"Not in Heaven": Coherence and Complexity in Biblical Narrative (review)

Hebrew Studies 34 (1993) 187 Reviews assumption of linguistic influence must not be made too quickly, particularly given the hostilities between the two linguistic communities. The partial nature of the evidence that Rendsburg has at his disposal frequently becomes apparent. For instance, his assumption that forms which appear in later dialects of Aramaic would also appear in Early Aramaic if there were more of it (p. 6, n. 25) mayor may not be true. The same holds for the assumptions that R. S. Hanson's evidence for a close relation between Phoenicia and northern Israel in the Persian and Hellenistic periods (Tyrian Influence in the Upper Galilee [Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1980) also holds for the earlier period (pp. 6-7, n. 28). That these sorts of moves were often necessary for Rendsburg to have produced the present volume is not a criticism of his work so much as a recognition of the subject's difficulty. Indeed, the author is to be commended for his initiative in a difficult field. He has broadened the data-base for attempting to distinguish Israelian and Judahite Hebrew. An appendix which summarizes his results (pp. 105-107) is quite useful. Walter Bodine Dallas, TX 75214 "NOT IN HEAVEN": COHERENCE AND COMPLEXITY IN BIBLICAL NARRATIVE. Jason P. Rosenblatt and Joseph C. Sitterson, Jr., eds. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature. Pp. 262. Indianapolis: Indiana University, 1991. Cloth, $39.95; Paper, $14.95. In introducing this collection of ten essays originally presented as conference papers on "The Bible and Contemporary Literary Theory," the editors explain the book's title and comment on the contributions of the various essayists to the discussion of coherence and complexity in biblical narrative. The title "Not in Heaven", taken from Deuteronomy 30:12, reflects both the autonomy of the text, by virtue of the scriptures' own statement that the word of God no longer resides in heaven but on earth, and the derivative nature of that authority, by virtue of the quotation marks signifying the scriptures' dependence on God's dynamic and disruptive revelation. Hebrew Studies 34 (1993) 188 Reviews This essentially theological debate surfaces in biblical studies as disagreement among literary analysts over the coherence in narrative point of view. The editors' introduction outlines usefully the major issues and basic positions of the essayists. They summarize: Alter, Sternberg, Nohrnberg, and Drury all assume or discover coherent and unitary narratives and narrators; Berlin, Levinson, and Sanders explicitly or implicitly critique this assumption; Trible, Schwartz, and McBride assume or discover its opposite. (p. 5) Robert Alter's eloquent and lucid essay wrestles with the unique nature of the scriptures and the attendant question of the validity of literary (aesthetic) analysis. He affirms Harold Fisch's argument of a "poetics of violence" whereby the biblical text seeks to reject smoothness in favor of discontinuity and violence. Without claiming positive identification of the Bible's distinctiveness, Alter points to the singular content of the Bible and the writers' accommodation to and confrontation with that unique content. He claims a conscious playfulness on the part of b,iblical writers intended to challenge accepted ideology. Unremitting in his attention to details, Meir Sternberg scrutinizes the dialogue in the Genesis 23 account of Abraham's purchase of Machpelah. His attempt to account for every indirection in the double-talk leads Sternberg to construct a coordinate of three sets of motives for the Hittite responses. He insists that indirection in biblical dialogue (and narration) intends to cause the reader to stumble, even wander, rather than seize the import of the text immediately. The two "self-sovereign" characters of the Hebrew Bible, Joseph and David, interest James Nohrnberg, who claims that their unique complexity in biblical literature results from their pivotal positions in the national history. Nohrnberg detects an authorial effort to parallel these two lives and the symbolized divisions of history between tribalism and state government . Joseph and David represent the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom, respectively. While the mode of knowledge (revealed secrets) is common to both stories, their modes of coherence differ. John Drury's wry style enlivens his ingenious study of a passage from Mark. Assuming Mark's original readers to have...