Matt, Thanks for reply. In reading over what you quoted of me, I realize I left off the end of my facile statement re fluency. Should have read: Are you fluent in Geman? Which I guess to mean something along the lines of: while Rilke's poems are seducing you, is your mind turning over the German into the sluttish hiss of English *or not*? Needless to say, the fluent loved one is still hearing only *German* and never fantasizes into the English of the poem's meaning. In fact, our old friend Randall Jarrell, has a wonderful poem--can't recall title, don't have book--on trying to learn German, which invokes Rilke at one point. Something like: It is by trust and love and reading Rilke without ein Worterbuch [dictionary] that one learns German. The words rain down as glistening as from the hand of God and means-- what does it mean? It's in German. Okay: who on this list is holding out, and reads Rilke as Rilke heard the words ringing in his ear, as Rilke wrote the words down, as Rilke *himself* read Rilke? Surely *you* (as well as the eleven-year-old lurker, gender unknown) are out there? Matt wrote: "that ridiculous delicate Rilke" To quote RMR from The Notebooks of Malte L. Brigge: "Fame is the sum of misunderstandings that gather around a new name." I suggest you have fallen for the Hollywood version of Rilke's life. No one gets from *that* beginning in Prague, and the incredibly facile books of the first eight or so years, to The New Poems (trans. by Snow is best), to the *end* of Malte Brigge (trans. by Norton is best) to the first line of the First Duino Elegy (January 1912) and then drags himself across all of Europe for *ten* years getting a couple of more elegies, and bits and fragments, and finally with four years left to live, hits *Bingo!* in Muzot in February of 1922 with the complete arrival of Elegies and The Sonnets to Orpheus in the space of three weeks. What I am suggesting is: there is some pretty damn impressive good old I-go-to-gym-everyday-and-press-x-hundred-pounds of endurance exemplified by that strange miraculous life Rilke led. You wrote: "I remember reading that Rilke's German was accessible at an early level of study/reading..." (Of course, the Arndt example is a howl.) But yes and no. Rilke's early forgettable work--the books from 1894 through 1902--those are approachable with, say, 2 years of college German. BUT *native* speakers of German have trouble with the German of The New Poems (1907, 2nd volume 1908) onwards to the end (1926). (And let's not forget the *French* RMR. The 400 plus poems from c. 1919 to 1926 written *in* French and appreciated by Gide, Valery, et al. (granted, they were personal friends of RMR).) Okay, enough of *my own* posturing on this soapbox. -----Original Message----- From: Matt Kozusko <mkozusko@parallel.park.uga.edu> To: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu <bananafish@lists.nyu.edu> Date: Saturday, October 16, 1999 10:05 AM Subject: Arndt ya gonna just fergit about the rhyme and meter? > > >> Never considered Arndt one of the best. But who am I to say which are. >> Are you fluent in German? Which I guess to mean something along the lines >> of: while Rilke's poems are seducing you, is your mind turning over the >> German into the sluttish hiss of English? > >The churning teeth and spittle and glottal--to tell you the truth, to >this day I can't imagine that ridiculous delicate Rilke speaking such >an unmannerly language. German to me always sounded like someone >trying to chew up and swallow a large bit of car fender. I studied >only a little--just enough to reassure me that Herter Norton's Rilke >was right, and Walter Arndt's was wrong. I have always based my >argument on the strong resemblence in voice between her translations >of the prose vs. her translations of the poetry. Sounds like the same >person to me. Or maybe I jsut want it to. I do remember reading >somewhere that Rilke's German was accessible at an early level of >study/reading. Need one be fluent to understand that Arndt's "lose it >/ booze it" rhyme ("Drunkard's Song") sits as undelicately in Rilke's >mouth as, well, the native German? > > >> I do think we of the west can get *a tiny >> bit* closer to India than the far east. > >Undoubtedly. I am, of course, only posturing myself with all that >French theory. > > > > -- >Matt Kozusko mkozusko@parallel.park.uga.edu >