaohascalleda ‘traumatic breach ’.¹¹Ononesideofthedivide,modernistsviolentlydenouncedthe ‘pedagogues,philologistsandprofessors’ whopromotedthestifling ‘cake-icing’ ofclassicalsculpture,andobscuredthevitalityofancientpoetrybyrenderingit ‘ so safeandsodead’.¹²Fortheirpart,classicalscholarsbristledatwhattheysawasthe amateureffortstoencroachontheirprofessionalterritory.AstheChicago classicistWilliamGardnerHalenotoriouslyputitinresponsetoEzraPound’ s HomagetoSextusPropertius (1919): ‘IfMr.PoundwereaProfessorofLatinthere wouldbenothingleftforhimbutsuicide.’¹³
Yetasagroundswellofrecentscholarshiphasbeguntoemphasize,despitethe rhetoricofmutualrejection,modernistartistsandwritersturnedtotheremainsof Graeco-Romanantiquitywithanalmostobsessiveattraction.JamesJoyce’sclassicisms,¹⁴ H.D.’sHellenism,¹ ⁵ PoundandJoyce’sengagementwithHomer,¹⁶ VirginiaWoolf ’sreceptionofGreece,¹⁷ andthedynamicsofmodernisttranslationall – wenowknowindetail – formedactivevectorsinthedevelopmentof
¹⁰ Fortheexpression ‘apotheosisofthefragment’ asappliedtomodernistliterature,seeCollecott (1999),15(citingPatMoyer)andCambria,Gregorio,andRes(2018),29.
¹¹Yao(2019),xv.
¹²Aldington(1915);EzraPound, ‘TheNewSculpture’ , TheEgoist I.4,1914,p.68;Aldington(1915).
¹³ ‘PegasusImpounded’,LettertotheEditor, Poetry:AMagazineofVerse (1919),April,14.1, pp.52–5(55)=Hale(1919),citedin(e.g.)Scroggins(2015),59;CulliganFlack(2015),20,andYao (2019),xv–xvi.
¹⁴ CulliganFlack(2020).¹⁵ Gregory(1997);Collecott(1999).
¹⁶ CulliganFlack(2015).¹⁷ Koulouris(2011);Mills(2014);Worman(2018).
anglophonemodernismandbeyond.¹⁸ Atthesametime,whatElizabethCowling andJenniferMundyhaveidentifiedasthe ‘classicground’ onwhichthevisual cultureoftheperiodwasbasedhasbeenuncoveredtorevealanengagementwith classicalantiquitythatbeliestheviolentrepudiationoftheclassicalpastwhich characterizedtheartwritingofthe firsthalfofthetwentiethcentury.¹⁹
Likerecentstudies,thisbookrecognizestheneedtoreachacrosstheperceived breachbetweenmodernismandclassicalscholarshipbyattendingindetailto modernism’sclassicalpreoccupations.Itbuildsupaninterconnectedpicture –beyondtheindividualcasestudy – ofthewaysinwhichGraeco-Romanmaterial informedmodernistfragment-makingacrossliteraryandvisualcultures.More specifically,itaimstoshowhowmodernistexperimentsinfragmentationwere notpredicatedonantiquity inspiteof the ‘safeanddead’ obfuscationsofclassical scholars;theywereenabledbyavitalcreativeengagementwiththeveryscholarshipthatwassovolublyrejectedintheavant-garderhetoricoftheperiod.The fragmentaryreceptionsofmodernism,Iargue,wouldhavebeenimpossible withouttheworkofthepapyrologistsandphilologists,epigraphists,archaeologists,andmuseumcuratorsengagedindiscovering,deciphering,anddisseminatingthefragmentsofantiquityformodernity.²⁰
Inmappingthenetworksofinfluencebetweenmodernism,Graeco-Roman textsandobjects,andclassicalscholarship,however, FragmentaryModernism also trailsthespotlighttotheothersideofthebreach.Justasmodernistrejectionsof theworkofclassicalscholarswereoftenonlysurfacedeep,classicists’ denunciationofmodernismwererarelyashard-and-fastastheytendtobeportrayed.
J.P.Sullivan,whopublishedareceptivestudyofPound’ s HomagetoSextus Propertius in1964,isoftenseenasthe firstprofessionalclassicistwhowastruly sympathetictotheaimsofAnglo-Americanliterarymodernism.Buttheapparent rupturebetweenscholarshipandartisticproductionwasoftenbridgedandcrisscrossedmuchearlier,andinmorenuancedandlessimmediatelyobviousways.
WilliamGardnerHale’sfatalverdictonPound’ s Propertius isregularlyheldupas anemblemoftheriftbetweenmodernistsandclassicalscholars.Butwhattendsto
¹⁸ Imentiononlythemostextensiveandrecentstudieshere,thoughthepracticeofexplicatingthe classicalreferencesinmodernisttextshasbeenpartofthecriticalhistoryoftheirreceptionfromthe outset.Translationhasbeenaparticularlyfruitfullensforstudiesofmodernismandclassicalreception: seerecentlyLiebregts(2019)(onEzraPoundandGreektragedy),andHickmanandKozak(2019). KaterinaStergiopoulou’sforthcomingworkonmodernistHellenismandthetranslationofGreece, whichfocusesparticularlyonthelaterworkofPound,H.D.,andT.S.Eliot,alsopromiseskeyinsights. Cf.alsoTaxidou(2021)onHellenisminmodernisttheatreandtheatricality.
¹⁹ CowlingandMundy(1990);GreenandDaehner(2011);Prettejohn(2012);Martin(2016).
²⁰ DetailsabouthowsomefragmentaryGreektexts(especiallySappho)orarchaeologicaldiscoveriesinfluencedtheculturalproductionoftheperiodhavebeenhighlightedbefore,butthereremainsno comprehensivestudyofthemodernistfragmentandthedisseminationofantiquityinfragments.See esp.Kenner(1969);Kenner(1971),54–9;Gregory(1997),149–50andCollecott(1999)onSapphoand H.D.;Gere(2009)onKnossos,andKocziszky(2015)andColby(2009)onthegeneral ‘archaeological imagination’ inmodernwriting. 4
gounnoticedisthefactthateven ‘thatfoolinChicago’,asPoundcalledhim,²¹was engagingwithoneofthemajoravant-gardeliteraryoutletsintheperiod.Halewas aspecialistinLatingrammar,whohadspenttimestudyingat ‘theuniversitiesof Deutschland’ whichformedthecradleofrigorousnineteenth-centuryclassical learning.²²Yet,strikingly,hismuch-citedcommentsonPound’sdefectivephilologywerenotpublishedinawell-respectedprofessionaljournalinthe fieldlike TheJournalofRomanStudies or TheClassicalReview.²³Theyweremadeinthe formofalettertotheeditorpublishedin Poetry:AMagazineofVerse: ‘thebiggest littlemagazine ’ andapowerhouseofcutting-edgemodernism,whichhostedsome oftheperiod’sbiggesthits,includingthe firstoutingofPound’ s Cantos (Three Cantos),T.S.Eliot’ s ‘TheLoveSongofJ.AlfredPrufrock’ andpoemsbyJames Joyce,W.B.Yeats,MarianneMoore,D.H.Lawrence,WallaceStevens,Amy Lowell,andWilliamCarlosWilliams.²⁴ Hale,inotherwords,wasactively engagingwithoneoftheforemostoutletsofliterarymodernism.Hiscasual readingof Poetry mighthavefailedtopenetratehistextbookonLatingrammar, whicharguablytypifiestheworkofthe ‘pedagogues,philologistsandprofessors’ thatmanymodernistswereostensiblytryingtoescape.Butinseveralothercases thelinesbetweenwhatHalecalledmodernism’ s ‘maskoferudition’²⁵ andthe academicprofessionalswhodealtwiththeclassicalmaterialbeingprocessedby writersandartistsintheperiodwereoftenfarmoreblurred.Artistsandwritersin the firstdecadesofthetwentiethcenturyclearlywadedintothephilologicaland archaeologicalterritoryofthosewho(inW.B.Yeats’ terms) ‘coughinink’ and ‘wearoutthecarpetwiththeirshoes’,²⁶ butprofessionalclassicists,too,were responsivetotheradicalchangesincontemporaryartisticproduction.
Oneoftheaimsofthisbook,therefore,istoremediatetheperceivedbreach betweenmodernismandclassicalscholarship,notsimplybytakingtheclassical presencesofmodernismseriouslyhereandnow(asStevenYaocounsels),butby showinghowthoseinterdisciplinarynetworkswerealreadyactivefromthe beginning.²⁷ Classicalreceptionstudiesisoftentheorizedasamodeofinvestigationwhichaimstoexposethefactthatthereisnoaccesstoantiquity ‘ proper ’ , sincenothingcomestousunmediatedbythelayersofreceptionthatinevitably distortourunderstandingofthepast.²⁸ Theartisticproductionofthe firsthalfof
²¹LettertoFelixE.Schelling,8July1922= L 245.
²²EzraPound, ‘ProvincialismtheEnemy III’ inPound, SPr,289.
²³Itischaracteristicofthefeedbackloopbetweenmodernismandclassicalscholarshipthat The ClassicalReview playedakeypartinthereadingcultureofmodernistpoets:seeChapter1,pp.17–18.
²⁴ Carr(2012);Hale’sletterwaspublishedintheissueimmediatelyfollowingthepublicationof HomagetoSextusPropertius (sowithinamonthofitspublication).ForHarrietMonroeand Poetry,see Williams(1977);Carr(2012),andBen-Mere (n.d.).Poundhimselfwasthemagazine’sforeign correspondentuntil1917.
²⁵ Hale(1919),55.²⁶ W.B.Yeats, ‘TheScholars’,(1919),ll.7–8.
²⁷ Yao(2019),xvi: ‘Yetwitheveryestrangementcomesanopportunityforreconciliation.And now...thatinitiallytraumaticbreachhasatlastbeguntoheal.’
²⁸ The locusclassicus isMartindale(1993).
thetwentiethcenturyeffectedarangeoflarge-scaleparadigmshiftswhoselegacies arestillpowerfullyactivetoday.Modernismhaschangedhowwethinkabout literatureandhowwethinkaboutart,andthosechangesnecessarilycolourour interpretationsoftheartandliteratureoftheGreekandRomanpast.Forthat reasonalone,modernism’sroleinourperceptionsofantiquitycallsforurgent attention.Morethanjustalensthatmediateshowwelookbackatancienttexts andobjectsfromwherewestandnow,themediationsofmodernismwerealways entangledwiththeworkofclassicalscholarsandthefragmentarymaterialthey broughttolight.Understandingthefullextentofthoseinterdisciplinaryentanglementsnotonlyexposesacrucialdriverintheemergenceofthemodernist fragment;itforcesustore-evaluatetheextenttowhichmodernismisbaked intohowweperceive,construct,andpresentthefragmentarytextsandobjects thatconstituteouraccesstothepast.
Modernism
‘Modernism ’ hasrecentlybeenexpandedonthegeographicalandtemporalaxes totakeinaneverincreasingsetoftextsandobjects.Thetermhasmovedoutwards onaglobalscaletoencompassmodernismsinlocationsasdiverseasTurkeyand sub-SaharanAfrica,andithasshiftedbeyondthe firsthalfofthetwentieth centurytoothermomentsofrupturewiththepaststimulatedbysocietaland technologicalchange,rangingaswidelyastheporcelainofTangDynastyChinato themusicofcontemporaryAfghanistan.² ⁹ The ‘modernism’ coveredinthisbook ismorespecifictothegroupofartistsandwritersassociatedwithwhatEzra Poundcalledthe ‘grrrreatlitttttteraryperiod’ ofmodernismthatsprungup, primarilyinLondon,inthe firstdecadesofthetwentiethcentury:thepoetryof EzraPound,T.S.Eliot,H.D.,andRichardAldington,andthesculptureofJacob EpsteinandHenriGaudier-Brzeska.³⁰
Onereasonforthatchoiceisthattheversionofmodernismrepresentedby EliotandPound,inparticular,hasbecomewhatSeanLathamandGayleRogers callan ‘obsession’ inthestudyoftheperiodroughlycovering1890–1930inBritish andAmericanacademia.³¹Closelyassociatedwiththeterm ‘modernism’,their workwasquicklyabsorbedintotheacademicstudyofEnglish,providing
²⁹ FortheNewModernistStudies,seeesp.Mao(2021)andLathamandRogers(2021),withMao andWalkowitz(2008),738–42andJailantandMartin(2018).Forglobalmodernisms,seeesp.Moody andRoss(2020).Similartranshistoricalandtransborderperspectivesarebeingdeployedinthe discussionof ‘globalClassics’:seeesp.Bromberg(2021).
³⁰ LettertoT.S.Eliot,24December1921=Paige235.
³¹LathamandRogers(2015),4.Astheauthorspointout,itispartlyasaconsequencethattheterm ‘modernism’ iscentraltoEnglish-languagescholarship,whereasit ‘barelysignifies ’ (4)inrelationto otheravant-gardemovements.
paradigmsforPracticalandNewCriticism(‘thetheoryofwhichthemodernist movementsprovidedthepractice’)thatshapedthewaysinwhichliterarycriticism hasbeenconductedinEnglish-speakinguniversities.³²Scholarsofmoderniststudieshaveunravelledsomeofthoselong-standingobsessionsandunpickedtheir implications,butwhenitcomestomodernism’scross-overintootherdisciplines theimplicationsofthatlasting fixationhaveyettobefullyexamined.Themodernist ‘obsession’ hasshapedthestudyofclassicsinunacknowledgedways.Itunderlies practicesofclosereadingthatareusedintheliterarycriticismofancienttexts;itis entangledinmanyofthetheoreticalmodelsimportedtostudythem,andit underwritesourtheorizationofclassicalreceptionstudiesitself.³³Aboveall,the versionofmodernismstudiedhereistightlyimbricatedintheinterpretationand presentationofthefragmentarymaterialonwhichouraccesstothepastisbased. Asthecasestudiesinthisbookhighlight,thewaysinwhichwepresentancient fragmentsonthepageordisplaytheminthemodernmuseumarenotintrinsicto thematerialitself.Theyhavebeen,andinmanywaysstillare,shapedbythe modernistaestheticofthefragment.Understandingthatdominantintervention intheclassicalfragment – andtheinterventionoftheclassicalfragmentinthe obsessionsofmodernism – iscentraltotheprojectofthisbook.³⁴ Thatisnottosaythatthenucleusofthestorytoldherecouldnotbeextended inseveralways.Thefragmentaryimperativeinthe firsthalfofthetwentieth centuryisatransculturalandtransdisciplinaryphenomenonthatinteractswith, butisinnowayrestrictedto,cognatedevelopmentsinclassicalreception.The fragmentworkofPoundandhiscirclewasitselfmarkedbyanoutward-looking ‘transnationalturn’,³⁵ andawiderangeofavant-gardecultureswerealsosimultaneouslyturningtofragmentsinvariousformsandmodes.Interestinthe fragmentcanbeseeninglobalmodernismsfromtheKoreanpoetryofKim KirimtotheUrdu qit’ah ofN.M.Rashed.³ ⁶ Itisthereintheseveredbodiesof Surrealism,thebrokenplanesofCubism,thetechno-aestheticsofFuturism;³⁷ it underliesItalian frammentismo ,³⁸ montagetechniquesin film,³⁹ andArnold
³²Baldick(1996),11withMao(2021),39.Thoughtheyreferredtotheir ‘modern “movement”’,the writersandartistsinthisbookneverquitecalledthemselves ‘modernist’:LathamandRogers(2015),1 (theterm ‘modernism’ was ‘christened’,asStanSmithputsit(Smith(1994),1)in1927withRobert GravesandLauraRiding’ s ASurveyofModernistPoetry).ForthelastinglegacyofNewCriticismsee, e.g.,HickmanandMcIntyre(2012),PartII ‘LegacyandFutureDirections’,andforitslinkswith modernism,seeLathamandRogers(2015),42–52.
³³Eliot,inparticular,isfrequentlyquotedintheorizationsofclassicalreceptionstudies:Hiscock (2020).
³⁴ Forthepressingimportanceoftheinterrogationof ‘interveningmomentsorevents’ thatcan ‘shapethedisciplineinunnoticedways’,seePostclassicismsCollective(2020),4.
³⁵ Park(2019);seealsoGoldwyn(2016)ontheclassicsasworldliteratureinPound’ s Cantos.
³⁶ MoodyandRoss(2020),e.g.,347–51;253.ForthefragmentascharacteristicofJorgeLuisBorges’ ‘globalclassics’,seeJansen(2018),esp.30–51;101–7;122–3.
³⁷ Orban(1997).³⁸ Sorrentino(1950).
³⁹ See,e.g.,McCabe(2005)on ‘cinematicmodernism’ inpoetryandonscreen.
Schoenberg’ s ‘liquidation’ andotherformsoffragmentationinmusic.⁴⁰ The fragmentisacentralpreoccupationofclassicalscholarship,butitalsocharacterizesothermodesofinvestigationwhichwerealsoimportantvectorsinthe emergenceofmodernism,includingdevelopmentsinphysics,anthropology, andpsychoanalysis – disciplineswhich,inEliot ’sterms, ‘madethemodern worldpossibleforart’ . ⁴¹
Thestorycouldalsobeextendedonthetemporalaxis.Modernismisfounded ontheassumptionofaradicalbreakwiththeproximatepast, ‘arebellionagainst theRomantictradition’ (asEliotdescribedPound’sproject)andthemoraland aestheticconventionsofthenineteenthcentury.⁴²Butitwasnotthe firstorthe onlypointatwhichclassicalreceptionandmodernfragment-makingcame together.Fragmentsandruinswerealreadyactiveconceptsandpracticesin antiquity,⁴³andthefragmenthassurfacedandre-surfacedasafeatureofclassical receptionatvariouspointsinitshistory,fromMichelangelo’ s non finito to moderntranslationsofSappho.⁴⁴ Inparticular,the ‘Romantictradition’ against whichmodernismostensiblyrebelledhasbeencreditedwithengenderingan apotheosisofthefragmentlongbeforemodernism.⁴⁵ OnSusanStanford Friedman’sanalysisofthemoveabilityof ‘planetarymodernism’,theRomantic fragmentcouldevenbeseenasa ‘modernistfragment’ beforetwentieth-century modernismeverexisted.⁴⁶ It,too,wassituatedatthe ‘“avantgarde” ofthe “avant garde”’ , ⁴⁷ emergingatatimeofseismicculturalchange,whentheFrench RevolutionputwhatLindaNochlincalls ‘thebodyinpieces’ atthecentreofthe visualimagination.⁴⁸
Yet,asmultiplestudiesofRomanticfragmentationemphasize,themodernist fragmentwasputtoworkverydifferentlyfromitsRomanticpredecessors. ⁴⁹ Romanticfragmentswereofapiecewiththeeighteenth-centuryruinindustry andpopularaestheticdiscoursesofthesublimeandthepicturesque.⁵⁰ Theywere ‘[n]otnecessarily[a]sign ...ofa brokenreality’ (34).⁵¹Theydidnotbring ‘the
⁴⁰ Schoenberg(1967),58.Forfragmentationinmusicalmodernism,seeesp.Guldbrandsenand Johnson(2015)withBernhartandEnglund(2021)onfragmentationinwordsandmusic,includingthe modernistperiod.
⁴¹ ‘Ulysses,OrderandMyth’ (1922),Eliot, CP II,479. ⁴²Pound, SP 17=Eliot, CP III,526.
⁴³Levene(1992);Azzarà(2002);Edwards(2011);Kahane(2011);MartinandLangin-Hooper (2018);Hughes(2018).
⁴⁴ Fortheculturalhistoryofthefragment,seeesp.KritzmanandPlottel(1981);Dällenbachand HartNibbrig(1984);Pingeot(1990);Ostermann(1991);Tronzo(2009);Most(2010);Pachet(2011); Harbison(2015).
⁴⁵ Mcfarland(1981),22. ⁴⁶ Friedman(2015);Mao(2021),74–6.
⁴⁷ Lacoue-LabartheandNancy(1988),133n.2.
⁴⁸ Nochlin(1994).Cf.Lichtenstein(2009),125ontheRomanticconceptofthefragmentas ‘paradigmaticofwhatweusedtocall modern’ .
⁴⁹ Mcfarland(1981);Janowitz(1990);WanningHarries(1994);Janowitz(1999);Thomas(2008); Strathman(2006).SeealsoRegier(2010)onRomanticfragmentationandcf.Lichtenstein(2009), 124–5ontheromanticfragment ‘asawholeinitself ’
⁵⁰ Thomas(2008),21. ⁵¹WanningHarries(1994),34.
dispersionortheshatteringoftheworkintoplay’ , ⁵²andtheytendedtobefuture orientedandhopeful:whatSchlegelcalled ‘fragmentsofthefuture’ (‘Fragmente ausderZukunft’ , Athenäums-Fragmente 22).⁵³Inpractice,thereislittleconnectingKeats’ Hyperion andColeridge’ s KublaiKahn tothefragmentaryrealitiesof TheWasteLand orPound’ s ‘Papyrus’.Still,therearecontinuitiesaswellas rupturestobefound.Romantictheoriesandpracticesofthefragmentfrom Shelley ’ s Ozymandias totheSchlegelbrotherssetimportantprecedentsforthe productionandconsumptionoffragments,notjustforthemodernistwritersand artistsofthetwentiethcenturywhocanbeseeninsomewaysastheheirsof Romanticism,⁵⁴ butforthedisciplineofclassicalscholarship,whichmediatedthe textsofantiquityfornewgenerationsofreadersinincreasinglyprofessional, institutional,andscientificcontexts.⁵⁵ TheRomanticcultofthefragmentestablishedtheformasamarketablecommodityinscholarshipandinartisticproductionintothenineteenthcentury,anditsexpressionandevolutioncanbeseenat variouspressurepointstowardstheendofthenineteenthcenturyatwhatJonah Siegelcalls ‘thethresholdofModernism ’,fromtheaphorismsofNietzscheto HenryThorntonWharton’spopulareditionofthefragmentsofSappho,which werecrucialtotheemergenceofthemodernistfragment.⁵⁶
Ultimately,thestorypiecedtogetherinthisbookoffersjustonewayof repairingthebreach.ItlooksoutwardsbeyondthemajorexponentsofAngloAmericanmodernismtootheravant-gardepractitionersandotherkindsof culturalproduction,anditdigsdowntosomeoftheliterary,artistic,philological, andarchaeologicaldevelopmentsbeforethetwentiethcenturythatcametoshape thereceptionoftheclassicalfragmentintheperiod.Butitsmainfocusremainsa specificmomentofexchange ‘onorabout1910’,asVirginiaWoolffamouslyput it,whenthemodernistculturesthatcametoconstituteafundamentalinterventioninthemodernreceptionoftheclassicalfragmentcametogetherwith developmentsinclassicalscholarshipinintenselygenerativeways.⁵⁷ Theimpact ofanewmodernityseemedtochange ‘humancharacter’,asWoolfcoylyputit, andthemodernistfragmentwasclearlyasymptomofthatchange.Butitwasalso implicatedinafundamentalreconfigurationofthepossibilitiesavailableforthe receptionofantiquity.Itwasultimatelyatthejuncturesandinteractionsoftwo
⁵²Lacoue-LabartheandNancy(1988),48.
⁵³InStrackandEicheldinger(2011),24.Seeesp.Janowitz(1999)onthedistinction.
⁵⁴ Varley-Winter(2018),15.
⁵⁵ Sometimesthecross-overbetweenscholarshipandartwasveryclear:seeesp.Chapter2,p.47n.11 forcollaborationsbetweenFriedrichSchleiermacherandtheRomanticfragment-makerFriedrich SchlegelwithGüthenke(2020),72–95.
⁵⁶ Siegel(2015),237,tracingaspectsof ‘thepoeticsofthefragment’ (208)totheperiod1790–1880.
⁵⁷‘[O]noraboutDecember1910humancharacterchanged’ : MrBennettandMrsBrown (1924). Woolf ’sdatingcorelateswithRogerFry’ s firstPost-ImpressionistexhibitionheldinLondonin NovemberandDecemberof1910,butthedate(andtheplace: ‘inLondonabout1910’),becameiconic, asEliotlaterreflected,forthe ‘pointderepère’ ofAnglo-Americanmodernism(Eliot(1966),18).For thesignificanceoftheyear,seeStansky(1996).
