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.

100 KIE 6

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 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. ( )

Il tema di questo classico del pensiero esistenzialistico, uscito nel 1843, è la scelta di fondo che la persona concreta deve compiere riguardo alla propria esperienza, alla propria direzione di vita. La scelta non è tra bene e male, ma tra la visione etica ed estetica della vita. Scelta molto concreta che riguarda il nostro modo di organizzare esperienze e sensazioni, al nostro modo di amare e di dar senso al nostro amore. La scelta etica è la scelta della continuità, del significato, della presenza riconoscibile del bene e del male. La scelta estetica costringe alla discontinuità, ad una vita senza significato perchè incapace di organizzarsi in valori assoluti. Il salto di qualità, dal quale deriva la necessità eroica dello scegliere, sarà la disperazione: una disperazione attiva, che nasce dalla constatata assoluta esigenza di valori eterni nei quali la effimera presenza dell'uomo acquista un senso definitivo. L'esteta difende la sua estrema precarietà sottraendosi, prima che alla scelta, a questa illuminante disperazione. La filosofia conosce pochi libri più felici di questo, scritto con estro dialettico e affascinante fervore morale, impetuoso e severo, ma anche affettuoso e cordiale. ( )

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 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. ( )