Passion for Nothing: Kierkegaard's Apophatic Theology

by Peter Kline

Passion for Nothing offers a reading of Kierkegaard as an apophatic author. As it functions in this book, "apophasis" is a flexible term inclusive of both "negative theology" and "deconstruction." One of the main points of this volume is that Kierkegaard's authorship opens pathways between these two resonate but often contentiously related terrains. The main contention of this book is that Kierkegaard's apophaticism is an ethical-religious difficulty, one that concerns itself with the "whylessness" of existence. This is a theme that Kierkegaard inherits from the philosophical and theological traditions stemming from Meister Eckhart. Additionally, the forms of Kierkegaard's writing are irreducibly apophatic-animated by a passion to communicate what cannot be said. The book examines Kierkegaard's apophaticism with reference to five indirect communication, God, faith, hope, and love. Across each of these themes, the aim is to lend voice to "the unruly energy of the unsayable" and, in doing so, let Kierkegaard's theological, spiritual, and philosophical provocation remain a living one for us today.

Genres: Philosophy, Theology

224 pages, Hardcover

Published September 1, 2017

Reviews

[B. Rule · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's something to writing about Kierkegaard that tends to make authors go a bit barmy. His methods are a seduction, intended in a maieutic mode rather than a discursive one. His explicators often get seduced, then believe that they too ought to write like SK. However, where SK is playful, brilliant, witty, and concealing, it's more cringeworthy coming from the pens of lesser lights. This same danger exists, in a slightly lesser degree, for academic writing on negative theology.

This book suffers a near-fatal dose of that goofiness, redoubled by its twin foci. The topic is a fantastic one, and I truly believe Kline has identified a genuine strain of apophaticism coursing through SK's works. Kline even does a good job teasing it out through careful readings of a diverse cross-section of SK's corpus. I fundamentally agree with Kline on many baseline assumptions, such as the role of the pseudonyms, the explication of key Kierkegaardian concepts like repetition, self-reflexivity, relation, infinite difference, and the re-inscription of the ethical on the far side of the religious. I even like some of Kline's paintings, included here as a self-indulgent apophatic feint in place of an actual concluding thesis.

However, great chunks of this text are also SK-intoxicated word salad, an excited and furious scribbling in an effort to say the unsayable. Kline drags in a lot of post-modern philosophy as an aid, but I'm not sure it helped much in the clarity department. In particular, he relies heavily on Jean-Luc Nancy in the latter half of the book. My not-especially-informed opinion is that Nancy is an inferior thinker to SK, and this book did little to disabuse me of that opinion. I found the copious quotes from Nancy's oeuvre to mostly consist of sillier and more garbled versions of Kierkegaardian ideas. I can see why Kline likes him, but I wish he would have toned down his reliance.

In the end, I too am seduced by the great seducer, so I'm going to rate this relatively highly. I'm a sucker for Kierkegaard, I'm a sucker for apophatic theology, and I can tolerate post-modernism. Lovers of John Caputo may find a lot of sympathetic echoes in this book, although he's not expressly cited. If you're like me, this is worth a read. Read it in a generous spirit and you'll enjoy it more. And even when you can't, have faith that an eye-roll is also a form of the unsayable.

[Yusuf · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Being is a broken heart, a break, the infinite repetition of a break, each time infinitely singular, infinitely intimate, infinutely finite, infinitely fragile, and infinitely exposed."

[GONZA · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is far too complicated for me to review as I'm not a Kierkegard expert or a Philosopher, but what I got was illuminating. Second part, was also, in a way, a sort of clarification for me.

Questo libro é assolutamente troppo complicato per me da recensire, sia perché non sono un'esperta di Kierkegaard, sia perché non ho studiato filosofia, peró c'é da dire che quel poco che ho capito é stato illuminante. Inoltre anche la seconda parte del libro é stata, per quanto strano, chiarificatrice.

THANKS TO EDELWEISS FOR THE PREVIEW!