Remarks: there are inevitably mistakes in private recording.
The negative way in Rilke's poems is very typical. This Rilke-style "configuration inversion" eliminates all kinds of opposites that constitute his rhetorical structure, and enables the poet to do what he can't do in direct expression by calling and hinting.
In his early poems, Rilke tried to transcend the dichotomy of fate by reversing the positions of subject and object. He thinks that the blind have some inner vision, while leopards, gazelles, swans and cats have some imagination and feelings. By naming the absentee, the poet actually makes it appear in the language. In this way, reversal has become a powerful means to create things from scratch and complete the transformation mission.
Rilke described this act of creating things with language as an act of naming and praising. When the poet calls for angels to make the little boy's smile eternal, "praise" is the key word. For Rilke, poetry, as a kind of praise, can create miracles: it is the poet's call and the poet's answer to how to create things with language. That is, poetry, as a tribute, helps to summon those nameless and unspeakable things. It is "as real as the cry of a male pigeon, calling for an invisible female pigeon" (wirklich? wie？ der？ RUF? Des? Taubers der？ nach？ der？ unsichtbaren？ Taube ruft).
This language magic has indeed opened the possibility of reversal, and the poet's complaints-unable to talk to angels, unable to materialize tangible things into intangible things, and difficult poetic expression-are expected to be reversed.
When the poet stopped looking up at angels and re-affirmed everything that people have, the contrast between angels and people was strengthened in the whole set of lamentations for Duino, and finally reached such a turning point-here, people's voices became braver, more confident and even more inflammatory.
The poet no longer invites angels to spoil him, but regards man's short life as almost able to withstand angelic eternity-"Even once: it seems better to be integrated with the earth than to be freed." (Wenn？ auch？ Nurein? Mal:？ irdisch？ Gwensen? Joe? sein？ scheint？ nicht？ Widerrufbar。 The hardships of life and the joy of love are unspeakable, but language is the only way to record all our feelings, actions and experiences. The combination of language and things is unique because it shows the regained confidence that it can combine the external world with the internal world and realize that it is the poet's mission to say everything that can be said.
This is one of the most powerful defenses made by modern poetry for language. Speech is understood as ontologically more powerful than the thing itself can dream of-it is a language, a language that names simple things, a language that makes things exist, and a language that defines the only meaning that belongs to human beings. This language not only involves external phenomena as the ultimate reference and defense, but also tries to awaken the silent voice in things, which transcends tangible things and points to intangible and unspeakable things.
German "Sagihm? Die? Dinge "contains the direct relationship between words and things, and its emphasis on this relationship is difficult to convey in Chinese translation" Tell him something ". It is this change that emphasizes the creativity of language and the power to make things exist. Only by virtue of this language that can create from nothingness and make things exist through naming can poets hope to call angels.
General idea of the discussion: the difficulty of speech, the split of the mind, and the birth of poetry from inner silence and nothingness.
Summary:
By naming what is finite and what can be said, a poet can say what is infinite and what cannot be named. And each name is so symbolic and magical that the connotation of the poem From Silence is far richer than its simple literal meaning. To praise a thing is to give it a name and give it an ontological value through naming. By defining poetry as praise in this special sense, Rilke reaffirmed the power of language to convey the inner truth, and made the inner truth become the poetic equivalent of logos. This concept is quite different from the concept of internalization of romantic art, and it advocates a silent poetics.
Others:
Paul de Man:
Does Rilke's poetry really bear the linguistic concept that belongs to it?
Did Rilke's words turn against each other? To some extent, its own claims and assertions are questioned, especially when they relate to the writing style it defends.
Zhang Longxi:
The appeal of Rilke's language when talking about his powerlessness makes the confession of powerlessness a problem.
Disdain for language is ultimately a kind of self-satire, which seems to be denying the poet of language, and will certainly follow the same satirical pattern as philosophers and mystics to reaffirm language.
Silence is obviously a total negation of language, but paradoxically, it contains the "root of speech".
Horshosen (H？ e？ Holthusen):
The talker (das? s？ Gliche) has become a mysterious keyword when describing the status of human beings relative to angels, while "unspeakable" represents the attributes of angels, that is, a transcendental pseudonym.
Walter Strauss (Walter? Strauss):
Rilke is defending from the heart, in order to awaken the silent voice of things in the relationship with human beings, break through the cage of interpretation, and move towards the mutual opening of things.
Reading materials:
Selected Poems of Cang Di and Rilke? Make up. China Literature Publishing House. 1996.
Tao and logos-hermeneutics of eastern and western literature Zhang Longxi? Write it. ? Feng Chuan? Translation. Jiangsu Education Press. 2006.