Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2008-03-10 The Conception of Irony with Continual Reference to Kierkegaard: An Examination of Ironic Play in Fear and Trembling Julie Ann Parker Frederick Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Classics Commons, and the Comparative Literature Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Frederick, Julie Ann Parker, "The Conception of Irony with Continual Reference to Kierkegaard: An Examination of Ironic Play in Fear and Trembling" (2008). Theses and Dissertations. 1337. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/1337 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive All Theses and Dissertations 2008-03-10 The onceptC ion of Irony with Continual Reference to Kierkegaard: An Examination of Ironic Play in Fear and Trembling Julie Ann Parker Frederick Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Classics Commons, and the Comparative Literature Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Frederick, Julie Ann Parker, "The oncC eption of Irony with Continual Reference to Kierkegaard: An Examination of Ironic Play in Fear and Trembling" (2008). All Theses and Dissertations. 1337. http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/1337 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CONCEPTION OF IRONY WITH CONTINUAL REFERENCE TO KIERKEGAARD: AN EXAMINATION OF IRONIC PLAY IN FEAR AND TREMBLING TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents………………………………………………………………................ix Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….1 Part I: Irony at Play in Fear and Trembling…......……………………………………....17 Chapter 1: A View Made Necessary: Irony in the Structure and Text of Fear and Trembling………………………………………………………………………………...18 Chapter 2: A View Made Actual: Abraham and Irony......................................................37 Chapter 3: A View Made Possible: Irony and Faith..........................................................70 Part II: Playing with Irony (An)Other View Made Possible.…………………………... .85 Chapter 4: The Virgin Mary, Irony, And Faith..................................................................87 Chapter 5: Kierkegaard and the Foeminini Generis........................................................107 Chapter 6: The Foeminini Generis, Irony, and Faith.......................................................120 Chapter 7: Maternal Irony and Faith……………………………………................…....139 Concluding Thoughts……………………………………………………………….......169 Appendix A …………………………………………………………………………….172 Appendix B …………………………………………………………………………….184 Appendix C……………………………………………………………………………..188 Bibliography………........................................................................................................196 ix Introduction: Irony as a theoretical concept, a rhetorical device, and a mode of living Trying to define the concept of irony in order to give a literary reading is akin to juggling knives. The reading must maintain a careful balance to avoid injury on irony’s dangerous edge. When adding to that reading an element of feminist criticism, the issue can become dicey indeed. Despite the hazards of such an endeavor, the first half of this thesis will attempt first, to analyze the ironic nature of Fear and Trembling; second, to examine Abraham as an example of ironic living, and finally to consider the relationship of irony to faith. The second half of this thesis will then study first, how irony relates to the Virgin Mary and her faith, and second, how irony relates to the maternal experience. Because irony is an elusive device, it is necessary to delineate how this discussion approaches irony as a theoretical concept. The basic qualification for irony as will be discussed in this thesis is negative space that both separates and binds and makes possible for something to be both (its)self and its opposite (or other). Such a broad definition of irony includes both colloquial and academic types of irony, including Kierkegaard’s definition of irony as “uendelige absolute Negativitet [infinite, absolute negativity].”1 Colloquial irony is generally created when two elements are connected through coincidence, but the coincidence seems too poignant to be merely happenstance. Kierkegaard’s own name is an example of this type of irony. The name Kierkegaard is 1The Danish text quoted in this thesis is from Kierkegaard: Samlede Værker, 3rd Edition corrected, as reproduced on Past Masters CD Copyright 1990, Alastair McKinnon (original eds A. B. Drachmann, J.L. Heiberg, and H.O. Lange(Copenhagen: Gyldendal) 1962). Hereafter, it will be cited as KSV, and will be followed by the paragraph number from which the quote comes. The English translations are by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong published by Princeton University Press, unless otherwise noted. The title The Concept of Irony will be abbreviated CI, and the title Fear and Trembling will be abbreviated FT. KSV, 339; CI, 261. 1 made up of kierke, which means “church” and gaard, which means “yard” or “surrounding land.” Because in Denmark people were buried on the property of the local church the word “kierkegaard” means both churchyard and graveyard. This coupling of names is somewhat ironic because of the role of death in Kierkegaardian corpus. When this type of relationship arises between two otherwise unrelated elements and creates a proximity between them, irony exists in the negative space in which they are associated. It is the poignance of the negative space relating the elements, which colloquial irony shares with academic irony. In some cases irony comes from bringing together previously separate or opposite elements. In other cases irony is created by dividing previously joined elements. Whether by relation or separation, both types of irony create a negative space in which interpretation can play. The new relationship created by irony allows for more complex and interpretable intercourse between the elements. When elements become separated, they are still related because the separation cannot exist unless the elements still share some degree of proximity. The elements then become defined by their separation as much as they were previously defined by their union. Because proximity and separation are necessary to create opposites, one cannot be invoked without assuming the other.2 Whether the emphasis is on the separation or proximity, either one requires the other to complete it. In this way irony becomes a separation that binds as well as a coupling that separates. Irony exists in a contradiction 2Perhaps it would be appropriate to note that although Hegel suggested that nothing can be mentioned without admitting that its opposite exists, I do not think that everything can be categorized in this way. There are numerous ideas that cannot exist without their opposite (hot and cold, separation and proximity), but I am not claiming that every idea has a one and only opposite. Indeed, many ideas are more complex than that. However, I am suggesting that proximity and separation are an opposite pair in which one cannot be expressed without the presence of the other. 2 or paradox because it is itself and its opposite. If I define irony as separation between elements then it must also be the proximity between them and vice versa. In the same action irony pulls apart and holds together its elements; it creates both distance and proximity. Kierkegaard references a story about Mohammed’s coffin to illustrate the idea of irony. Supposedly the coffin of Mohammed was suspended by two magnets.3 When positioned with the ends oppositely polarized, the magnets are attracted to each other and try to join together. By forcing separation between elements that normally would join together, the magnets create a negative space strong enough to hold a coffin. Like the magnets of Mohammed’s coffin, irony holds together positive elements by the negative space that separates them. Without the relationship between the positive elements, the negative space would not exist,+ much less have any meaning. However, because of the relationship of the two elements, the negative space that is created between them takes on more meaning than the positive space. When negative space takes on more meaning than the positive space creating it the result is irony. The meaning of the irony “hovers” between the separated elements. In the case of the magnets and the coffin, the coffin 3KSV, 251; CI, 152. This image is useful because it shows how irony exists by both separating and binding elements. If the magnets are turned one way they attract each other and pull themselves until they are unified. If they are turned the other way they repel each other. In either case the irony exists in the tension between the two magnets. Interestingly enough, Kierkegaard describes the relationship of the magnets as “det Tillokkende og det Frastødende [the one attracting and the other repelling],” (KSV, 440; CI,48 note*). This depiction is inaccurate because one magnet cannot attract while