Soren Kierkegaard

I constantly remember it. It did not know that the two of us together pre-
served its memory.”
The symbolism in the letter and the subsequent gap in their correspon-
dence tells its own dispiritin gtale, and onWednesday, August 11, Kierke-
gaard returned his engagement ring, accompanied by a letter of farewell—
which he found in other respects to be such a literary success that it was
subsequently incorporatedword-for-wordin the “ ‘Guilty?’/‘Not Guilty?’ ”
section ofStages on Life’s Way. The original letter has been lost, but in the
book it reads: “So as not to have to rehearse yet again something which
must, in the end, be done; somethin gwhich, when it has been done, will
surely give the strength that is needed; let it be done, then. Above all, forget
the person who writes this; forgive a person who, whatever he might have
been capable of, was incapable of makin ga girl happy. In the Orient, to
send a silk cord was a death sentence for the recipient; here, to send a ring
will likely be a death sentence for the person who sends it.”
When Regine read these lines she was beside herself and immediately
ran over to Kierkegaard’s place on Nørregade. He was not at home, how-
ever, so she went into his room and left what Kierkegaard described as a
“note of utter despair” in which she pleaded with him for “the sake of Jesus
Christ and the memory of my late father, not to leave her.” Regine certainly
knew where her beloved was most sensitive. “So,” Kierkegaard continued,
“there was nothin gelse for me to do but to venture to the uttermost, to
support her, if possible, by means of a deception, to do everythin gto repel
her from me in order to rekindle her pride.”
Thus began “the time of terrors,” the phase during which Kierkegaard,
accordin gto his own account, was compelled to appear as an “arch-villain”
in order to break off the connection, behavior which he himself viewed as
“exquisite gallantry.” Sibbern would recall: “When he wanted to break off
with her—but by compellingherto break off with him—he behaved in
such a way that Miss O. said he had mistreated her soul. She used that
expression, and she felt deep indignation about it.” Nonetheless the villain-
ous strategy seems to have been effective, because many years later Regine
declared that it wasshewho had broken off the engagement. Sibbern tried
to console Regine by pointing out that it had been well that she “had
not become Kierkegaard’s... because Kierkegaard’s spirit was continually
preoccupied with itself, and the man was confined in self-reflection,” so
that he either would have “tormented her with jealousy” or would have
lived with her as “if he were totally unconcerned with her.” Later on, this
same Sibbern refused to say anythin gabout why the relationship had been
broken off, though he claimed that hecouldhave related “things that perhaps
only a very few people, besides myself, know; but I dare not entrust the