Either/Or

1. Introduction

Either/Or (Enten – Eller, 1843) is a two-volume philosophical work by Søren Kierkegaard, presented under a network of pseudonyms and framed as a collection of discovered papers. It is widely regarded as his first major book and as a foundational text for later existential philosophy.

The work is organized as a confrontation between two contrasting “spheres” or “stages” of life: the aesthetic, associated with immediacy, enjoyment, irony, and possibility, and the ethical, associated with commitment, responsibility, and continuity of selfhood. These standpoints are not discussed in an abstract treatise but are dramatized through fictional authors: an anonymous aesthete (“A”) in Part I and Judge Wilhelm in Part II. A fictional editor, Victor Eremita, claims to have found and arranged their papers.

Rather than arguing directly for one standpoint, Either/Or employs literary forms—aphorism, essay, diary, quasi-novella, and letters—to show what it is like to live according to each orientation. Proponents of existential readings emphasize that the book does not merely describe options but aims to confront readers with the necessity of a qualitative choice that defines their lives.

Scholars often highlight three tightly interwoven themes:

• the analysis of aesthetic existence (boredom, seduction, irony, despair),
• the articulation of an ethical ideal (marriage, duty, the unity of the self),
• and the oblique indication of a further, religious horizon.

Because the authorial voices are fictional and frequently ironic, interpreters disagree about how to relate them to Kierkegaard’s own views. Some read Either/Or primarily as a Christian apologetic in disguise; others emphasize its open-endedness and see it as a study in conflicting life-views rather than a doctrinal statement. In all cases, the work is treated as a central document for understanding modern ideas of subjectivity, commitment, and personal identity.

2. Historical and Intellectual Context

2.1 Danish Golden Age and Social Setting

Either/Or emerged in Copenhagen during the so‑called Danish Golden Age, a period (roughly 1800–1850) marked by literary, artistic, and theological ferment within a relatively small, bourgeois society. The Danish state church (Lutheran) enjoyed close ties with the monarchy, and everyday life was strongly shaped by inherited social roles and Protestant moral expectations. Critics note that Kierkegaard was reacting both to this complacent, culturally Christian milieu and to contemporary debates in philosophy and theology.

2.2 Hegelianism and Post‑Kantian Philosophy

The immediate philosophical backdrop was German Idealism, especially Hegel. Many Danish intellectuals, including theologian H. L. Martensen, promoted Hegel’s system, which claimed to reconcile individual and universal in a rational, historical process. Kierkegaard had studied Hegel intensively and was conversant with this tradition.

Interpreters widely agree that Either/Or is structured as a response to Hegelian ethics and speculative philosophy. The opposition of aesthetic and ethical spheres can be seen as a challenge to the idea that human life is simply subsumed into an objectively knowable ethical order. Nonetheless, some commentators argue that Kierkegaard also adopts certain Hegelian motifs (such as the importance of mediation and development) even as he polemicizes against them.

2.3 Romanticism, Irony, and Aestheticism

Kierkegaard was also influenced by Romanticism, Danish and German, with its emphasis on genius, individuality, and irony. Thinkers such as Friedrich Schlegel and their concept of romantic irony inform the portrait of the reflective aesthete, who distances himself from all commitments.

The fascination with music, Mozart, Don Giovanni, and seductive eroticism in Part I reflects contemporary Romantic aesthetics. At the same time, Either/Or interrogates Romantic subjectivity: many scholars read the figure of “A” as a critique of the Romantic ideal of the ironic, self‑enclosed individual.

2.4 Religious and Theological Background

The work appears against the background of Lutheran orthodoxy and emerging liberal theology. Debates about sin, grace, and the role of the church were active in Copenhagen. The ethical emphasis on marriage and duty reflects Lutheran values, while hints of a more radical religious perspective anticipate later controversies between Kierkegaard and the established church.

Some scholars frame Either/Or as Kierkegaard’s exploration of what it means to exist as an individual before God in a culture where Christianity has become socially routine, though the explicitly religious dimension remains largely indirect in this work.

3. Author, Pseudonyms, and Composition

3.1 Kierkegaard as Author and the Pseudonymous Voices

While Either/Or is attributed on its title page to Victor Eremita as editor, the historic author is Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855). Kierkegaard developed a systematic practice of pseudonymous authorship, assigning different viewpoints to fictional authors who claim responsibility for their texts. In Either/Or three key pseudonyms appear:

Kierkegaard later insisted that these pseudonyms do not simply “hide” his views but function to present different existential positions from the inside.

3.2 Genesis and Period of Composition

Kierkegaard worked on materials that would become Either/Or between 1839 and 1842, a period overlapping with his broken engagement to Regine Olsen (1841). Many scholars consider this biographical trauma a significant background to the work’s preoccupation with love, engagement, marriage, and renunciation, though views differ on how directly autobiographical the text is.

Drafts and notebooks from this period show Kierkegaard experimenting with diverse literary forms and with contrasting personae. The elements later assigned to “A” and Judge Wilhelm appear in embryonic form in these documents.

3.3 Construction of the Framing Narrative

The fictional editor, Victor Eremita, narrates in the preface how he allegedly discovered a hidden drawer in an antique desk containing two bundles of papers. This framing device:

• allows Kierkegaard to claim that the writings of “A” and Wilhelm are independent,
• emphasizes the indirect nature of the communication,
• and distances the historical author from explicit endorsement of any single view.

Interpreters disagree on the significance of Victor Eremita: some see him as a neutral arranger; others suggest he subtly shapes the reader’s perspective through the order and juxtaposition of the papers.

3.4 Intentions behind the Pseudonymous Strategy

Kierkegaard later explained (especially in The Point of View for My Work as an Author) that pseudonyms were used to “deceive into the truth”: by encountering compelling but limited life-views, readers are invited to examine their own existence. With Either/Or, this strategy enters full maturity: the aesthetic and ethical are not described from above but enacted by distinct authorial figures, whose styles, arguments, and blind spots embody their respective standpoints.

4. Publication History and Textual Tradition

4.1 First Edition and Early Printings

Either/Or was first published in Copenhagen on 20 February 1843 by C.A. Reitzel, in two separate volumes. The title page named Victor Eremita as editor, with no indication of Kierkegaard’s authorship. Contemporary records indicate that Kierkegaard personally financed the printing, a common practice for serious works in Denmark at the time.

The initial print run appears to have been modest but sufficient to attract notice in Danish literary and theological circles. Early sales and reviews encouraged Kierkegaard to continue his pseudonymous project with subsequent works.

4.2 Later Danish Editions and Critical Scholarship

Over the 19th and 20th centuries, Either/Or was reprinted multiple times in Danish. The most authoritative modern edition is that of Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter (SKS), vols. 2–3, by Gads Forlag, which provides a critical text based on surviving manuscripts and early printings, together with extensive commentary.

Scholars rely on SKS as the standard textual basis for translations and commentaries.

4.3 Manuscripts and Autographs

Unlike some of Kierkegaard’s other works, autograph materials for Either/Or have survived. These include drafts and notebooks that shed light on the composition process and the ordering of sections. Textual scholars use these manuscripts to:

• trace the development of key passages,
• verify readings where the first edition is ambiguous,
• and study how Kierkegaard refined the voices of “A” and Judge Wilhelm.

The existence of such materials has allowed editors to correct a small number of typographical errors from the first edition and to clarify some punctuation and paragraphing decisions.

4.4 Translations and International Dissemination

Either/Or began to circulate widely outside Denmark only in the late 19th and especially the 20th century, with translations into German, French, and English. These translations played a major role in its reception within existentialism and theology.

Textual historians note that earlier translations sometimes paraphrased or smoothed out Kierkegaard’s style, while later ones have aimed at greater philological accuracy. This has led to differences in how certain concepts (for example Valget as “choice” or “decision”) are rendered, contributing to divergent interpretive traditions.

4.5 Current Textual Status

There is broad scholarly agreement that the text of Either/Or is stable and well established. Critical debates now focus less on textual reconstruction and more on:

• the order and interpretive weight of sections,
• cross-references to Kierkegaard’s journals,
• and the relation between Either/Or and the rest of his pseudonymous and signed corpus.

5. Overall Structure of Either/Or

Either/Or is organized as two contrasting sets of papers, each representing a different “sphere” of existence. The structure itself enacts the central opposition of the work.

5.1 Two Volumes, Two Spheres

Part I presents a variety of writings exemplifying the aesthetic life-view, emphasizing mood, style, and psychological observation. Part II contains sustained letters from Judge Wilhelm to “A”, articulating an ethical alternative.

5.2 Internal Organization of Part I

Within the first volume, the papers of “A” are ordered to move from fragmentary impressions toward a more extended narrative:

1. “Diapsalmata” – brief aphorisms and lyrical fragments.
2. “The Immediate Erotic Stages or the Musical-Erotic” – a theoretical essay on erotic immediacy and music.
3. “Ancient Tragedy’s Reflection in the Modern” – a comparative essay on tragedy.
4. “Shadowgraphs: A Psychological Pastime” – short psychological sketches.
5. “The Unhappiest One” – reflections on unhappiness and reflective misfortune.
6. “The Rotation Method” – a satirical essay on boredom and “crop rotation”.
7. “The Seducer’s Diary” – a lengthy fictional diary of Johannes the Seducer.

Commentators often note a progression from scattered mood to a concrete, disturbing embodiment of aesthetic existence in Johannes.

5.3 Internal Organization of Part II

Part II, titled “Either/Or: A Fragment of Life”, comprises letters from Judge Wilhelm:

1. “The Aesthetic Validity of Marriage” – a defense of marriage addressed to “A”.
2. “Equilibrium Between the Aesthetic and the Ethical in the Development of Personality” – a broader account of ethical selfhood and choice.
3. “Ultimatum” – an appended piece including a sermon by a country pastor.

Within these, the judge systematically critiques “A”’s outlook and develops an ethical conception of personality, treating marriage as a central example.

5.4 Framing Device and Overall Composition

A short preface by Victor Eremita precedes the two main parts, explaining their “discovery” and arrangement. The title Either/Or suggests a fundamental alternative without stating which side the reader should choose. Many interpreters argue that the cumulative structure—moving from aesthetic plurality to ethical seriousness and finally to the religiously tinged sermon—forms an indirect trajectory, while others emphasize the unresolved tension as essential to the work’s design.

6. Part I: The Aesthetic Sphere and Its Forms

Part I, attributed to “A”, explores the aesthetic sphere from within. The texts neither praise nor condemn it explicitly but display its characteristic moods, practices, and inner contradictions.

6.1 Diapsalmata and Fragmented Subjectivity

The opening “Diapsalmata” consists of short aphorisms and poetic fragments expressing irony, melancholy, and fleeting enjoyment. These pieces illustrate a consciousness that avoids stable commitments, preferring momentary impressions. Scholars view this fragmentation as emblematic of aesthetic existence: the self is dispersed across moods and reflections.

6.2 The Musical-Erotic and Don Giovanni

In “The Immediate Erotic Stages or the Musical-Erotic”, “A” argues that Mozart’s Don Giovanni is the highest artistic expression of immediate erotic desire. Music is presented as the medium that can best express pure sensuous immediacy, since it unfolds in time without fixed conceptual content. This essay articulates an aesthetic ideal where intensity and immediacy of feeling are central values.

6.3 Modern Tragedy and Reflection

“Ancient Tragedy’s Reflection in the Modern” compares Greek tragedy (e.g., Oedipus Rex) with modern works (e.g., Goethe’s Faust). “A” maintains that modern subjectivity and reflection alter the nature of the tragic: guilt and conflict become more interior and psychological. This reveals how the aesthete is fascinated by forms of consciousness and by the inner complexity of characters.

6.4 Psychological Sketches and Unhappiness

“Shadowgraphs: A Psychological Pastime” offers brief portraits of subtle psychological types, showing the aesthete’s enjoyment of observing possibilities in others’ inner lives. “The Unhappiest One” reflects on who is most unhappy—mythical figures or modern reflective individuals—concluding that reflective misfortune, in which suffering cannot be expressed or resolved, has a special intensity. Commentators take this as an indirect diagnosis of the aesthete’s own condition.

6.5 Boredom, Crop Rotation, and the Seducer

In “The Rotation Method”, “A” treats boredom as the root problem of life and prescribes a method of “crop rotation” (constant variation of circumstances and interests) to avoid it. The essay is satirical and exposes the futility of perpetual novelty-seeking.

The culminating text, “The Seducer’s Diary”, presents the carefully planned seduction of Cordelia by Johannes the Seducer. It combines literary brilliance with a chilling portrayal of manipulative eroticism. Many interpreters treat Johannes as the fully developed aesthete, whose refined pursuit of “interesting” experiences exemplifies the moral emptiness and latent despair of the aesthetic sphere.

7. Part II: The Ethical Sphere and Judge Wilhelm’s Letters

Part II, titled “Either/Or: A Fragment of Life”, consists of letters from Judge (Assessor) Wilhelm to the younger “A”, presenting and defending the ethical sphere of existence.

7.1 The Aesthetic Validity of Marriage

In the first letter, “The Aesthetic Validity of Marriage”, Wilhelm addresses “A”’s likely skepticism about marriage as bourgeois or dull. He argues that marriage possesses its own aesthetic beauty, precisely because it integrates passion with continuity and responsibility. Rather than opposing aesthetic and ethical values, Wilhelm claims that the ethical deepens the aesthetic by binding love to a lifelong commitment.

7.2 Ethical Personality and Choice

The second major letter, “Equilibrium Between the Aesthetic and the Ethical in the Development of Personality”, develops Wilhelm’s conception of ethical selfhood. Ethical existence is characterized by:

• continuity: a unified life-history rather than disconnected episodes,
• responsibility: taking ownership of one’s actions,
• choice: a decisive commitment that constitutes the self.

Wilhelm contends that the aesthete’s ironic detachment leads to inner division, whereas the ethical person “chooses himself” in making binding decisions (such as marriage, vocation, or duty). He presents the ethical sphere as capable of reconciling aesthetic individuality and universal moral demands.

7.3 Critique of the Aesthetic Life-View

Throughout the letters, Wilhelm critiques “A”’s standpoint without caricature. He acknowledges the allure of aesthetic enjoyment and the insights of reflective irony, but he argues that they culminate in despair and boredom. The judge claims that true freedom is realized not in avoiding ties but in willing commitments that unify one’s life.

Interpretations differ on whether Wilhelm fully understands the depth of the aesthete’s problems or whether his ethical optimism is intentionally limited, preparing the way for a further, religious perspective hinted at in the final section.

7.4 The “Ultimatum” and the Country Pastor’s Sermon

The concluding piece, “Ultimatum”, includes a sermon by a country pastor on the theme “The Edification Which Lies in the Thought that in Relation to God We Are Always in the Wrong.” Although appended by Wilhelm, the sermon’s voice is distinct. It introduces explicitly religious concerns—sin, guilt before God, and the need for forgiveness—beyond Wilhelm’s ethical discourse. Many scholars see this as signaling that even the ethical sphere is not final but points toward a higher, religious mode of existence.

8. Central Arguments: Aesthetic versus Ethical Life

The core argumentative tension of Either/Or concerns two fundamentally different life-orientations: the aesthetic and the ethical. Rather than offering a systematic treatise, the work stages these options through contrasting voices.

8.1 The Aesthetic Life-View

The aesthetic standpoint, embodied in “A” and Johannes the Seducer, is characterized by:

• pursuit of pleasure, interesting experiences, and novelty,
• avoidance of fixed commitments,
• cultivation of irony and reflective distance,
• preoccupation with mood, style, and psychological observation.

Proponents of this standpoint within the text argue that binding commitments restrict freedom and that life’s meaning lies in intensifying experience, especially erotic and artistic experience. Boredom appears as the main threat; techniques like the rotation method aim to manage it.

Critics (especially Judge Wilhelm) contend that this orientation leads inevitably to despair, since the self never attains unity or enduring significance.

8.2 The Ethical Life-View

The ethical standpoint, represented by Judge Wilhelm, emphasizes:

• duty and responsibility,
• continuity of self across time,
• marriage and social roles as sites of ethical realization,
• the importance of choice in constituting the self.

Wilhelm argues that only by committing oneself—“choosing oneself in one’s choice”—does an individual become a true self. The ethical person appropriates the past and projects a coherent future, thereby integrating aesthetic elements (pleasure, individuality) within a stable life-project.

8.3 The Either/Or: Exclusivity and Decision

The title Either/Or signals that these are not simply coexisting options to be blended at will. The work presents the choice between them as a qualitative either/or: one must fundamentally orient one’s life either aesthetically or ethically. However, the ethical sphere is portrayed as capable of transforming and incorporating aesthetic moments, while the purely aesthetic cannot ground ethical commitments.

8.4 Interpretive Debates

Commentators disagree on several issues:

• whether the book endorses the ethical standpoint or leaves the choice genuinely open,
• whether the aesthetic and ethical are mutually exclusive “stages” or can coexist in a more complex way,
• and how strongly the text hints that both are ultimately inadequate compared to a religious stage.

Nonetheless, there is broad agreement that the confrontation between these life-views constitutes the central philosophical drama of the work.

9. Choice, Selfhood, and Despair

9.1 Choice (Valget) as Self-Constitution

A central theme of Either/Or is choice (Valget). In Judge Wilhelm’s letters, choice is not merely selecting among options but a qualitative act that constitutes who one is. By making a decisive commitment—such as entering marriage—the individual “chooses himself”, taking responsibility for past, present, and future.

This conception contrasts with purely calculative decision-making: there are no neutral criteria that can fully justify the existential choice between aesthetic and ethical life. The decision is portrayed as passionate, inward, and non‑derivable from theory.

9.2 Unity and Continuity of the Self

For Wilhelm, the self is not given but becomes unified through ethical choice. The ethical person:

• integrates disparate experiences into a coherent life-story,
• accepts responsibility for missteps instead of retreating into irony,
• and holds together immediacy (feeling, desire) with reflection and duty.

By contrast, the aesthete’s self is fragmented across changing moods and roles; he lacks a stable identity anchored in commitment.

9.3 Despair and Reflective Unhappiness

While the term despair (Fortvivlelse) is more fully developed in Kierkegaard’s later The Sickness unto Death, Either/Or already portrays a form of reflective unhappiness. In essays like “The Unhappiest One” and in the figure of Johannes the Seducer, aesthetic existence is shown to harbor a hidden despair:

• boredom reveals the emptiness of constant novelty,
• irony undermines the possibility of wholehearted engagement,
• and the individual experiences an inner division between what he is and what he might be.

Proponents of existential interpretations see this as a structural condition of the aesthetic life: without decisive choice, the self cannot achieve wholeness and thus becomes despairing, even if outwardly amused or successful.

9.4 Limits of Ethical Self-Mastery

At the same time, Either/Or hints—especially in the Ultimatum—that even ethical self-constitution has limits. The thought that “in relation to God we are always in the wrong” suggests that no amount of ethical effort can overcome a deeper dimension of guilt and finitude. Some commentators argue that this prepares for a religious understanding of selfhood that depends on grace rather than on autonomous choice alone.

10. Key Concepts and Technical Terminology

This section clarifies several recurrent terms as used within Either/Or and related scholarship.

10.1 Stages or Spheres of Existence

• Aesthetic Stage (Sphere): A way of life oriented toward immediacy, pleasure, and the “interesting.” Commitments are avoided; irony and reflection are used to keep options open. Boredom is the chief enemy.

• Ethical Stage (Sphere): A life structured by duty, commitment, and the continuity of the self. Ethical existence integrates aesthetic elements into a stable life-project, often exemplified by marriage and vocation.

• Religious Stage (Sphere): Only hinted at in Either/Or. Here the self relates absolutely to God, acknowledging sin and dependence on divine forgiveness. It goes beyond purely ethical self-discipline.

10.2 Key Psychological and Existential Terms

• Choice (Valget): The decisive, qualitative act by which an individual constitutes a unified self and life-orientation. Not reducible to rational calculation; involves passion and inwardness.

• Despair (Fortvivlelse): A condition of self-division or failure to be oneself. In Either/Or, despair appears primarily in the aesthetic life as hidden beneath irony, boredom, and restless seeking for novelty.

• Irony: A reflective stance that distances the individual from commitments and meanings. For the aesthete, irony is a protection against earnest engagement but also a barrier to authentic selfhood.

• Boredom: Treated as a central existential problem in Part I. “A” famously calls boredom the root of all mischief and treats it as inevitable in a life of mere enjoyment.

10.3 Aesthetic Practices and Methods

• Rotation Method: The aesthete’s strategy for combating boredom by constantly varying experiences, surroundings, and relationships (“crop rotation”). Presented satirically as ultimately self-defeating.

• Musical-Erotic: A category used by “A” to describe immediate, sensuous eroticism as best expressed in music (especially Mozart’s Don Giovanni), which conveys pure desire without reflective content.

10.4 Pseudonyms and Narrative Roles

• Victor Eremita: Fictional editor who discovers and arranges the papers, framing the whole work and emphasizing indirect communication.

• “A” (the Aesthete): Pseudonymous author of Part I, expressing the aesthetic standpoint through aphorisms, essays, and narratives such as “The Seducer’s Diary.”

• Judge Wilhelm: Pseudonymous author of Part II, articulating the ethical standpoint via letters on marriage, choice, and personality.

• Johannes the Seducer: Narrator of “The Seducer’s Diary,” embodying refined aestheticism focused on manipulative erotic conquest.

• Cordelia: Young woman seduced by Johannes; represents innocence and the human cost of aesthetic manipulation.

10.5 Indirect Communication

• Indirect Communication: Kierkegaard’s method of conveying existential insights through pseudonymous, literary, and dramatic forms rather than overt doctrinal exposition. In Either/Or, this is central to how the aesthetic and ethical positions are presented.

11. Famous Passages: The Seducer’s Diary and The Rotation Method

11.1 “The Seducer’s Diary”

Location: Part I, final major section.

Form and Content: Presented as the diary of Johannes, it narrates his calculated seduction of Cordelia. Johannes orchestrates every detail—meeting, courtship, engagement, and eventual withdrawal—to experience the aesthetic thrill of conquest.

"

“I had discovered that she loved me; now the engagement was to be broken.”

— Johannes, The Seducer’s Diary (paraphrased from Part I)

The diary exemplifies:

• extreme reflective control over emotion,
• aestheticization of another person as an “interesting” object,
• and the refusal of genuine reciprocity.

Critics within and outside the text view this as a devastating portrait of aesthetic immorality. Feminist and ethical readings highlight the objectification of Cordelia and the psychological harm inflicted. Other scholars note its literary power, seeing it as a precursor to modern psychological novels.

Interpretive debates focus on whether the diary should be read primarily as:

• a warning against aestheticism,
• an exploration of the darker aspects of desire,
• or a complex interplay between author, editor, and pseudonym that resists simple moralization.

11.2 “The Rotation Method”

Location: Part I, essay “The Rotation Method.”

Central Idea: The aesthete “A” proposes boredom as the fundamental problem of life and offers a technique to avoid it: crop rotation of experiences. Instead of exhausting one pleasure, the aesthete constantly varies circumstances, friendships, and activities so that nothing becomes stale.

Passages from this essay are frequently cited for their wit and for encapsulating the logic of aesthetic existence: life is managed as an art of maximizing interest and avoiding commitment. Many readers see the self-undermining nature of this method—it produces emptiness rather than fulfillment—as an implicit critique built into the text’s irony.

Together, “The Seducer’s Diary” and “The Rotation Method” have become the most widely known parts of Either/Or, often anthologized and studied independently for their psychological insight and literary sophistication.

12. Aesthetics of Music, Tragedy, and Narrative

Either/Or offers an extended reflection on different art forms—music, tragedy, and narrative—primarily through the voice of the aesthete “A”.

12.1 Music and the Immediate Erotic

In “The Immediate Erotic Stages or the Musical-Erotic”, “A” develops a distinctive aesthetics of music. He argues that:

• music is the art form most suited to expressing immediate sensuous desire,
• Mozart’s Don Giovanni is the unsurpassed exemplar of this, embodying pure erotic energy,
• the Don Juan figure is metaphysical rather than psychological: he is desire itself.

"

“Don Juan is desire; and this is expressed immediately in music.”

— “A”, The Immediate Erotic Stages (paraphrased)

Scholars note that this essay helped shape later understandings of the relationship between music, sexuality, and subjectivity.

12.2 Ancient vs. Modern Tragedy

In “Ancient Tragedy’s Reflection in the Modern”, “A” compares ancient Greek tragedy with modern drama:

“A” suggests that modernity’s heightened reflection transforms tragedy: the tragic hero now suffers from inner conflict and self-awareness, mirroring the aesthete’s own reflective condition.

12.3 Narrative and Psychological Observation

Narrative forms in Part I—especially “Shadowgraphs” and “The Seducer’s Diary”—showcase an aesthetics of psychological subtlety:

• characters are presented as intricate inner possibilities,
• the narrator delights in fine gradations of mood and motive,
• narrative becomes a means of exploring possible lives rather than affirming moral lessons.

Some commentators see these narratives as anticipating the psychological novel, while others stress their role in dramatizing the limitations of aesthetic detachment.

12.4 Aesthetic Theory and Existential Themes

While ostensibly works of art criticism, these essays also function as indirect reflections on existence. The preference for music and modern tragedy underscores the value placed on immediacy and reflection; at the same time, the tragic and erotic themes anticipate the suffering and despair associated with the aesthetic life.

Interpretations differ on how systematically “A”’s aesthetic theory should be taken: some readers see a coherent implicit aesthetics, others view it as deliberately one-sided, embodying a stance that will later be critiqued by the ethical and religious perspectives.

13. Philosophical Method and Indirect Communication

13.1 Pseudonymity as Method

Either/Or exemplifies Kierkegaard’s method of indirect communication through pseudonymous authors. Rather than presenting a straightforward philosophical system, the work stages multiple viewpoints:

• Victor Eremita frames the collection as found papers.
• “A” articulates the aesthetic standpoint.
• Judge Wilhelm offers the ethical alternative.
• The country pastor in the Ultimatum hints at a religious voice.

This multiplicity allows the reader to inhabit each perspective from the inside, experiencing its attractions and limitations.

13.2 Indirect vs. Direct Communication

Kierkegaard later distinguished direct communication (suitable for objective truths) from indirect communication (suitable for existential truths). Either/Or communicates existential possibilities indirectly by:

• using literary forms (diary, aphorism, sermon),
• avoiding explicit authorial verdicts,
• and requiring readers to appropriate or reject positions for themselves.

"

“My pseudonymous works are without authority; they are merely the confusions of poetry and thought.”
— Kierkegaard, The Point of View for My Work as an Author (reflecting on works like Either/Or)

13.3 Anti-Systematic and Anti-Hegelian Dimensions

Many scholars read the method of Either/Or as a critique of Hegelian system-building. Rather than subsuming life-views into a higher synthesis, the book maintains an unresolved either/or. Philosophically, this resists the idea that rational theory can fully mediate conflicting existential stances.

However, others argue that the work still shows a kind of progression—from aesthetic to ethical to religious horizons—suggesting a quasi-structural order, even if not a closed system.

13.4 Reader Involvement and Existential Engagement

Indirect communication in Either/Or aims to engage the reader’s own existence. Because no explicit doctrine is laid down, the reader is compelled to decide:

• which voice is more compelling,
• whether to remain in reflective aestheticism,
• or to move toward ethical or religious commitment.

This structure has led commentators to describe Either/Or as a “mirror” in which readers see their own lives reflected and are nudged toward an existential decision, even though the text itself abstains from stating what that decision must be.

14. The Religious Horizon in Either/Or

Although Either/Or overtly contrasts only the aesthetic and ethical spheres, it contains persistent hints of a further religious dimension.

14.1 The Ultimatum and the Country Pastor’s Sermon

The clearest religious element appears in the Ultimatum, particularly the sermon titled “The Edification Which Lies in the Thought that in Relation to God We Are Always in the Wrong.” This sermon emphasizes:

• universal human sinfulness before God,
• the impossibility of achieving full righteousness by one’s own efforts,
• the need for forgiveness and grace.

This introduces concerns that exceed Judge Wilhelm’s ethical ideal of self-constitution. Even the ethically upright person is portrayed as “in the wrong” before God, suggesting that ethical self-mastery is insufficient.

14.2 Tension between Ethical and Religious

Interpretations diverge on how far Either/Or develops this religious horizon:

• Some scholars argue that the book merely foreshadows Kierkegaard’s later religious works, leaving the religious stage implicit.
• Others see the religious perspective as already structurally present, insofar as the ethical life itself points beyond its own resources when confronting guilt, finitude, and the inability to secure one’s own salvation.

Judge Wilhelm, while primarily an ethical thinker, occasionally gestures toward God and divine order. Yet his focus remains on ethical self-realization, and the more radical religious themes are entrusted to the country pastor.

14.3 Existential Implications

The religious horizon reframes the central issues of choice and selfhood:

• Choice is not only between aesthetic and ethical life, but ultimately about one’s relationship to God.
• Despair is not just ethical failure but can signal a deeper estrangement from the divine.
• The self is called to relate absolutely to something beyond social roles and personal projects.

Later works such as Fear and Trembling and Stages on Life’s Way expand on these themes, but Either/Or already prepares the ground by hinting that genuine resolution of despair and guilt requires a leap into faith, not merely ethical discipline.

14.4 Debates on the Extent of Religious Content

Some commentators maintain that emphasizing the religious horizon risks reading later ideas back into Either/Or. They argue for treating the work primarily as a contrast between two secular life-views. Others contend that Kierkegaard’s own retrospective writings support a reading in which the religious telos is integral, even if it remains indirectly signaled.

The consensus is that, at minimum, Either/Or opens a question about the sufficiency of aesthetic enjoyment and ethical duty, without definitively settling what a fully religious existence entails.

15. Reception, Criticism, and Interpretive Debates

15.1 Contemporary Danish Reception

Upon publication in 1843, Either/Or attracted attention in Danish literary and theological circles for its stylistic brilliance and enigmatic authorship. Some contemporaries treated it as a dazzling piece of belles lettres; others recognized its challenge to Hegelian philosophy and bourgeois morality. Reviews often praised its psychological insight while expressing puzzlement about its ultimate message.

15.2 19th- and Early 20th-Century Readings

In the later 19th century, the work gained prominence in Scandinavia and Germany. The growing interest in individual subjectivity and anti-Hegelian currents made Kierkegaard attractive to theologians and philosophers. Early 20th-century existentialist thinkers such as Heidegger and Sartre drew on themes of choice, authenticity, and despair, often citing Either/Or as a key source.

15.3 Major Criticisms

Critics have raised several enduring objections:

Feminist interpretations, for instance, examine how Cordelia functions as an object for male aesthetic projects and question whether the text adequately problematizes this.

15.4 Interpretive Disagreements

Scholars continue to debate:

• Authorial stance: Does Kierkegaard endorse Judge Wilhelm, or is even the ethical perspective shown to be limited?
• Structure of stages: Are “aesthetic,” “ethical,” and “religious” strict stages, or heuristic constructs with overlap?
• Autobiographical dimension: How closely do Johannes and the discussions of marriage reflect Kierkegaard’s relationship with Regine Olsen?

Some interpret the work as essentially Christian apologetic, guiding the reader beyond the aesthetic to ethical and then religious life. Others emphasize its open-endedness, suggesting that its primary function is to illuminate existential possibilities rather than prescribe a specific path.

15.5 Influence on Later Thought

Debate also concerns Either/Or’s relationship to later existentialism and theology: some see it as a direct precursor to concerns about authenticity and bad faith; others highlight differences, noting that Kierkegaard remains deeply rooted in a Christian framework.

Overall, Either/Or remains a locus of active scholarly discussion, precisely because its pseudonymous and indirect method resists definitive interpretation.

16. Recommended Editions, Translations, and Further Reading

16.1 Major English Translations

Several English translations are commonly recommended, each with distinct strengths:

Readers interested in technical terminology and textual variants tend to favor the Hong & Hong edition; those seeking a more fluent contemporary English often choose Hannay.

16.2 Standard Danish Edition

For work with the original text:

• Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter (SKS), vols. 2–3 (Gads Forlag) provides the critical Danish text, with apparatus and commentary in Danish. It is the standard reference for scholarly citation.

16.3 Introductory and Commentary Works

Several secondary sources offer accessible entry points and detailed analysis:

16.4 Further Reading and Related Texts

Readers interested in how Either/Or connects to Kierkegaard’s larger project often turn to:

• Fear and Trembling (on faith and Abraham),
• Repetition (contemporary with Either/Or, exploring similar themes),
• The Sickness unto Death (systematic treatment of despair and selfhood),
• The Point of View for My Work as an Author (Kierkegaard’s retrospective account of his pseudonymous method).

These works help situate Either/Or within the broader development of Kierkegaard’s thought and clarify how its aesthetic, ethical, and religious dimensions interrelate.

17. Legacy and Historical Significance

17.1 Place in Kierkegaard’s Authorship

Either/Or is widely regarded as Kierkegaard’s first major work and as the starting point of his mature pseudonymous authorship. It inaugurates themes—stages of existence, subjective inwardness, indirect communication—that he develops across subsequent books. Many scholars view it as the foundational text for understanding the overall architecture of his thought.

17.2 Influence on Existential Philosophy

The work has had a substantial impact on existential philosophy. Concepts such as:

• existential choice,
• authenticity vs. inauthenticity,
• and despair as a structural condition of selfhood

resonate in the writings of Heidegger, Sartre, Jaspers, and Marcel, among others. While these thinkers reinterpret Kierkegaard in largely secular frameworks, they often cite Either/Or as crucial for articulating the stakes of personal commitment and freedom.

17.3 Impact on Theology and Religious Thought

In theology, Either/Or contributed to dialectical and neo-orthodox movements, influencing figures such as Karl Barth and Paul Tillich. Its portrayal of the individual before God, and its critique of “Christendom” as cultural Christianity, helped reshape Protestant understandings of faith, guilt, and grace.

17.4 Literary and Cultural Influence

Literary modernism and psychological fiction have drawn on Either/Or’s narrative experiments, especially “The Seducer’s Diary.” Authors and critics note its early exploration of unreliable narration, interior monologue, and complex erotic psychology. The aesthetic/ethical contrast has entered broader cultural discourse as a shorthand for conflicting life-styles—bohemian vs. bourgeois, hedonist vs. responsible citizen.

17.5 Ongoing Relevance

In contemporary discussions, Either/Or remains a reference point for:

• debates about commitment in an age of choice and fluid identities,
• critiques of aestheticized or ironic approaches to life,
• and explorations of how individuals construct narratives of self.

Philosophers, theologians, and literary theorists continue to return to the work for its rich portrayal of competing life-views and for its distinctive method of engaging readers in their own existential decisions. Its enduring significance lies not only in the doctrines it suggests but in the way it stages the drama of choosing who one will be.