DIE SCHERE #30: Text, translation, notes: corrected

[Rebing <Rebing@compuserve.com>]

-------------Forwarded Message-----------------

From:	INTERNET:ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk, INTERNET:ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk
To:	Ernst Juenger List, INTERNET:ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk
	
Date:	2/7/99 10:25 AM

RE:	DIE SCHERE #30: Text, translation, notes

Sender: owner-ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk
Received: from bagpuss.oucs.ox.ac.uk (bagpuss.oucs.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.37])
	by arl-img-2.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) with ESMTP id KAA07884;
	Sun, 7 Feb 1999 10:25:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordom by bagpuss.oucs.ox.ac.uk with local (Exim 2.02 #2)
	id 109Vv6-0006Z7-00
	for ernst-juenger-l-outgoing@bagpuss.oucs.ox.ac.uk; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 15:14:48 +0000
Received: from hil-img-1.compuserve.com ([149.174.177.131])
	by bagpuss.oucs.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #2)
	id 109Vv5-0006Yu-00
	for ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 15:14:47 +0000
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by hil-img-1.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id KAA28590
	for ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 10:13:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 10:12:49 -0500
From: Rebing <Rebing@compuserve.com>
Subject: DIE SCHERE #30: Text, translation, notes
To: Ernst Juenger List <ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <199902071012_MC2-6990-693C@compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ernst-juenger-l@maillist.ox.ac.uk

Ernst Jünger, DIE SCHERE #30: Text
>  30
>  >  In der Vorschau hat ein Zeitsprung stattgefunden; eine Vorhut wurde
>  vorausgeschickt. Insofern wird in der Schau nicht Zukünftiges, sondern
>  Vergangenes gesehen. Der Vorschauer hat die Gegenwart überholt. So kam
>  es zur verblüffenden Identität des Geschauten und seiner Wiederholung in
>  der Zeit.
>  Für Schopenhauer galt das Zweite Gesicht als Bestätigung seiner These,
>  »daß alles, was geschieht, mit strenger Notwendigkeit eintritt«. Den
>  jungen Grillparzer hat solch »unentrinnbares Verhängnis« bestürzt. Sein
>  Schicksalsdrama »Die Ahnfrau« wird von der Kritik als »vorübergehende
>  Irrung« eingestuft.
>  Da es sich aber beim Zweiten Gesicht um eine Rückschau handelt, ist auch
>  dessen Notwendigkeit normal. Absolut notwendig und nicht zu verändern
>  ist alles Vergangene. Schiller: Was man von der Minute ausgeschlagen,
>  Gibt keine Ewigkeit zurück.
>  

DIE SCHERE #30: Walter's translation
30
In the prewiew a time-leap has occurred, an advance guard was sent off.
Accordingly, in the vision not future events, but past ones are seen. The
visionary has overtaken the present time. Thus came about the astonishing
identity of the foreseen and its repitition in time.

Schopenhauer took the second sight as a confirmation for his thesis "that all
that occurrs does so with strict necessity". Young Grillparzer was consterned
by this "unescapeable destiny". His fate-drama "Die Ahnfrau" is rendered a
"transitory erring" by reviewers.

But because the second sight is a retrospective view, also its necessity is
normal. Absolutely necessary and not alterable is all that has passed.
Schiller: What one has declined from the minute, no eternity will return.



DIE SCHERE #30: Notes
If you can accept the idea that the Vorschau is at the same time a
Rückschau you need not accept Schopenhauer's and the young Grillparzer's
belief in the absolute necessity of whatever happens. To be sure, everybody
can easily agree to the statement that everything past is necessary
(because it cannot be changed any more, except in realms which do not count
here: fiction, or science fiction, or in Orwell's Ministry of Truth).
However, for most people Schopenhauer and Grillparzer are too radical when
they extend this quality of necessity to all things in the future. For
these two authors second sight was additional proof of this universal
necessity. Now, since second sight is, according to EJ's reasoning in the
last few aphorisms, also a matter of the past, everybody can accept the
necessity of a Vorschau having to be corroborated by its fulfilment in
reality some day in the future. 
So, if you go along with EJ and take second sight to be a look back into
the past (I cannot, for me this remains a speculative playing around with
ideas) you will have to believe that what is seen in second sight will
always come true. Moreover, you will have to believe that the occult link
between anticipatory vision and real event is a normal fact of life, as
much as the indeed irrefutable truth expressed in Schiller's great lines at
the end of this text. 

Günter Rebing