ernst jünger in cyberspace

mailing list archive - reply to Mr. Petak, Mr. Tobias, et al

June 11, 2002

In cordial reply to Mr. Gerhard Petak, Mr. Tobias, et al;


Inadequate I tend to think comparison between “allerseelen” and the opera of 
Battistelli. It is nearly irreverent to consider otherwise.

Although you cite literature read to you very well, scholars with whom I 
discuss Juenger find that non-academic interpretations seem to lack the 
essential and trained understanding needed to fully appreciate the detailed 
significance of Juenger’s thought. Otherwise, one is left with vague general 
notions that, perhaps, may only be conveyed in art, do indeed lack the 
ability to express more detailed notions in respect to Juenger’s work in the 
form of writing. Incidentally, Mr. Petak has attempted such writing as he 
acknowledges. Academically, though, I apologize that I do not find 
self-photocopied booklets a reputable and credentialed source of thought 
about Herr Juenger. It is more or less comparing apples to oranges. It 
cannot be done.

If Mr. Petak’s writing is not published by a house other than himself, then 
what reason do I have to believe that his information is not third rate and 
unviable? What type of training qualifies Mr. Petak to garner serious 
consideration of his work? So far his writing has been poor, his logic 
convoluted, and his language rather inaccurate.  This damages the reputation 
of Juengerian study because the quality of his independent activity is not 
at all of parity to the standards of academia, or for the matter, to parity 
with the scope of Juenger’s work. I am in no way attacking Mr. Petak 
personally, I am only curious about his qualifications. So I am incapable of 
understanding what merits my question as to his academic affiliation to be 
strange.

In closing, this short letter requires no response, nor do my thoughts 
require further elaboration or defense. It is somewhat embarrassing to even 
consider such a response to Mr. Petak necessary, and I finally decided it to 
be worthwhile only to preserve the integrity of Jungerian study. I am sure 
that anyone may contribute to the list, and I hopefully will not prompt 
adolescent slander from Mr. Petak or his constituents. I apologize for 
presupposing that academic qualification was necessary to participate. I do 
find Mr. Petak’s “Kotos=Kalanda” alone exceptionally listenable, and I wish 
him luck with his artistic endeavors. Several weeks from now I plan to post 
some ideas I am working on, and Mr. Petak is more than welcome to discuss 
those if he so chooses. Perhaps it would moreso enable his understanding of 
Juenger’s thought (and mine as well).

With particular regard,

Leon J. Niemoczynski
East Stroudsburg University




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com



Markup © John King, July 2001.