Paul Auster on cancer, connection and the fallacy of closure

When I immigrated to USA, his books were my way of learning English in high school. I still (23 years later) consider Moon Palace one of my favorite books of all time. Paul has a way of making the real world feel somewhat magical, wistful, mysterious. The only similar feeling I got since then was when playing the game Disco Elysium.

>In a recent interview, Auster described the American obsession with “closure” as being “the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard of.

I'm having a hard time with the logic that follows this statement. Losing a loved one is indeed tremendously painful, and while I agree that no sense of closure will ever make it "OK", it can significantly ease the pain somewhat.

My father died of cancer when I was 24. He fought almost to the end, and in the day or two between that moment and when he lost lucidity for the final time, we were able to make sure nothing was left unsaid and share our collective loss together.

While it took me years to come to grips with his death, having the ability to share everything and say goodbye provided tremendous comfort.

I contrast that with the experience of a very close cousin who lost her dad when he had a fatal heart attack and died suddenly. For my cousin, there was no closure, and that's something that still causes pain years later.

So yes, I agree that closure isn't a magic solution to eliminate allmpain, but I disagree that it lacks real value.