“What postcolonialism makes clear is that biblical studies can no longer be confined to the history of textual traditions, or to the doctrinal richness embedded in texts, but needs to extend its scope to include issues of domination, Western expansion and it ideological manifestations, as central forces in defining biblical scholarship.”[1]
Post-colonial criticism is a diverse field with diverse methods, but its two main thrusts stem from the text based analysis of post-structuralism (decoding texts to discover the interests of power at work in and through them) and critical theorizing (not a theory as much as a way of continual questioning of dominant paradigms). This third chapter is focused on explaining how the text based analysis works in the field of biblical studies.
One of the features of texts that have been lost to the American reader steeped in the Enlightenment perspective is the very contextual nature of text. In our “common sense” and literalist readings of text we tend to think of text as possessing the ability to communicate simply, clearly without significant distortion. However, texts are born out of a particular context, and that context (historical, religious, political, economic, social and philosophical) deeply shapes the nature of that text. Texts are not neutral descriptions that provide windows to see the world “as it really is.” Recognizing this contextual nature of texts, post-colonialism seeks to highlight and critique the ideologies in a text and the power structures they reinforce.
To this end, there are four codes that are detectable in a text: hegemonic, professional, negotiated and oppositional. The hegemonic code in the text seeks to promote the dominant values and ideological interests of the powerful, ruling class. A notable case of this code in the biblical text, according to Sugirtharajah, is the narratives in Kings and Samuel of the transition of power from David to Solomon. These narratives seem to describe how one establishes power, destroys enemies and successfully transfers power to the next generation of the ruling class.
The professional code attempts to establish and maintain customs, rules and norms to preserve their professional class and the law and order of society. A prime example of this type of code in the biblical text would be the various laws and regulations found in the Torah and the New Testament household codes. Sugirtharajah points out, however, that prophetic and priestly accounts could also cut against the dominant powers of culture. In the Old Testament the Jubilee laws and Sabbath seems to cut against the interests of the economically powerful.
The negotiated code acknowledges the right of the hegemonic influences of culture to prevail, but it takes a narrative into a new context to address a particular need of the community being addressed. The best example of this type of code is found in the gospels. Think of how many stories about Jesus are told with some rather different contexts based upon which synoptic gospel it appears. Think of the story involving a lawyer asking Jesus which of the laws was greatest found in Mark 12, Matt. 22 and Luke 10. Each gospel tells this story in a different context to emphasize various angles of the text to address their unique community and their interests.
Lastly, the protest or oppositional code brings the marginalized into the text even if it is at the periphery of the text. For example, Numbers 27 mentions the complaint of the five daughters of a deceased father complaining to Moses about the inheritance laws that dispossess women. The text mentions that an exemption is made in their case. Sugirtharajah points out that the decision is later restricted in Numbers 36 when these women are not allowed to marry outside of the clan, making sure the property remains part of the clan.
The value of these codes to post-colonial criticism, Sugirtharajah argues, is that they help the reader become sensitive to the interests of power in the text by those who produce the text. When applying these to the gospel narratives it becomes clear that ambiguity surrounds the stories about Jesus. Sugirtharajah points out the lack of clear statements about the colonial situation found in Judea, although some hints of a critique from Jesus are present they are certainly not central to the text. One example of the highlighting of the colonial presence in the text can be found in the story of Jesus healing the Gerasene demoniac found in Mark 5. Most commentators find a connection between the 10th Roman legion located in the nearby town and the textual reference to the demons’ name as Legion and casting the demons into the swine (boars) that is the symbol of the 10th Legion.
The project of decoding the text utilizes the traditional tools of the critical-historical schools of the Enlightenment (textual, form, source and literary criticism), but the aim of the project is to discover new readings of the text as against the dominant powers and traditional (Western) readings of the biblical text. Post-colonial criticism seeks to “liberate” people groups from traditional interpretations of the text that have oppressed. It also seeks to highlight the contradictory material of the text, undermining its authoritative position.
The benefits of a post-colonial examination are that it allows the Christian West to remove their (unnoticed) lenses of traditional interpretation to see things in the text that our wealthy and privileged contexts tend to ignore or diminish. It also enables the Protestants that are genuinely committed to the original Protestant task of protesting secured, dominate readings of the biblical text to continue to ongoing task of the Reformation, always reforming. It helps the church ask again the question, “Are we sure our understanding of the text is legitimate?”
However, there are obvious detriments to this approach to the text as well. Springing from post-structuralist concerns, the original intent of the author is irrelevant to the reading of the text. That particular approach to any text is ungenerous at best, and in the case of the biblical text it recapitulates the original sin of Eden, attempting to dethrone the God of the text. Taking no care for the ability of the Author of the text to speak His message to all of humanity, even through the politically and economically dominant powers of the world that produced the text, is to ignore the power of the Author to inspire the human authors.
Also, given the post-colonial reading the biblical text, it looses its power and authority to actually and forcefully challenge the illegitimate powers in our culture, since the text is seen as merely another product of dominant powers. The meta-narrative of scripture, Fall, Crucifixion/Resurrection and Final Restoration/Defeat of Evil, is lost in such a reading, and the very power of the divine, cosmic gospel (good news of a distant battling being won/birth of a new King) is replaced by a toothless human project to bring progress to all through manipulation of the text.
I suspect there will be much we can learn from the post-colonial school, and I am looking forward to growing in my hermeneutic of scripture. But like most good art school films, in spite of an interesting twist to film making, much will need to be left on the cutting room floor.
[1] R.S. Sugirtharajah, Postcolonial Criticism and Biblical Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford Press, 2002), 75.
No comments:
Post a Comment