ルドルフ・シュタイナーにおける「身体」・「リズム」・「教育」の関係をめぐって

エミール・ジャック=ダルクローズとの比較考察を通じて

抄録

This paper describes an aspect of Steiner's discourse concerning “Body, ” “Rhythm, ” and “Education.” At first, the author will analyze Steiner's lectures in 1923 on “Muse Education” in ancient Greece, because this concept and his educational practice sustain an important relationship. Steiner envisages the viewpoints of “Rhythmic System” and “Synesthesea” from the antcient Greek idea of the universe. These viewpoints enable him to adopt “Art Education” in his educational practice.
Here, the author will compare Steiner's discourse with the thought of Dalcroze, a contemporary philosopher. Dalcroze and Steiner give their thought to the relation of the human body and rhythm, an Aporia for 19th century science. By appropriating the evolutionary theory in the different contexts, both try to explicate the mechanism of the relation between body and rhythm. Each identifies a distinct “Organ of Sense, ” and tries to develop it respectively. But their difference ultimately drives from linguistic definitions. Steiner's “Euryhtmie” consists in the rhythm and gesture which consist in the rhythm and gesture as defined by language.
Moreover, the beginning of the 20th century has discovered various “rhythms.” Krieck takes up the rhythm that promoted the moment of festivity as well as human mobilization to community. Dalcorze mentions the rhythm which facilitated human adjustment to the external environment. Steiner points to the inner rhythm of life and to that of words as logos. Although the author has analyzed the same word “Rhythm”, he found its various meanings.
The discourse on the connection of “Body, ” “Rhythm, ” and “Education” indicates different possibilities and dangers which may attend various rhythms. Dalcroze notes the power of rhythm which promotes individuals' involvement in the community. By comparison, Steiner emphasizes the transcendental relations between the universe and individuals, and he explores a vision of the rhythm and education distinctly different from that for the formation of community.