tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post1445942695413089019..comments2023-06-08T07:32:39.725-05:00Comments on Aristotle's Feminist Subject: female trafficking in the bible?J. K. Gaylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-18844314594597945382009-11-08T21:29:08.129-06:002009-11-08T21:29:08.129-06:00I am working through a number of commentaries on R...I am working through a number of commentaries on Ruth - this one noted <a href="http://stenagmois.blogspot.com/2009/11/ruth-16th-century-view-by-lavater.html" rel="nofollow">here</a> is a great curiosity - will report over the next several months on Ruth if all goes as planned.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-69547651515512319472009-11-07T11:27:59.029-06:002009-11-07T11:27:59.029-06:00Thanks for all your insights Kurk and Bob - perhap...Thanks for all your insights Kurk and Bob - perhaps the story is "also" a love story. The great thing about all of these stories is that they don't just have one reading. Ruth the moabite's child is actually Naomi's child - a quick bit of literary fine-tuning to sort out David's blood line? <br />Kurk those insights abotu translation are fascianting btw the actual title of Fulata's talk was "Break my body, eat and drink me": retelling Ruth's story in the context of sacrificing women's bodies to put food on the table!Janehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04405344181636487394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-69920108762628656892009-11-06T09:57:28.941-06:002009-11-06T09:57:28.941-06:00...is so simple. No I would not oversimplify it. ......is so simple. No I would not oversimplify it. But - what if it were the only way that the razor's edge could find its way through the patriarchal system? Via a Moabite woman no less through whom David is disqualified from being Israelite (he is only three generations from that act of love - David is a Moabite!)Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-72275477549819013772009-11-06T08:38:49.343-06:002009-11-06T08:38:49.343-06:00Good discussion!
Hospitality, Jane! Reminds me ...Good discussion! <br /><br />Hospitality, Jane! Reminds me in some ways of what Lydia H. Liu says about translation: <br /><br />"[O]ne does not translate between equivalents; rather, one creates tropes of equivalence in the middle zone of translation between the host and guest languages. This middle zone of hypothetical equivalence, which is occupied by neologistic imagination, becomes the very ground for change."<br /><i>Tokens of Exchange</i>, page 137<br /><br />"If it is true that the translator . . . in the host language always initiates the linguistic transaction by inviting, selecting, combining, and reinventing words and texts from the guest language and, moreover, if the needs of the translator and his/her audience together determine and negotiate the meaning (i.e., usefulness) of the text taken from the guest language, then the terms traditional theorists [in the West] use to designate the languages involved in translation, such as 'source' and 'target/receptor,' are not only inappropriate but misleading.<br /><i>Translingual Practice</i>, page 27<br /><br />A feminist Matthew, David!<br /><br />Women abused by the patriarchy abusing, Jane!<br /><br />Power, and love, Bob! But I'm not sure the story, if a love story, is so simple. Your praise of Ruth reminds me of what Laurent Pernot says of the sophist and his Praise of Helen: <br /><br />"Gorgias undertakes to excuse her by arguing that if she followed Paris, she could only have done so for one of these four reasons: (1) she obeyed the gods' commands; (2) she was carried off by force; (3) she was persuaded by speech; (4) she succumbed to love." <br /><i>Rhetoric in Antiquity</i>, page 17<br /><br />I wonder if "she could only have done so for . . . these reasons" could also mean she could have done so also for all of these reasons. And I wonder that about Helen, Naomi, and Ruth.J. K. Gaylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-816184162483804642009-11-05T20:48:05.655-06:002009-11-05T20:48:05.655-06:00Tonight I was eating alone since my wife and son h...Tonight I was eating alone since my wife and son have gone to Winnipeg to visit another son. The older boy had prepared a stir fry for me and as I finished it, I dipped my bread in the leftover gravy and took note - that Boaz simply had in chapter 2 been smitten with Ruth and 'fell in love'. Thus he is not trafficking or abusing power - simply it is a love story.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-43796994818827509512009-11-04T17:52:58.465-06:002009-11-04T17:52:58.465-06:00I am using Ruth as a grammar lesson this year. Tar...I am using Ruth as a grammar lesson this year. Targuman - Chris Brady also is working on the Ruth Targum and promises to post on it by the Spring.<br /><br />The situation in chapter 3 is definitely one in which power is present. What is the significance of the right of redemption issues in that social structure? The Levirate law plays a part. I guess I will have to read some commentaries.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-14196172431121223032009-11-04T15:53:28.472-06:002009-11-04T15:53:28.472-06:00OF course from Rahab via Naomi and Ruth and - but...OF course from Rahab via Naomi and Ruth and - but in some ways this also shows that women also abuse one another as well as being abused by patriarchy. It's not always easy to act with integrity if you don't feel you have choices ...Janehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04405344181636487394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-33579859891367268292009-11-04T14:39:13.386-06:002009-11-04T14:39:13.386-06:00Fascinating! Matthew's genealogy can be read a...Fascinating! Matthew's genealogy can be read as a feminist manifesto.David Kerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13140007604009678479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-62959079463980936312009-11-04T13:42:31.692-06:002009-11-04T13:42:31.692-06:00thank you so much for this passionate post. Fulata...thank you so much for this passionate post. Fulata's day to day work is very much about trying to challenge and change masculinities. Her Bible studies are always brilliant because she brings her faith and experience to them and never pretends to be offering an "objective" view of the text. As we read chapter 3 of Ruth last night I was very deeply moved - we read the TOB French translation and the word "rachateur" coems up time and again. Women's bodies are merely commodities, their lives do not exist. The other image Fulata used was the image of hospitality - she rewrote slightly the words of the institution speaking of broken bodies - trafficking is a table at which women are forced to offer hospitality which they cannot in any way limit.Janehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04405344181636487394noreply@blogger.com