Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Penguin Classics (1992), Paperback, 640 pages
Description
In Either/Or, using the voices of two characters--the aesthetic young man of part one, called simply "A," and the ethical Judge Vilhelm of the second section--Kierkegaard reflects upon the search for a meaningful existence, contemplating subjects as diverse as Mozart, drama, boredom, and, in the famous Seducer's Diary, the cynical seduction and ultimate rejection of a young, beautiful woman. A masterpiece of duality, Either/Or is a brilliant exploration of the conflict between the aesthetic and the ethical - both meditating ironically and seductively upon Epicurean pleasures, and eloquently expounding the noble virtues of a morally upstanding life. For more than seventy years, Penguin has been the leading publisher of classic literature in the English-speaking world. With more than 1,700 titles, Penguin Classics represents a global bookshelf of the best works throughout history and across genres and disciplines. Readers trust the series to provide authoritative texts enhanced by introductions and notes by distinguished scholars and contemporary authors, as well as up-to-date translations by award-winning translators.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member drardavis
The first part about the aesthetic is much more readable than the second part about the ethical. It is hard to understand how the same man wrote these two excerpts!
“I have always loved, on a moonlit night, to lie out in a boat on one of our lovely lakes. I take in the sails and the oars, remove
“Doubt, therefore, lies in difference, despair in the absolute. It requires talent to doubt, it requires no talent at all to despair; but talent as such is difference and what needs talent to make it effectual can never be the absolute, for it is only for the absolute that the absolute can be absolute as such.”
Perhaps the philosophy loses meaning in the translation. Perhaps I should reread the introductory explanations, or get a copy of the Cliff Notes. But I am too exhausted from slogging through to the end, to start over. I’ll just accept that I did my duty to give it a try, and remember some of the beautiful lines from the beginning.
“I have always loved, on a moonlit night, to lie out in a boat on one of our lovely lakes. I take in the sails and the oars, remove
Show More
the rudder, stretch out full-length, and gaze up into the vault of heaven. When the boat rocks on the breast of the waves, when the clouds scud before the strong wind so that the moon vanishes for a moment and then reappears, I find rest in this unrest. The motion of the waves lulls me, their lapping against the boat is a monstrous cradle-song.”“Doubt, therefore, lies in difference, despair in the absolute. It requires talent to doubt, it requires no talent at all to despair; but talent as such is difference and what needs talent to make it effectual can never be the absolute, for it is only for the absolute that the absolute can be absolute as such.”
Perhaps the philosophy loses meaning in the translation. Perhaps I should reread the introductory explanations, or get a copy of the Cliff Notes. But I am too exhausted from slogging through to the end, to start over. I’ll just accept that I did my duty to give it a try, and remember some of the beautiful lines from the beginning.
Show Less
LibraryThing member DinadansFriend
I found this work quite engaging for a work of philosophy in a foreign language. There is a lot of characterization, the the premise, that either impulse, as shown by the imagined life of an "arty" artist, is king, or we live an life bound by rigorous adherence to a set of principles. the latter
Show More
pattern is illustrated by a conversation with an imagined judge. The book was I hope well translated in the edition whose cover I have attached. Show Less
LibraryThing member jwhenderson
Essentially an argument that one should make a choice between the aesthetic way of life and the ethical way of life. Although as one reads deeply into the book he finds that the choice is not a simple one and the difficulties in discerning how to make the choice are manifold. This is not a book for
Show More
the general or light reader, but one rather that rewards deep reading and thought about how one really should make choices in the direction of one's life. Show Less
LibraryThing member goosecap
Just a short, suggestive re-review, because, although I might never get to re-read a 600 page philosophy book when there are other philosophy books I’ll never read, right, my stance towards life when I read this book was too isolative to allow me to see its flaws, or, perhaps, even its strengths:
Well, certainly both the ‘aesthetic’ and of course also the ‘ethical’ ways have changed a lot since the 1840s: I’m kinda disappointed in Past Ted to start a review off based on the almost idiotic premise that ‘ethics’ has changed (ethics is good!) and ‘aesthetics’ has not, right (the kids never change!): certainly in any particularist sense at all, a feminist ethicist and a country cleric of the 1840s would not consider themselves to be at all alike, you know; and obviously the aesthetes of previous times were…. I mean, they were elitists; they intended to be, you know. Not for them, the music of people who farm in the villages, right, or sweep the streets.
Let’s see, what else: one or two more things…. I mean, there is kinda this question of it being a rumble between aesthetics and ethics, right: just the two of them; Soren was a sort of literary Hegel, and Hegel had his living god-dying god-resurrected god thing, right, but in this book I don’t know so much that there is a synthesis, probably because I doubt somewhat that there was one in society: either you sought pleasure, or you crushed it, right…. I mean, does living ethically mean that you give up beauty in your life? Is it a case of either being a seducer and deceiving girls, or entering into the grey marriage-of-duty, right….? I forget exactly how Soren’s ethicist feels, and it’s just as well, because I don’t trust myself to have perceived aright, but, although I don’t consider reading this book to have been time “wasted”—even in the sense of, “the only way to know is to find out”, and you find out that society was deceiving/controlling, right—obviously in my opinion there’s the aspect that generally marriage then was duty and sacrifice and beauty might be okay—sorta—if it helped you conform, but really….
Yeah, I mean, a very relevant point for a book like this is that reading philosophy is NOT the only way to explore these problems, you know. Really I feel that we all should have non-philosophical methods to go into this stuff—although generally speaking, people have no methods at all, not least because they’re mostly told that they’re not worth it from an early age, not least in school: and even the person who tests well is told that they had value, sorta, because they succeeded at conforming and “earned” it, or rather were granted it, as a sort of monarch’s gift, you know—and then philosophers should have both philosophical and non-philosophical tools, right~ whereas the average philosopher of post-medieval times, if not much earlier, as well, tries to have only philosophical tools, so that he—very much, ‘he’—can be confirmed to be separate from the dirty masses, right, which is basically the goal, the whole goal. Soren is much better along these lines than the average philosopher, but it is certain that people study who try to assimilate his attitude to the attitude of the majority-elite guy, right: and it is hard to have a culture, all to one’s self, right.
Show More
Well, certainly both the ‘aesthetic’ and of course also the ‘ethical’ ways have changed a lot since the 1840s: I’m kinda disappointed in Past Ted to start a review off based on the almost idiotic premise that ‘ethics’ has changed (ethics is good!) and ‘aesthetics’ has not, right (the kids never change!): certainly in any particularist sense at all, a feminist ethicist and a country cleric of the 1840s would not consider themselves to be at all alike, you know; and obviously the aesthetes of previous times were…. I mean, they were elitists; they intended to be, you know. Not for them, the music of people who farm in the villages, right, or sweep the streets.
Let’s see, what else: one or two more things…. I mean, there is kinda this question of it being a rumble between aesthetics and ethics, right: just the two of them; Soren was a sort of literary Hegel, and Hegel had his living god-dying god-resurrected god thing, right, but in this book I don’t know so much that there is a synthesis, probably because I doubt somewhat that there was one in society: either you sought pleasure, or you crushed it, right…. I mean, does living ethically mean that you give up beauty in your life? Is it a case of either being a seducer and deceiving girls, or entering into the grey marriage-of-duty, right….? I forget exactly how Soren’s ethicist feels, and it’s just as well, because I don’t trust myself to have perceived aright, but, although I don’t consider reading this book to have been time “wasted”—even in the sense of, “the only way to know is to find out”, and you find out that society was deceiving/controlling, right—obviously in my opinion there’s the aspect that generally marriage then was duty and sacrifice and beauty might be okay—sorta—if it helped you conform, but really….
Yeah, I mean, a very relevant point for a book like this is that reading philosophy is NOT the only way to explore these problems, you know. Really I feel that we all should have non-philosophical methods to go into this stuff—although generally speaking, people have no methods at all, not least because they’re mostly told that they’re not worth it from an early age, not least in school: and even the person who tests well is told that they had value, sorta, because they succeeded at conforming and “earned” it, or rather were granted it, as a sort of monarch’s gift, you know—and then philosophers should have both philosophical and non-philosophical tools, right~ whereas the average philosopher of post-medieval times, if not much earlier, as well, tries to have only philosophical tools, so that he—very much, ‘he’—can be confirmed to be separate from the dirty masses, right, which is basically the goal, the whole goal. Soren is much better along these lines than the average philosopher, but it is certain that people study who try to assimilate his attitude to the attitude of the majority-elite guy, right: and it is hard to have a culture, all to one’s self, right.
Show Less
Awards
Language
Original language
Danish
Original publication date
1843
1943 (French, Guignot-Prior)
Physical description
640 p.; 7.81 inches
ISBN
0140445773 / 9780140445770
Local notes
Danish: Enten-Eller