Most of us find a lot of Ezra Pound’s pronouncements and activities in areas other than poetry unsavory, if not reprehensible. Perhaps his anti-Semitism and allegiance to Mussolini have been introjected into his verse. There seems to be an ongoing argument that the verse must be rejected because of the reprehensible views.
Richard Wagner is often subject to the same argument for the same reason.
On the other hand, Bobby Fisher’s anti-Semitic views became increasingly reprehensible and pathological as he became, well, more pathological. Yet his games are admired without reservation and remain unsullied by the man’s life.
The opening of the old 1960’s television show, Star Trek, is often held up to approbation by prescriptivist grammarian mavens as an egregious violation of the Split Infinitive Rule: “To boldly go where no man has gone before.”
The rule requires that no adverb or other word be inserted between the two halves of the infinitive, “to” and “go.” The two words are to be considered an indivisible unit, because, in Latin, the infinitive of a verb is one single word.
This overlooks the reason for the exact phrasing. “To boldly go” is two iambs, and the whole line itself nearly perfect iambic pentameter, if you consider “..man has gone…” to be an anapest. “To go boldly” is awful— an iamb followed by a trochee—a flat-footed, moribund construction.
Finally, consider the viability of the following:
In English grammar, one must always X, because in Attic Greek, X is always the case.
In English grammar, one must always X, because in Japanese, X is always the case.
In English grammar, one must always X, because in Etruscan, X is always the case.
In English grammar, one must always X, because in Navajo, X is always the case.