Herein lies many of Kierkegaard's most vehement attacks on his utter disgust as what he sees as the shallow and hypocritical Christians of his time. In fact, the rantings rank up there with Nietzsche's tirades against what he liked to call the "rabble."

As you may have guessed by the title, this is not to be an uplifting book. Kierkegaard will never be mistaken for Robert Schuller - that much is for certain. In it, the Danish philosopher (generally considered the father of existentialism) grapples with guilt. Not just anyone's guilt, either, but Soren Kierkegaard's guilt. In page after page he discerns how man's sinful nature is corruptive to his relationship to God. What is worse, no matter how hard he tries, he can't stop sinning any more than he can consciously stop breathing.

Kierkegaard then looks up from his desk and wonders why all those so-called Christians out there aren't doing the same thing that he is. The Dane is introspective, to say the least, and the nucleus of his thought emanates from Socrates' words at his trial, as recorded in Plato's APOLOGY:

...I say again that the greatest good of man is daily to converse about virtue, and all that concerning which you hear me examining myself and others, and that the life which is unexamined is not worth living
- Plato, APOLOGY, Trans: B Jowett

Here is a great man's attempt to follow the dictum of Socrates, and examine his own life. In this sense, THE SICKNESS UNTO DEATH is comparable to St. Augustine's CONFESSIONS, albeit a bit on the morbid side.

One of the Dane's favorite metaphors was of driver falling asleep at the reigns of his wagon. So too did K believe that that is how most of us live our lives. With this in mind, it is not surprising that he anoints this work as an "awakening" for his readers.

I am not a philosopher or even a literary person by any stretch, but I found this book surprisingly accessible. I believe it is essential reading for anyone dealing with despair (depression) in their lives- especially Christians.

The jewel that I was able garner from this book is that faith, fundamentally, is forgoing our common senses and putting our hope in God even when all our senses and previous experiences tell us otherwise. Because with God, everything is possible.

which, in response to Kierkegaard's brilliance Allen succintly noted, "and I have trouble writing two sentences on My Trip to the Zoo."

As most Kierkegaard buffs will know, this novel is actually a small part of the monumental philosophical tract, Either/Or from 1843. Please don't let that fact keep you from reading this delightfully seductive and disturbing novel. In it, Kierkegaard sets out to describe and explore the life of the ultimate aesthete, Johannes, as he targets an innocent young girl, Cordelia, for seduction. Kierkegaard plays with layers of framing and writes such exquisite prose that at least this reader constantly has to struggle not to be seduced by the beauty of it. His aim in writing the text is, at least in part, to show how horrible Johannes and people like him really are, but a surprising number of people just plain don't get the subtlety of Kierkegaard's irony. Hannay's translation doesn't seem to get in the way (I've read it in the original Danish as well), although I'll leave it to the Kierkegaard scholars to determine whether its really a good translation or not.

K./Eremita/... is certainly an amazing and entertaining philosopher, and one should either read everything of his or nothing, I was surprised that the book is not listed as ABRIDGED. The first (and most popular) book is less badly cut, and I'm sure all of the excisions improve the book, if you're serious about K., you might find this a problem. E/O is a two volume work-- good luck finding them, though.

there is a countervailing advantage this edition offers against the princeton volumes even though its abridged... this is a lighter and smoother English translation. English is not my native language, but I believe many American readers would find the Hong translations as tough-going as I did (even if meticulous). Kierkegaard is already very wordy so this translation is a pain reducer.

When you are a young, attractive, seventeen year-old girl, you are the perfect bait for Johannes. Johannes falls in love with Cordelia. At first, his feelings are rather 'normal' - others who fall in love would most likely feel similarly towards their beloved. However, there comes a point when Johannes is unable to control his feelings - his 'crush' becomes an obsession. He is in search of a drama, and strives to be the director of his own play. He invades Cordelia's privacy by spying on her, and befriending her aunt. Johannes even attempts to bring in a third party candidate to win Cordelia's heart - an attractive young man named Edvard. Johannes succeeds. He is a master of manipulation. When Johannes' plan begins to backfire, Edvard is getting too close to Cordelia's heart for Johannes' comfort, he does the unimaginable - he proposes marriage to her! Cordelia refers him to her aunt, who is delighted because of the admiration she has for Johannes. Perhaps she wished him for herself? Nevertheless, Edvard is crushed. Johannes has no mercy, he finds Edvard's despair as humorous as the concept of engagement itself. This is where the story reaches its climax, and plummets from that of a romantic comedy to a devastating tragedy. Johannes' plan is to have Cordelia call off the engagement. However, he will not do this right away. Oh no! He must get her to her erotic peak, he must posses her soul, her self, before he will crush her. The seduction is referred to as several different things throughout the story. My personal favorite: "The web into which she is spun." Johannes and Cordelia begin a letter correspondence that is filled with symbolism and foreshadow. Cordelia signs her letter "Your Cordelia," and Johannes begins his with "My Cordelia." It is clear that he wants to posses her, and perhaps she is too innocent to know otherwise. I suppose that it would be fair to say that she basically hands herself over to him in writing. At the height of their romance, Johannes consciously destroys her. He retuns the letters that she has composed to him unopened. She may be young, a beginner in love, but she is not unwise. She realizes that she has lost herself to him; he has won the battle. Kierkegaard wrote his book "Either/Or" using his real name, Soren Kierkegaard. However, the section entitled "The Seducer's Diary," was written as by a pseudonymous author: Johannes. Perhaps this was a form of indirect communication for Kierkegaard. It makes perfect sense, for "The Seducer's Diary" is based on Kierkegaard's own romance with Miss Regina Olsen. However, this is where the concept of irony steps into the story. In real life, it was not Regina who broke off the engagement, but rather Kierkegaard himself! Perhaps writing the piece pseudonymously was a way for Kierkegaard to control a situation he ultimately never had control over - it was his way of directing his own play. Why did he need to do this? Simple: Indeed Johannes won his battle, but in a sense he has also lost it. Kierkegaard went to his grave still lovesick. He later admitted, "If I had faith, I would have remained with Regina." Kierkegaard had a tendency to contradict himself. He was a spiritual individual who preached faith, yet his comment above suggests otherwise. He also states several times in the story that he is in love, but his love is completely selfish. However, he later retracts this thought. To avoid boredom, the aesthetic Kierkegaard prescribes the "Rotation Method," which allows one to create their own world of pleasure. You fall in love not with the woman, but rather with the IDEA of the woman. Therefore, you don't risk loss. Kierkegaard explored 'fear' throughout a number of his works, and even went as far as to offer advice on how to overcome it. Therefore, it is ironic that he was a coward in terms of love. Nevertheless, the pseudonym, the irony, and contradiction enhance the story. For whatever impact my intellectual arrogance might have, "The Seducer's Diary" is a masterpiece. It is an eloquently written love story that doesn't involve love. "The Seducer's Diary" is a guide to any young girl who is on the brink of womanhood, or any person who is in search of their own self. It teaches us that one can't help losing their soul in love, but can help losing themselves. This was apparent in Kierkegaard's lifetime, and is still relevant today. Reading Kierkegaard is a pleasure. The reader becomes spun into the "web" of Kierkegaard's life, and afterward discovers something curious about their own existence.

Kierkegaard first takes issue with the prevailing (i.e., Hegelian) notion that faith is something to be "transcended" by means of systematic philosophy, and almost baits the reader to consider what it means to go "beyond" faith anyway. Next, he postulates 4 thought experiments that (poetically) reconstruct the Abraham and Isaac ordeal, each of which is intended to show how the story might be harmonized with the prevailing Hegelian mode of understanding the "univeral" in ethical terms. Finally, the section on "Problemata" argues against three (at the time well-known) postulates of Hegelian ethical thought by showing that these are all inconsistent with some remarkable feature of the faith that Abraham evidences.

The section on the Knight of Infinite Resignation and the Knight of Faith provide, albeit obliquely, support for the view that the movement of faith is absolute, and cannot be transcended.

Hannay's introduction is excellent (however, I would suggest first skimming it, then reading Kierkegaard's book, then reading it in earnest at the end).

Kierkegaard first takes issue with the prevailing (i.e., Hegelian) notion that faith is something to be "transcended" by means of systematic philosophy, and almost baits the reader to consider what it means to go "beyond" faith anyway. Next, he postulates 4 thought experiments that (poetically) reconstruct the Abraham and Isaac ordeal, each of which is intended to show how the story might be harmonized with the prevailing Hegelian mode of understanding the "univeral" in ethical terms. Finally, the section on "Problemata" argues against three (at the time well-known) postulates of Hegelian ethical thought by showing that these are all inconsistent with some remarkable feature of the faith that Abraham evidences.

The section on the Knight of Infinite Resignation and the Knight of Faith provide, albeit obliquely, support for the view that the movement of faith is absolute, and cannot be transcended.

The ironic pen-name Kierkegaard uses should be more than enough warning that things aren't necessarily what they seem, so if anyone tells you what this book is about, or what Kierkegaard intended, I suggest you take it with a grain of salt, read this book, and decide for yourself.

Students of Kierkegaard will tell you the meaning of this book in terms of his personal life; philosophers will show you its philosophical meaning; the religious will describe it as a treatise on faith. It is probably all of these, and may be even more. The work centers on the exemplary life of Abraham, in particular the story in which he is asked by God to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac - the son given to him as fulfillment of a promise by God himself. This story is fully worthy of the "fear and trembling" the title expects, but it also serves as an archetypal example of faith itself, in uncompromising terms.

It is also a counter-argument against the (in Kierkegaard's view) stifling moral rationalism of Hegel - an argument "on the strength of the absurd" which is nonetheless compelling, even if one were to ultimately reject it. Considering this, it is perhaps fitting that his work - certainly grave and severe - ultimately provides an affirmation of individual self-determination and a wholehearted engagement with the real world and its affairs... a faith which Kierkegaard professed himself incapable of.

Worth the time of reading once or several times. Poetic, but not lighthearted entertainment - then again, who would read a book titled "Fear and Trembling" on a lark?