Speech and Response: A Rhetorical Analysis of the Introductions to the Speeches of the Book of Job (Chaps. 4-24) (review)

Hebrew Studies 37 (1996) 182 Reviews This dissertation is clearly developed, agreeable to read, and convincing . I have, however, some doubts on the argument taken from P. Skehan. There arises also the question of the connection between Amenemope's influence and the impact of Torah and the Prophets on the final editors of Proverbs. In any case, Washington throws new light on a difficult problem (compare with R. C. Van Leeuwen, "Wealth and Poverty: System and Contradiction in Proverbs," Hebrew Studies 33 [1992] 25-36). Maurice Gilbert University ofNamur Namur, Belgium SPEECH AND RESPONSE: A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE INTRODUCTIONS TO THE SPEECHES OF THE BOOK OF JOB (CHAPS. 4-24). By John E. Course. CBQMS 25. Pp. vii + 184. Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1994. Paper, $8.50. This book presents the results of a dissertation which was written under the direction of Professor Gerald T. Sheppard. The brief introductory chapter describes the book's concern as the investigation of the rhetorical links between the speeches of Job and his three friends in Job 4-24. Methodologically, rhetorical criticism is largely defined in terms of Muilenburg's celebrated 1968 SBL presidential address. In the analysis of a specific literary unit, crucial significance is thus attached to the presence of repetitions, synonyms, and thematic correspondences, which point to associations with previous sections. Refuting the common assumption that Job and his friends largely speak past each other, Course refers to a few studies which have attempted to establish terminological and thematic links between the speeches (Gordis, Power, Holbert, Klaus, and especially Habel). His main aim is to demonstrate that the evidence for such links-especiaUy between the introductions of consecutive speeches-is far more extensive than has previously been recognized. The specific focus of the study falls on the sixteen introductory sections of the speeches between Job 4-24. This strategy is motivated by two considerations . Firstly, the speeches all have clearly delimitable introductory units which provide evidence of literary interrelatedness. Secondly, instead of concentrating on only one cycle of speeches, Course wishes to probe the Hebrew Studies 37 (1996) 183 Reviews coherence of the speeches across as broad a spectrum of material as possible . While his approach is defensible, it puts the reader of the book at a disadvantage. In the analysis of each successive introductory unit, Course refers not only to preceding introductory units, but also to the whole body of the preceding speeches. The book thus assumes a familiarity with the rhetorical shaping of the speeches which it does not explain. The inclusion of short reviews of important aspects of the main body of each speech which are pertinent to the study could have been most useful in this regard. The main section of the book consists of three chapters (chaps. 24), in which each of the cycles is discussed. The analysis of each introductory unit follows a standard pattern in which attention is paid to the following matters: 1) the delimitation of the introductory unit of each speech; 2) the translation of the text (with text-critical notes); 3) form-critical remarks which discuss the genre and structure of the unit; 4) a discussion of the connection between the unit and previous passages; and 5) an overview of the unit with attention to the proposed connections. While Course lists items 4) and 5) under the rubric "rhetorical analysis," it is clear that all the steps contribute to an adequate appreciation of the rhetoric of the text. The delimitations which Course proposes for the various introductory units are plausible and are based on cogent stylistic, structural, and thematic grounds. The translation contains illuminating proposals for some difficult material (e.g., 5:5, 7; 12:2, 5-6; 19:6), although they are usually based on a careful consideration of suggestions which have been made by other scholars. A few of the translations seem rather tenuous (e.g., "He made them cross the Channel" for C1J7~~1 in 8:4; and "blow" for l~o'~I;I in 18:2), but they make no substantive impact on the results of the study. It should be noted that the translation of 12:4a~ ("The one who calls to...