Thomas Friese wrote: > > GK: > Another subject altogether. Did Jünger anywhere express an opinion as > to why he lived so long? Perhaps in SIEBZIG VERWEHT, which I have not > read? Was his good fortune all in his genes, or did he think that his > habits and mental attitude helped? > > TKF: > Ice-cold baths or swims in the lake each morning. I am only half-joking - > this is a practice he seems to take quite seriously for whatever reason. > Somewhere in The Details of Time he also jokes about his longevity being > surprizing considering the abuse his body took in the wars and in life. > > GK: > He surely thought about it, seeing everyone he knew as a young man die > years and even decades ahead of him. Paradoxically, the theme appears > in DIE SCHERE--i.e., every life is complete no matter when it ends. > That may be guilt talking. > > TKF: > He also states somewhere else that no-one dies until their work is done > (nice link to Die Schere here!) > ***************************************** Wait a minute! There are two different concepts here:
1. A person's life is complete, no matter how or at what age he dies. 2. No one dies before his work is done. The first is the idea that EJ has been arguing in DIE SCHERE. I strongly disagree with it, but understand how one could interpret life this way. The second may have been expressed in DIE SCHERE, but if so, I missed it. In any event, I reject it even more strenuously than the first. Example: Mozart dies in his prime, failing to complete his Requiem. Süssmeyer completes it for him, and does a good job. Mozart achieves the status of the great youthful talent who achieved so much--his last two symphonies, written in haste, are his "mature" works, the culmination of a long string of symphonies. His Requiem, with its mysterious commission, becomes the stuff of legend. Old Salieri, who lived on, is set in opposition to the forever young and brilliant Mozart. That's the first concept. But can we also say: Mozart was finished. He had no more to say. His Requiem was left in just the right form--had he lived another month in remarkably good health and spirits (as sometimes happens with the dying) he could not have added another note. Had he lived 10 more years he would not have added to his output of great works, but would have spoiled his overall accomplishment. Yes, Mozart, Schubert, Salieri were done, they were finished as creative forces, then they died. This is the second idea, and it's preposterous. 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
