Review in: Hebrew
Studies Journal
RUTH: A COMMENTARY. By
Kirsten Nielsen. Old Testament Library. Pp. 99. Louisville: Westminster John
Knox, 1997. Cloth, $20.00.
Kirsten Nielsen, Professor of Old Testament Theology at the University of Aarhus, Denmark, adds a competent and occasionally original volume to the Old Testament Library series. Emphasizing comparative biblical treatments about women in general and Tamar in particular, the function of the Book of Ruth as Realpolitik, and the narrative coherence produced by chiastic structure, repetition of key themes (hesed, bread, seed, life, Moabite, etc.), and recapitulatory dialogue, she demonstrates the complexity of this deceptively simple tale.
The slim commentary is
traditional in format: minimal notes, a thirty-five page introduction attending
to structure, genre, versions, intertextual resonances
and literary contexts, recycling of the text through Rabbinic
traditions but not early Christianity (e.g., only a passing reference to
Matthew's genealogy), canonical placement, historical context, theological
themes, references to uses of the Book of Ruth in "the church" (but
not to contemporary Judaism; this is consistent with the series), and a section
by section translation (Hebrew in transliteration) and commentary. Among
Nielsen's contributions are her treatment of the genealogy as integral to the
text and her translation of Ruth 3:4 concerning the events on the threshing
floor; among the disappointments are her lack of attention to modem critical and
ecumenical approaches.
Nielsen argues that the genealogy is not, as many have claimed, an appendix, but the story's occasion. Positing the existence of arguments against the legitimacy of the Davidic dynasty, most likely arising at the division of the kingdom, as the motivation for the Book of Ruth, Nielsen sees the author as responding to charges against both David's Moabite ancestry and his connection with the incestuously conceived Perez. This hypothesis is compromised by the lack of evidence concerning this aspect of David's reputation; it also lacks reference to the folktale motifs of problematic descent and sexual irregularities. Although historical reconstructions that require the existence of a negative event to explain a text are not uncommon, they are also difficult to support.
More intriguing is Nielsen's insistence that on the threshing floor, Ruth did not--as most commentators argue--uncover Boaz's feet (i.e., genitals). To the contrary, she proposes that Ruth herself is naked. Nielsen correctly notes that most translations read either as the object of "uncover," and thus see Ruth as exposing Boaz's feet (a euphemism for genitals), or they regard the object of the verb as implicit and locate [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] as a place indication, i.e., the place at his feet. Appealing to Isa 57:8, and possibly Isa 47:2, and the Old Latin version as well as the lack of evidence elsewhere in the biblical tradition of a woman uncovering a man, Nielsen heightens the implications of Ruth's request to Boaz that he "cover" her. Appeal to a parallel use of clothes by Tamar is inconclusive, since it is not clear that Tamar "puts on the prostitute's veil"; rather, Genesis notes simply that she veiled herself (surely a respectable act for a woman, as Rebecca's meeting of Isaac suggests) and that Judah mistook her for a prostitute. The uniqueness of the event is also not a strong argument: in no other text is the main character a Moabite widow.
Nielsen's treatment of matters that may be coded "Jewish" causes some concern: there are vague, negative references to the "law" (e.g., Judah as "righteous in the sense that he demands that the law be upheld" in commanding Tamar be burned; "Hesed can require a person to choose the unexpected and not just to be satisfied with what the law declares"; "God is presented as being on the side of the marginalized, conducting their case even where the law is inadequate and they must resort to trickery to gain justice"). Confusing are a few terms (e.g., Ruth in the "Hebraic Bible" appears in the "Scriptures" rather than in what American audiences would call "Writings"; a reference to reading of Lamentations at the "feast"--not fast--to mourn the destruction of the Temple) and the remark (p. 14) that Jacob "obeys when his father orders him to marry a Canaanite woman."
In a late 1990s commentary, one might expect application of contemporary critical methodology. There is no reference to post-colonial concerns with the book's praise of giving up one's land, people, and religion, or even detailed attention to the role of the volume in the post-exilic period (one of the traditional datings, posited as a counter to the pronouncements against exogamy and a complement to the similarly structured volume of Jonah). Absent are feminist concerns about the use of one's body, Naomi's insistence that a meaningful life requires a man, the silencing of Ruth in the final chapter, and the cultural valences of those cultural situations in which the mother-in-law controls the daughter-in-law's life. Untreated are literary-critical concerns about the absence of motives and the naturalizing of readings. For example, Nielsen sees Ruth as motivated to produce a child for Naomi's line (she "dares with all her might to carry on the family which she had bound herself to through marriage to Mahlon"), but the book never ascribes to her this motive; similarly, she insists that Tamar's motive is the perpetuation of Judah's line, while it may have been a concern for her own needs, or even, as the folktale motif of the dangerous bride suggests, the death of Judah himself. The more conventional approach is again, however, a hallmark of this series.
The Old Testament Library has found a permanent home on the bookshelves of many a Christian minister and not a few rabbis. This newest addition, with its attention to intertextual concerns, women's narratives, and a promising move toward analysis in light of the author's political needs, will find a welcome place with its companion volumes. Should the reader want more detailed discussion of philological analysis, feminist treatments, historical implications, or Jewish interpretation, the select bibliography offers a helpful starting point.
Nielsen argues that the genealogy is not, as many have claimed, an appendix, but the story's occasion. Positing the existence of arguments against the legitimacy of the Davidic dynasty, most likely arising at the division of the kingdom, as the motivation for the Book of Ruth, Nielsen sees the author as responding to charges against both David's Moabite ancestry and his connection with the incestuously conceived Perez. This hypothesis is compromised by the lack of evidence concerning this aspect of David's reputation; it also lacks reference to the folktale motifs of problematic descent and sexual irregularities. Although historical reconstructions that require the existence of a negative event to explain a text are not uncommon, they are also difficult to support.
More intriguing is Nielsen's insistence that on the threshing floor, Ruth did not--as most commentators argue--uncover Boaz's feet (i.e., genitals). To the contrary, she proposes that Ruth herself is naked. Nielsen correctly notes that most translations read either as the object of "uncover," and thus see Ruth as exposing Boaz's feet (a euphemism for genitals), or they regard the object of the verb as implicit and locate [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] as a place indication, i.e., the place at his feet. Appealing to Isa 57:8, and possibly Isa 47:2, and the Old Latin version as well as the lack of evidence elsewhere in the biblical tradition of a woman uncovering a man, Nielsen heightens the implications of Ruth's request to Boaz that he "cover" her. Appeal to a parallel use of clothes by Tamar is inconclusive, since it is not clear that Tamar "puts on the prostitute's veil"; rather, Genesis notes simply that she veiled herself (surely a respectable act for a woman, as Rebecca's meeting of Isaac suggests) and that Judah mistook her for a prostitute. The uniqueness of the event is also not a strong argument: in no other text is the main character a Moabite widow.
Nielsen's treatment of matters that may be coded "Jewish" causes some concern: there are vague, negative references to the "law" (e.g., Judah as "righteous in the sense that he demands that the law be upheld" in commanding Tamar be burned; "Hesed can require a person to choose the unexpected and not just to be satisfied with what the law declares"; "God is presented as being on the side of the marginalized, conducting their case even where the law is inadequate and they must resort to trickery to gain justice"). Confusing are a few terms (e.g., Ruth in the "Hebraic Bible" appears in the "Scriptures" rather than in what American audiences would call "Writings"; a reference to reading of Lamentations at the "feast"--not fast--to mourn the destruction of the Temple) and the remark (p. 14) that Jacob "obeys when his father orders him to marry a Canaanite woman."
In a late 1990s commentary, one might expect application of contemporary critical methodology. There is no reference to post-colonial concerns with the book's praise of giving up one's land, people, and religion, or even detailed attention to the role of the volume in the post-exilic period (one of the traditional datings, posited as a counter to the pronouncements against exogamy and a complement to the similarly structured volume of Jonah). Absent are feminist concerns about the use of one's body, Naomi's insistence that a meaningful life requires a man, the silencing of Ruth in the final chapter, and the cultural valences of those cultural situations in which the mother-in-law controls the daughter-in-law's life. Untreated are literary-critical concerns about the absence of motives and the naturalizing of readings. For example, Nielsen sees Ruth as motivated to produce a child for Naomi's line (she "dares with all her might to carry on the family which she had bound herself to through marriage to Mahlon"), but the book never ascribes to her this motive; similarly, she insists that Tamar's motive is the perpetuation of Judah's line, while it may have been a concern for her own needs, or even, as the folktale motif of the dangerous bride suggests, the death of Judah himself. The more conventional approach is again, however, a hallmark of this series.
The Old Testament Library has found a permanent home on the bookshelves of many a Christian minister and not a few rabbis. This newest addition, with its attention to intertextual concerns, women's narratives, and a promising move toward analysis in light of the author's political needs, will find a welcome place with its companion volumes. Should the reader want more detailed discussion of philological analysis, feminist treatments, historical implications, or Jewish interpretation, the select bibliography offers a helpful starting point.
Amy-Jill
Levine
Vanderbilt Divinity School
Vanderbilt Divinity School
Nashville,
TN 37240
amy-jill.levine@vanderbilt.edu
amy-jill.levine@vanderbilt.edu
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten