[Joseph Figliolia]

For those of you familiar with humanistic psychology, specifically Maslow’s theory of “self actualization,” this poem takes on a new degree of antifeminism. In Maslow’s theory, “self actualization” equates more or less to unity of being achieved through striving towards, and eventually realizing,  one’s ideal self. For maslow, this actualization takes different forms based on the individual differences of every person. Although Yeats’ notion of perfecting oneself through various incarnations seems to echo maslow’s theory, there is a key difference. For Maslow, the path–and end goal– of actualization grows organically for each individual; however, Yeats emphasizes the same form of actualization for women: the perfection of physical beauty. For Maslow, one is free to channel their creative faculties in any direction, but for Yeats this direction, for women at least, is carefully prescribed. For instance, if “cultivating her dragon” through schooling was inextricable to a woman’s developing sense of self, Yeats would seem to crack down on this development. I’m interested in seeing what other people think about this

[Devon Poniatowski]

I think it is interesting that you have paired Maslow’s theory of self-actualization with Yeats’s Michael Robartes and the Dancer. When I first read the poems from this collection, I had a similar reaction: the poems seemed to be slighting women. I even wrote a blog post about “A Prayer for my Daughter,” in reaction to how the piece seemed to be constricting female energy, rather than enriching it. After doing a little research on Yeats and letting this speculation permeate, I came to a new understanding of the poems presented in Michael Robartes. I’ll share some of my thoughts:

It didn’t make sense to me that Yeats would use his art to demean women, in part because he was a huge collaborator with A. Gregory, and a lot of his poetry revolves around women who he has loved. In the same vein as Shakespeare, Yeats had his “Dark Lady” (Maud? Her daughter?), toward whom he expressed bitterness and resentment in his work—but still, it does not seem to me that Yeats is anti-women, or even anti-feminist.

To elaborate, I want to touch on your point concerning Maslow and self-actualization. After reading some of what Maslow had to philosophize, he seems to write for the men, about the men. He speaks of the collective as an exclusively masculine body. With this in mind, I believe Yeats is reacting to (and actually fighting against) a male supremacist mentality in the poem “Michael Robartes and the Dancer.” For example, Yeats explicitly details that the “she” of the piece is a dancer—an artist and tool within a collective force of energy. This alone is a strong indication that the woman (dancer) is the poem’s heroine. Additionally, the reader * should * grow immediately skeptical of the man in the poem, as his first expression to the woman is “opinion is not worth a rush.” He is encouraging the woman to abandon her opinions. She continually challenges the man in the poem, stating “and must no beautiful woman be/ Learned like a man?” This question appears to be rhetorical, but it is answered by the man who encourages the woman to focus on the state of her body rather than the state of her cultivated mind. The woman’s response is golden, as she states: “there is great danger in the body,” (ephemerality, vanity) — and later says, “My wretched dragon is perplexed.” I interpret the dragon to be the woman’s mind–her opinions that grow and are potentially subject to being “tamed” by the man/ the mentality of male superiority.

In the cited lines above, the woman/dancer reveals her contradiction: a woman is far more than merely her body, though the traditional male mentality may not agree. Her last line enforces the feministic quality of the poem, as she says, “they say such different things at school.” In my opinion, this line speaks to the ability of education to transform the traditional roles of women, encourage women to question and rise above their oppression, and propel women forward as intellectuals capable of cultivating the artistic collective–much like Yeats’s dancer in the poem.

[Therese Taillon]

I think the utilization to understand “Michael Robartes and the Dancer” is an interesting one. Devon, I agree with your point that Yeats does not seem to be anti-woman or anti-feminist in this poem. Yeats, as we have discussed is class, is a very self conscious writer and deliberately creates the voice of both the man and the woman in the poem, and it is important to remember that just because he is a male doesn’t mean that the male voice in the poem necessarily represents his own. In fact, on the contrary, it seems as though Yeats is making fun of Michael Robartes using the female voice, as he uses elaborate and convoluted arguments and statements and the dancer simply replies, “You mean the argued.” It seems that Yeats is mocking the patriarchal superiority complex as the pompous attitude of the male voice in the poem inclines the reader to sympathize with the dancer as she is genuinely questioning and attempting to understand, likening her actions to seeking out self actualization whereas the male voice believes that he has already achieved it. For Yeats, having already reached a goal as large as achieving a unity of being would be detrimental to his aesthetic, therefore it is more likely that he would admire the dancer’s train of thought, and perhaps the poem isn’t quite as anti-woman as it at first seemed to be.

[Author]

Posts