You are on page 1of 3

I.

THEMES, FORMS, AND MEANINGS: CRITICAL COMMENTS


Dan Ben-Amos
University of Pennsylvania
0. Jean Piaget suggests that the notion of structure is comprised of three key ideas: the
idea of wholeness, the idea of transformation, and the idea of self-regulation (5). But within
the confines of these three basic notions, diversity flourishes. The present collection of essays
is no exception. They do not conform to a single method, nor do they purport to define a
single research problem. Rather, the authors thrive upon the multiplicity in modes of inquiry
that the concept of structure permits. Occasionally this wide scope of possibilities seems
perplexing and obscures the ultimate goals and research aims of these studies. Thus, for
example, either out of modesty or lack of conviction, Robert Culley concludes his paper with
a disclaimer: No great claims are being made for what has been done. This is after all an
exploration. The grouping of stories according to patterns was very much an intuitive
operation to start with; even though comparison was used as a guide in order to give the
procedure some semblance of being descriptive.
0.1 In my comments I would like to reverse this posture of humility. In doing so I intend to
suggest that although none of these essays offers a prolegomenon to structural analysis of the
Bible, it is possible to detect, in individual discussions and in the collection as a whole, a
theoretical core that could grow into a direction of research that would significantly
contribute to biblical studies. My comments are directed at the papers of Robert C. Culley,
David M. Gunn, Burke O. Long, and Robert Polzin. The exclusion from my discussion of the
articles of Sean E. McEvenue and Hugh C. White is by no means a reflection on their import.
The omission is simply a function of the issues upon which I chose to focus.
1. The basic methodological principle that structuralism contributes to biblical studies is
the separation between historical perspectives and narrative analysis. There is some irony in
the fact that the work of Vladimir Propp generated this mode of research, because originally
Propp conceived of the morphological definition of tales as an instrument in the
reconstruction of the history of tales. At the introduction to his Morphology of the Folktale he
states: We shall insist that as long as no correct morphological study exists, there can be no
correct historical study (15). Yet by giving priority to morphology over history, Propp does
not invalidate the latter, but rather suggests the proper sequence of research procedures. In
1946, almost twenty years after the publication of his Morphology, Propps book on "The
Historical Roots of the Fairy Tale" appeared, constituting a sequel to rather than a departure
from his previous work.
2. But let us put scholarly irony aside. A methodological disregard for the historical
dimension permits us to examine the rules for plot construction in biblical narratives. Thus
Culley is able to establish three distinct sequences of narrative elements in biblical stories
taken from different periods and sources. In order to discover the meaning that each of these
narrative patterns had for biblical narrators it is necessary to draw a correlation between
thematic domains and narrative forms. Here, I disagree with Culleys interpretation that death
is at the center of all three groups of narratives, and would like to suggest that each sequence
of narrative elements is appropriate for telling about a particular theme.
2.1 The tales of the first group of miracle stories, that consist of the sequence
problem//miracle/solution, revolve around daily affairs, the mundane questions of
subsistence, finance, and health. The second group of deception stories, in which the
element of deception replaces miracle to form the sequence of
problem//deception/solution is concerned primarily with political affairs. (The association
between deception and politics that resonates into modern life is purely co-incidental.) Even

stories nos. 9 and 10 that involve conception by deception have political implications,
because at stake is the continuation of a line of descent and inheritance of property. The third
group of punishment stories has as its subjects characters who, from the point of view of
the biblical narrators, are marginal. Thus the commitment of ethical or religious wrongs is
attributed to figures who are at the periphery of biblical society.
2.2 Perhaps the correlation between narrative forms and thematic domains can be best
demonstrated by those stories that violate these principles. The biblical account of the exodus
from Egypt is a case in point. In these tales miracles function in a political strugglea clear
violation of the correlation between form and theme that underlies biblical narrative rules. Yet
this very departure from the grammar of stories serves biblical storytellers rhetorically in
creating a greater narrative impact upon listeners and readers. That storytellers knew and
made creative use of the rules of narration is demonstrated by their adherence to and
departure from those rules.
3. One of the main goals of structural analysis is, indeed, the discovery of narrative
principles and the understanding of a corpus of tales as a system of communication in a
culture. Hence Burke O. Long takes a correct step in his attempt to remove the label of
legend from stories about prophets. As he points out, the term (and the concept) is
anachronistic, deriving from medieval saints narratives. The term legend imparts to the
biblical stories about prophets a whole range of connotations and meanings which is alien to
them, often distorting our perception and understanding of their nature and background. Yet,
the solution that Long offers, drawing an analogy between prophets and shamans, is hardly
satisfactory.
3.1 The difficulty in accepting his proposal does not derive from the lack of historically
and geographically verifiable connections between Siberian, North American, and biblical
peoples. Rather, by comparatively employing concepts from different cultures, Long commits
the same error he tries to avoid. Like the concept legend, that of a shaman carries with it
a whole range of connotations and meanings that can skew our understanding of the biblical
stories about prophets. In order to achieve the same goal that Long has set for himself it is
necessary to interpret the biblical stories and their social setting not by resorting to models
from other periods nor from other cultures, but by constructing the biblical culture as a
complex system. The concept of prophecy itself has a variety of manifestations and meanings
in biblical society that differ from each other not only historically, in different periods, but
synchronically as well. The same term had been applied to a variety of social and cultural
phenomena. Only by discovering the similarities and differences that existed between the
various manifestations of prophecy in biblical society would it be possible to understand their
intrinsic qualities.
4. While structural studies have often been developed by resorting to deductive models, as
Long has done, some of the most valuable contributions in this direction of research were
achieved inductively when the folklorists, anthropologists, or linguists followed the dictate of
the texts. Such an approach made possible the discovery of meanings in the relationships that
existed between narrative elements, meanings that often even contrasted with explicit
statements made by the narrators. To a certain extent Polzin and Gunn have taken this route.
Both deal with historical narratives, but after their respective interpretations it becomes
apparent that the stories contain symbolic and not historical truths.
4.1 The incident of "The Ancestress of Israel in Danger" seems, at best, to be an anecdotal
event in the history of a nation. However, by examining the three versions of this account and
their transformation, Polzin demonstrates that the narration progresses along the pivot of the
two major symbols of prosperity: wealth and progeny. Both relate, either negatively or
positively, to the violation of family order through adultery. While wealth can be a function of
adultery, progeny cannot.

4.2 The succession story of King Solomon that Gunn analyzes clearly shows that for
biblical storytellers this was an issue and a concern. After all, the David and Bathsheba story
is the same tale of Pharaoh and Sarai, and Abimelech and Sarah, narrated however from an
opposite perspective and sanctioning rather than condemning the progeny that resulted from
adultery with royalty. Thus symbolically, royal intercourse ensured progeny, and the biblical
narrators had to neutralize this powerful idea in the account of the origin of the nation.
5. Thus, while initially structural analysis abstracted forms out of narrative contents, in the
long run, it could contribute to the discovery of symbolic meanings of story patterns and the
rules of appropriate correlation between themes and forms. Ultimately this research could
formulate the principles of narration that guided storytellers in the biblical periods by
bringing together the concerns for themes, forms, and meanings.
1

1Robert C. Culley, ed ; Robert C. Culley, ed ; Society of Biblical Literature:


Semeia. Semeia 3. Missoula, MT : Society of Biblical Literature, 1975 (Semeia 3),
S. 128

You might also like