Welcome aboard The Bus!
The Stop
Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) was born in Copenhagen and left the city only five times in his life - four to visit Berlin and once to Sweden. Despite his lack of travel, the absence of a university professorship and a relatively short life, he became one of the 19th century’s most influential thinkers. Kierkegaard’s ‘work crosses the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, literary criticism, devotional literature and fiction’ - a wide variety of discourses he used for social and cultural criticism. Deeply religious, Kierkegaard was tormented by theological questions - specifically how one might renew the practice of the Christian faith within the mechanics of established Christendom.1
Widely considered the father of existentialism,2 Kierkegaard was a notorious crank. Everything about him was different. He had a twisted spine - ‘for which his enemies cruelly mocked him’ - and he ‘considered it a matter of principle to throw people off their stride.’ He ‘picked quarrels with his contemporaries, broke off personal relationships and generally made difficulties out of everything.’3 Embracing the Greek ideal that philosophers should be judged by their lives and not simply their intellectual works, Kierkegaard thought such a test applicable to anyone who truly lives. Theologically, he believed Christianity provided one of the most exacting standards for life due to its doctrine that, at the end of life, God alone validates the totality of one’s existence. Consequently, he believed judgement - on both the temporal and spiritual planes - must focus on one’s entire life and not just a particular part.4
Kierkegaard wrote, ‘Abstraction is disinterested, but for one who exists his existing is the supreme interest.’5 When developing his philosophy of existentialism, Jean Paul Sartre6 took Kierkegaard’s use of the word ‘existence’ to mean a description of the human way of being - that human life is only what we make of it while we exist. For the atheist Sartre, nothing exists before or after our lives to influence or affect the quality of our existence - it is purely our decisions which determine our lives. Agreeing with Kierkegaard, Sartre believed we create our existence by making ‘either/or’ choices throughout every step of life - and recognised that this lifetime of ‘constant choosing brings a pervasive anxiety, not unlike the vertigo that comes from looking over a cliff. It is not the fear of falling so much as the fear that you can’t trust yourself not to throw yourself off. Your head spins; you want to cling to something … but you can’t secure yourself so easily against the dangers that come with being free.’
For Sartre, this anxiety forces one to keep moving in the world, to create what ‘will be’ by ‘acting in the world and making a difference to it,’ but Kierkegaard believed the only response to this anguish/anxiety was to take the paradoxical ‘leap of faith’ into belief in God - whether or not you felt God existed. Making the conscious decision to plunge into accepting this ‘Absurdity’ - which can be neither rationally proved nor justified - was for him the ultimate way to define one’s existence.
The Detour
Today’s Detour is to an article from Lapham’s Quarterly about issues created by the rise of colour photography in the early 20th century - ones which converted philosophical questions into actual problems. It’s a great read - and contains some great photos. It’s also a good reminder that there was - not too long ago - a time when taking a photograph was akin to doing something magical - and rare.
The Book
Today’s book is Joseph Heller’s Catch-22 - in my opinion, one of the most existential works of fiction ever written. It’s a classic novel about the absurdity of war - and, by extension, life in general. Most importantly, it’s the ONLY novel I’ve taught that’s caused high school students to laugh out loud.7
Remember: You can buy Catch-22 at Amazon, but you can also get it from your local bookstore. And that’s better for everyone.
The Sounds
Kierkegaard is one of those topics that doesn’t immediately inspire a playlist, so these are a few tracks I think manage to convey the feeling of existentialism. I’m not sure exactly what that means, but I do know the Meat Puppets more or less sum it up: there’s nothing on the top/but a bucket and a mop/and an illustrated book about birds.
You’re welcome to disagree, but I hope you’ll agree they’re great tunes.
The Thought
Today’s Thought is from the Roman Emperor and Stoic philosopher Marcus Aurelius8 - and quite fitting, considering the nature of The Stop.
“The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts: therefore, guard accordingly, and take care that you entertain no notions unsuitable to virtue and reasonable nature.”
If you have a thought on this Thought - or any part of today’s issue - please leave a comment below:
And that’s the end of this stop - I hope you enjoyed a brief diversion from your regular journey!
Thanks to everyone who subscribes - I genuinely appreciate your interest and support. If you like The Bus, please SHARE it with a friend or several hundred.
If you haven’t climbed aboard, please do!
Until the next stop …
Kierkegaard was a highly complicated thinker with an equally complicated life - and the limits of The Bus mean this is a cursory glance at a slender fraction of his thoughts. I’ll return to aspects of Kierkegaard in future Stops, but if you’re interested, a relatively brief biography can be found here: Kierkegaard
Kierkegaard’s use of the word ‘existential’ to describe thought concerning the problems of human existence became the origin point of the early 20th century philosophical school. An excellent, very readable introduction to existentialism is Sarah Bakewell’s At the Existentialist Cafe, New York: Other Press (2016), which - along with Kierkegaard - is a source for this Stop. See also: Existentialism
He even played games with his publications, using his gift of noting the ‘attention-grabbing phrase.’ Kierkegaard first included the word ‘existential’ in the rather awkwardly titled Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments: a mimical-pathetical-dialectical compilation: an existential contribution. Other titles include The Sickness Unto Death, Either/Or, Fear and Trembling and From the Papers of One Still Living. It’s not everyone’s cup of philosophical tea, but Sickness was very influential on my thinking during graduate school.
Which, I guess, means everyone who’s ever made a mistake can breathe a sigh of relief. Phew.
Concluding Unscientific Postscript
Sartre is one of - if not the - most famous of the existentialists (both because of the quality of his thought and his skills at self-promotion). The Bakewell book provides an excellent review of his life and works, but for a brief biography, see: Sartre
Let’s just say, Thomas Hardy’s Return of the Native doesn’t elicit a similar response.
Fascinating issue. And, by the way, everyone needs to get on The Bus: a grace note dropped surreptitiously into the humdrum of life to remind us there is more out there.
Regarding Kierkegaard, “a notorious crank”, with an apparent socially self destructive penchant, I have this observation. I would bet comfortably that he was a depressive. If he’d had access to modern cognitive-behavioral therapy and/or Prozac, would he have written anything he did? Can angsty and profound existential introspection exist without emotional torment? If so, would it have the same depth? You underscored this query with your playlist: Elliott Smith’s music is depressing, beautifully so, and self involved.
That’s for starters. Not to mention the core of his work itself. Kierkegaard provides perhaps more food for thought than anyone who has laid pen to paper.