I have lifted up the question posed in the opening journal in our eurythmy group. No-one has responded for a few days. Is it pertinent or irrelevant? I would like to free the question from the questioner. It is an existential enigma for me.

What ideas are embedded within the question? Firstly, people may not be free in choosing cultural pursuits. There are many reasons not to do eurythmy. Secondly, people are restricted by fears that they avoid. Is fear a major factor limiting more popular involvement in eurythmy?

A friend and colleague once described her experiences of eurythmy for office workers. Initial enthusiasm was gradually tempered by unease. My colleague related the unease to inner discomfort that was brought to the surface by eurythmy. These office ladies were happy doing line dancing, but the eurythmy sessions came to an end because the inner challenges overwhelmed the fun of eurythmical movement.

Was fear an overriding factor, or were there other more significant reasons?

I have worked with groups that were keen to explore their inner creative potential. These folk remained enthusiastic about eurythmy over a year of monthly sessions. Yet in one of the groups, where there was only a qualified receptivity to some aspects of a creative approach, there arose some resistance to continuing eurythmy. It was not just blissful fun, it was also hard work. The work was not enjoyable for some participants, while others leaped to embrace challenges with enthusiasm.

Are these differences related to fearfulness?

Why would people steer clear of cultural challenges such as eurythmy that address their inner fears? Not everyone feels the inner urge of Cain to be a mover and shaper of creative life. Some people are more content to be moved and shaped by their culture. Creators thrive in dynamic flux whereas others crave stability and balance. Too many cooks for too few diners do not a great world soup kitchen make. There is room in the world for both. Can eurythmy cater for those who seek stability rather than dynamic in life? Are we looking for sustainable comfort or sustainable inner growth in eurythmy? Does the one demand the lack of the other?

Such questions have individual answers that do not qualify for generalisation or normalisation. Why join eurythmy activity? Does eurythmy scare you? Would more people join if it was available in other approaches? Contributions from you all are warmly invited.

Dear John,

I am really happy that there are people like you; and I am appreciating from your openness and will of help without scare to share with others your knowledge ( what I look for in Poland for many years without any results). I like eurythmy very much, I mean that I feel it and it’s effects and immediately caught all sequences which we learnt in our IMPT courses.

I wish myself to learn more about it! I love it and I want to learn more about eurythmy  as well as all anthroposophy medicine. But the problem is that until now it was impossible in Poland - only once a year in international medical training we could meet with this method (but from this year that courses available only in Dornah). People who are responsible for organization in Poland have a strange purpose to make from anthroposophy something hermetic. I cannot understand the reasons and don’t agree with them. But I cannot do for that anything, because I’m actually living in an Arab country… (temporary).

In my situation, when I in fact cannot learn from teachers like you (only through this site :), as an optimist from the nature, also temporary I solved this problem: I started to ‘teach’ others (!?!) or rather introduce them to the different methods of ‘natural medicine’ and ‘relaxation techniques’ and ‘exercises’, but I explain to people what eurythmy is as an art of visible speech and how it’s important for our health as curative and also preventive method ( as the first step, I think, it’s good that they only touch this knowledge, may be in the future they will open more somewhere). My role is rather being a bridge…I cannot speak deeper about anthroposophy with people here– they will not understand, but I love them and I feel very grateful for the chance being among this society. Almost everyday I meet here people from many countries in the world; I can see the differences and rather similarities between all of us.

I have a question for you, John. A few years ago during making eurythmy, I had an inspiration – how it is important making our own name, with conscious, of course, and I felt it so strong, that it helps us understand ourselves and our life path better. Our name is not given to us by coincidence, when we born God tells us here to this world… What do you think about it?

Thank you very much for your contributions and links.

Best Regards and Love

Olga

When are you going to post your picture, Olga? I'm sure we'd all like to see you. I know I would.

From the same vine as Borges' genius comes this text :

From A Return to Love by Marianne Williamson
(1992)  
Our deepest fear is not that
          We are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are
          Powerful beyond measure.
It is our light, not our darkness,
          That most frightens us.
We ask ourselves: Who am I to be
          Brilliant, gorgeous,
          Talented and fabulous?
Actually who are you not to be?
 
You are a child of God.
Your playing small doesn’t serve the world.
There is nothing enlightened about
          Shrinking so that other people
Won’t feel insecure around you.
 
We are all meant to shine, as children do.
We were born to make manifest the glory
          Of God that is within us.
It’s not just in some of us; it’s in everyone.
And as we let our own light shine,
          We unconsciously give other people
          Permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear

          Our presence automatically liberates others.

===

Note: this extract was reformatted for a eurythmy presentation so it probably does not follow the original layout. The section in bold was selected for inclusion in his inauguration speech (1994) by Nelson Mandela. I understand that the speech was not actually delivered, but the text has often been reproduced in his name.

A helpful contribution to this thread comes from Sebastian here.