Re: long life and short

[Gary Kern <gkern@alumni.Princeton.EDU>]

Brown wrote:
> 
> >
> > I think EJ had strong motives to try to find a meaning in the way people
> > are cut off from a full life.  He had seen too many people die, both
> > when he was young and then over the long decades of his astonishingly
> > long life.  And so he tried to turn things around by the power of his
> > mind.  But human life really is cruel, great talents are cut off well
> > before they are done, and to reverse that reality is a falsification of
> > it.  It is the nature of man to oppose nature.
> >
> > GK
> >
> 
> Gary,
> 
> I really don't buy this position at all. In a previous posting you
> mention EJ's guilt at having lived such a long life and now you mention
> a similiar point of view by rephrasing it.
> 
> IMHO I feel your position is too materialist i.e. that all of EJ's views
> are simply an intellectual cover-up (power of the mind). The indications
> are contrary to this though. EJ has rejected the materialist conclusions
> from a very early date. We see that he is actively seeking meaning even
> in his early works and that his later works are a similiar to a
> theogony. He has a keen interest in theology and persues it continuously
> in his readings. Also it would not be like Jünger to show remorse over
> something which he had no control. Now it is important to note that EJ's
> view of fate is very complex and cannot be reduce to those simple
> statements which were mentioned above.
> 
> Sorry to keep mentioning it, I hope somebody bites soon, but EJ's later
> work has to main streams in his later work, building a bridge to the
> divine (enabling it to return) and freedom in the age of tyrrany. These
> two matters could also be seen as one and the same. I have posted quite
> a few quotes with regards to this subject matter and I've run across a
> lot that I have not posted. Seems we all have our focuses on the list.
> In this respect EJ's views of God and freedom are my favorite aspects of
> his work. In anycase I feel that although you don't share his view of
> things, it seems to me that your interpretation is a bit out of focus.
> 
> Have you ever got a copy of Prognosen? I think its still in print.
> 
****************************
1. I did not say anything about "all of Jünger's views," only this one,
namely, that a person's life is complete no matter when he dies and no
one dies before his work is done.

2. In opposing that view I do not assert a materialist position at all.
Quite the contrary, I assert the value of human life against the
implacable hand of fate--or the will of God.

3. EJ's position, I think, is meant to be paradoxical.  It charms us by
overturning the normal reaction to things.  Generally I like to do the
that, but here the consequences are too great:  total acceptance of the
"will of God," which "allots" you your time.

4. Now what is that "will of God"?  The answer is anything that happens.
You cross the street and live 30 more years, completing your life's work
and dying in retirement.  Or you cross the street and are catapulted 350
feet against a stone wall, so that your survivors have to conceptualize
you as a completed life.  Both, to those people left behind, is the will
of God.  Or:  you have a serious disease, and those who accept the will
of God are prepared to go either way--if you survive, God helped you; if
you die, God took you to heaven.  In short, EJ asserts that no matter
what happens to you, it is good.

5. It is possible to reject this position and still to admire EJ.  Even
when wrong he is original and stimulating.  He is a teacher, but not to
be followed in all things.  On this point we can follow his iconoclastic
spirit, not his specific solution to the tragedy of premature death.

My position is this:  Sometimes what happens to you is good, sometimes
it is bad.  When it is bad, it is wrong.  The world is so arranged that
you must play a losing game.  So the set-up is wrong.  Man opposes the
will of God.

I don't have Prognosen, but will make a mental note.  Right now, the
German on this list, plus DIE SCHERE, is as much as I can handle.  Maybe
we'll do it after DIE SCHERE, in the year 2005?  

GK