Tod Linafelt, associate professor of biblical literature at Georgetown University and a humanities professor in the English department at Loyola College in Baltimore, has a great piece in the Chronicle (of Higher Ed) Review about the literary merit of Biblical narratives.
The piece is a response to literary critic James Wood’s recent assertion that Biblical narratives are inferior because the reader is not exposed to the thought-life of characters. Thus, we never learn what individuals were thinking, and if they developed. What was David thinking when he saw Bathsheba? When his son Absalom led a coupe? James argues that without access to the characters inner-thought-life, the reader is in the dark.
Linafelt does a good job of explaining that monologue and dialogue exposing the thought-life of characters is a historically development, but not necessarily as the development of presence of inner-thought life. Woods assumes that because the writers did not record an inner-thought life that the characters are not rich. It is assumed that the writers, as well as the characters, are not as multidimensional. Linafelt argues that the discerning reader can find character development in action: in words and deeds. The saying “Actions speak louder than words” has great merit. Rather than assuming the biblical writers and their characters lacked sophistication, why not give them the benefit of the doubt and think instead they were purposeful in their writing choices? Linafelt argues that the decision by the author to not give voice to inner-thought life is a more honest interaction with them. Resulting in characters which are veiled and therefore complex. The end result are stories which are more inviting to the reader, because they more closely match the reality we experience.
My own contribution to the discussion is this:
First, the absence of character thought-life yields a more meditative reader thought-process. It actually forces me to try to put myself in the character’s shoes and try to locate in my own experiences something which can be related. This is a difficult task, for sure. But is is a richly engaging task. I am trying to fill in the gaps. This helps foster a deep relationship with the characters. I avoid objectifying them as I converse with them. It has a tendency to generate more questions than answers, which helps develop humility. The characters are complex. They are worthy of respect and careful consideration. I should not be so quick to cast judgment.
Secondly, In 9th grade English when I read Huck Finn, my teacher introduced the idea that another character was present in the story. This character was unseen. And yet Huck’s and Jim’s story were intimately related to this third character. That character was the Mississippi river. And thus, Biblical narratives should similarly be approached. There is another character present to whom all the other characters have relationship. That character is God. And thus, as we read Biblical Narratives, there is another line of questioning that one should be working. What is God about? What are his words and deeds? What do they tell us about his character? This is the greatest mystery – but a mystery that we are not completely in the dark about. The Bible is a communication. Through it we gain access into how man has related to God and vice-versa. But we must ask the simply question: who started the relationship? The Bible is unlike any other literature; it is Redemptive Historical. That is to say it is first and foremost the story of how God has and is redeeming his creation. How redemption plays itself out in the lives of individuals is a great mystery. Biblical narratives call us to examine the words and deeds of the saints as well as our own. If our eyes are open, we find a faithless people to whom God is the perfect Foil. We find a God who remains faithful to his creation.
Literary Merit of Biblical Narratives
Tod Linafelt, associate professor of biblical literature at Georgetown University and a humanities professor in the English department at Loyola College in Baltimore, has a great piece in the Chronicle (of Higher Ed) Review about the literary merit of Biblical narratives.
The piece is a response to literary critic James Wood’s recent assertion that Biblical narratives are inferior because the reader is not exposed to the thought-life of characters. Thus, we never learn what individuals were thinking, and if they developed. What was David thinking when he saw Bathsheba? When his son Absalom led a coupe? James argues that without access to the characters inner-thought-life, the reader is in the dark.
Linafelt does a good job of explaining that monologue and dialogue exposing the thought-life of characters is a historically development, but not necessarily as the development of presence of inner-thought life. Woods assumes that because the writers did not record an inner-thought life that the characters are not rich. It is assumed that the writers, as well as the characters, are not as multidimensional. Linafelt argues that the discerning reader can find character development in action: in words and deeds. The saying “Actions speak louder than words” has great merit. Rather than assuming the biblical writers and their characters lacked sophistication, why not give them the benefit of the doubt and think instead they were purposeful in their writing choices? Linafelt argues that the decision by the author to not give voice to inner-thought life is a more honest interaction with them. Resulting in characters which are veiled and therefore complex. The end result are stories which are more inviting to the reader, because they more closely match the reality we experience.
My own contribution to the discussion is this:
First, the absence of character thought-life yields a more meditative reader thought-process. It actually forces me to try to put myself in the character’s shoes and try to locate in my own experiences something which can be related. This is a difficult task, for sure. But is is a richly engaging task. I am trying to fill in the gaps. This helps foster a deep relationship with the characters. I avoid objectifying them as I converse with them. It has a tendency to generate more questions than answers, which helps develop humility. The characters are complex. They are worthy of respect and careful consideration. I should not be so quick to cast judgment.
Secondly, In 9th grade English when I read Huck Finn, my teacher introduced the idea that another character was present in the story. This character was unseen. And yet Huck’s and Jim’s story were intimately related to this third character. That character was the Mississippi river. And thus, Biblical narratives should similarly be approached. There is another character present to whom all the other characters have relationship. That character is God. And thus, as we read Biblical Narratives, there is another line of questioning that one should be working. What is God about? What are his words and deeds? What do they tell us about his character? This is the greatest mystery – but a mystery that we are not completely in the dark about. The Bible is a communication. Through it we gain access into how man has related to God and vice-versa. But we must ask the simply question: who started the relationship? The Bible is unlike any other literature; it is Redemptive Historical. That is to say it is first and foremost the story of how God has and is redeeming his creation. How redemption plays itself out in the lives of individuals is a great mystery. Biblical narratives call us to examine the words and deeds of the saints as well as our own. If our eyes are open, we find a faithless people to whom God is the perfect Foil. We find a God who remains faithful to his creation.