Greetings folks, > Peter Hovmand wrote: > > > > About the article in Linguafranca > > > > The article is clearly problematic. It is yet another example of how > > Jünger as so many other subjects is not fit for short introductory > > journalism. He is too vast. It is difficult to grasp him as a whole. > > And maybe one shouldn't, even though it is very interesting to try, but > > one shouldn't do it in a normal article, since that would never be > > sincere. > > Here I completely agree with your analysis. What remains unfortunate > is that people do write these articles and for better or for worse they > have the tendency to form the opionions of others. > > > Thus I don't see the article as an academic problem, since it is not > > academic, I see it as a journalistic problem, and this lies in the > > problems of normal journalism itself. Not much we can do about it, and > > I can live with that. Jünger will never be popular, and I don't think > > he should be. But I sincerely hope his audience among the academics and > > the intellectuals will grow, and I believe it will, for so many > > reasons. > > It may not be an academic problem here in Europe, but as you can see the > academics in U.S. have a slightly more ideological approach to EJ than > their counterparts here in Europe. Simple the two titles from Nevin's > "Ernst Jünger and Germany: Into the Abyss, 1914-1945" and Neaman's > "Dubious Past: Ernst Jünger and the Politics of Literature After Nazism" > indicate the overall American view. > > You may be right about EJ's popularity, I guess we'll have to wait and > see how his Pariser Diaries are received in the U.S.. I think EJ's brush with > the NS still somehow offends the short-sighted and narrow minded > political correctness of the american academic. > > with my best regards > Abdalbarr
Markup © John King, 2008. Web archive generated Tue, 21st August 2007.