Soren Kierkegaard

vig has in fact written: “His style, especially in his later pieces, does not
occasionally include an arousing allusion to Nordic mythology; no, it has
becomegibberishinwhichelves,andtrolls,andtheMillofDalby,andthe
secondhand inventory of a worn-out poetic phraseology, and God knows
whatelseturnup. Youhavetoreadhimwith adictionaryorbeprepared
to be unable to understand him, since he lards his style with this furniture
just as sea captains lard their speech with nautical terminology.” Or, to
repeatthedistasteintheabbreviatedformofexclamation:“Ooh,ayy,oyy,
ohh!Matchless!Hoohay!See!See!Moses!Moses!”
Although Kierkegaard’s sarcastic attitude toward Grundtvig’s heartiness
becameincreasinglyheartlessastheyearspassed,heclearlyhadrespectfor
the Nordic giant’s legendary learning, the weightiness of his personality,
andhisindefatigable,titanicenergy.“Grundtvigisapuregeniusor,ifyou
will, sheer genius—it doesn’t matter which word is used,” Kierkegaard
noted, expressing a sharp-tongued little reservation apparently occasioned
bytheuseoftheword“genius.”BecauseotherwiseKierkegaardneverused
the term about any living person—except with reference to himself. And
thenhewentontosubjectGrundtvigtoapsychologicalanalysisthathelps
correct the widely held view of the man as the very essence of Danish
popularculture: “Everynature hasa needfor itsopposite—produces itit-
self—andquiteoftenimaginesthatitisitselfthatopposite.ThusGrundtvig
is apowerful nature—power,toughness, doggedness,and thelike. Thatis
characteristic of him. And precisely for that reason he loves to speak of
warmth and cordiality and the like. It is a necessary emanation.” There is
certainlyalottobesaidforthissuppositionofahiddenconnectionbetween
toughnessandcordialityinGrundtvig,anditsurelycorrespondstoKierke-
gaard’s own oddly paradoxical situation: his continuing emphasis on the
necessityofchoiceandhisownineluctablefickleness.Despitehisnotorious
distaste for the multitude and the masses, Kierkegaard wasin practicemore
attuned to the people than was Grundtvig (who sat and wrote about the
importance of the people and therefore did not want to be disturbed—by
thepeople).Thisisattestedtobyanumberofsources,includingtheRudel-
bach sisters,who wrote with someindignation that “Grundtvig isjust not
suited to talk to simple people. They are unableto come to him in confi-
denceorwithanopenheart.Ofcourse,thereasonforthisisthatGrundtvig
hasalwaysmaintainedalimitednetworkofacquaintances,whichwaswhat
suited him, and has otherwise buried himself in his books and research.
Now,whentheseordinarypeoplecometohim,hetreatsthemquitecurtly
andrepelsthem,orisatanyrateinaccessibletothem.”
Viewed from Kierkegaard’s perspective, Grundtvig’s reclusiveness was
hisnecessaryprotectionfromtheGrundtvigians,whofailedtogainpsycho-