Thanks for your kind reply, Cecilia. It was great fun getting “hooked” on Rilke. I didn’t manage to get hold on any Swedish translations, but my library now includes “Gesammelte Gedichte”, a very nice copy of which I found in a used bookshop. A great way of improving my German! >… I think that you have to take that thought a >little further, and understand that Rilke would have felt that their >relationship limited them both. Orpheus's poetry became more beautiful >when >faced with the loss of Eurydice, and Eurydice was now freed to explore the >fullness of her death. Maybe Orpheus’ poetry improved from him oscillating around his own misery. In a way. But I’m primarily concerned about Orpheus and Eurydice as (symbols of) humans. And I do think Orpheus’ poetry might have been even more beautiful if followed by a development inside himself, eventually. The beginning of Requiem for a Friend does illustrate your point about Eurydice, even if I still wonder what that fullness is supposed to be. Death is in this respect mainly interesting (to me) as the compliment state of living. Death in itself is uninteresting. So what fullness is Eurydice’s? I’ll go back to my German Rilke, decipher the rest of “Für eine Freundin” to the best of my ability, and see if I get any clue from there to Rilke’s opinion. >"Tellingly, Eurydice's return to the underworld is no sad accident >here; it is an active, ruthless condemnation performed in the guise of an >anxious backward glance" (3). Go Melissa! Hit ‘im! I wouldn’t go with the “active” opinion, even though I definitely like it esthetically. Focusing on Orpheus is all and well, but what I like the most in Rilke’s poem is that perspective shift towards Eurydice. We know very little of Eurydice: she is passive in the myths. Here she comes alive before us. Dead as she is, she comes alive. Just don’t tell me it is because she is dead, she comes alive. Please. Rilke or no Rilke. >So maybe you'll soon have a third and a >fourth and a five hundred thousandth reading by the time that we're >through. >Amen, Alleluia. > Amen indeed! /TLM PS I wonder if there is any analysis made of O&E from a feministic point of view? It is definitely made for it: all the historical focus on Orpheus and his pain, the vision of Love crossing all boundaries; and none on the object for it. It is quite easy to read Rilke’s poem as a feministic questioning on that. The one thing I absolutely love about the feministic approach is the questioning of both *what* we chose to ‘look at’ and *how* we do it. So many perspectives we take for granted, shaking our shoulders, saying “that’s just the way it is” like it was a law of nature. I love that questioning of set frames. The feminist movement has as many ignorant people in it as every movement, and as many near-sighted, but is supported by some really interesting perspectives. Often, however, looking at the establishment trying to learn from it is a sad sight: This weekend I watched an exhibit at the Royal Castle called “The Queens. The Women and the Power.” which focused on the 30-ish Swedish queens throughout history. The title promised something very interesting: focusing on what power the queens did have: formal and informal. What was their role? What influence did they have on the political arena, the society in general as well as specifically? But you really had to go through the material with a microscope to find that. Instead the exhibition focused on very traditional subjects: the queens and marriage, the queens and childbirth, the queens and charity etc. And even inside these subject lines something interesting could have been told. OK, the queens didn’t have much formal political power (apart from the 3 ruling Queens), the exhibition said. Instead they put emphasis on religious matters and on social (more like charity) questions. Well, do you think there was any analysis about THAT power, then? Nothing apart from the anecdotal. Laughable. Sweden is supposed to be one of the most “emancipated” countries in the world. Supported by labor statistics, quantity as well as quality; by influence in the political agenda, family values etc. But sometimes is surely is a shallow game. I don’t think the feministic view is the most interesting there is. But sometimes it is really revealing… ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com