A Kierkegaardian Evaluation of the

Aesthetic and Ethical Modes of Punk Rock

By

Mitchell Cairns
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 1

Introduction

In ​Either/Or: A Fragment of Life​, Søren Kierkegaard presents the concepts of his stages

of existence. The first, the aesthetic stage of existence, is that in which one values his outer

appearance first and foremost, finding meaning in the immediate sensory pleasure, whereas the

second, the ethical stage of existence, is that in which one values his inner character. Kierkegaard

ultimately believed that the first two stages of existence are imperfect, and ultimately

incompatible with a meaningful experience of life, which requires moving on to the third stage of

existence, the religious stage. His critique of these stages of existence presents an interesting

ideology under which to consider punk rock, and the aesthetic and ethical values espoused by the

subculture. Ultimately, such an ability to construct a meaningful identity in the punk subculture

demonstrates the value of both the aesthetic and the ethical, and how they are ultimately

intertwined within each other; it also demonstrates a need for a third stage of existence, similar to

Kierkegaard’s classification of the religious.

Kierkegaard’s Stages of Existence

Kierkegaard’s ​Either/Or ​introduces the reader to several different characters. There is the

Editor, Victor Eremita; the Aesthete, known only as A; the Ethicist, Judge Vilhelm; and

Johannes the Seducer. Victor Eremita has apparently compiled letters written by the Aesthete (in

which is also contained the diary of the Seducer), as well as Judge Vilhelm’s responding letters.

Contained in each group of letters is a demonstration of a stage of existence as lived by these

characters, which Kierkegaard uses to critique these lesser experiences of life.

The letters of the Aesthete in the first half of ​Either/Or ​represent a character living in the

first stage of Kierkegaard’s three stages of existence. In writing as the Aesthete, Kierkegaard

demonstrates that such a stage of existence is incompatible with living a truly meaningful life.

One factor of Kierkegaard’s primary characterization of the Aesthete is that his life is lived in

such a way so as to turn the boring into the interesting. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia

of Philosophy, the Aesthete will, “inject interest into a book by reading only the last third, or into

a conversation by provoking a bore into an apoplectic fit so that he can see a bead of sweat form

between the bore’s eyes and run down his nose” (McDonald, 3). This theme is ultimately

realized in “The Seducer’s Diary”, in which the reflective aesthete Johannes the Seducer

engineers a relationship in order to create an interesting experience for himself.

Kierkegaard criticizes Johannes for his inability to separate poetry from reality, writing,

“How, then, can we explain that the diary has nevertheless acquired such a poetic

flavour? The answer is not difficult; it can be explained by his poetic

temperament, which is, if you will, not rich, or if you prefer, not poor enough to

distinguish poetry and reality from each other. The poetic was the extra he himself

brought with him. This extra was the poetical element he enjoyed in the poetic

situation provided by reality;this element he took back in again in the form of

poetic reflection.” (​EO​, 249)

Johannes’ inability to separate poetry from reality leads to the inability of an aesthete to live in a

way that recognizes his duty to others in the world, in reality. In fact, he actively pursues
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 3

unethical goals in order to raise up his own aesthetic existence. Johannes manipulates Cordelia to

fall in love and become engaged with him, which he then turns around to manipulate her to break

off the relationship. However, he is not simply happy enough at this point. He must then

manipulate her further to cause her to ​question​ her decision to end the relationship, despite the

fact that he no longer wishes to have any contact with her, and instead wishes to pursue new

means of finding aesthetic enjoyment.

Kierkegaard further criticizes the aesthetic stage of existence by demonstrating that the

pursuit of aesthetic pleasure is itself more likely to lead to boredom and despair. In “Crop

Rotation”, the Aesthete claims that one must rotate his life like a farmer rotates his crops in order

to remain interesting, as boredom is the root of all evils (​EO,​ 227). However, Kierkegaard is

actually proving the opposite of what the Aesthete claims: one can manipulate relationships for

all eternity, believing in the ideal of crop rotation, but they never ultimately do anything new and

exciting; rather, they resign themselves to planning their entire existence, instead of partaking in

the excitement of unplanned experience.

The second stage of existence, the ethical, is demonstrated in the letters of Judge Vilhem

in the second half of ​Either/Or​. Just as with the aesthetic stage of existence, it is Kierkegaard’s

ultimate goal to show that such a stage of life is not truly the most meaningful. Unlike the

aesthete, the ethicist finds meaning in their own inner character, as they attempt to partake in

society in a dutiful sense (McDonald, 4). The ethicist is concerned with their own personal moral

responsibility, and it is the essence of their existence that they contribute positively to their

surrounding community (McDonald, 4). The ethicist also has the ability to partake in aesthetic

enjoyment, so long as it does not violate their ethical duty. So, while the ethicist would not be
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 4

capable of manipulating a relationship the way Johannes the Seducer did, they would find the

ability to enjoy poetic flavour in the world.

While these may sound like positive traits, Kierkegaard ultimately dislikes them due to

the fact that they ignore a duty to God. In ​Fear and Trembling​, Johannes de Silentio writes about

the teleological suspension of the ethical, in which one must suspend their ethical duties in order

to fulfil their duty to God, just as Abraham did when he took Isaac up the mountain to offer his

son as an offering to God (McDonald, 4). This clearly violates an ethical duty to society, but

Kierkegaard argued that the duty to God supersedes any duty to society. Thus, if God

commanded for one to act as Johannes the Seducer did, the highest mode of existence would be

to do as God commanded; the inability for the the ethicist to do so is why the ethical stage of

existence cannot be the most meaningful stage.

Understanding the Aesthetics and Ethics of Punk

Punk can be categorized by similar stages of existence as those espoused by Kierkegaard.

One can partake and enter the subculture via the lower stages, but in order to truly find identity

in the punk subculture, one must go beyond such stages to some third form. However, in order to

evaluate how this may occur, it is first important to gain an understanding of what is found in the

first two stages of punk subculture.

There are certain aesthetic characteristics that are associated with punk that distinguish it

heavily from more popular culture. Punk’s aesthetic stage, as in Kierkegaard’s, is categorized by

the immediate sensory experience. In “The Aesthetics of Punk Rock,” Jesse Prinz writes,
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 5

“One of the most striking things about the punk aesthetic is that, to many ears and

eyes, it is flagrantly anti-aesthetic in the narrow meaning of the term. Punk is an

assault on prevailing canons of beauty. Punk songs are often out of tune, off key,

incompetently played and poorly recorded. Punk fashion can be shabby (a tattered

shirt) or grotesque (a safety pin in the cheek). Punk is a celebration of ugliness

and discord. Punk rockers regard these features as good precisely because others

regard them as bad.” (Prinz, 587-588)

Prinz categorizes three aesthetic ideals of punk subculture as irreverence, nihilism, and

amateurism. While these appear to be ethical ideals, it is the ​appearance ​of participating in these

ideals that pertains to the aesthetics of punk subculture. It is aesthetically valuable in punk to

make a mockery of societal norms, of serious issues, and to partake in the taboo; it is also

aesthetically valuable to thematically represent, as Prinz says, “. . . decay, despair, suicide, and

societal collapse” (Prinz, 585).

Kierkegaard believed that participation in the aesthetic is the lowest stage of existence,

and did not allow one to create a meaningful identity. This thought is also found in the punk

subculture. Prinz explains, “One of the cardinal insults in punk vocabulary is “poser,” often

applied to people whose interest in punk seems suspiciously recent, untutored, superficial, or

overly commercial” (Prinz, 590). Partaking only in the punk aesthetic, finding value only in the

immediate sensory experience and in appearing interesting, is not enough to meaningfully

identify with the punk subculture; those at the higher stages of existence within punk will call out

those who are in the aesthetic stage as poseurs.

Those who partake in the punk subculture via only the aesthetic stage will find

themselves suffering the same issues that Kierkegaard references in ​Either/Or​. As mentioned

above, Kierkegaard believed that partaking only in the aesthetic would lead to boredom and

despair. While it may appear that one is constantly partaking in something new and exciting, they

truly find themselves partaking in a planned routine; if one attempts to inject interest into their

life by constructing an identity in the punk subculture via only the aesthetic stage, they will find

their aesthetic sensory experience ultimately become just another form of conformity.

One partaking in the aesthetic form can increase their identification with the punk

subculture by finding value in the ethical form. The ethicist still finds value in the aesthetic, but

they also worry about their inner character, according to Kierkegaard. Prinz writes, “. . . punk can

be an encompassing aesthetic system. More than that, punk is an ethos” (Prinz, 589). The earlier

aesthetic ideals mentioned - irreverence, nihilism, and amateurism - are as much ethical systems

as they are aesthetic systems. One participating in the ethical stage of the punk subculture will

find value not only in the appearance of these ideals, but in the ideals themselves. Dr. Michael

Friedman further mentions the ideals of, “. . . independence, fairness and inclusivity” (Friedman).

All of these ideals represent Kierkegaard’s thoughts on the ethical stage. When one is in the

ethical stage of the punk subculture, they enjoy the aesthetics of such ideals, but there is also the

personal moral responsibility, and the need to contribute to the surrounding community.

Kierkegaard’s ethical stage, and the overall ethical stage of punk, can ultimately be found

in the DIY (Do-It-Yourself) ethic of the punk subculture. This ethic encompasses the various

ethics previously mentioned. Ian Moran writes, “D.I.Y. was not only the forefront for just strictly

music, but made it possible for individuals to book their own tours, release their own records,
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 7

and distribute their own ideas and materials through fanzines” (Moran, 62). The DIY ethic of

punk is what allowed it to foster an ethic of amateurism and independence (anybody can make

and record music, or make their own merchandise), as well as fostering the inclusivity of the

subculture.

Ultimately, however, Kierkegaard would still criticize the ethical stage of punk.

According to Kierkegaard, there is a third stage higher than the ethical, being the religious, which

leads to a necessity for understanding what may be contained beyond the ethical stage.

A Third Stage of Punk?

If to truly create a meaningful identity in the punk subculture requires moving on to a

third stage of existence, what is contained in such a stage? For Kierkegaard, the religious stage

contained the teleological suspension of the ethical. In this stage, one must ignore the ethical in

order to remain faithful to God. While such a stage will not translate into punk subculture as well

as the former two stages, this does offer an interesting way to interpret what may be contained in

the third stage.

In the punk subculture, one may find the most identity when they are able to suspend

their participation in the ethical stage and the aesthetic stage in order to participate in a

meta-satirical form. That is to say, when one is capable of satirizing their own personal identity,

and the ethics and aesthetics associated with it, this may lead to the most true form of identity.

Some of the names that one would most associate with being able to truly identify as punk have

satirized the subculture. Take, for example, bands that play songs that challenge the punk

aesthetic of, “. . . loud, fast, and short” (Prinz, 587). Punk bands have been known to play songs
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 8

that are closer to jazz or pop, all in the name of challenging their own aesthetic taste. Similarly,

punks may dress in a way that challenges the aesthetic ideals of punk, such as dressing like a

prep school students. For example, in the film “Repo Man”, the hardcore punk band the Circle

Jerks dressed and played as a lounge band.

Those in the punk may also suspend the ethical in order to challenge it, and to participate

more heavily in the aesthetic. For example, non-racist bands have worn Swastikas; when asked

why she wore one, Siouxsie Sioux explained, “It was an anti-mums and dads thing. We hated

older people always harping on about Hitler, 'We showed him,' and that smug pride. It was a way

of watching someone like that go completely red-faced” (Harris). The Stooges and Sid Vicious

also both wore Swastikas at various points (Prinz, 585). When wearing the Swastika, they

suspended their participation in the ethical in order to participate even more heavily in the taboo

aspect of the aesthetic stage of the punk subculture.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the stages of existence as espoused by Søren Kierkegaard translate quite well

into the punk subculture. In the first stage, the aesthetic, Kierkegaard writes that one finds

enjoyment in the immediate sensory experience. Likewise, this enjoyment of immediate sensory

experience is also found in the first stage of punk rock. Kierkegaard then moves on to the ethical

stage, in which one worries about their inner character and their contributions to the community.

Punk subculture is heavily identifiable by such ethical considerations beyond the aesthetic

enjoyment. Finally, Kierkegaard claims that the religious stage is classified by the teleological

suspension of the ethical, in a duty to God. While this stage does not translate as well to punk
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 9

subculture, it offers an interesting consideration for such a third stage, in which punks suspend

their participation in the ethical and aesthetic to participate in a meta-satirical form.

Kierkegaard’s criticisms of finding identity in the lower stages, in particular, translate well to

one’s ability to criticize their own identity in the third stage of punk. Overall, Kierkegaardian

stages of existence and the value associated with them are also found in the punk subculture.
 Kierkegaardian Stages of Existence and Punk 10

Works Cited

Friedman, M. (2015, July 7). Steve Albini Shows That Punk Rock Ethics Are Good Business.

Retrieved from

<https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brick-brick/201507/steve-albini-shows-punk-ro

ck-ethics-are-good-business>

Harris, J. (2013, May 06). 29 Things You Didn't Know About Punk Style. Retrieved from

<http://www.complex.com/style/2013/05/29-things-you-didnt-know-about-punk-style/>

Kierkegaard, S. ​Either/Or: A Fragment of Life​, ed. Alastair Hannay (New York: Penguin,1992).

McDonald, William, "Søren Kierkegaard", ​The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ​(Winter

2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =

<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/kierkegaard/>.

Moran, I. P. (2011). Punk: The Do-It-Yourself Subculture. ​Social Sciences Journal,10​(1), 58-65.

Prinz, J. (2014). The Aesthetics of Punk Rock. ​Philosophy Compass,9​(9), 583-593.

doi:10.1111/phc3.12145