User talk:Alastair Haines/Draft Bible synopsis

Your organizing principle seems to be people, particularly the male characters...have you thought about why? 11:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a lot. Frankly I don't mind whether they stay or go. In defence of the organizing principle, I'd offer elle(h) toldot ... Though I haven't followed it precisely.

In defence of listing male characters, I'd offer that it is precisely the men that feature in the elle(h) toldot phrases, additionally it is almost exclusively men that feature in the genealogies. Of the wives, it is Eve, Sarah and Rebecca that stand out. They are critical to the plot, and they are mentioned when this happens.

A practical reason to have the headings is that some people know the names and it serves as an index.

Adding Asenath, for example, would not help index the plot, it would merely be a politically motivated cosmetic decision. (I'm not totally against doing that sort of thing, but it's ideal if we know what we're doing and why.) We don't know the Name of Noah's wife. ...

I don't feel either the need to hide the patriarchalism of the Bible, nor to preach it (in this context). Would you deny that Genesis is patriarchal? ... I didn't censor Lot offering his daughters to the mob, nor Judah taking Tamar as a prostitute. Ditto re Dinah. They simply weren't central to the main plot. Abuse of responsibility, and failure to take responsibility are features of the biblical presentation of the patriarchs. Deliberate presentations in most cases, probably including Adam's silence ... he was with her.

There are so many feminist commentators that have made much of the patriarchal narrative as archetypical patriarchal social structuring, that minimizing it would eventually be discovered.

Interestingly, my own personal reading of the Bible focusses so much on female characters that in a couple of cases I had to go back to include the men.

If the headings are a distraction for you, they will be for others, another solution can be found.

But apart from the headings? What leaps out as over-done, neglected, or twisted? Alastair Haines 15:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I obviously asked the wrong question (BTW you are really good at asking the right question - I was watching you today on the Holy Bible matter). I wasn't actually trying to point out patriarchy...and I most certainly agree that whitewashing the bible is pointless. What I was trying to get at is that a text such as the bible has more than one organizing principle.

The writing style is good and energetic, but I couldn't really feel a sense of cohesiveness. You started out saying that we needed a narrative to show how these books fit together. But even within a book we need to see how each story fits together. I don't think the glue is in the names of the people.

There are other ways to look at these stories. For example,

1. Learning and taking on responsibility.
   • Just God: In the beginning...
   • Let us make humankind: God and humankind become co-stewards
   • From co-steward to co-creator: end of Adam and Eve: God and humankind are now not just co-stewards, but co-creators: creating together both life (babies) and the food that nurtures it!
   • From knowing to doing: the first laws for ben adam l'havero (how people treat each other). We don't just know good and evil. Now we have to set up courts of law and use that knowledge to make the world a better place.
   • From passivity to proactivity: our responsibility now becomes proactive and complex. Abraham is not only responsible for justice, but also mercy and the balance between the two. His responsiblity is not just to set up courts (reactive), but also to teach the generations to come (proactive).
   • Moral maturity: the responsibility passes from generation to generation and each generation has more complex choices than the next. Whereas Abraham chooses between a son of his wife and a son of concubine, Issac must choose between two sons of his own wife. Poor Jacob has to deal with sibling rivalries between twelve. And Joseph tops it all with a wingdinger story of life and death, slavery and freedom, judgement and mercy, and ultimately reconcilation and forgiveness.
2. The hiding of God and the empowering of humankind: At the beginning of Genesis God is everything - quite literally. And as each chapter progresses there is a little more man and a little less God. By the end we have a nearly completely secular hero, Joseph. Unlike his father, grandfather, or great grandfather, Joseph does not have a direct conversation with God. The closest he gets (like many people today!) is his dreams.
3. Increasing focus: World->Humanity->Abraham's entire family->one child of twelve
4. Choices: Setting apart and sending away:
   • Abel favored and then sacrificed by his brother, Cain sent away
   • Noah lifted up on the waters, set apart from humanity; the rest of humanity sent to oblivion
   • Issac favored and nearly sacrificed, Ishmael sent away
   • Esau favored (by Dad), Jacob sent away (by Mom)
   • Benyamin favored (by Dad), Joseph sent away (by brothers)
5. From darkness to light (Note: no PC here the women are necessary to these stories):
   • Creation: Vayehi erev vayehi boker...And there was evening and there was morning...
   • Adam and Eve: Yes you are naked...but God will clothe you
   • A mother and her children: Abel dies and Cain must wander...but Eve has another son (Seth) and Cain is protected by God's seal. Humanity continues. (if God had punished Cain with death, and there were no Seth, humanity would be no more. Also mother not parent here because in this story only Eve speaks)
   • Abraham and Sarah: no children--> child
   • Issac and Rebecca: on the alter with a knife over my head --> married with two kids
   • Rachel, Leah, Jacob: nothing I do matters - can't make Dad happy, can't make Laban happy --> two wives, twelve kids, and lots of goats
   • Joseph: torn from family and thrown into the pit, slavery, and prison --> second to Pharoah, reunited with family

So now, I ask again: what makes Genesis move? what do you want the reader to see? Best, Egfrank 18:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fantastic feedback!

Thanks for your kind words. And for quality feedback. I have to go out soon, so I'll interact with your thoughts when I return. Alastair Haines 00:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)