The Pseudonym of Anti-Climacus Anti- Climacus in Kierkegaard‟s The Sickness Unto Death Søren Kierkegaard uses an assortment of pseudonyms to author the majority of his literary works, including The Sickness Unto Death (SUD), published in 1849. In SUD, the pseudonym Anti-Climacus persuades the reader to examine his or her self to see if they experience existential despair. According to Anti-Climacus, the sickness of despair is equivalent to sin (109) and that, “there is not no t a single human being who does not despair at least a little” (52). Anti-Climacus, Anti-Climacus, who is a “Christian to an extraordinary ex traordinary degree” (Kierkegaard, 393), provides the reader with the much desired solution to despair and sin, that being faith (AntiClimacus, 115). This paper will explain some of the main reasons as to why Kierkegaard chooses to adopt a persona and write SUD pseudonymously. Upon examining the personal journal of Kierkegaard, which was published posthumously, one can see that he was “despairing in [his] melancholy” (391) and that his own physical health is in decline (326) in the year before SUD was published. Kierkegaard even doubts that he may live long enough to see his work published (326). This insight into his mental and physical health shows that Kierkegaard was certainly not well during the time in which SUD was published. The fact that he was despairing himself may explain why he uses the pseudonym of Anti-Climacus, the type of Christian in which he espoused to be. For Kierkegaard, Anti-Climacus was a doctor and he was merely one of the sick like everyone else (Kierkegaard, 422). It will be concluded that Kierkegaard writes SUD using a persona because he feels that he is entirely unworthy to provide the cure for despair, and that the ideal Christian should lead the reader to faith. Not only is this the case, but Kierkegaard also writes using a pseudonym to indirectly communicate this faith, which allows the reader to find the truth for themselves.
In order to understand why Kierkegaard uses a pseudonym, it is imperative to first find out what it means for him to adopt a persona. The term persona is a Latin word that translates into the English word mask (Stern, 31). The mask that Kierkegaard wears, “which acts as a screen” (Stern, 32), separates him from his pseudonym. pseudony m. In the case of Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard sees him as “higher than [his] p ersonal existence” but also one who expresses the “truth about [his] nature” (430). The persona that Kierkegaard adopts not only serves to create distance but also, in a paradoxical manner, create proximity (Stern, 32). Anti-Climacus is so unlike Kierkegaard in that he is the ideal Christian; however, he is exactly the individual Kierkegaard strives to become. Adopting Anti-Climacus as a persona allows Kierkegaard to become what he cannot and to say precisely what he cannot say, but nonetheless, “must be heard” (Kierkegaard, 440). Due to his despair it is clear that Kierkegaard feels unworthy to lead others into true Christian faith and that Anti-Climacus could be much more proactive in this endeavor. He writes in his journal that SUD is “extremely valuable” and that it granted [him] to illuminate “
Christianity on a scale greater than [he] had ever dared hoped” (373). This is not to say that Kierkegaard himself was no longer a Christian, but rather that Anti-Climacus is more of a “simple Christian” (Kierkegaard, 393). It is difficult to determine what Kierkegaard means when he says Anti-Climacus Anti-Climacus is a “simple Christian”; although, it may have something to do with a personality difference between himself and his persona (393). There is no doubt however that Kierkegaard was a Christian and accordingl y, was “God“God-fearing” (Kierkegaard, 391). Though Kierkegaard was indeed a Christian, he feels that those in Christendom are in need of a judge. Kierkegaard claims that Anti- Climacus is the “voice of such a judge” (396). He also mentions that he “would not pass [himself] off as that judge” and “therefore [Anti[Anti-
Climacus] judges him too” (396). This makes it somewhat c lear that Kierkegaard also needs to hear the message Anti-Climacus is proclaiming. This may be due to the fact that Kierkegaard often had an “addiction to t o the aesthetic mode of existence” ex istence” (Kimball, 26). Because of this addiction, Kierkegaard feels unworthy to provide the answer for despair himself. To understand this even further, it may help to disclose what it means for Kierkegaard to exist in the aesthetic mode. In the writings of Kierkegaard, there are “three basic modes or „spheres‟ of existence” (Gardiner, 44-45). 44-45). The aesthetic mode comes first, followed by what is known as the ethical mode, and finally the religious mode (Gardiner, 45). The early works of Kierkegaard deal “extensively with aesthetic themes” (Howe, 136) and exemplify the aesthetic mode of existence in which Kierkegaard himself was a participant. An encyclopedia article on Kierkegaard explains that: The aesthetic stage is characterized by immersion in sensuous experience; valorization of possibility over actuality; egotism; fragmentation of the subject of experience; nihilistic wielding of irony and scepticism; and flight from boredom. (McDonald) Simple stated, when one resides in the aesthetic mode of existence they chase after pleasures to escape their boredom. “Such a person is in a state of despair, even if he if he does not initially realize this”, writes historian historian of philosophy Anthony Kenny (299). Kierkegaard, despairing in the aesthetic mode of existence, places himself “lower then AntiAnti-Climacus” (Kierkegaard, 394). Anti-Climacus, since he is a higher being, exists entirely in the religious sphere and therefore is more suited to lead others to faith. This is precisely why Kierkegaard needs Anti-Climacus. There is still yet another reason why Kierkegaard uses a pseudonym in more general terms. For Kierkegaard, there was no objective certainty with Christianity. The truth of Christianity could only be known individually and subjectively. He writes in his journal that
“you cannot get the truth by capturing it, only by it capturing you” (600). In order to communicate the truth that has captured him, that being Christianity, he must find some way to communicate it indirectly. This “„method of indirect communication‟ was designed to sever the reliance of the reader on the authority of the author” (McDonald) and hence hence why Kierkegaard needed to adopt a persona. In SUD, SUD, and almost all of his literary works, Kierkegaard‟s purpose was to remove the “illusion” of Christendom (McCreary, 30). The illusion of Christendom was that one can be a Christian, and at the same time, remain completely nominal. He writes that his task is to stop the “mendacious propaganda” of Christendom (578). The illusion of Christendom “can only be removed through indirect communication” (McCreary, 30). In order to be successful in his task, Kierkegaard must put on a mask, separating himself from both his pseudonyms and his audience. During Kierkegaard‟s short life, his “intriguing pseudonymous authorship received little popular attention” (McDonald). In Denmark, he was even ridiculed by the “popular “popular satirical review” called The Corsair (McDonald), which often mocked his unusual appearance. Though Kierkegaard was not revered much during his life, in death he has become slightly more popular, particularly with existential philosophers and writers. His brilliance should not be ignored, nor should the brilliance of his pseudonyms, including the extraordinary Christian personality of Anti-Climacus.
Works Cited Anti-Climacus [Kierkegaard, Søren]. The Sickness Unto Death: A Christian Psychological Exposition for Edification and Awakening by Anti-Climactus. Ed. S. Kierkegaard. Trans.
Alastair Hannay. 1989. Penguin: London, 2004. Print. Gardiner, Patrick. Kierkegaard: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press: New York, 1988. Print. Howe, A. Leslie. “Kierkegaard and the Feminine Self.” Hypatia 9:4 (1994): 131-157. Literary Reference Center Plus. Web. 9 Apr. 2012.
Kenny, Anthony. A Brief History of Western Philosophy. Blackwell: Oxford. 1998. Print. Kierkegaard, Søren. Papers and Journals: A Selection. Trans. Alastair Hannay. 1996. Penguin: London, 1996. Print. Kimball, Roger. “What Did Kierkegaard Want?.” New Criterion 20:1 (2001): 19-27. Literary Reference Center Plus. Web. 9 Apr. 2012.
McCreary, L. Mark. “Deceptive “Deceptive Love: Kierkegaard on Mystification and Deceiving into the Truth.” Journal of Religious Ethics 39:1 (2011): 25-47. Humanities Full Text . Web. 22 Apr. 2012. McDonald, William. “Søren Kierkegaard.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The Metaphysics Research Lab, 2009. Web. 9 Apr. 2012. Stern, Michael J. “Persona, Personae! Placing Kierkegaard in Conversation with Bergman.” Scandinavian Studies 77.1 (2005): 31-52. Literary Reference Center Plus. Web. 9
Apr. 2012.