But more to the point, what Kierkegaard emphasizes in his dissertation on irony is the specific historical situatedness of Socrates and the irony he employed to show that the wisdom of that culture was all vain. The backdrop to this in Socrates’ time is Sophists, and in Kierkegaard’s own time the contrast is shown in the discussion of the willy nilly irony of the Romantics such as the Schlegels and Ludwig Tieck. Both Hegel and Kierkegaard rightly critique the no-holds-barred irony of these folk. Hegel’s polemic was a bit harsher on the Schlegels, but probably rightly so because he knew them personally (Terry Pinkard’s biography of Hegel has some good stuff here on the relationships). The irony must be controlled and used correctly he says. As an aside, I’m curious as to whether or not Kierkegaard finally thought he got his irony under ‘control’ by the time he renounced his pseudonymity. In sum, while I think his pseudonymity is a clear example of Kierkegaard’s ironic distance, and even though this layer of irony was ultimately dropped, I think this is only one of the ways he was ironic.

Peace,

Eric

Eric, I really like this: “If we take Anti-Climacus off the title page and replace it with the original ‘S. Kierkegaard,’ the case holds that we are still receiving a communication from an indirect communicator—the God-man.” I think this is right. I was curious…do you see the “negative” function of irony (as the “way” to truth), one that is performed here on pseudonymity itself, also at work in the kind of dialectical stance against the established order, Danish christendom? I mean, most folks who read SK would tend to dismiss the later “attack” literature (beginning here with Practice) as just crude, and deluded by SK’s declining mental stability, or something. Do you think we can read the earlier use of irony (as a “negative” function on the way to truth) here also in the “attack”? Thanks…this looks great. Stick with it!

Fascinating quote from Garff. I’ve always thought of Practice as the least “pseudonymous” of the pseudonymous works, so much so that I often find myself thinking of it in non-pseudonymous ways, much like I think of Works of Love.