Write to the booksellers
Mesnard, Pierre.
Kierkegaard
Paris, Presses universitaires de France 1970 1 in -8 Broché couverture Illustrée 102[p.p]
Reference : LCI-4204
Très bon état général Disponibilité sous réserve de vente en boutique, prix valable frais de port inclus pour commande > 90 € et poids < 1 Kg
Bookseller's contact details
Le Chef d'Oeuvre Inconnu
M. Jean-Claude Codevelle
20 rue Edouard Delesalle
59000 Lille
Hauts-de-France France
contact@lechefdoeuvreinconnu.com
07 86 26 13 25
Payment mode
Sale conditions
Librairie Ancienne Arts et Lettres Le Chef d'Oeuvre Inconnu SASU au capital de 3500 € SIREN : 810 817 916 APE : 4761Z Siège Social 47 rue Turgot 59000 Lille TVA non applicable - article 293 B du CGI http://vosdroits.service-public.fr/professionnels-entreprises/F21746.xhtml\#R24406 avant expédition cash
5 book(s) with the same title
Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt hensyn til Socrates. Af S. A. Kierkegaard. - [ARGUABLY THE BEST POSSIBLE COPY ONE CAN EVER HOPE TO ACQUIRE OF KIERKEGAARD’S DISSERTATION – ONE OF TWO COPIES ON THICK VELLUM PAPER]
Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsens Forlag, 1841. 8vo. (8), 350 pp. Gift binding of elaborately blindpatterned full cloth with single gilt lines to spine. All edges gilt and printed on thick vellum paper. A splendid copy in completely unrestored state with minimal edge wear. Slight sunning to upper 1 cm of front board and slight bumping to corners and capitals. Leaves completely fresh and clean. Pencil-annotation from the Kierkegaard archive of the Royal Library (nr. 83) and discreet stamp from the Royal Library of Copenhagen to inside of front board (with a deaccession-inscription) and to verso of title-page. With ownership signatures of P.S. Lund and Troels Lund to title-page. Inside of back board with previous owner’s pencil-annotations listing the entire provenance of the copy and explaining that this is one of two copies printed on thick vellum paper. Laid in is the original agreement for the exchange of real property between the previous owner and the Royal Library of Denmark, from which is evident that in 2003, The Royal Library and the previous owner legally agreed to exchange their respective copies of Om Begrebet Ironie – the present one for Ørsted, being one of two copies on thick vellum paper, and the copy on normal paper for Heiberg, which is now in the holdings of the Royal Library of Denmark.
Arguably the best possible copy one can ever hope to acquire of Kierkegaard’s dissertation – one of two copies on thick vellum paper, being a presentation-copy from Kierkegaard to the discoverer of electromagnetism H.C. Ørsted. Inscribed to verso of front fly-leaf: “Til / Hans Magnificens / Universitetets Rector / Hr. Conferentsraad Ørsted. / C og D.M.” (For / His Magnificence / Principle of the University / Mr. [a high Danish title, now obsolete] Ørsted. / C (ommandør) (i.e. Commander) and DM (short for Dannebrogsmand, another honourable title) ). The copy is with the Thesis, and both the day and the time has been filled in by hand. As mentioned in the introduction to the Irony, Kierkegaard had two copies made on thick vellum paper –one for himself (which is in the Royal Library of Denmark), and one for H. C. Ørsted, a towering figure of the Danish Golden Age, one of the most important scientists that Denmark has produced, then principle of the University of Copenhagen. This copy is unique among the 11 registered presentation-copies of Kierkegaard’s dissertation and is without doubt the most desirable. It is approximately twice as thick as the other copies and stand out completely. THIS IS KIERKEGAARD’S dissertation, which constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and hadto petition the King to be granted permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself poses as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. One of Kierkegaard’s only true friends, his school friend H.P. Holst recounts (in 1869) how the two had a special school friendship and working relationship, in which Kierkegaard wrote Latin compositions for Holst, while Holst wrote Danish compositions for Kierkegaard, who “expressed himself in a hopelessly Latin Danish crawling with participial phrases and extraordinarily complicatedsentences” (Garff, p. 139). When Kierkegaard, in 1838, was ready to publish his famous piece on Hans Christian Andersen (see nr. 1 & 2 above), which was to appear in Heiberg’s journal Perseus, Heiberg had agreed to publish the piece, although he had some severe critical comments about the way and the form in which it was written – if it were to appear in Perseus, Heiberg demanded, at the very least, the young Kierkegaard would have to submit it in a reasonably readable Danish. “Kierkegaard therefore turned to his old schoolmate H. P. Holst and asked him to do something with the language…” (Garff, p. 139). From their school days, Holst was well aware of the problem with Kierkegaard’s Danish, and he recounts that over the summer, he actually “translated” Kierkegaard’s article on Andersen into proper Danish. The oral defense was conducted in Latin, however. The judges all agreed that the work submitted was both intelligent and noteworthy. But they were concerned about its style, which was found to be both tasteless, long-winded, and idiosyncratic. We already here witness Kierkegaard’s idiosyncratic approach to content and style that is so characteristic for all of his greatest works. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. The year 1841 is a momentous one in Kierkegaard’s life. It is the year that he completes his dissertation and commences his sojourn in Berlin, but it is also the defining year in his personal life, namely the year that he breaks off his engagement with Regine Olsen. And finally, it is the year that he begins writing Either-Or. In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of The Concept of Irony and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. With irony, we will be able to embrace the not knowing. We need to question the world knowing we may not find an answer. The moment we stop questioning and just accept the easy answers, we succumb to ignorance. We must use irony to laugh at ourselves in order to improve ourselves and to laugh at society in order to improve the world. The work was submitted to the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Copenhagen on June 3rd 1841. Kierkegaard had asked for his dissertation to be ready from the printer’s in ample time for him to defend it before the new semester commenced. This presumably because he had already planned his sojourn to Berlin to hear the master philosopher Schelling. On September 16th, the book was issued, and on September 29th, the defense would take place. The entire defense, including a two hour long lunch break, took seven hours, during which ”an unusually full auditorium” would listen to the official opponents F.C. Sibbern and P.O. Brøndsted as well as the seven “ex auditorio” opponents F.C. Petersen, J.L. Heiberg, P.C. Kierkegaard, Fr. Beck, F.P.J. Dahl, H .J.Thue og C.F. Christens, not to mention Kierkegaard himself. Two weeks later, on October 12th, Kierkegaard broke off his engagement with Regine Olsen (for the implications of this event, see the section about Regine in vol. II). The work appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. The first page of the theses always contains the day “XXIX” of September written in hand, and sometimes the time “hora X” is also written in hand, but not always. In all, 11 presentation-copies of the dissertation are known, and of these only one is signed (that for Holst), all the others merely state the title and name of the recipient. As is evident from the auction catalogue of his collection, Kierkegaard had a number of copies of his dissertation in his possession when he died. Five of them were bound, and two of them were “nit. M. Guldsnit” (i.e. daintily bound and with gilt edges). These two copies were obviously meant as presentation-copies that he then never gave away. The gift copies of the dissertation were given two types of bindings, both brownish cloth, one type patterned, the other one plain, and some of them have gilt edges, but most of the plain ones do not. There exist two copies on thick vellum paper – one being Kierkegaard’s own copy, the other being the copy for H.C. Ørsted, discoverer of electromagnetism and then principle of the University of Copenhagen. “As already implied, two works of the authorship stand out in the sense that Kierkegaard sent his presentation-copies to a special circle of people: The dissertation from 1841...” (Posselt, Textspejle, p. 91, translated from Danish). Most of the copies were given to former teachers and especially to people who, due to leading positions, personified the university. “For this circle of initiated we can now, due to registered copies, confirm that Kierkegaard gave copies with handwritten dedications to the headmaster of the University H.C. Ørsted (printed on thick paper), Kolderup-Rosenvinge and to J.L. Heiberg. It is granted that Sibbern, Madvig and F.C. Petersen were also given the dissertation as a gift,... but these copies are not known (yet).” (Posselt, Textspejle, pp. 93-94, translated fromDanish). (N.b. We have since handled the copy given to Petersen and can thus confirm that it exists). The presentation-inscriptions in the 11 registered copies of the Irony all follow a certain, strict pattern. “The wording could not be briefer. In the donation of his academic treatise, the otherwise prolific Kierkegaard sticks to name, titles, and the modes of address that goes with the titles.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). When presenting his later books, he always signs himself “from the author”, sometimes abbreviated (i.e. “Forf.” In stead of “Forfatteren”), unless he is mentioned by name on the title-page as the publisher, not the author, as is the case with some of the pseudonymous works. In that case he signs his inscriptions “From the publisher”, always accompanied by “in deep reverence”, “with reverence”, “with friendship” or the like, adapted to the rank of the recipient and his place on Kierkegaard’s personal scale. An academic treatise, however, published before the oral defense took place – in the mind of Kierkegaard – required certain demands in relation to the donation of it. Thus, the brevity and rigidity in the following inscriptions. With the exception of Kierkegaard Hans Christian Ørsted (1777-1851) is arguably the most famous and influential Dane ever to have lived, universally known for his discovery of Electro-magnetism in 1820, which led to new theories and discoveries that constituted the foundation of all later electro-technology. After this milestone of scientific discovery, Ørsted went on to write a number of important philosophical works on natural philosophy and empiricism, of which The Spirit in Nature is the most famous and the work he himself considered his main work. Both H.C. Andersen and Søren Kierkegaard admit to having been influenced by the writings of Ørsted. “He was an enthusiastic follower of the “Naturphilosophie” school in Germany, whose main object was the unification of physical forces, thus producing a monistic theory of the universe. It was to further this purpose that Oersted sought in actual phenomena the electro-magnetic identity of which he had already convinced himself on metaphysical grounds” (Percy H. Muir in Printing and The Mind of Man). “The natural scientist Hans Christian Ørsted was one of the most significant and influential personalities of his age and together with the sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen, the poet Hans Christian Andersen, and the thinker Søren Kierkegaard, constituted the small handful of figures from “The Danish Golden Age” who achieved international and even world fame.” (Troelsen in Kierkegaard and his Danish Contemporaries I: p. (215) ). In intellectual circles in Denmark at the time of Kierkegaard, Ørsted was inevitable. He influenced not only natural sciences profoundly, but also philosophy, literature, and Danish languages (coining more than 2.000 neologisms). He was furthermore rector of the university of Copenhagen, when Kierkegaard in 1841 submitted his master’s thesis On the Concept of Irony. Being the rector, Ørsted was the one who needed to pass the treatise, but having read it, he was simply not sure whether to do so or not and needed to consult other experts, before making his decision. He ended up allowing it to pass, but not without having first famously said about it (in a letter to Sibbern) that it “makes a generally unpleasant impression on me, particularly because of two things both of which I detest: verbosity and affectation.” (Kirmmmse (edt.): Encounters with Kierkegaard, p. 32). Kierkegaard makes several references to Ørsted’s Spirit in Nature and mentions him several times in his journals and notebooks. Although being of different generations and not particularly close on a personal level, the two intellectual giants would naturally be unavoidably connected in one way or the other. Ørsted was simply so centrally placed and so influential that there was no way around him for someone like Kierkegaard. Himmelstrup 8
Enten – Eller. Et Livs=Fragment udgivet af Victor Eremita. Anden Udgave. Første Deel, indeholdende A.’s Papirer + Anden Deel, indeholdende B.’s Papirer, Breve til A. - [KIERKEGAARD’S OWN PERSONAL COPY OF EITHER-OR, WITH HIS OWN CORRECTIONS]
Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1849. 8vo. XIV, (2), 320" (4), 250 pp. Bound in one original green full cloth binding with blindstamped decorative borders to boards and blindstamped lines and gilt title to spine. Rebacked preserving most of the original spine. White moiré end-papers and all edges gilt. Corners bumped. First title-page browned and brownspotting throughout. Previous owner’s neat pencil annotations about the history of the copy to back free end-paper and annotations/corrections in Kierkegaard’s hand to pp. 208 and 275 of vol. 1.
Kierkegaard’s own personal copy of the second issue of Either-Or, with his own corrections – one of them correcting a “not” to an “either”! This copy is with all likelihood nr. 2116 of the auction catalogue of Kierkgaard’s book collection – there merely described as “dainty binding with gilt edges”. The title-gilding on the spine, including the types, the fond, and the size, is identical to that of the five presentation-bindings of the second edition of Either-Or that have been preserved and identified (the ones for Hertz, Andersen, and Winther being the only ones with the presentation-inscription preserved). The spine- and the border-decoration, however, differs, as there is no decorative border on the other copies, which all have gilt volume-identification on them. This is clearly one of the dainty copies Kierkegaard had made, but differing somewhat from the copies he gave away. The style of the handwritten corrections is identical to those in Kierkegaard’s copy of Stadier paa Livets Vei (Stages on Life’s Way) (ex the collection of Muüllertz). The two corrections are:Vol. 1 p. 208: correcting “ret” to “vel”, i.e. meaning to change the sentence “One rightfully feels” to “One presumably feels”Vol. 1 p. 275: correcting “ikke” to “enten”, i.e. meaning to change the sentence “I could not use the conversation…” to “I could either use the conversation…” The two errors were first publicly identified with the publication of Kierkegaard’s collected works half a century later. It is absolutely magnificent to have here what is with all likelihood Kierkegaard’s own personal copy of his magnum opus, with his own handwritten corrections in it. In the light of the history of the work, it makes perfect sense for Kierkegaard to have used and read the second edition of the work. Kierkegaard’s magnum opus Either-Or is considered the foundational work of existentialism and doubtlessly the most famous work by the greatest Scandinavian philosopher of all times, who ""is now generally considered to be, however eccentric, one of the most important Christian philosophers"" (PMM 314). Kierkegaard's monumental magnum opus seminally influenced later as well as contemporary philosophy and ranks as one of the most important works of philosophy of modern times. Either-Or is the earliest of Kierkegaard’s major works and the work with which he begins his pseudonymous authorship. Kierkegaard’s pseudonymity is an entire subject unto its own. The various cover names he uses play a significant role in his way of communicating and are essential to the understanding of his philosophical and religious messages. And it all properly begins here, with his groundbreaking magnum opus. Conjuring up two distinctive figures with diverging beliefs and modes of life – the aesthetic “A” of Part One, and the ethical B (note that this is the first “pseudonym” that Kierkegaard uses, in his earliest articles – no. I above)/Judge Vilhelm of Part Two, Kierkegaard presents us with the most basic reflections on the search for a meaningful existence, seen from two completely different philosophical views. This masterpiece of duality explores the foundational conflict between the ethical and the aesthetical, providing us along the way with the now so famous contemplations on music (Mozart), drama, boredom, pleasures, virtues, and, probably most famously, seduction (and rejection – The Seducer’s Diary). It is primarily Judge Vilhelm from Part Two of Either-Or that has bestowed upon Kierkegaard the reputation as the Father of Existentialism. His emphasis on taking ownership of oneself and the importance of making choices has made him the (first) personification of Existentialism and the idea that one does not passively develop into the self that he or she should be or ought to become. Kierkegaard went to great lengths to ensure that the public would not know the identity of the author was of Either-Or. He even had the draft of the work done by several hands, so that employees at the printer’s would also be deceived. Despite his efforts, however, it did not take long for the public to guess that Kierkegaard had written this astounding work. But Kierkegaard himself kept up the façade and did not accept authorship until several years later. Nothing Kierkegaard did was left to chance, which his carefully chosen pseudonyms also reflect. This also spills over in his presentation-inscriptions, which follow as strict a pattern as the pseudonyms themselves – he never signed himself the author, if his Christian name was not listed as the author on the title-page. And seeing that he had not accepted authorship of Either-Or and is not mentioned by name anywhere on the title-page (also not as the editor nor publisher as with the other pseudonymous works), he was not able to give away copies of his magnum opus, which is why no presentation-copy of the first edition exists. The appearance of the second edition of this monumental work was, naturally, carefully planned. Either-Or first appeared in 1843, and due to the great demand for the work, which had originally only been printed in ca 525 copies, it had quickly been sold out" but Kierkegaard refused to have it reprinted. In 1849, finally, he decided to let it appear again, in a textually unchanged version. When the second edition appeared (recte second issue), Kierkegaard had meanwhile owned up to the authorship of Either-Or. He had done so in 1846, in his Concluding Unscientific Postscript to The Philosophical Fragments (own translation): “For the sake of manners and etiquette I hereby acknowledge, what can hardly in reality be of interest to anybody to know, that I am, as one says, the author of Either-Or (Victor Eremita), Copenhagen in February 1843...”. Now, finally, Kierkegaard could give away his magnum opus! In his Papers from 1849, Kierkegaard states (own translation): “The poets here at home each received a copy of Either-Or. I thought it my duty and now I was able to do it because now one cannot reasonably claim that a conspiracy is made concerning the book. -because the book is now old and its crisis over. Of course they were given the copy from Victor Eremita...” (Pap., X1A 402). Naturally, because “as little as I in Either-Or is the Seductor or the Assessor, as little am I the publisher Victor Eremita, exactly as little" he is a poetically-real subjective thinker, as he is also found in “in vino veritas.” “ (the postscript to the Postscript, 1846) But he only sent few copies to very choice people, fewer than he did most of his other works, and only three copies have been identified (to Henrik Hertz, Christian Winther, and Hans Christian Andersen). Three further copies in gift-bindings corresponding to these have been identified, but in these copies, the leaf with the presentation-inscription has also been torn out. He must have given away yet another copy – one presumably not being on vellum-paper, as, according to his own notes, he had asked the printers for six copies on vellum paper (see Pap., Vol. X, part five, p. (203).) -, making the total known (albeit not all identified) number of copies seven. “Two copies in a binding corresponding to Hertz’s copy have been traced, but in both, the front free end-paper has been torn out. It leads one to think that the completely unusual presentation inscription (signed by Victor Eremita!), for the immediate posterity has been of such a curious nature that it has tempted autograph hunters on several occasions.” (Tekstspejle, p. 97, translated from Danish). “The other book, of which the recipients stand out is the second edition of Either-Or, which appeared in May 1849. The first edition from 1843 had been sold out for several years, but Kierkegaard had refused to have it reprinted. In our context we must remember that in 1843, he was unable to send gift copies of the first edition… When, in 1843, he lets Either-Or be reprinted in textually unaltered form, he has meanwhile (1846) admitted to authorship of the work. But the wording on the title-pages of the two leaves does not allow him to sign the dedication “from the Author” or “from the publisher” or the like.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). Either-Or is now not only the title of Kierkegaard’s most famous and widely read work, it is also a phrase that summarizes much of the thinking for which he is best known and a cornerstone of what we now characterize as Existentialism. The first edition caused a sensation. The second issue (termed “edition”, although it is textually unaltered) is not only the first edition of the work to appear after Kierkegaard had acknowledged authorship of it and thus also confirmed being one and the same with his most famous pseudonym, it is also the first of Kierkegaard’s works to appear in a second edition or issue. The second edition of the work is thus also of the utmost importance and is one of the only important second editions of any of Kierkegaard’s works. Only a few months after Kierkegaard died (11th of November 1855), at the beginning of April 1856, his books were put up for sale. The sale was an event which created stir among scholars all over Denmark, and the event drew large crowds. Everyone wanted a piece of the recently deceased legend, and bidding was lively. The average price for the single items was nearly a rix-dollar a very high price for that time. As the old Herman Lynge wrote in a letter on the 22nd of May (The Royal Library, Recent Letters, D.), to the famous collector F.S. Bang, “At the sale of Dr. Søren Kierkegaard’s books everything went at very high prices, especially his own works, which brought 2 or 3 times the published prices”.” (Rohde Auction Catalogue, p. LVIJ). Many authors, philosophers, and scholars were present in the auction room, which was completely full, as was the Royal Library, who bought ca 80 lots. “Many of the books, not only his own, were paid for with much higher prices than in the book shops” (In Morgenposten no. 99, 30. April 1856, written by “P.”, translated from Danish). ""Some books were bought by libraries where they still are today, others were bought by private people, who sometimes wrote their names in the front of the books and thus, indirectly, stated that they came from Kierkegaard’s book collection… The edition (of the auction catalogue, 1967) registers all books from Kierkegaard’s book collection that it has hitherto been possible to identify – either in public or in private ownership… All in all, nearly a couple of hundred volumes – i.e. ca. 10 % – of the Kierkegaardian book collection is said to be rediscovered…"" (Rohde). Thus, today, books from Kierkegaard’s library are of the utmost scarcity. Only very few are still possible to acquire, and they hardly ever appear on the market. PMM: 314 Himmelstrup 21
Gjentagelsen. Et Forsøg i den experimenterende Psychologi af Constantin Constantius. - [KIERKEGAARD’S OWN COPY - ONE OF THE TWO COPIES HE HAD MADE FOR REGINE AND FOR HIMSELF]
Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1843. Small 8vo. 157 pp. Splendidly bound in beautiful patterned pink moiré-paper covered with red and green floriated gilt branches. Rebacked in nearly matching paper. Blue silk end-papers. All edges gilt. Printed on thick vellum-paper. A splendid copy with light edgewear and absolutely minimal brownspotting. Contemporary inscription to front fly-leaf stating that this is Kierkegaard’s own copy and that it was bought at the auction after him, April 1856 (presumably in the hand of Herman H.J. Lynge). Housed in a beautiful marbled paper box with red Morocco spine. Spine with gilt lines and gilt gothic lettering stating title, the pseudonymous author name and that this is Kierkegaard’s own copy printed on heavy vellum-paper.
Kierkegaard’s own copy of Repetition, one of the two copies he had printed on special paper and specially bound, one for Regine, one for himself, with a correction in Kierkegaard’s hand. This is as close as one comes to the love story of Regine and Kierkegaard – this is Kierkegaard’s own copy that he kept himself, from the love-set of the two copies of Repetition he had made, where the other was for Regine. One of the two copies of the book that he had made on special paper and bound in this particularly beautiful and romantic binding with gilding and flowers. Kierkegaard had his eight pseudonymous works made like this, one for Regine, one for himself. So far, only four of these have surfaced, Regine’s copies of Repetition, Prefaces, and Either-Or (all three sold at auction in 2002), and Kierkegaard’s own copy of Either-Or (which is in the Danish Royal Library). The other copies are unregistered, and the whereabouts unknown. The present copy is presumably that described merely as “dainty w. gilt edges”, nr. 2125 from the auction catalogue, which Herman H.L. Lynge bought at the auction. The correction is to be found on p. 80, where “legede” (played) has been changed to “levede” (lived). See Pap. IV B99. REPETITION – not only the title of one of his most significant books, but also a key concept in the philosophy of Kierkegaard – was written during the same brief spell of feverish activity that also produced Fear and Trembling the two books were even published on the same day. ”Say what you will, this question will play a very important role in modern philosophy, for repetition is a crucial expression for what “recollection” was to the Greeks. Just as they taught that all knowing is a recollecting, modern philosophy will teach that all life is a repetition.” (Repetition, p. 3 – translation by Hong), Kierkegaard states in the beginning of his treatise, anticipating the importance that his concept of Repetition is to have for modern philosophy. Written in the narrative form of an experimental novel centered on two stories that are internally linked, Kierkegaard lets us understand what Repetition could be and what it is in his philosophy. The first story portrays Repetition as something empty and trivial, whereas the second portrays it as an ethical category that is inextricably linked to religion. Repetition is that which makes it possible for man to become and to remain present in the present. Kierkegaard’s explanation of his key concept of Repetition is exhausted in the present work, but it also plays a significant rôle throughout his later works and is considered one of the key concepts in his philosophy. The work is centered around the story of a young man, who has fallen in love with an innocent young girl to whom he has become engaged. But, finding himself unable to consummate the love because of poetic stirrings inside himself, he tries to understand what is going on inside him and whether or not he should break off the engagement. The elderly Constantin Constantius, one of Kierkegaard’s numerous pseudonyms, interferes with the emotions of our young man and begins to conduct speculative experiments with him that are meant to investigate whether a repetition (of the relationship with the girl, of the young man’s feelings, etc.) might be possible. At the end of the first part, the young man flees Copenhagen and leaves the girl, presumably at her wits’ end. Later, she marries someone else, and the young man transforms into the true poet that he could only be when unattached to the girl he loved. It does not take much of an imagination to link this story to the Kierkegaard’s own wildly famous love story and failed engagement to Regine Olsen. It all begins in 1837, when Kierkegaard meets the lovely young girl Regine Olsen at a visit to the widowed Cathrine Rørdam. Three years later, in September 1840, after having corresponded frequently with her and visited her on numerous occasions, Kierkegaard decides to ask for her hand in marriage. She and her family accept, but the following day, Kierkegaard regrets his decision and ends up finally breaking off the engagement in October 1841. Disregarding the scandal, the heartbreak (his own included), and the numerous pleas from family members and friends alike, Kierkegaard’s tortured soul, still searching for God and for the meaning of faith, cannot continue living with the promise of marriage. Later the same month, he flees Copenhagen and the scandal surrounding the broken engagement. He leaves for Berlin, the first of his four stays there, clearly tortured by his decision, but also intent on not being able to go through with the engagement. As is evident from his posthumously published Papers, Kierkegaard’s only way out of the relationship was to play a charming, but cold, villain, a charlatan, not betraying his inner thoughts and feelings. Despite the brevity of the engagement, it has gone down in history as one of the most significant in the entire history of modern thought. It is a real-life Werther-story with the father of Existentialism as the main character, thus with the dumbfounding existentialist outcome that no-one could have foreseen. This exceedingly famous and difficult engagement became the introduction to one of the most influential authorships in the last two centuries. “She was the reason for my authorship”, Kierkegaard writes in his Papers, and there is no doubt that several of his most significant works are born out of the relationship with Regine – and its ending. It is during his stay in Berlin, his first of four altogether, right after the rupture of the engagement, that he begins writing Either-Or, parts of which, like Repetition, can be read as an almost autobiographical rendering of his failed engagement. Repetition, more than any other work, lets us see how Kierkegaard came to be as an author through his tumultuous inner life during his engagement and the ending of it. After a couple of years, Regine got engaged to someone else, whom she married in 1847. But as is well known, Kierkegaard never married, and the impact of his engagement to Regine and what it made him understand – about himself, about religion, faith, the inner workings of the philosopher and the poet –, never lost its significance. It is evident from the many drafts of a letter that he sent to Regine, through her husband, in 1849 (which was returned to him, unopened) that he had never lain the matter to rest and that the relationship with Regine was still very much alive. He also states in his Notebook 15 from 1849 “By the way, it is certainly the case that my relationship with her has been a very close, present study for me of what faith is. For I know better in this relationship how it is apparently the exact opposite of the foundational. That I have lasted in this relationship has been useful for me in relating to God as a believer.” In his Notebook 15, also known as My Relationship with Her, from 1849, Kierkegaard describes how, when he finally broke off the engagement and she tried to get him to stay, she had told him “that she would thank me her entire life for being allowed to stay with me, even if she were to live in a little cupboard” (SKS No. 16: 6). Thus, Kierkegaard had a little cupboard made, with no shelves in it. Here, he kept “everything that reminds me of her and will remind me of her. There is also a copy of the pseudonyms (i.e. the works that he wrote under a pseudonym) of these, there were always only two copies on vellum-paper, one for her and one for me.” (SKS: Not. 15:6.). Here we have it – the closest we get to this pivotal love affair from which grew one of the most important philosophical-religious authorships in the Western world. In all, Kierkegaard wrote eight pseudonymous books, Repetition being one of them, all of which were evidently printed in two copies each on vellum-paper and bound in special bindings, one for Regine, one for Kierkegaard himself. 24 years ago, three of these books surfaced, at an auction in 2002, namely Either-Or, Repetiton, and Prefaces, all being the copies Kierkegaard had bound for Regine. Before that, only one single copy of one of these eight titles for Kierkegaard himself or for Regine were known (namely Kierkegaard’s own copy of Either-Or, which is in the Danish Royal Library). Seven of the books, Kierkegaard’s own copies, were listed in the auction catalogue after his death, but apart from the mentioned copy of Either-Or in the Royal Library, the others had not been found. The four known copies are all bound in very particular, beautiful, patterned bindings with flowers and gold, in either pink or white. Like Fear and Trembling, there are no presentation-copies known to exist of Repetition. Himmelstrup 53
Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt hensyn til Socrates. Af S. A. Kierkegaard. - [PRESENTATION-COPY TO HIS PREVIOUS GREEK TEACHER BOJESEN]
Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsens Forlag, 1841. 8vo. (8), 350 pp. Gift binding of plain brown full cloth with single gilt lines to spine. Printed on fine paper. Handwritten title to spine: “Kierkegaard / Om / Ironie”. Very neat, barely noticeable small restorations to capitals and to corners. A bit of browning and brownspotting, mostly to the first leaves. With the ex libris of Georg Nygaard to inside of front board and pencil annotation stating that the copy was bought at the auction of his collection in 1943, by bookseller Hagerup.
Magnificent presentation-copy of Kierkegaard's dissertation, inscribed toverso of front fly-leaf to his previous Greek teacher, Bojesen: “Til / Hr. Professor Boiesen” (i.e. For / Mr. Professor Boiesen). The copy is with the Thesis, but neither the date nor the time has been filled in by hand as usual in the presentation-copies. This is presumably because he did not expect his previous teacher to show up to the defense. Kierkegaard's dissertation constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and hadto petition the King to be granted permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself poses as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. One of Kierkegaard’s only true friends, his school friend H.P. Holst recounts (in 1869) how the two had a special school friendship and working relationship, in which Kierkegaard wrote Latin compositions for Holst, while Holst wrote Danish compositions for Kierkegaard, who “expressed himself in a hopelessly Latin Danish crawling with participial phrases and extraordinarily complicatedsentences” (Garff, p. 139). When Kierkegaard, in 1838, was ready to publish his famous piece on Hans Christian Andersen (see nr. 1 & 2 above), which was to appear in Heiberg’s journal Perseus, Heiberg had agreed to publish the piece, although he had some severe critical comments about the way and the form in which it was written – if it were to appear in Perseus, Heiberg demanded, at the very least, the young Kierkegaard would have to submit it in a reasonably readable Danish. “Kierkegaard therefore turned to his old schoolmate H. P. Holst and asked him to do something with the language…” (Garff, p. 139). From their school days, Holst was well aware of the problem with Kierkegaard’s Danish, and he recounts that over the summer, he actually “translated” Kierkegaard’s article on Andersen into proper Danish. The oral defense was conducted in Latin, however. The judges all agreed that the work submitted was both intelligent and noteworthy. But they were concerned about its style, which was found to be both tasteless, long-winded, and idiosyncratic. We already here witness Kierkegaard’s idiosyncratic approach to content and style that is so characteristic for all of his greatest works. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of The Concept of Irony and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. With irony, we will be able to embrace the not knowing. We need to question the world knowing we may not find an answer. The moment we stop questioning and just accept the easy answers, we succumb to ignorance. We must use irony to laugh at ourselves in order to improve ourselves and to laugh at society in order to improve the world. The work was submitted to the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Copenhagen on June 3rd 1841. Kierkegaard had asked for his dissertation to be ready from the printer’s in ample time for him to defend it before the new semester commenced. This presumably because he had already planned his sojourn to Berlin to hear the master philosopher Schelling. On September 16th, the book was issued, and on September 29th, the defense would take place. The entire defense, including a two hour long lunch break, took seven hours, during which ”an unusually full auditorium” would listen to the official opponents F.C. Sibbern and P.O. Brøndsted as well as the seven “ex auditorio” opponents F.C. Petersen, J.L. Heiberg, P.C. Kierkegaard, Fr. Beck, F.P.J. Dahl, H .J.Thue og C.F. Christens, not to mention Kierkegaard himself. The work appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. The first page of the theses always contains the day “XXIX” of September written in hand, and sometimes the time “hora X” is also written in hand, but not always. In all, 11 presentation-copies of the dissertation are known, and of these only one is signed (that for Holst), all the others merely state the title and name of the recipient. As is evident from the auction catalogue of his collection, Kierkegaard had a number of copies of his dissertation in his possession when he died. Five of them were bound, and two of them were “nit. M. Guldsnit” (i.e. daintily bound and with gilt edges). These two copies were obviously meant as presentation-copies that he then never gave away. The gift copies of the dissertation were given two types of bindings, both brownish cloth, one type patterned, the other one plain, and some of them have gilt edges, but most of the plain ones do not. There exist two copies on thick vellum paper – one being Kierkegaard’s own copy, the other being the copy for H.C. Ørsted, discoverer of electromagnetism and then principle of the University of Copenhagen. “As already implied, two works of the authorship stand out in the sense that Kierkegaard sent his presentation-copies to a special circle of people: The dissertation from 1841...” (Posselt, Textspejle, p. 91, translated from Danish). Most of the copies were given to former teachers and especially to people who, due to leading positions, personified the university. “For this circle of initiated we can now, due to registered copies, confirm that Kierkegaard gave copies with handwritten dedications to the headmaster of the University H.C. Ørsted (printed on thick paper), Kolderup-Rosenvinge and to J.L. Heiberg. It is granted that Sibbern, Madvig and F.C. Petersen were also given the dissertation as a gift,... but these copies are not known (yet).” (Posselt, Textspejle, pp. 93-94, translated fromDanish). (N.b. We have since handled the copy given to Petersen and can thus confirm that it exists). The presentation-inscriptions in the 11 registered copies of the Irony all follow a certain, strict pattern. “The wording could not be briefer. In the donation of his academic treatise, the otherwise prolific Kierkegaard sticks to name, titles, and the modes of address that goes with the titles.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). When presenting his later books, he always signs himself “from the author”, sometimes abbreviated (i.e. “Forf.” In stead of “Forfatteren”), unless he is mentioned by name on the title-page as the publisher, not the author, as is the case with some of the pseudonymous works. In that case he signs his inscriptions “From the publisher”, always accompanied by “in deep reverence”, “with reverence”, “with friendship” or the like, adapted to the rank of the recipient and his place on Kierkegaard’s personal scale. An academic treatise, however, published before the oral defense took place – in the mind of Kierkegaard – required certain demands in relation to the donation of it. Thus, the brevity and rigidity in the inscriptions. Ernst Frederik Christian Bojesen (1803-64) was a philologist and school man. In 1820, Bojesen graduated as student from Borgerdydskolen, where he already the following year began teaching classical languages and soon became the principal’s right hand man. Here, he taught classical languages and was Kierkegaard’s teacher of classical Greek. He later became dr. Phil and professor at Sorø Akademi, where “in September 1841, he received, by post, a presentation-copy of the dissertation “On the Concept of Irony” by his previous disciple. (Tudvad, Kierkegaards København, p. 171). Himmelstrup 8
Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt hensyn til Socrates. Af S. A. Kierkegaard. - [KIERKEGAARD’S DISSERTATION IN THE ORIGINAL BINDING, WHICH IS OF THE UTMOST SCARCITY.]
Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsens Forlag, 1841. 8vo. (4), 350 pp., 1 f. (blank), 2 pp. (advertisements). Completely uncut and partly unopened in the original brown cardboard binding. Rebacked with paper perfectly matching that of the boards. Corners restored. Title-page evenly browned and a few leaves with a bit of brownspotting, but overall in unusually nice condition, clean, fresh, and bright. Completely unmarked.
A fabulous copy of the first edition of Kierkegaard’s dissertation, here in the original binding, which is of the utmost scarcity. We have only seen it in this state once before. And of all the copies we have handled of the Irony over the last decades, we have only once before come across a copy with the advertisement-leaf in the back. This is virtually never present. This completely uncut copy is approximately 1 cm taller and wider than regular copies. The spines of the original Kierkegaard cardboard bindings are always just thin paper directly glued on the block, making them extremely fragile, especially on the thicker volumes. If one finds these original bindings, the spines are almost always more or less disintegrated. Kierkegaard's dissertation constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and hadto petition the King to be granted permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself poses as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. One of Kierkegaard’s only true friends, his school friend H.P. Holst recounts (in 1869) how the two had a special school friendship and working relationship, in which Kierkegaard wrote Latin compositions for Holst, while Holst wrote Danish compositions for Kierkegaard, who “expressed himself in a hopelessly Latin Danish crawling with participial phrases and extraordinarily complicatedsentences” (Garff, p. 139). When Kierkegaard, in 1838, was ready to publish his famous piece on Hans Christian Andersen (see nr. 1 & 2 above), which was to appear in Heiberg’s journal Perseus, Heiberg had agreed to publish the piece, although he had some severe critical comments about the way and the form in which it was written – if it were to appear in Perseus, Heiberg demanded, at the very least, the young Kierkegaard would have to submit it in a reasonably readable Danish. “Kierkegaard therefore turned to his old schoolmate H. P. Holst and asked him to do something with the language…” (Garff, p. 139). From their school days, Holst was well aware of the problem with Kierkegaard’s Danish, and he recounts that over the summer, he actually “translated” Kierkegaard’s article on Andersen into proper Danish. The oral defense was conducted in Latin, however. The judges all agreed that the work submitted was both intelligent and noteworthy. But they were concerned about its style, which was found to be both tasteless, long-winded, and idiosyncratic. We already here witness Kierkegaard’s idiosyncratic approach to content and style that is so characteristic for all of his greatest works. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. The year 1841 is a momentous one in Kierkegaard’s life. It is the year that he completes his dissertation and commences his sojourn in Berlin, but it is also the defining year in his personal life, namely the year that he breaks off his engagement with Regine Olsen. And finally, it is the year that he begins writing Either-Or. In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of The Concept of Irony and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. With irony, we will be able to embrace the not knowing. We need to question the world knowing we may not find an answer. The moment we stop questioning and just accept the easy answers, we succumb to ignorance. We must use irony to laugh at ourselves in order to improve ourselves and to laugh at society in order to improve the world. The work was submitted to the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Copenhagen on June 3rd 1841. Kierkegaard had asked for his dissertation to be ready from the printer’s in ample time for him to defend it before the new semester commenced. This presumably because he had already planned his sojourn to Berlin to hear the master philosopher Schelling. On September 16th, the book was issued, and on September 29th, the defense would take place. The entire defense, including a two hour long lunch break, took seven hours, during which ”an unusually full auditorium” would listen to the official opponents F.C. Sibbern and P.O. Brøndsted as well as the seven “ex auditorio” opponents F.C. Petersen, J.L. Heiberg, P.C. Kierkegaard, Fr. Beck, F.P.J. Dahl, H .J.Thue og C.F. Christens, not to mention Kierkegaard himself. Two weeks later, on October 12th, Kierkegaard broke off his engagement with Regine Olsen (for the implications of this event, see the section about Regine in vol. II). The work appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. The present copy is one of the sales-copies without theses. Himmelstrup 8
