Kierkegaard, the Seducer

So I decided tonight, since my wife is out of town, to pick back up my “Kierkegaard Anthology” and I ran across a section that I hadn’t read in some time. It is from a section called “Diary of the Seducer,” which is found in a larger work called “Either/Or.” I am a fan of most of what Soren Kierkegaard writes, but am particularly drawn to “Diary of the Seducer” because of the sheer brilliance with which he writes and his ability to express deep, penetrating emotions. What is more is that Kierkegaard is not known as a novelist or writer in that sense, but rather as an Existentialist. He is indeed the latter, but his work in the area of the former captivated me and thus I must share. I think the passage is fairly self-explanatory.

This one woman, the only woman in all the world, she must belong to me, she must be mine. Let God keep Heaven, if I could keep her. I know what I choose; it is something so great that Heaven itself must be the loser by such a division, for what would be left to Heaven if I keep her? The faithful Mohammedans will be disappointed in their hopes when in their Paradise they embrace pale, weak shadows; for warm hearts they cannot find, all the warmth of the hear is concentrated in her breast; they will yield themselves to a comfortless despair when they find pale lips, dim eyes, a lifeless bosom, a limp pressure of the hand; for all the redness of the lips, and the fire of the eye, and all the restlessness of the bosom, and the promise of the hand, and the foreboding of the saigh, and the seal of the kiss, and the trembling of the touch, and the passion of the embrace - all, all are concentrated in her, and she lavishes on me a wealth sufficient for a whole world, both for time and eternity..."

Why is it that others can always say it better than me?

P.S. I really like pictures of famous dead people, especially if they're cool looking and it just so happens that Kierkegaard is, so that's the handsome man starring at you at the top of this post. In the future I will probably continue to add pictures of the cool people I am referencing.

Epi-Strauss-ium

The following is a poem by Arthur Hugh Clough titled "Epi-Strauss-ium," which means "On-Strauss-ism." Thus, it is a response to David Friedrich Strauss' Das Leben Jesu, which looked critically at the life of Jesus.

"Matthew and Mark and Luke and holy John
Evanished all and gone!
Yea, he that erst, his dusky curtains quitting,
Through Eastern pictured panes his level beams transmitting,
With gorgeous portraits blent,
On them his glories intercepted spent,
Southwestering now, through windows plainly glassed,
On the inside face his radiance keen hath cast,
And int he lustre lost, invisible and gone,
Are, say you, Matthew, Mark and Luke and holy John?
Lost, is it? lost, to be recovered never?
However,
The place of worship the meantime with light
Is, if less richly, more sincerely bright,
And in blue skies the Orb is manifest to sight."

NB: 'he' in line 3 is 'the sun'

Clough is saying, I believe, that though the historical-critical method (higher criticism), as evidenced by Strauss' work, might have cast a shadow on the gospels, rendering them lost, the truth can be seen more clearly without them. The picture is of the narrator standing in church facing East watching the sun rise through the windows that are the gospels. Here he can only see dimly ("On them his glories intercepted spent"). He then turns to face SouthWest and watch the sun set. These windows are clear and allow him to see the sun more clearly. Note the sun in line 3 and the Orb in line 15.

Just some things to think about. I had to read this poem for my Literature and Religion class and was struck by it, so I thought I'd share.

Comments welcome...

Dark and Light

This dark is so deep
And the light is so bright
I am blinded by the darkness
I am blinded by the light

Though desire to expound this thought whelms over me, have I yet come up deficient? How to explain that antitheses have the same outcome? What is learned by this observation, if anything? Is there also a realm antithetical to the result of the aforementioned antitheses? Cannot both illumine as well? Are there not things that can only be seen in the dark and not in the light? Is not the dark of life as illuminating as the light of life? Do not we purport that the shadow proves the sunshine? Is it not also true that the light proves the dark? Then, again, what to make of this? Do not blinding and illuminating also have similar effects? Do not they both cause one to ‘see’ in a different manner than formerly? What to make of existence in the dark? What to make of existence in the light? If both yield the same harvest, then ought not both be held equally? Where is God in the spring and summer of life? Is God not there? Where is God in the winter of life? Is God not there too? Does not God pervade all? Is God in the light? Is God not also, then, in the dark?

Doing Nothing

"Some of us need to discover that we will not begin to live more fully until we have the courage to do and see and taste and experience much less than usual...There are times, then, when in order to keep ourselves in existence at all we simply have to sit back for a while and do nothing. And for a man who has let himself be drawn completely out of himself by his activity, nothing is more difficult than to sit still and rest, doing nothing at all. The very act of resting is the hardest and most courageous act he can perform."
- Thomas Merton

Wouldn't this be easier if we actually had time to sit and rest and do nothing at all?

Food for thought...

"And if the old guard still offend,
They've got nothing left on which you depend.
So enlist every ounce of your bright blood, and off with their heads!
Jump from the hook! You're not obliged to swallow anything you despise!"
- Sleeping Lessons by The Shins

Welcome

Welcome to my new blog. I hope you like the new look. Feel free to give suggestions.

More to come...