Monologue on the monologue. PART II.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SÖREN KIERKEGAARD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.a.) Copenhagen.b.) Mikael P. Kierkegaard , c.) the catastrophic curse.
d.) Anne Sorensdatter Lund Kierkegaard.e.) Of herrnhutism and of the pietist
movement.
f.) The upbringing of S.K.
2. Historical presumptions: The Tradition. Tertullian, Augustine baroque, Leibniz,
Descartes, Pascal, the Enlightenment, Rationalism, British Empirism, G.E. Lessing
. The romantic era and the romantic movement and it´s philosophy. Imm.Kant,
the older Fichte, the Schlegel brothers, Fr. Vischer and the young Fr.W.Schelling
....About and on the theology of the time. The Tübingen school. F. Baur,
Möhler and others. Pietism, J. Arndt.
3.The romantic era and the concept of Irony.
4. S. Kierkegaard s theory about "way wards", about going astray...,
in connection to a play by H.C. Andersen.
5. S.Kierkegaard and Regine Olsen. An engagement. A catastrophe.
6. Of G.W.F. Hegel and Phänomenologie des Geistes ,The Phenomenology
of Spirit ( Jena, 1807 ).
7. The S.K.s mag.dissertation : "The Concept of Irony"(1841).
8. Socrates - the anarchist. When Western democracy rises, Socrates is not willing
to accept it unconditionally.....S.K. as a modern "wasp", anti-democrat
and conservative. His contempt for "The crowd".
9. S.K.s writings in general - a survey. A twofold aim.
10. "Either - Or." Directed to Regine?
11. S.K. and the concept of freedom. The "vertigo". The problem of
decision. The unknowingness.
12. Acts of love. A book on dialogue ?
13. On S.K. and and on the concept of "Self".Autenticity and the problem
of the "Self". The views on this matter by Th. Adorno , L. Koskinen
and others.
14.The later books : Practices Into Christianity.The Sickness unto Death.
Relation to Martensen. Relation to Mynster.
15. The Corsar battle. A second catastrophe. M. Goldschmidt et consorts. S.K.
and the bitterness.
16. Fragment of an analysis of S.K. as a person. The concepts of strict Logic,
Skepticism and Mental Disintegration.
17. S.K.s attack upon the church - and the concept of "Now" and contemporaneousness.
18. On S.K. , his writings and philosophy in connection with the theory of monologism.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel:
Mikael Pedersen Kierkegaard, father.
Ane Sörensdatter (Lund) Kierkegaard, mother.
Sören Kierkegaard, himself.
Peter Kierkegaard, Brother, Bishop.
Jesus, man from Nazareth.
Socrates, philosopher.
Augustine, philosopher, author and bishop.
G.E. Lessing, German author, play writer, columnist.
Imm.Kant. German philosopher.
Karl Solger, German philosopher.
G.W.F. Hegel, German philosopher.
J. Mynster, Bishop of Sjaelland.
Poul Möller, Prof. of Philosophy in Copenhagen.
Regine Olsen, engaged to S.K.
H.L. Martensen, Theol.Prof. and bishop of Sjaelland successor of Mynster.
J.L. Heiberg, prof. and Copenhagen´s central figure of cultural life.
M. Goldschmidt, journalist and author, owner of the tabloid The Corsar.
P.L. Möller, cand.phil.
-----------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" My misfortune, basically speaking, has simply been , that I am a
genius, and that I was raised strictly in Christianity, and that I have had
a lot of money."
( S.Kierkegaard, in The Diary. )
" He isolated himself from all and everything, restlessly walking to and
fro in his apartment, like an animal in a cage, the rooms all lit up, excited
and devastated at the same time,/..../." ( J. Danstrup. in History of
Denmark. )
"There has never been any Christian."(Fr. Nietzsche.)
"I know of no other authorship so widely set, any other author, that has so amny strings on his lyre, and that yet assemled it all towards one goal. Strictly speaking it is impossible to understand how."(Joh. Slök. )
------------
A man, Anders Westergaard, who later in his life became a police constable ,
was servant with S.K. until 1848 and told E. Schiödte, after the death
of S.K., that he himself had asked S.K. for advice in one of the big questions
of Life: " Once W. wondered if he, S.K., as a learned man could give him
a complete proof and conviction about the immortality of the soul. It would
please him very much and make him feel more calm. S.K. answered, that in such
questions all humans were alike in their not knowing; you have to choose between
the one or the other; according to the choice it would appear a proof."--------
( A. Schiödte.-a Copenhahuener academic.))
On S.K.s appearance:
" In the street, in the surroundings of Copenhagen, I met him very often
in those days when he, according to his plan , was letting his personal life
appear contrary to what he wrote. He took me by the arm, if he did not have
other things to do; while he was walking, he was formulating in his head and
expressing thoughts, which he later wrote down at home. How it could cascade
from him, deep thought and witty remarks."
( Fr.Hammerich.1882.. Fellow at the university and a relative of S.K.s.)
"S.K. almost looked like his own caricature. Below the broad brimmed hat the large head could be seen with the thick brownish hair, the blue expressive eyes in contrast to a pale yellowish skin and hollow cheeks ,with a lot of sharp wrinkles down around a mouth, that spoke yet if it was silent. He always had his head a bit askew. The back was a bit crocked. Under his arm he had the walking stick or the umbrella. The brown coat was tightly buttoned up around the meager corpse. The very thin legs seemed to carry their burden with uncertainty, but they did a long time support him during his daily walk from the study to the bright air, where he took his " bath of people"..."
( P.Chr. Zahle.- Danish contemporary academic. )
-------------------------
1.a.) S.K.. Ancestors, Family and upbringing.
The father of S.K., Mikael Pedersen Kierkegaard, was born 1757 as one of
nine children of a very poor peasant in Saeding, 10 miles from Ringköping
on the western side of Jutland ( Jylland ) - the continental part of Denmark
. The farm where the grandfather lived were one of the so called "kirkegaardene",
which were like annexes assigned to the parsonage, and hence the name, Kirkegaard,
Kierkegaard or Kjerkegard. For several generation S.K.s ancestors had been living
in this village. The grangrandgrandgrandfather has been traced.("tipoldefadern").
M.Pedersen K. never got any education apart from four years of very elementary
school, and had to take care of a heard of sheep on the meager, desert heath.
In his despair by this terrible fate the young M.P.K. climbed a big stone, lifted
his fist and ....cursed God.
- He could never forget it. S.K. writes in his diary, that the memory of that
event was haunting the 82 years old father...-
At the age of 12 the young former shepherd came to the big trading center of
the north, Copenhagen, where an uncle on his mother´s side owned a flourishing
clothing firm. He was the sole child of the nine who got the opportunity of
education - and M.P.K. saw this as a sign from God - or later as a punishment
from God - a God´s probing him ( To his son S.K. life came to be looked
upon as an exam.) -that this happened, and that much else of extraordinary character
happened to him too - especially that he was to become so very rich ... ( All
this about M.P.K. , according to the myth about this man. Nobody can really
know. M.P.K. left nothing revealingly behind, like diaries ....)
After having been an apprentice for some years with the hosier, M.P.K. gradually
took over the business from his uncle , Niels Andersen Saeding, and inherited
the firm when his well-doer and very dear uncle died. M.P.Kierkegaard showed
himself very gifted in affairs, ended up as a wholesaler in wools and foodstuff
, so prosperous that he, perhaps ashamed over his wealth, retired at the age
of forty, buying a mansion outside Copenhagen, living as a rentier. He devoted
himself to books and religion ( he was a herrnhutist /moravian ) and to his
family. Sometimes he had periods of severe depression. It seems to have been
a mano-depressive vein in the family, since the son Peter ( Sören´s
brother ) was forced to leave his bishop´s chair due to this illness,
and Peter´s son, Paul Kierkegaard was also struck by illfatedness in this
manner, and spent all his life walking to and fro in his father´s garden
in Aalborg , regarded as slightly insane and an alcoholic.( This unhappy man
has - famous by connection - got his own biography !: Poul Kierkegaard, En
Skjaebne (1957, by Ib Ostenfeld, a psychiatrist.)
However,- M.P.K. thus managed to be rich by working with his firm, but he became still more rich by investing his money into Royal government bonds, when the danish National Stock Exchange collapsed in the year of 1813 - the year when S.K. was born -. The danish government had during the Napoleon years , when Denmark was involved in war -, printed an enormous amount of money bills without protection. In the bankruptcy the worth of all bonds and papers were reduced to a tenth of their former value. The only bonds that kept their value, by necessary regard to foreign investors , were the Royal government bonds. M.P.K. had invested his entire fortune in these kind of bonds. By this strike of luck M.P.K.- sixteen years after having given up business - became ten times richer than before - while most wealthy Danes were ruined this year, and Denmark as a whole was in a bad condition. M.P.K. regarded the whole fate and reality about his own wealth and prosperity as a big evil irony from a avengeous God. The immensely rich Mikael married late in life, at 37. His first wife died two years after they had married, leaving no children behind. M.P.K. remarried to his housekeeper, Ane Sörensdatter Lund - then already pregnant - 1797 - ( He kept being a sinner, as he saw it.....) and they got seven children, three girls and four boys. Only two of the children lived to experience their 30th birthday, - two of the boys, namely Peter and Sören. One boy died an infant, the other, Niels, died 24 years old in Paterson, U.S.A.- one of many immigrants. Ane, their mother, died in 1834, much bewailed.
M.P.K. never forgot his background and the village Saeding in which he once
was born. In memory of Niels Andersen Saeding M.P.K. donated a large amount
of money to build a schoolhouse in real brick stone in this village in western
Jylland, maybe then the poorest part of Denmark. The schoolhouse later became
known as "the red house", since all the other cottages in the village,
apart from the church , were built by clay and straw or by granite ("kampesten")
. The donation included , wisely enough, permanent money for a salary to a teacher
too. Later, in the year of 1841 S.K., the son , as newly examined priest, was
to make a journey to the village and lead the sermon in the church.
S.K.s father was a clever, determined and solemn man. The meals of the week
were set up on a schedule by him. He was clad in simple, correct clothing. The
wealthy old "hosekraemmere" ( pants salesman ) moved into the central
part of Copenhagen and invited to his home intellectuals and priests to discussions
in the evenings. The discussions lasted in a fiestly manner. M.P.K. was fond
of debating, and he was extraordinary skilled and always managed to win. These
debates were like combats. Both Sören and Peter , who sometimes were allowed
to listen by, later in life held their father as the most intellectually gifted
man they had ever known. Other people, like the bishop of Sjaelland, Jakob Mynster,
who sometimes attended to the house of M.P.K. regarded him, more modestly, as
a "simple and straightforward man". It has to be remembered that the
old businessman only had spent four years of his life in school. ( Mynster probably
twenty.)
The young S.K. was a lively child, a red haired boy running about, playing.
Once on vacation with relatives he climbed a tree and fell down and hurt his
back. This probably caused him to be a hunchback later in life, and maybe even
caused other injuries. ( Cf. H. Lund and Hohlenbergs biography.) The biographies
about S.K. are numerous and more e or less speculative. ( Since he wrote such
a great deal about himself, they are, though, not at all that speculative as,
for instance, a Mozart-biography, which also concerns a man still a little bit
further back in the darker realms of history. Cf. W.Hildesheims Mozart-biography
Mozart and his penetrating and intriguing discussion about the nature and difficulties
of the biography as such.) The case of the state of S.K.s mental and physical
conditions will probably remain undiscovered. The father of S.K. came to be
as important to S.K.- to important - , as Franz Kafka s father , Hermann Kafka,
being a prosperous clothes wholesaler as well , became to F.K.. Much of the
griefs and sorrows and much of the herrnhutism were transferred to the youngest
child, Sören, who were not permitted to have comrades, but spent much time
with the old father. Significant is the notice of the walks to and fro on the
carpet of the living room of the father and son, both talking, imagining scenery
s, imagining real walks downtown, making up people a. s. f.. The horror story
of the curse on the heath were not told until later, but Sören always had
the feeling that something terrible was at stake. As late as 1842 S.K. wrote
in his famous Diary:
"I might be able to reproduce the tragedy of my childhood in a short story
:the terrible, secret explanation of the religious, which came to me as an anxious
foreboding feeling and which was hammered out by my fantasy, and the offense
religion became to me , and I would call this story The mysterious Family. It
would begin in patriarch idyll, so that nobody could figure out what was going
on until the Word sounded and transformed everything into despair." When
one after another of his brothers and sisters died, the youngest began to fear
the worst, and was supported in this by the behavior of the ruler of the family.
M.P.K. was personally wholly convinced in this matter, it seems : God had let
him be rich and prosperous and have many children ( and very gifted such ),
but as a punishment for the action upon the stone the heath long ago, God would
( in an old testament way ) take everything away from him! S.K. increasingly
came to believe that he would himself not be older than Jesus,i.e. 34 (according
to the alleged knowledge of the historic science of that time. ). Yet, when
this later was proved to be false and he lived on his 35th birthday, he was
perplexed..... It is a remarkable fact, that S.K. managed to live trough the
horrors and loneliness of his childhood and was able to produce such and amount
of original and fresh ideas as he really did ! He never seemed though to grew
up to a mature man. Georg Brandes meant, that S.K. never grew any older than
14 years, mentally. * S. Kierkegaard, 1877.(( Likewise there was a certain infantile
air about F. Kafka. The much to strong fathers never lost their grips. S.K.
had a "present" and caring mother, unlike Franz Kafka, whose mother
mostly were occupied in supporting her husband with his business, and left her
children to nurses.)
I would like to add some information about the religiosity of Mikael P. Kierkegaard,
since it is most probable that it left traces with the youngest son, him being
so closely tied up to his father emotionally. This gifted and stubborn old man
had as an adult been strongly influenced by the flourishing herrnhutism - as
mentioned above - a movement successor of pietism, later parallel to this. M.P.K.
was a member of the hernhutian community in Copenhagen. M.P.K. left nothing
written behind. Some letter to his sister in Jutland. That is all. We do not
know anything about the inner life of M.P.K., but we can guess. Since hernhutism
was not only affecting M.P.K. but also the family of S.K.s beloved, Regine Olsen
and her family, I would - ( though it may to some more uneasy people seen a
bit too ambitious and even superfluous, but it will, I believe, furthermore
add pretty much to the picture of what the spiritual and political climate was
like in the time preceding S.Kierkegaard..... ) - like to make a brief sketch
of the origin and nature of this movement.
The hernhutians arose as a small sect in Bertelsdorf in southern Germany at
a estate owned by count Nicolaus L. von Zinzendorf ( 1700-1760) . The land lay
in the shadow of a huge mountain called "the hat",( Herrnhut ) or
"The hat of the Master", hence the name hernhutians. The folks that
had gathered by the Hat and timbered their first house were laboursome and decent
folks from Böhmen-Mähren, refugees from the severe Catholic oppression.
The ideas of hernhutism as they were shaped by the intellectual and charismatic
count Z. came to effect not only these farmers in their small almost communist
society, but affected Denmark, ( even the court ), Sweden, the Netherlands,
Island and even Greenland. ( The situation in Sweden is described neatly by
Arne Jarrick in his small book Den himmelske älskaren, 1987. - We can learn
that the Swedish editor of the song-book Sions nya sånger (1750), the
counterpart to the pietist Mose och Lambsens visor ( 1717 ) , the vicar
by Ladugårds församlingen in Stockholm, Dr Anders Rutström,
was expelled from Sweden - the common penalty by this time for those who did
not stay close to the Lutheran dogmas and not respected the prohibition of private
gatherings in private homes, the prohibition of conventicles ( konventikelplakatet,
1726 ). The expulsions were stopped not until 1860.( The law of Dissenters.)
Freedom of religious belief were fully stated in Sweden as late as .... 1951!
Rutström took to Copenhagen, the usual retreat for practitioners of odd
religiosity at this time - if they did not frankly emigrated to America, or
as Emm. Swedenborg did, to London - and Rutström edited in Copenhagen the
second song-book for Swedes. Denmark was tolerant in these matters.
During the reign of ( the actual regent ) Struense the first free town in
Denmark was created ( it still exists) 1773, the hernhutian Kristiansfeld in
Jutland. Such a thing had at this time been unthinkable f.ex. in Sweden. The
enlightenment had a far greater impact on Denmark and Germany than on Sweden.(
Struense was, like Holberg , greatly affected by it.)
The most well known hernhutian in Sweden was probably the librarian A. Gjörwell,
the grandfather and benefician of C.J.L. Almqvist, (!) and the preacher in Skeppsholmskyrkan
in Stockholm, Erik Tollstadius. There were also hernhutians in Gothenburg and
Lund.
Nicolaus von Zinzendorf ( twelve years younger than Swedenborg ) as a young
and wealthy man first studied law but then turned to theology. After 1721, when
Z. worked as a counseling lawyer in Dresden he began to gather around him his
own community in order to practice a "religion of the Heart". They
called themselves "the Covenant of the Four". Then Z. started a agricultural
school, a printing factory and an editing company, and he himself wrote several
books edited by himself. "The Four" edited a M. Luther translation
of the Bible (1726) and some of J. Arndt´s books in the French language.(
Of True Christianity ).. In the year of 1727 Z. quit as a lawyer and
moved to the settlers by The Hat. They all set up a "prayer community",
where someone always was in the state of praying, all day - all night, the whole
year. Decisions were taken , remarkably enough, by balloting. (They always married
according to ballot too. ) In 1734 Z. was ordained as a priest at Tubingen,
the intellectual center in Germany at that time .Already in 1736 he was to be
expelled from his farm and from Germany by the kursachsichian governments due
to the rules and circumstances at Hernhut. He lived much abroad, traveled far
and founded religious communities in America, in the West-Indian Isles and so
forth. 1735, when Z. were in Copenhagen , he went to Lund and met the learned
giant and very wise man, bishop Andreas Rydelius of Lund- perhaps the greatest
bishop in Sweden ever.
At a synod in London the hernhutians choose Jesus Christ himself to "over
elderly", the only one worthy of such a title. They began to call their
parishes "the Parishes of the Lamb". 1747 Z. was allowed to return
to Hernhut, and the parish decided by acclamation (!) to adopt the Augsburgian
doctrine of M.Luther. In the same year the hernhutian church were recognized
in England as a church by the side of the episcopal. The count led the original
parish until his death in 1760.
Z. teachings held very close to the script of the Bible, but it was all centered
around the wounds and the blood of Christ. Hernhutism has fair enough been labeled
"blood theology". It was Christ-centered, and centered around the
sufferings and wounds of Christ. ( Earlier mystics of this kind are Gregorius
of Nyssa and Juan de la Cruz, Cf. Canzones entre el esposo y la esposa. as well
as the already mentioned J. Arndt.
The meeting with Christ was most intense during Easter and the concentration
of attention was the hole in the side of the body of Christ, where the sword
of the roman soldier had cut. The doctrine of Zinzendorf was anti-intellectualistic.
It turned against all "proofs" of the existence of God. A. Jarrick
writes:"It was antiortodox due to the lawfulness of orthodoxy; it was anti-pietist
due to the asceticism of pietism; it was anti-mysticistic due to the inwardness
of the mystics and their concentration on inner awakening, the importance assigned
to the inner word instead of to the word of the Bible; it was, finally, anti-rationalist
due to the lack of sensuality of rationalism. The religiousness of Zinzendorf
was empiricistic."( p.42.) The hernhutians could even blame God as the
one who violated Jesus Christ.
Something like this might the religiosity, the Christianity of M.P. Kierkegaard
have been. And we could guess that some traits in the religiosity of S.K., such
as his being anti-orthodox, anti-mysticist and anti-rationalist in part has
it´s roots here.
( Amongst the German romantics of the 19th century with a hernhutian background
are Novalis ( Fr. von Hardenberg ) the master of speculative thought en masse,
and, not least, the founder of modern science of religion, the flexible and
sound philosopher, Fr. Schleiermacher.
Peter Kierkegaard was born in Denmark, who was very influenced by Germany and
he studied in Germany.( Neither he or his brother Sören ever learnt English.
In Germany Kant, Hegel and Schopenhauer all were fluent in English, and could
read all the great empiricists, which perhaps was a very important thing at
that time. And Shakespeare. The Danes read Shakespeare in the Schlegelian German
translation ! ..... ) He , Peter, got his doctor´s degree in Göttingen
1829 on a thesis on St. Augustine ( De notione atque Turpitudine Mendacii Commentatio,
Göttingen, 1829. ). He got, according to S.K. "morbidly religious".(
Journals of S.K.). In Germany he was a feared opponent called “Der disputationsteufel
aus Norden”. He later became a courageous an straightforward and generally
highly esteemed bishop. He married - as I mentioned - and got a son. A couple
of the sisters married and got children, but they themselves died young. Kierkegaard
was fond of his sister s children, especially Jette, Karl and Troels. The latter
( Troels Troels-Lund ) became a famous historican and a professor. Henriette
Lund, daughter of Petra Kierkegaard , knowing of the nick-name by which S.K.
went, i.e. :“Either – Or”, rapidly created one , well
fit, for her other uncle:” Both – and”. There were an ever growing
tension between the two brothers, that ended with a complete rupture. They could
finally not talk to each other in person, but only by representative. P.Chr.K.
took the syncretism with him from Augustine , while S.K. took a way of
no compromise, more of a Tertullian way ( the paradoxican ) and was to end up
battling the whole Danish church and the official Christianity , defended with
so much faith, force and cleverness by his older brother. As for Augustine S.K.
read him carefully – he was generally not a careful reader at all –
and came to the conclusion, that Augustine had done Christianity much harm,
that he had confused the concept of Faith, and S.K. did not think much of him
as a thinker at all. Aug. indulged himself in vague categories, according to
the view of S.K.. ("sludder-kategorier". )
Sören went to school in Copenhagen ( Borgerdydsskolen ) dressed in
trousers much to short, according to his father's will and own habit. S. was
teased by his comrades. Thus - proudly - he came to wear much to short trousers
all his life...
Copenhagen was a town with about 120.000 inhabitants at that time , a town encircled
by a wall and four gates östre Port, Nörre Port, Vestre Port and Amager
Port, gates that were locked every evening , the key delivered to the Amalienborg
castle every evening to the king' s secretary, a rather small town in a country,
where the king still was the actual ruler ( like in Preussia, unlike for instance
Sweden, where 1809 the king's power had been reduced to nearly nothing, partly
due to the misbehavings of Gustav III, the stronger aristocracy and the more
stable growing economy in general. ).S.K. was in no way a distinguished scholar.
He cheated and left to a comrade to write his essays in Danish. In return he
wrote his mates Latin papers. S.K. anyway finished school with good records.
He was not only good at languages , but had also an A in mathematics.
S. Kierkegaard entered university at the age of 17 in the year of 1830.
The student and the early author S.K..
S.K. began studying theology according to his father´s wish. It seems
though that he took very little interest in the subject and mostly interested
in reading novels, go to the theater, drinking, be witty in the caf?s. All his
life he was a great coffee consumer. His mother died when he was 21 years old,
( 1834 ), and he mourned her for a very long time. He much liked his Greek teacher
Poul Möller, - and it was mutual, ( M. though warned Kierkegaard to take
on too ambitious projects. This harmed S.K. a bit.) - disliked another, Martensen,
the Hegelian. He read indiscriminately and all the time. He now could read German,
Latin, Greek and Hebrew. He never learnt more languages. His father had early
advised him , if he became an author , not to write in danish, because he would
reach so few. ( According to his nature and to the sort of relationship to his
father he then wrote everything in danish.) It seems that he was not sure of
what he really wanted to do. Some notes in his diary also suggests that he was
extraordinary depressed periodically and that he did not feel "like the
others". He discovered his talent , but seemed a wayward student. He was
strongly influenced by the romantic novel, but also by ancient writers like
Plato and Tertullian, writers who had an ambiguity around them. It seems that
he young university student S.K. was drawn to secrecy and paradox, - and he
was never ready to let anybody know how he really felt. Thus he had no close
friends, but merely used friends for confrontation and information. ( He was
never a quite sympathetic person in this respect.) The shadow of his father
was always there. But Sören did not finish his exam. Then his father, M.P.
Kierkegaard , died in 1939. This seemed to be a turning point. Sören rapidly
finished his theological studies with a Theol. Cand. and preached in front of
his censors in a church in Copenhagen , "interestingly" but "too
complicated for the common man". He then worked hard with his thesis, engaged
himself to the very young Regine Olsen and began a period of intense work with
his pen. From 1939 until 1846 he was constantly writing. ( It is hard to find
anybody in the history of literature that has worked so hard, and at the same
time with such high quality in the output.)
Before the death of his father S.K. had written a book, and he published
the book: Af en endnu Lefvendes Papirer. (From the papers of one still living..)
one month after the death of his father. ,which has interest particular to us
in this essay concerning the monologue. In this book we are meeting S.K. as
a literary critic and a wit. The author taken into consideration by S.K. is
none less than the later famous H.C. Andersen. We will look closer at this criticism
. A small piece, Kun en spillemand, had been published by A..S.K. attacked Andersen
and his work violently and especially the "soft artist" in Andersens
play and at the same time S.K. is placing himself in position in regard to the
current aesthetic. The great assault (cf. "when the hero dies, Andersen
dies as well" ) was later judged by the Nordic cultural oracle of literary
criticism, Georg Brandes , as a " healthy attack".... But Brandes
soon came to criticize S.K. with deep insight, and what he wrote about S.K.
is still worth reading.( G. Brandes book on S.K. appeared in 1877, 23 years
after the death of S.K..-Georg Brandes was born in 1842 in Copenhagen by wealthy
jewish parents.)
Kierkegaard criticizes Andersen among other things for not having any specific
view of life, other than a passive , somehow religious fatalism. Andersen himself
complained about being famous for his tales, not his novels. The tales were
not either aimed for children. Kierkegaard thought of him as a naive and sentimental
person. Brandes meant that Andersen in fact had come near to a soft spot on
S.K. in Kun en Spillemand ( Only a fiddler.) "The main thought in Andersen
s novel had struck Kierkegaard in a special way concerning his own way of thinking,.
It had harmed him by calling forth some of the best in him. It was the doctrine
Andersen had shown about the genius, a doctrine about doing nothing, about the
genus in need for the care of other people, in need for a certain lukewarmth
in order to be able to bear fruit, and A. meant, that without this support the
genius was bound to perish."
I am not wholly satisfied with the interpretation Brandes gives us. The passiveness
and fatalism is not mainly what we find with or in S.K.. Furthermore can pro
primo be asserted the fact that S.K. violently criticizes A.s passivity , "hele
Andersens Passivitets-Theorie", by citing a lengthy passage from "Lykke-Per",
and I think that it is the lengthiest citation S.K. ever admits himself to in
his entire authorship. Pro secundo Kierkegaard constructively gives Andersen
the advise to travel and write public diaries of travel, something Andersen
really came to be very good at. Andersen was abroad 29 times, and famous is
his visits to England, where he was the guest of Charles Dickens 1847 and 1857.
( B. Bettelheim points out that all A.s tales are not tragic ones, and that
they are moralistic., in The Uses of Enchantment, (1975.)p. 47,et al.
Andersen surprisingly wrote a kind letter to Kierkegaard thanking him for the
article, but after the death of S.K. Andersen made fun of S.K. in the novel
At vaere eller ikke vaere(1858) .
These facts are of minor interests to us in this essay. The main thing for me
is that in the article about Andersen s Kun en Spillemand , S.K. puts forth
a theory about waywards, going astray,, ("Avveje") and of casualties
"Andersens Tilfaeldigheder" ( A.s stylistic trope of all of a sudden,
"by the way", telling something that is of very little importance
to the story, - a gambit used by Dickens, and - as we shall see - ( maybe )
dependently by ....Franz Kafka too.... This theory has a certain place within
the theory of monology
When talking about Mon.2. we have already ( see above § ) to be continued......
About S.K. and his father.
Youth and engagement.
(A confusing chapter. )
S.K. had met Regine Olsen early. Her family were hernhutians like S.K.s father
and members of the same parish. She was probably his first passion. As a young
student he was interested in a girl named Bolette Rördam, whose family
had a mansion closely outside Copenhague, during a time when he experienced
a feeling of utter loneliness in the world. ( He could not dance, being a little
hunchbacked already, he could not ride a horse without looking ridiculous, and
every joke from him made him feel more and more uneasy and left him in a state
of despair..... He then yet desperately tried to be like his fellow students,
used to sit on caf´es discussing and joking with his future enemy ( during
the Corsar battle ) P.L. Möller, writing small plays, comedies about philosophy
and known local characters etc., - but suffering more and more from a depression
and a sense of being sort of an outcast, being qualitatively different.
He developed his tough sarcastic irony, and during his first years at the university
he seems to have recognized his extraordinary intellectual powers. This can
be concluded by many facts. It was clear that he had an excellent memory and
a clear conception for the essential. S.K. never wasted his time by visiting
boring lectures, but payed his fellow students to make written excerpts for
him. He had the money. ( He read books and reviews extensively and he was a
fast reader, but he never seems to have reread anything at all, except parts
of the Bible. He nearly always quoted out of his memory when writing. His library
grew and he selected very carefully the books he wanted to own. The sole Swedish
book he possessed was Bellman´s Fredmans epistlar.( So much for Sweden
! ) ) He made friends with the teachers. Though he at first was quite interested
in the progress of science - being himself a skillful mathematician - he suddenly
turned his back on science and he never - unfortunately for himself, I think
- returned. It seems that he had early an astonishing clear understanding of
the incompatibility of science, philosophy and religion. All his life he was
to maintain the conviction that philosophy had nothing to do with science, that
science had nothing to do with religion and that religion had nothing to do
with philosophy. ( It seems that the reading of Lessing - and Mendelsohn´s
book - played a mayor role here, but also the reading of Socrates and Tertullian.)
At this time, when Regine was at the age of 17, ( ten years younger than he
was himself ) , on the 10th of september 1840, S. Kierkegaard engageged himself
to her. He had known her since may 1837. She was a middleclass girl. Her father
was a high employee at the Danish Bank ( Finanshovedkassen). S.K. break the
engagemet about a year later ( on the 11th of october 1841, right before he
was taking his degree. The real cause of this break is forever hidden to all.
There are numerous guesses in this matter. Was it his depression, was it something
with his father guilt, was it some physical illness or something else. S.K.
wrtote much about it, but he is not reliable a scource in this matter.
He says that he certainly had got married if he had had the faith of Abraham.
( But noone has had that!) His insight, that he was never to ... --------------------------
The Hamiltonian view:
The report from A. Hamilton 1852 gives an instant picture of S.K.: " There
is a man whom it is impossible to omit in any account of Denmark, but whose
place it might be more difficult to fix; I mean Sören Kierkegaard. But
as his works have, at all events for the most part, a religious tendency, he
may find a place among the theologians. He is a philosophical Christian writer,
evermore dwelling, one might almost say harping, on the theme of the human heart.
There is no Danish writer more in earnest than he, yet there is no one in whose
way stand more things to prevent his becoming popular. He writes at times with
an unearthly beauty, but too often with an exaggerated display of logic that
disgusts the public. All very well, if he were not a popular author, but it
is for this he intends himself I have received the highest delight from some
of his books. But no one of them could I read with pleasure all through. His
"Works of Love" / ( Kjaerlighedens Gjaeninger) K.G. / has, I suppose,
been the most popular, or, perhaps, his Either- Or, a very singular book. A
little thing published during my stay, gave-me much pleasure, Sickness unto
Death. Kierkegaard's habits of life are singular enough to lend a (perhaps false)
interest to his proceedings. He goes into no company, and sees nobody in his
own house, which answers all the ends of an invisible dwelling; I could never
learn that anyone had been inside of it. Yet his one great study is human nature;
no one knows more people than he. The fact is he walks about town all day, and
generally in some person's company; only in the evening does he write and read.
When walking, he is very communicative, and at the same time manages to draw
everything out of his companion that is likely to be profitable to himself I
do not know him. I saw him almost daily in the streets, and when he was alone
I often felt much inclined to accost him, but never put it into execution. I
was told his 'talk' was very fine. Could I have enjoyed it, without the feeling
that I was myself being mercilessly pumped and sifted, I should have liked very
much. " Andrew Hamilton, Sixteen Months in the Danish Isles ( 1852 )
4.
Johannes Climacus and Anti-Climacus ......
The peudonym of Climacus was author of Philosopjhical Fragments and Concluding
....... and can be regarded as an ironic sceptican, a figure close to the supposed
real S.K.. The word 2climacus" is refering to a "ladder" in the
concept of "paradise ladder" ( Klimax tu paradeisu ), once written
by the monk Johannes of Sinai ( about 600 A.D.), also known as Johannes the
heavenly ( There are here some allusions to the ladder of Jacob. Cf. I Simonson,
Sören Kierkegaard och vår tid, p. 131. ) This book was publicly generally
known as "The heavenly ladder".
The prefix of "anti" does not mean "against" but "before" or "up above" - ( like the greek word "para" in f.ex. "paradox",i.e. "above knowledge" ) Thus the pseudonym Anti-Climacus is indicating a person a bit too religious ( in his late great works, like the Sicknness unto Death and Training into Christianty S.K. himself is/pretends to be this person, and those books are accordingly adorned with the pseud. Anti-Climacus.It is commonly regarded as a fact, that when S.K. writes under his own name, S. Kierkegaard, he is presenting his own views upon the state of affairs - like in Eighteen Edifying Discourses and Works of love(Kjaelighedens gjaerninger ), but I am not certain that this is the case. The plan for this authorship is not clear to anyone. And it can be doubted that this plan was fixed from the beginning - thus a true plan - or ever at all finally final and fixed.)
When S.K. published his huge work Either-Or, he was 29 years old.......... to
be c.d.
Faith.
S. Kierkegaard, who in his youth in vain had tried to get into the inner
circle of aristocracy of Copenhagen , i.e. come in closer contact with the Heiberg
clan, - led by the prof. - and the vaudeville writer - J.L. Heiberg with his
wife J.Lousie Heiberg, the beautiful actress - did not share Heiberg´s
interest in astronomy, but he was fond of using metaphors taken from physics
( like the metaphor of the fixed point ... ), and he uses his knowledge of the
Newtonian theory when he tries to describe faith:
" Believing is to make oneself light in weight by assistance of a rather
heavy weight, which one puts upon oneself; to be objective is to make oneself
light by throwing off the burdens. To believe is like flying, but you are flying
actually by a reversely acting weight; it is needed a reasonably heavy weight
to become so light, that it permits you to be able to flye.If I want to lift
up something in the air, I am lifting it by the weight . The celestial objects
are circling because of their great weight. Accordingly is the case with elasticity:
the height is won by the pressure. And because of this you can say: the lightness
of belief is an infinite weight, and it´s height is an infinite pressure."
( from the Diaries of S.K. )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The dissertation:
The Concept of Irony.
At the age of 28 Kierkegaard took his Mag. degree ( Magister Artium.).( The
title Mag. later changed to Doctor, since it equaled the continental, viz. German
Doctor´s degree.) His thesis Om Begrebet Ironi med stadig Hensyn til Socrates
, Of the Concept of Irony with constant regard to Socrates ,was presented -
in danish and not in Latin, which was the common way - and defended cum laude
in sept. 1841. ( The structure of the title has been an issue to Paul de Man,
who has argued that " it is an ironic title, since irony is not a concept"....
I do not think de Man is quite right.
In my book irony is a concept, as far as I can tell... to be cont. We are here
confronted for the first time with the ambiguity of S.K.. It cannot be established
on which side he is, on the side of Hegel or not. He is certainly very clever
in covering his opinions. And he displays his wish to stand wholly free in his
thinking, like Socrates. ( It never struck Kierkegaard, that Socrtate can be
regarded as being not present in what he was doing, like valuing the game higher
than life itself. The Apology of Socrates of Plato could easily be read as if
Socrates is not serious to himself, but only mocking and mocking again. The
lack of seriousness with Socrates in many dialogues ( including Menon) is no
great problem to S.K.. One is surprised at this very lack, and over and over
again one cannot get rid of the feeling and thought , when reading S.K. , that
seriousness seemed to be quite as big a problem to S.K. himself notwithstanding
his intense talk of the opposite in terms of "Inderlighed" and that
sincerety and intensity of feeling as the very truth itself.
In The repetition (1843) S.K. is dealing with the repetition ( the cathegory
of...) as the true ideal, like a counter-part to the ideal of the time, the
light and lofty irony, Schlegels and Tiecks, like a life-as-art-aesthethic ideal.
The repetition,"Gjentagelsen", is compared to the ancient greek idea
of rememberance as the mother of knowledge ( the platonian idea from the dialogue
Menon) - only with the difference that repetition is a reverse, to remember
backwards.... ( It is typically kierkegaardian to try to master reality within
paradoxes like these. Repetition is- thus- something double, and it seems to
be the idea for S.K., that nothing can be absolutely true, unless it has a doubleness.
This is even the case with his famous credo: Subjectivity is the truth. It can
be said, and is often said, that S.K. is a diffuse writer, or more correctly,
a diffuse thinker. He is often lost in a paradox. Or - this can also be maintained
- he often makes things very clear in presenting a paradox. One can easily see,
that he is trying to raise difficulties for his reader, but it is quite as clear,
that this is a very conscious move in his game of chess: S.K. always wants to
show what he thinks is knowable and what he thinks is not. He seems to have
an inborn talent regarding this question: as soon as he is opening up a new
field for investigation, he is quite clear where knowledge is possible to be
gained and where it is for ever impossible. ( He sometimes makes this very clear,
- sometimes it is hidden for a while... ) In this matter many has seen him as
a kantian philosopher, and this seems just as much a paradox as it probably
is true.
The early book The repetition( Gjentagelsen ) - written in Berlin - is at one
level philosophy of history in a heglian manner ( the very activity that S.K.
in fact regarded as meaningless , like he regarded all historical matters to
be... ), still directly influenced by Hegel, - ( Cf.J.Holmgaard´s book
En ironisk historia.(2003). The cathegory of repetition is partly based on a
playing with words - very much like Hegel himself was fond of with his play
with the german word "aufheben" in his dialectics. The danish word
for repetition has to meanings:1. to repeat, to make something twice. 2. to
take back, regain. (Cf.Henri-Bernard Vergote, Sens et répetition, (1982)).
Thus repetition is a cathegory parallell to the cathegory of " the double
movement of infinity" that is presented in another small but very important
book, written in the same year ( dedicated to the memory of his shortly before
deceased religious father Mikael ) Fear and trembling( Frygt og Baeven ), where
S.K. is dealing with the famous ( and terrifying ) passage in the Bible where
Abraham is ordered to kill Isac on the mountain of Moria.
In the R. S.K. sets out to prove that repetition is impossible, but the result
is certainly paradoxical. Partly he is here elaborating a theme from The most
unhappy. in Either-Or.( He was in this small piece dealing with utter unhappiness
in relation to remembrance and hope, explaining - out of personal experience
- how bitter remembrance can be of something that never was, and how a life
without hope can be described, how the deepest sorrow of one who loved and who
was betrayed by the one who she (!) loved is sheer happiness in comparison to
the sorrow of the one ...who never lived.
(Cf. the role of happiness in remembrance with Proust.)
He seemed to try to use the cathegory of repetition later in religious porpuse,
but without any major success. Everything S.K. is writing and publishing is
actually written under the pretext of being edifying and investigating the present
Christianity, and the possibility of being a christian.
It certainly could be true that this was his very intent, but it might as well
have been a clever and - to him - very suitable ...disguise. The more you read
S.K., the more you probably will think, that he is a psychological investigator
more than anything else, a Freud of his time. The more you read, the less you
think he was religious at all. ( Cf. A. LjungdahlProblemet Kierkegaard. I certainly
do not think he was religious at all. I think he was not at ease with the serious
G.E.Lessing, but mainly as much ( little ) religious as L., although he ( S.K.)
tried to find a way to become both religious and a christian through unending
intellectual efforts in between all the beautiful psychological remarks and
findings.
Fear and trembling is the first (great) try from S.K.s side to show the possibility
of faith. And it is a faith that is so close to the impossible as one could
ever wish. S.K. maintains all his life this position: it is an infinitely difficult
thing to believe. It is as difficult in every single moment as the decision
of Abraham. To believe is - and this is already known to many of my readers
- let go of all certainty, to dare, to get out over the depths of 40.000 feet.
Through the authorship it will become only harder and harder. And in the end
it will be a superhuman task. In the end S.K. declares, that there are no christians,
- but he himself declares himself to be a christian writer until the last letter
of the last syllable.
Fear and trembling was not well seen by Mynster, the archbishop. And when looking
upon the authorship as a Christian authorship we certainly must place Fear and
Trembling among the "tertullian" works, (Tertullian was to the young
Kierkegaard something like a muster, like Socrate ... ) whilst for instance
Works of love, which was written - edifying - later (1847), is a book that more
easily could be accepted by any believer ( and thus probably could be accepted
by both S.K.s brother and Mynster. ). These books are written ..........................
to be cont.in contrst to the earlerEither-Or, where Christianity is looked upon,
not with a bleeding intellect, but from aside. What I call "bleeding intellect"
is easily understood but will yet be explained further when we come to the latest
of S.K.´s works.
The problem of decision and freedom.
The concept of Anxiety. The problem of decision.
Regarded by many as a voluntarist S.K. has investigated , mainly in The Concept
of Anxiety, a caotic book, ill planned and with a rather sudden ending, in a
marvellously constructive way the act of decision..........................
Kapitel IV.
Freedom.
It appears from the complicated, rapidly written , book The Concept of Anxiety that the choice is settled in a vertigo. It is almost as though man makes his choice in a state of unconsciousness.But this is not the main message. The problems in The concept of Anxienty is placed within the frames which were set in Either-Or.
Final act. The death of S. Kierkegaard.
The battle against the church - the church did not reply - requested his
last powers and one day in 1855 he fell about on the street, maybe in one of
his epileptic seizures, we don´t know now. He was taken to Frederiks Hospital
and he was very weak, but all the time conscious and clear. The doctors - one
being a relative to S.K. - did not know what was exactly wrong, but it was a
skinny, hunchbacked man, the 42 years old S.K., they had before their eyes.
S.K. , looking at them with his giant , kind, sparkling , intelligent blue eyes
in the yellowish face, ( according to witnesses ) claimed that he had no physical
illness, it was all psychic.( The journal from the hospital is preserved. )
He was continuously mocking the doctors. He told them, that maybe he had drunk
too much cold water in the summertime, maybe his apartment had been a little
too dark, and he had worked a lot to much, and so on.... He had - we believe
- worked himself to this state of utter bodily exhaustion. Physicians of today
suspect tuberculosis, and this disease were also vaguely suspected:" Hemiplegia,
paralysis, tubercular....".
Kierkegaard got visits from his relatives, the dear Jette among others. He did
not let his brother come to visit him though.
The old friend from his early days, the priest man Emil Boesen came. They talked
for a long while. Emil asked: " Did you get the moments /Oieblikke / out
of life, that you wanted?" ( A strange question, I think... Was he serious,
or referring to the final pamphlets,,,, ) "Oh, Yes !" was the prompt
answer. " It is quite remarkable," Emil B. then said ", how very
much in your life that has been fulfilled." . "Oh, Yes, and I am very
happy about that , and very sad about it too, because I cannot share the joy
with anyone.", was the answer from Soren, who thus ended the conversation
with the impertinent member and representative of the danish church and slyly
denying him the favor of being the friend, with whom he was willing to share
joys with.
After a couple of days - and after a merrier talk with Jette and Troels Lund
- he became weaker and fell asleep. One of the doctors noted in the journal
on the 9th of November 1855, : "There seems to be some wryness in the face,
so that the left corner of the mouth is somewhat lifted up.". On the 12th
of November at 9 p.m. he died thus ( ironically, if you want ) smiling.
As O. Kuylenstierna is writing in his fine little book ( S.Kierkegaard ( 1898
) on S.K. " Even the one who is reading about this, is inclined to smile
when recognizing the sight of the representatives of what S.K. all his life
had fought against standing by his death-bed : the shallow, narrow minded religion
and the coldly attentive, hollow science." (p.140.) He was buried in Copenhagen,
but not really as the greatest son of the city. But maybe - in a way - he was.
Regine Schlegel lived until 1904 , when Jette ( Henriette Lund ) edited the love letters she had entrusted to her. They became another book, a small book , that I happened to see in an antiquarian book shop yesterday.
Chapter 7. About looking after a trustee.
( .... and of monology and the late S.K. )
S.K. often discarded people and turned them against himself. He rarely took any visitors in his apartments,( which grew smaller with the decreasing fortune ) and he soccialized on his conditions exclusively. S.K. definitely avoided disciples. He did not want successors, believing himself to be of extraordinary talent (and - at least towards the end of his life - task, given from above ).Mot he did want someone to look after his papers and his case after his upcoming death. It came to be - against his will - his brother Peter, and more precisely: the private secretary of the bishop of Aalborg, Hans Barfod, in collaboration with S.K.s distant relative, the theologican Hans Brochner, the younger niece Jette (Henriette) Lund and later on J.P. Heiberg, son of the mighty prof.J.L..... But during his lifetime S.K. clearly aimed at the cunning, according to S.K.s meaning, professor of Philosophy of the University of Copenh., the Hegel-specialsit Rasmus Nielsen (1809 - 1884 ).R.N. had written a book betitled Evangelietron og den moderne Bevidsthed ( 1849 ) The faith of the Gospels and modern Consciousness., where he held a kierkegaardian standpoint on the incompatibility between faith and (scientific ) knowledge - thus a anti-kantian book .
Like it often was with the human relations in S.K.s life, it was not to
become easy. R. Nielsen probably felt underestimated and could not refrain himself
from publishing a book in a competitive way, a book written in the mood and
ways of S.K., the book mentioned, and as a matter of fact, a book, where the
content was a pure nachahmung of the works of S.K.. Whole passages were stolen
straight off."Such a mediocracy !" , Kierkegaard cried out in his
Diary (Pap. X:6:96. ) and wrote a devastating critic against the Martensen dogmatic
philosophy.
Then R. Nielsens book Dr. Martensen%acute;s dogmatiske Oplysninger, belyste.
( 1850 ) , where Nielsen used S.K. s words. ----- Kierkegaard´:s reaction
is easy to follow by the notes and drafts in his Papirer. He, at that time,
always planned to write articles, and he truly wrote a lot, but this, - rather
typical one -, never reached the newspaper, Faedrelandet . It stayed with S.K.
and either in his yellow leather sack or in one of the zink coffins. ( He was
always afraid, - being himself a tobacco smoker (of pipes) and all - that it
would take fire and that all his "official secrets " would vanish
into ashes. They luckily did not - though. )
(Angaaende Prof. Nielsens Forhold til min Forfatter-Virksomhed. Literair Revisions-Artikel.1853.
S.K. ) ( Regarding prof. Nielsen´s relation to my authorship.Article of
litaray revision.1853. - The readtion at times was delayed. S.K. never forgot
anything, and he did not forgive people easily...):
"What we are talking about here is having extraordinary gifts (talent/dan. Evner/sv. begåvning/. I will not talk about that exclusivelsy, but in relation to this having extraordinary gifts there is a difference, that I since long have been aware of, as a psychologist, and of which everybody might have a notion of, when I reveal what I am thinking of. The difference is: to have extraordinary gifts on common conditions, and to have them on special conditions.( On a special condition.)
(S.K.:Pap.X:6:116.)
Rasmus Nielsen had in his book compared himself to S.K.s pseudonym Johannes
Climacus - i.e. the author of Philosophical Fragments and Final Concluding Post-Script
,i.e. the Martensen/Hegel-critical books - , ---- S.K. were almost "raving
mad" since 1849 because of the plagiation and the comparison, the stealing
of parts of Final Concluding , and now, Kierkegaard asserted, it was all too
intrusive to use the pseudonym J.C., regardless how close N. felt for this.
"What is happening ?" Kierkegaard asks himself, and he finds, surprisingly
enough, a certain thankfulness: "What I neither could or would do, the
world is taking it´s trouble to do. From everywhere it is heard of his
great book: - It is nothing else than the kierkegaardian...." (p.113.)
Kierkegaard continoues to talk about gifts on different conditions, using his
tiresome, but still beautiful, almost hypnotizing, logic::
"This is what I want to talk about, neither of the uncommon gifts, but
of the special condition. Paganism knows about it. There fore it is said: The
Gods are grudgious. The meaning by this is not, that the Gods are so envious
that they do not give these gifts, oh no, upon that the pagans did not think
by speaking like this, no: the Gods do give these great gifts - but on a special
condition! This condition is changing the whole matter; the gifts are not straightforwardly
given - oh, the Gods are grudgy! Half of it is enough, oh, half of it are more
than enough, and all my life I shall keep on praising you, you good Gods; but
this condition, on which I got double the share of it - oh, I do not dare to
lead you, you mighty, to let you see what is going on deep inside in me, how
could I, but are those Gods envious! So in paganism . In the tales of folklore
it is the same. One has uncommon gifts, but he is, so it says, so strange. What
does that mean? That means, that he has got these on special conditions. Like
him noone takes to the bow, these notes, exactly these notes are not played
by anybody else on any fiddle - but there is something strange with it, because
you can almost hear by the playing or by the song, that there is something strange
with it, but: what is it ? It is that he has got this virtuosity, he has this
gift of expression of poetry on a special condition. - This is known to each
and every Man. You can tell instinctively, as soon as yu get in touch with such
a human; a young man, a young girl, who are no less than watchers, know by themselves
when coming close to such a person. There are moments, when you might be tempted
to wish that you yourself had these gifts, but in the same you are saying to
yourself: no, no, oh, the condition! "(Pap.X.p.117.)
We are here struck by a few things. The picture of the classical romantic genious, of the artist of the tales, the artist with heavenly gifts, by the reflections upon the strange, wonderous, (/underfulle/): the special condition: the curious, - ( at the same time"full of wonders, the miracolous, wondersome....) the strange like the predestination- one might think of somebody like Mose, who by the condition was denied entrance to the land of Kanaan. But we do percieve a small monological "waywarding",(Mon 1), when S.K. begins to talk about the young couple and their relationship to the strange person, but S.K. does not fulfil his investigating of the young people´s minds: it is not his errand anymore.... these are other times, times of battle. S.K. continues his draft:
": But .... to be continued ......................................
is this now already a misunderstanding in relation to uncommon gifts on common conditions to want to assert the possibility of doing the same TOO by industriousness and hard work: in relation to uncommon gifts is this as well a kind of crime [ Brode ] .
Chapter 9. The Concept of mental disintegration in general and with special concern to S.K..
Already the psychiatrist Hj Helweg examined in his voluminous book the enormous
entire bulk of S.K.s authorship in search of psycho-patological phenomena, also
wth special regard to consitency-notconsistency of thought. The long sentences,
the extended chains of logically developed thoughts were examined by H. to see
if S.K. ever lost his way..... Helweg could only register one example of incompleteness
in the utter shape of the reasoning. S.K. was a rigourous writer, strongly disciplined
in order simply to survive the constant attacks from the side of the imagination.
Thus he never wrote after 02.00 in the morning . Writing, producing, was his
life´s passion. To be able to keep the constraint he - like Strindberg
- altered his handwriting to a smaller , more legible one. Only on the scribbled
notes and in certain drafts of contents we can see his ordinary pittura.
Psychologically speaking the concept of mental disintegration usually is linked
to difficulties regarding keeping things in focus, difficulties regarding logic
and memory and unconsistency of character plus a certain weird multidimensionality.
If we regard it that way, S.K. does not seem to have been a person marked by
mental disintegration.
II.
-------- When we examined the problem of "the double Self" , in the chapter above, we could not easily link this "problem" to a psychic disorder, but rather as an indication regarding the problems S.K. had in dealing with both life itself ( a daring comment!) and with a philosophical problem of no small difficuly and abstractness, in fact: a problem, that he is not the first to have dealt with rather badly. We do meet, in the talk about the concept of the Self a tendency towards tautological infinity.... ( read Sickness unto Death ! ) ... but it is possible to regard this tendency as yet another literary means to gain an effect special to his great Project. It is quite possible, though, that a highly intelligent man, like S.K., could push his alleged disinegration into a philosophical corner on such an abstract level. -------------
In September 1855 the last edition of the periodical paper "The moment"
( Oieblikket") , nr. 9, appeared. For a period of nine months S.K. had
held his country in a state of siege, under constant fire, only with short breaks.
Now when he should leave this earht, he probably wanted to do yet another assault,
make yet another reflexion, but at the same thime he seemed rather glad to go...
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kaj B. Genell 2007.
© K.B. Genell 2007.