Dear All, Please remember to keep the posts relevant to the topic and to avoid personal comments about other list participants. You may severely disagree with their points but please address those points specifically and reasonably and do not use them to draw personal conclusions which may not be warranted. Remember, (in the main) you only know other list participants from their contributions to the list and those expose only a small (and coloured by the intention of their writing) part of themselves. As I have often stated, I refuse to tolerate any flame wars on this list. Moderation (i.e blatant censorship by me) is an option - albeit one I am loathe to take. It has happened in the past as a few of you will remember, and was removed as soon as things calmed down. At the same time, an interesting discussion of what constitutes a valid reception of Jünger is an altogether different matter. To whit: I don't think it is even worth drawing the comparison between a serious academic investigation with its rules of peer-reviewed publication and an artistic reception/inspiration such as Gerhard's or indeed a fanzine. I haven't listened to any of the music and so won't be drawn into a comment on it. The comparison would be like comparing the proverbial chalk and cheese. Now, of course it is a perfectly legitimate branch of academic investigation to pursue such endeavors as Allerseelen's work or the Marmorklippen opera or, again, a fanzine distributed by good old-fashioned Xerox. I have no doubt that in future some bored research student will be perusing these postings as part of a similar endavour. On the other hand, if we feel called upon to make aesthetic judgements about a piece of work inspired by Jünger (or whoever) - that's quite a different case altogether, and general relativist that I am, I would also want to consider standards that adhere to the genre in question. Is it a good opera? Is it a good poem? Is it a good fanzine? (i.e. is it photocopied to the point of near-illegibility - oops, being flippant). I do not believe that one can rule a piece of work invalid or of lesser intrinsic value because it is not published in a respected peer-reviewed journal. Believe me, I have read some complete rubbish in journals and theses and the academy in its greatest sense is far from infallible - especially in such an area as literary studies which can so easily lack any rigour whatsoever. I don't think any of the list participants would be surprised to learn that I generally prefer the academic approach to Jünger's texts. But on the other hand, if I took that approach to everything - well, that doesn't really bear contemplating, does it? And I think we should grant others the lattitude to approach Jünger's texts in the way they see fit even if only because the results would make for an interesting article in reception history... Best regards from London, John (and if anyone has any idea about installing Windows2000 under VMWare for Linux, let me know. It's all going not quite to plan - that's why I'm still at the computer this late at night).
Markup © John King, July 2001.