Rainer Maria Rilke (1875 - 1926) was a Bohemian-Austrian poet who wrote in German and French. Some of his work is really beautiful, including an entire series of poems about Mary, the mother of Jesus. Even though he was a white dude writing a hundred years ago, he demonstrates immense respect, reverence, and empathy for women and mothers.
His best known work, however, is not any of his poems or poetry collections; it is his correspondence with Franz Xaver Kappus. Kappus was a fan of Rilke, and a student at the same military academy that Rilke had attended. The young Kappus sent a few original poems to Rilke and asked, "Should I be a poet?" Rilke wrote back, and the two maintained a correspondence for a few years. Rilke's ten letters to Kappus were later collected and published with the fitting title Letters to a Young Poet.
Two different people gifted me two different editions of Rilke's work, (and they each very sweetly annotated them for me - so romantic!) and I took the hint that Rilke is probably someone I would enjoy. Lovies, you were right. I enjoyed Rilke very much, so much that I intend to write two different blog posts responding to two different letters.
First I will respond to the first letter. I will quote Ulrich Baer's translation. In answer to Kappus' question, "Should I be a poet?" Rilke says, "Go within yourself. Explore the cause that compels you to write... Above all: ask yourself in the most silent hour of your night: 'Do I absolutely have to write?'"
My answer to this is a big fat DUH. But my less obvious, secondary reaction is: Doesn't everybody? I mean, not everybody has to write necessarily, but doesn't everybody have to make stuff?
Growing up, all of my peers were creative. They played instruments, wrote novels and plays, and got into art schools. At college parties, I didn't ask, "What's your major?" I asked, "What's your creative endeavor?" I couldn't get behind buddhism, because it blames desire for suffering. Even if that's true, desire also leads to so much good art! My favorite quote from Grendel by John Gardner is "The Chief God's purpose in the creative advance is the evocation of novel intensities." When the bible said God created man in His image, I thought that meant that we also are driven to create.
All of this is to say, I believed that everyone had creative urges. I just thought that responsible people set aside those creative urges and prioritize profitable endeavors. Responsible people don't become poets; They get real jobs. Whether or not you needed to write was irrelevant.
It has since become clear to me that not everyone has a creative need as desperate as my own. More than a few times people answered my questions about creative endeavors with, "Uuuuuh, I don't have one." This shocked me at first. I pestered the poor soul about their typical routines. I was like, "Surely you have a creative endeavor. You just don't recognize it for what it is." Eventually it came out that this individual sometimes made bath bombs, and I felt vindicated.
I'm still not certain that the creative drive isn't a universal part of the human condition, but I'm willing to entertain the idea that not everyone is called to the life of an artist. Possibly, maybe, perhaps, not everyone needs to make stuff. If that's true, and if you are a person who must create, then that is a rather large responsibility. It is a calling that should not be ignored. Especially in light of my perspective that creativity is the God's-image part of us. But also because of what creativity gives to society. Culture! Advancement! The paramount reminder of our common humanity and connectedness.
Yo, art saves lives. Feelings of isolation are a huge contributor to suicidality. Art says, "You are not alone." (Achilles Come Down is a favorite song in my house right now. ) So we can all agree that art is important and the call to create should not be ignored. But how much attention should it really be given? Should Kappus be a poet? Should any of us be poets?
Remember Rilke has directed us to ask ourselves if we must write. He goes on to say, "And if the answer is affirmative, if you can counter this grave question with a strong and simple 'I must' then build your life according to this need."
Build my life?! Build my entire frickin life around writing?! What about being responsible and having a real job and whatever?! What a bunch of privileged bunk! What an easy thing for a white dude to say!
There's some truth to my criticism, but there's also value in Rilke's argument. It is easier and a lot less scary to treat art as a hobby. There's no vulnerability required in making things that never get presented. I would like to disagree with Rilke on this point so that I can continue to only make and share things when it is convenient for me. But there is good to be done, and I have a responsibility to do it. I must create, and I must build my life around this need.
What does that look like in practice? Do I have to quit my job? Do I have to ditch my friends? Do I have to stay inside and write 24/7?
No, I still have to nourish myself. I still have to work to live. I still have to have intimacy and laughter and positive experiences. I just also have to carve out time for creative work.
And I have to be honest about the things I am using as excuses not to get the work done. It's all well and good to say that I am reading a fantasy novel as part of research for my own novel, but I don't get to say that unless I am actually writing my own novel. And date nights are good for my soul, but not every night can be date night. Some nights have to be art nights.
I'm grateful that I started 2020 off with Rilke. I hope I can carry his edict with me throughout this decade.
His best known work, however, is not any of his poems or poetry collections; it is his correspondence with Franz Xaver Kappus. Kappus was a fan of Rilke, and a student at the same military academy that Rilke had attended. The young Kappus sent a few original poems to Rilke and asked, "Should I be a poet?" Rilke wrote back, and the two maintained a correspondence for a few years. Rilke's ten letters to Kappus were later collected and published with the fitting title Letters to a Young Poet.
Two different people gifted me two different editions of Rilke's work, (and they each very sweetly annotated them for me - so romantic!) and I took the hint that Rilke is probably someone I would enjoy. Lovies, you were right. I enjoyed Rilke very much, so much that I intend to write two different blog posts responding to two different letters.
First I will respond to the first letter. I will quote Ulrich Baer's translation. In answer to Kappus' question, "Should I be a poet?" Rilke says, "Go within yourself. Explore the cause that compels you to write... Above all: ask yourself in the most silent hour of your night: 'Do I absolutely have to write?'"
My answer to this is a big fat DUH. But my less obvious, secondary reaction is: Doesn't everybody? I mean, not everybody has to write necessarily, but doesn't everybody have to make stuff?
Growing up, all of my peers were creative. They played instruments, wrote novels and plays, and got into art schools. At college parties, I didn't ask, "What's your major?" I asked, "What's your creative endeavor?" I couldn't get behind buddhism, because it blames desire for suffering. Even if that's true, desire also leads to so much good art! My favorite quote from Grendel by John Gardner is "The Chief God's purpose in the creative advance is the evocation of novel intensities." When the bible said God created man in His image, I thought that meant that we also are driven to create.
All of this is to say, I believed that everyone had creative urges. I just thought that responsible people set aside those creative urges and prioritize profitable endeavors. Responsible people don't become poets; They get real jobs. Whether or not you needed to write was irrelevant.
It has since become clear to me that not everyone has a creative need as desperate as my own. More than a few times people answered my questions about creative endeavors with, "Uuuuuh, I don't have one." This shocked me at first. I pestered the poor soul about their typical routines. I was like, "Surely you have a creative endeavor. You just don't recognize it for what it is." Eventually it came out that this individual sometimes made bath bombs, and I felt vindicated.
I'm still not certain that the creative drive isn't a universal part of the human condition, but I'm willing to entertain the idea that not everyone is called to the life of an artist. Possibly, maybe, perhaps, not everyone needs to make stuff. If that's true, and if you are a person who must create, then that is a rather large responsibility. It is a calling that should not be ignored. Especially in light of my perspective that creativity is the God's-image part of us. But also because of what creativity gives to society. Culture! Advancement! The paramount reminder of our common humanity and connectedness.
Yo, art saves lives. Feelings of isolation are a huge contributor to suicidality. Art says, "You are not alone." (Achilles Come Down is a favorite song in my house right now. ) So we can all agree that art is important and the call to create should not be ignored. But how much attention should it really be given? Should Kappus be a poet? Should any of us be poets?
Remember Rilke has directed us to ask ourselves if we must write. He goes on to say, "And if the answer is affirmative, if you can counter this grave question with a strong and simple 'I must' then build your life according to this need."
Build my life?! Build my entire frickin life around writing?! What about being responsible and having a real job and whatever?! What a bunch of privileged bunk! What an easy thing for a white dude to say!
There's some truth to my criticism, but there's also value in Rilke's argument. It is easier and a lot less scary to treat art as a hobby. There's no vulnerability required in making things that never get presented. I would like to disagree with Rilke on this point so that I can continue to only make and share things when it is convenient for me. But there is good to be done, and I have a responsibility to do it. I must create, and I must build my life around this need.
What does that look like in practice? Do I have to quit my job? Do I have to ditch my friends? Do I have to stay inside and write 24/7?
No, I still have to nourish myself. I still have to work to live. I still have to have intimacy and laughter and positive experiences. I just also have to carve out time for creative work.
And I have to be honest about the things I am using as excuses not to get the work done. It's all well and good to say that I am reading a fantasy novel as part of research for my own novel, but I don't get to say that unless I am actually writing my own novel. And date nights are good for my soul, but not every night can be date night. Some nights have to be art nights.
I'm grateful that I started 2020 off with Rilke. I hope I can carry his edict with me throughout this decade.
Comments
Post a Comment