Ezra Pound's "Meditatio": Humanity vs. the Canine

Meditatio

When I carefully consider the curious habits of dogs
I am compelled to conclude
That man is the superior animal.

When I consider the curious habits of man
I confess, my friend, I am puzzled.

As one of the fathers of literary modernism, Ezra Pound reacted against classicism and romanticism, and in the poem Meditatio he expresses the conflict between individual identity and the bestial nature of humankind. It is the social issue of what it means to be human that this poem epitomizes — what the definition of humanity and human causality might be, and in particular, the nature of humanity when compared to one of the classic symbols of human companionship: canis familiaris, the dog.

There are several levels of conflict within this short poem. First, Pound tells us in the title that this is a "meditation" — not simply a description, but something emotionally and psychologically invested, a puzzlement important enough to consider from all angles. Second, there is the mystery and conflict of what it means to be human, or to be a dog, in the context of early twentieth-century definitions. Third, we wonder at what habits Pound hints when he asks us to consider dogs and humans. And finally, there is the more metaphysical dimension of the entire poem: why is the author contemplating humans and dogs? What makes this a viable comparison, and what has caused Pound to reconsider humanity?

Meditation is not merely thought, nor random imagining, but a way of training the mind toward heightened consciousness — or a way to relax, build energy, and connect with the self and the innate nature of humanity. Pound's use of the word implies that this discussion about humans is vital to his own understanding of himself and of others. Rather than offering an academic approach or a quantitative analysis, meditating on a topic implies that there is no quantitative truth — only a problem for which there may be no answer, only a series of additional contemplative questions. In this way, Pound signals us to be mindful of what he is contemplating, perhaps hinting that we should look beyond the expected and find what is not always apparent.

The idea of being human has, of course, puzzled philosophers for centuries. By beginning the poem with a phrase about dogs, Pound signals that dogs carry symbolic weight in how humans see themselves. Prior to the twentieth century and the hyper-personalization of pet ownership, dogs were seen primarily as loyal companions — working animals bred from wolves to please their masters and assist in hunting or herding. Dogs have been valued in society for what they contribute, and perhaps also for what they refrain from adding.

The key phrase here is "the curious habits of dogs." What does this mean? Dogs are typically blindly loyal, trustworthy, and protective; they come when called, seem to absorb mistreatment yet return affection, and unless specifically trained to fight or be aggressive, are not generally so. Perhaps Pound is saying that when he contemplates how dogs do not judge, how they form rapid and lasting bonds, and how they prefer to serve rather than be served — he initially concludes in favor of humans. He finds "man the superior animal," yet offers no scale and does not tell us superior in what way.

Then, just as quickly, Pound asks us to rethink our original hypothesis as he asks us to "consider the curious habits of man." Which of these habits might he mean? Does he mean that we are the only species to actively wage war upon itself? That we are among the few species to actively enslave others? Or does he mean that our capacity for cognitive meditation has elevated us above the animals — granting us dominion over them, as the Bible suggests? Since Pound is puzzled when he compares the two species, we must ask whether he finds humans wanting, perhaps not as far ahead of or superior to dogs as expected.