Re: Die Schere 20 - Notes

[Wahe@aol.com]

Gary writes regarding #20


> Jünger changes the argument unfairly when he brings in Cecil Rhodes and
>  Spengler's assessment of him.  A man can accomplish much, and yet the
>  course of the times--the Zeitgeist--plow over his accomplishment.  He
>  can also accomplish much and foolishly on his deathbed bemoan that he
>  cannot accomplish more.  But neither is the same thing as being cut off,
>  blocked off in one's life path, and so Rhodes has nothing to do with the
>  chief assertion here, that no one dies before completing his task.
>
>  Perhaps in this meditation and at points in those immediately preceding,
>  Jünger is trying still to deal with the loss of his son in WWII.  He is
>  trying to reflect that, though cut down young, he reached a goal and
>  remained beloved by his father forever after.  But the ramifications of
>  J's meditation, its application to other fates, erase all human striving
>  and preach a fatalistic quietism.


It is a general problem to accept what happens (amor fati) and at the
same time believe in having significant influence on what is going to happen.
Fatalism is necessary when looking back, but it is not an instructions
manual for the present and future. It just means, that for various reasons
things this time have to happen this way, but does not exclude a similar
situation taking a different turn next time.
There is no contradiction between accepting what happens and still
striving for goals.

I understand the last sentence of #20 as Rhodes being a figure believing
in imperialism, thus belonging to the 19th and 20th century, and therefore
his "failure" because the zeitgeist had already passed by imperialism.

"And so much left to do !"  -  Rhodes as an example for someone
not having realized his own task, but nevertheless having achieved it.

Again, Juenger just hints at Rhodes and demands his reader to know
about him ... maybe someone could supply details.


Greetings,

Walter