Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Christianity, Wild Turkey, and Syphilis

1997, Biblical Interpretation

AI-generated Abstract

Christianity's influence on cultural narratives, particularly through the lens of biblical history, is explored in a collection of essays that juxtaposes Hegelian and Nietzschean historical perspectives. The contributors navigate between a totalizing view of history and a more fragmented, genealogical understanding, prompting deeper inquiry into the evolution of biblical interpretation within cultural contexts.

CHRISTIANITY, WILD TURKEY, AND SYPHILIS H. ARAM VEESER City Collegeof New York This volume is that thoroughly unexpected thing, a compelof highly well constellated grouping lingly readable, astoundingly individual verve and theoretiessays. Delivered with tremendous lifts biblical history out of antiquariancal fluency, the collection ism and lore and places it at the edge of literary critical debate. to which genre-New Which of the collected essays belongs cultural materialism, Historicism, criticism, feminism, ideological or postcolonial be a debated and I issue, perhaps, theory-will shall give my own answer here. The necessary taxonomical question should not, however, be allowed to obscure the enormous that infuse all of these artiand coherency of purpose learning cles. Those peering anxiously from within the citadel of establishthis volment biblical scholarship may well feel, upon reading ume, like besieged residents of Sarajevo, Kabul, or Kinshasa. And contentious collection to be manages yet this good-humoredly without and without passionate stridency, philosophical pedantry, without With Attic the volume richly playful frivolity. symmetry, relates to biblical studies in just the same way that the anecdote and off-beat stories are relates to a master narrative. Pungent in this collection whenever an all-comprehending freely quoted or Crossan, Henry Kissinger begins to explanation by Josephus, this volume, after the fashion of look too convenient or pat-and those anecdotes, breaks in upon and threatens to disrupt the prevailing happy consensus. it is The volume is not beyond criticism, of course. Whether or Marsh impugning the ethical character Carroll, Washington, has been put; of the Bible and the vile uses to which scripture Sherwood several historical slabs and demontunneling through the of that each substrate has colored Jonah and the strating story the fable with the minerals and ideological "Whale," infusing acids (statism, anti-Semitism, Darwinism) proper to its particular moment Germany; 19th-cen(16th-century England; 18th-century Crossan's or Moore and Graham tury England); deconstructing historical Jesus; all the contributions seem to be slightly out of 466 The Graham/Moore sync with their own fundamental premises. the curve of this volume and introduces an oppiece completes of its own. Four of these authors assert truth posite incoherency in principle, claims while professing, to doubt the availability of truth. Thus, if you read the volume straight through, you move from a Hegelian totalizing history that is rendered incoherent by its Nietzschean all the way to Graham/Moore's Nisubtext, etzschean which is rendered incoherent anarchism, by resonant harmonies and symmetries that encase it. Ever the keen bookmaker, editor Moore has wagered correctly, I believe, that slightly inconsistencies will only enhance the volume's overall hobbling success. To move beyond a bare taxonomy and pursue the more comone must move plicated questions, beyond the surface features of NH-condensed in every handbook and defined at length in the introduction and several of the essays. One should draw a fundamental distinction. On one hand, a pre-New Historicist Hegelian exurge toward totality remains alive in most of the essays-all Butler: "To affirm the Hegelian notion of cept Graham/Moore. of the past thought and action history as dialectical appropriation which recapitulates and realizes that past in the future is to affirm the historical actor-and the historian of that action-as a grand narrator...."I I do not mean to impute personal to arrogance the essayists, only intellectual overconfidence. To a (wo) man (exthe contributors believe that they can cepting Graham/Moore), the lead to ends. clearly perceive way origins They believe that a of and contradiction logic synthesis rationally governs evolutionhistorical The ary change.2 essayists adopt, silently, the position of a unified subject who can see and hold the whole of the past in a Hegelian embrace of a total history. On the other hand, a countervailing drive toward Nietzschean post-Hegelian genealogy operates unconsciously and as an unacknowledged sub-text through these essays. 1 Judith Butler, Review of Michael S. Roth, Knowingand History:Appropriations of Hegel in Twentieth-CenturyFrance (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988), in History and Theory29 (1990), p. 257. 2 Consider Sherwood, arguably the most experimental and playful of the four: "the 'authority' of the Bible ... evolves in a particular way" ("Rocking the Boat," p. 388); "Ever evolving, ever committed to survival, the biblical text shapes itself in response to cultural anxiety" (p. 396). She consistently implies that the Spirit of the Age determines the going reading of Jonah (a Hegelian habit widely denounced as "expressive causality theory").