Great study of this film

Following the OP's link which i am very grateful for, I read the entire treatise by Rosenfeld. It was quite a lot of reading, i must say, and at times the digressions were somewhat tedious, although most were rewarding. For some reason he left out a general assessment of the contributions the actors themselves made to the film, even the lead ones, even Monica Vitti. Which I find hard to understand. But for the most part it was very informative. I recommend it to any serious fan of this film. Which people should be. Heh.

In the end, I think I must now go and see the film again before I comment on how much I got out of reading Rosenfeld. For example, L'Eclisse probably does in part stand for an examination of the difficulties involved in sustaining romantic love of an authentic sort. But I am not sure it was intended to say that such relationships are in effect impossible. Despite Antonioni's more sweeping assessments of the ways people are with others in the social, architectural and literal lanscapes, there were quite overt reasons for the difficulties faced by Vittoria and Piero. Specific to them, in short. Yes, their experience can and should be analogized to an extent (how much is at least one question, i suppose). But we remain with the starting point of their particular ways of being.

On Antonioni's thread just yesterday I posted something about a comparison of him to Bergman. One could argue on behalf of Bergman's more interior approach that a successfully compelling effort can be made to portray his characters in a way that is for lack of a better term relatable. And from that we can compare our own ways of being, thereby learning, perhaps, ontological truths about ourselves and human experience in general, or at least to some extent. But I think L'Eclisse, despite Antonioni's different approach, achieves that as well.

In any event, take you time to go through it, but from my perspective i did find Rosenfeld's work to be more than worth the effort.