Heroine

February 27, 2010 Leave a comment

“But, semantics aside, the general practice of modern English translators of suppressing the ‘and’ when it is attached to a verb has the effect of changing the tempo, rhythm, and construction of events in biblical narrative. Let me illustrate by quoting a narrative sequence in Genesis 24 first in my own version, which reproduces every ‘and’ and every element of parataxis, and then in the version of the Revised English Bible. The Revised English Bible is in general one of the most compulsive repackagers of biblical language, though in this instance the reordering of the Hebrew is relatively minor: Its rendering of these sentences is roughly interchangeable with any of the other modern versions … . I begin in the middle of the verse 16, where Rebekah becomes the subject of a series of actions.

And she came down to the spring and filled her jug and came back up. And the servant ran toward her and said, “Pray, let me sip a bit of water from your jug.” And she said, “Drink, my lord,” and she hurried and tipped down her jug on one hand and let him drink. And she let him drink his fill and said, “For your camels, too, I shall draw water until they drink their fill.” And she hurried and emptied her jug into the trough, and she ran again to the well to draw water and drew water for all his camels.

“And this is how the Revised English Bible, in keeping with the prevailing assumptions of the most recent translations, renders these verses in what is presumed to be sensible modern English:

She went down to the spring, filled her jar, and came up again. Abraham’s servant hurried to meet her and said, “Will you give me a little water from your jar?” “Please drink, sir,” she answered, and at once lowered her jar on her hand to let him drink. When she had finished giving him a drink, she said, “I shall draw water also for your camels until they have had enough.” She quickly emptied her jar into the water trough, and then hurrying again to the well she drew water and watered all the camels.

“There is, as one would expect, some modification of biblical parataxis, though it is not so extreme here as elsewhere in the Revised English Bible: ‘And she let him drink his fill’ is converted into an introductory adverbial clause, ‘When she had finished giving him a drink’ …; ‘and she hurried’ is compressed into ‘quickly’; ‘and she ran again’ becomes the participial hurrying again’. (Moves of this sort, it should be said, push translation to the verge of paraphrase — recasting and interpreting the original instead of representing it.) The most striking divergence between these two versions is that mine has fifteen ‘and’s, corresponding precisely to fifteen occurrences of the particle waw in the Hebrew, whereas the Revised English Bible manages with just five. What difference does this make? To begin with, it should be observed that the waw, whatever is claimed about its linguistic functions, is by no means an inaudible element in the phonetics of the Hebrew text: we must keep constantly in mind that these narratives were composed to be heard, not merely to be decoded by a reader’s eye. The reiterated ‘and’, then, plays an important role in creating the rhythm of the story … [while] the elimination of the ‘and’ in the Revised English Bible and all its modern cousins produces — certainly to my ear — an abrupt, awkward effect in the sound pattern of the language … .

“More is at stake here than pleasing sounds, for the heroine of the repeated actions is in fact subtly but significantly reduced in all the rhythmically-deficient versions. She of course performs roughly the same acts in the different versions — politely offering water to the stranger, lowering her jug so that he can drink, rapidly going back and forth to the spring to bring water for the camels. But in the compressions, syntactical reorderings, and stop-and-start movements of the modernizing version, the encounter at the well and Rebekah’s actions are made to seem rather matter-of-fact … to obscure what the Hebrew highlights, which is that she is doing something quite extraordinary. Rebekah at the well presents one of the rare biblical instances of the performance of an act of ‘Homeric’ heroism. The servant begins by asking modestly to ‘sip a bit of water’, as though all he wanted were to wet his lips. But we need to remember, as the ancient audience surely did, that a camel after a long desert journey can drink as much as twenty-five gallons of water, and there are ten camels here whom Rebekah offers to water ‘until they drink their fill’. The chain of verbs tightly linked by all the ‘and’s does an admirable job in conveying the sense of the young woman’s hurling herself with prodigious speed into the sequence of required actions. Even her dialog is scarcely a pause in the narrative momentum, but is integrated syntactically and rhythmically into the chain: ‘And she said, “Drink, my lord,” and she hurried and tipped down her jug. … And she hurried and emptied her jug into the trough, and she ran again to the well to draw water and drew water for all his camels.’ The parallel syntax and the barrage of ‘and’s, far from being the reflex of a ‘primitive’ language, are as artfully effective in furthering the ends of the narrative as any device one could find in a sophisticated modern novelist.”

– Robert Alter

Categories: Observation Tags: , ,

Shaky

February 27, 2010 1 comment

“Broadly speaking, one may say that in the case of the modern revisions, the problem is a shaky sense of English and in the case of the King James Version, a shaky sense of Hebrew.”

– Robert Alter

(He goes on to show that the modern versions’ sense of Hebrew is generally worse than the KJV’s.) I like the quotation because it recognizes how bad is the modern translations’ English!

Categories: Observation Tags: ,

X 3

February 27, 2010 Leave a comment

Have you noticed that the unique Evangelicalist symbol is the three crosses? Whether on church side or letterhead, it is the symbol that other religious groups will not be found to share. I have never given this much thought, or have perceived it vaguely as a slap at Rome; but now I think it is important. That third or second cross, elevating the “saved thief”, symbolizes all their preaching and praxis: it might be said their belief in him is the way they believe in Him.

Categories: Polemic Tags: ,

To hell with him

February 18, 2010 2 comments

I ran across a poignant thread at an Evangelicalist website yesterday; a young man begs to know if his father is in hell or in heaven. I’ll reproduce parts of the thread below, heavily edited:

I am desperate and seek answers. Although my dad led a sinful life he knew God. A few weeks ago, the preacher came to him and he confessed his sins and prayed to be saved. Last night he passed away. Is he in heaven now? Is it possible that our prayers could still save him, if he is not? I am very upset and can’t function. I can’t bear the uncertainty. Please help and guide me.

If the preacher is from a Bible-believing church, then he is saved.

It was not just an accident that your father confessed and repented. God reads the minds and hearts of men and plans everything accordingly.

I hope you are in fellowship. We are to be in submission to our church so that we are under God’s protection when difficult times come, such as this.

Do not let the devil beat you with lies like praying for him; praying for the dead is witchcraft.

If your father confessed his sins and prayed to be saved, why would you doubt that he is saved?

You can be sure that your Dad is in heaven. The same with my mum: She said the sinner’s prayer, didn’t get baptized, died last year, but, thank you Jesus, she is saved. Amen.

Categories: Observation Tags: ,

Our prison

February 16, 2010 Leave a comment

Those who err against American society are punished with — American society.

The federal prisoners among whom I spent last weekend are fed only highly-processed or synthetic foods; no vegetables or fruit are served with any meal. At the prison store, bananas sell for three dollars each, cheap generic sneakers for ninety dollars. Indolence and boredom are enforced. The library is closet-tiny. Only top-40 radio plays: no one can choose from albums. Fox News is on television except for certain breaks for action movies. The chapel wall bears a plaque of rules for speakers: no contrasting of religions, no discussing prison or the government, no radical ideas. New-age religious materials are prominent, but also tracts by once-saved-always-saved-ers. Inmates are pasty and slow-moving, and full of vague hope for nothing.

Categories: Observation Tags:

Federal prison

February 15, 2010 Leave a comment

Every year it seems I realize more strongly how much I miss male friends. (I don’t anymore really have female friends, either, but that’s beside the point of this post.) This loss sometimes feels more than the nostalgia it usually feels — you know, one of those nostalgias that remain of our childhood — and this weekend I felt it poignantly to be a loss that really hampers my happiness and abilities. Because the men and boys I was among were in a specially-constrained environment, they could not shock or sadden me as they usually do — and so I opened up, and we seemed to enjoy a wonderful camaraderie. The — casual but high enthusiasm shared by men who are real friends is something no other relationship can offer — all other relationships require a finesse that somewhat drains — Does anything I am saying sound true to anyone else?

Categories: Contemplation Tags:

Pillars of the Mathetai

February 11, 2010 5 comments

There is an idea in much religion of a metaphysical foundation upon which practical action can be taken. For example, Islam erects the “Five Pillars”

Profession (of the creed),
Prayers,
Charity,
Fasting,
Pilgrimage (to the holy cities).

And ancient Jewish rabbis proposed seven precepts upon which all the world should base behavior; they are the Noachide Laws:

Monotheism,
No murder,
No robbery,
Sexual purity,
No blasphemy,
Kindness to animals,
Just courts.

Another example are the various Catholic religiouses, who generally profess four vows:

Poverty,
Celibacy,
Obedience,
and the fourth varies (e.g., stability, silence, loyalty to the pope).

The Religious Society of Friends has its “testimonies”, which by now have been narrowed to

Honesty,
Simplicity,
Non-violence,
Abstinence from nicotine, alcohol, or recreational drugs.

The Amish – Mennonites among whom I grew up base their copious lifestyle-laws on a three-cornered platform, viz.:

Nonconformity (to American life),
Uniformity,
Obedience.

Perhaps it is my knowledge of these religions that has gotten me thinking: What “pillars” could I discern in Jesus’s and his Envoys’ teaching upon which to base my life’s acts? To list them accurately, I would need to put out of my head all Christian dogma, to read thoroughly but sweepingly, to think systematically. Here, tentatively, is what I propose (roughly in the order the reader can find them):

Slavery,
Poverty,
Love and non-resistance,
Honesty,
Liberty,
Chastity
(with a special meaning for the married).

In-simpatico

January 18, 2010 Leave a comment

Whether we write or speak or do but look we are ever unapparent. What we are cannot be transfused into word or book. Our soul from us is infinitely far. However much we give our thoughts the will to be our soul and gesture it abroad, our hearts are incommunicable still. In what we show ourselves we are ignored. The abyss from soul to soul cannot be bridged by any skill of thought or trick of seeming. Unto our very selves we are abridged when we would utter to our thought our being. We are our dreams of ourselves, souls by gleams and each to each other dreams of others’ dreams.

– Fernando Pessoa

Categories: Contemplation Tags: ,

Apres moi

January 17, 2010 Leave a comment

I was just reading up on a theologian who calls himself a Deconstructionist. At any rate, I noticed among his bibliography a book titled After the Death of God. Mind you, I have no notion of the contents of this particular book — but the title struck. Really with just such casual arrogance do most of the post-modernisms replace Modernism. I would rather see a hundred generations of believers dismissed as stooges, in the good old Modern way, than sneered and soothed as “belovers”. Proud and impious are their manipulations, in my opinion.

Categories: Polemic Tags: ,

Ancient Hebrew

January 15, 2010 7 comments

The anti-Semitism that for over a century now has passed as Biblical scholarship has taken a blow. After a year of study, researchers have been forced to admit that a pottery shard and its inscription are very ancient — and that they are material proof the Hebrews were capable of written language hundreds of years before the scholarship has generally allowed. The shard comprises fragments of text that seem to be paraphrases of Isaiah, psalms, and others and of which the language, while unique, is inarguably Hebrew.

More can be read here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/…ertextsuggests

The modern Biblical scholarship, which began in earnest in German “new schools” in the nineteenth century, has generally maintained that the Hebrews were much inferior and dilatory imitators of surrounding cultures and that their scriptures were late pastiches of oral myth made to look like early history and prophecy.

Categories: Polemic Tags: ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.