Replies

Several commentators suggest it was a euphemism for sexual relations - I think I'm remembering a movie Streisand was in - Yentyl?- in which the picky/argumentative nature of (some?) Jewish rabbis was a highlight - in some of the rabbinical/orthodox analyses I briefly scanned, that seemed to be the consensus.

Others disagree, and (I tend to agree with them) - point to the integrity of both Ruth and Boaz, so that he would possibly grab his cloak to cover his feet - and "Who are you?" - continue reaching to cover her as well, symbolically taking over the job of protecting her: a symbolic "Yes, I'll marry you."

Interestingly, the artworks here seem almost evenly divided btwn interpretations; for the sexual side, look at # 22. Very suggestive, that.

Otoh, I like #5. Bazille was a "figure painter" liking nudes, etc. (BTW, he was somewhat heroic, leading a charge in the Franco-Prussian war, where he was killed at age 28. Sad, that.)

But note the great overall triangular balance: from Ruth to the crescent moon to Boaz. Also Bazille seems to strike, appropriately strike a delicate balance btwn the 2 interpretations. Ruth is hintingly voluptuous, with the large (able-to-bear-child) hips, yet she remains modestly at his feet. Boaz is drawn as significantly older (& who wouldn't want an attractive young girl at his feet?).

Yeah, I'd continue cloak-drawing over her, yesirree!