I was trying to look up your last footnote. Any idea why Princeton's Kierkegaard's Journals and Notebooks would be missing that paper (unless I just can't find it), but Hong's The Moment and Late Writings has it?
Good question. Sadly, I'm not 100% sure because the journals are so vast and varied that it could be a number of issues relating to quality of translation/editing, editorial choice, or an accidental incorrect reference in my notes/the Hongs' work/in another edition.
I know that M. G. Piety has come out in critique of Kirmmse's translations on her blog:
The second post in particular is a damning assessment, albeit with the added weight that Piety has publicly stated she openly dislikes Kirmmse and sees him as complicit with the Garff biography controversy.
Wow, this is some of your best work yet! Never seen a better takedown of the crowd and the "anti-crowd". I won't lie, it can be easy to fall into the trap of "siding with the underdogs" or always being a contrarian..
To be honest, as a 20 something agnostic, I've found tremendous insight in your posts. Finding your blog was such a blessing. Your writing has resonated with me in a way that none other have in a long time! Each post triggers a bout of self-reflection. I know you don't like to take much credit. At the very least, I'm sure I wouldn't have been able to digest Kierkegaard/ the Bible without your exegesis. Thanks for these posts!
I'm so glad to hear that there's someone out there enjoying all this. But, as you hint at, I'm always trying to "point beyond" what I've written. *For Self-Examination* is an excellent accompaniment to the Bible, which is probably the highest accolade S. K. could have hoped for: being a footnote to the gospel.
I was trying to look up your last footnote. Any idea why Princeton's Kierkegaard's Journals and Notebooks would be missing that paper (unless I just can't find it), but Hong's The Moment and Late Writings has it?
Good question. Sadly, I'm not 100% sure because the journals are so vast and varied that it could be a number of issues relating to quality of translation/editing, editorial choice, or an accidental incorrect reference in my notes/the Hongs' work/in another edition.
I know that M. G. Piety has come out in critique of Kirmmse's translations on her blog:
- https://pietyonkierkegaard.com/2024/06/07/4545/
- https://pietyonkierkegaard.com/2016/06/01/kierkegaards-journals-and-notebooks-oh-no/
The second post in particular is a damning assessment, albeit with the added weight that Piety has publicly stated she openly dislikes Kirmmse and sees him as complicit with the Garff biography controversy.
Wow, this is some of your best work yet! Never seen a better takedown of the crowd and the "anti-crowd". I won't lie, it can be easy to fall into the trap of "siding with the underdogs" or always being a contrarian..
To be honest, as a 20 something agnostic, I've found tremendous insight in your posts. Finding your blog was such a blessing. Your writing has resonated with me in a way that none other have in a long time! Each post triggers a bout of self-reflection. I know you don't like to take much credit. At the very least, I'm sure I wouldn't have been able to digest Kierkegaard/ the Bible without your exegesis. Thanks for these posts!
Can't wait for the follow-up!
Also:
(You've inspired me to pickup the Bible for the first time since youth. Thank-you!)
I'm so glad to hear that there's someone out there enjoying all this. But, as you hint at, I'm always trying to "point beyond" what I've written. *For Self-Examination* is an excellent accompaniment to the Bible, which is probably the highest accolade S. K. could have hoped for: being a footnote to the gospel.
God bless.