Literary and Socio-rhetoric study

Another methodological approach used in this thesis in an attempt to answer the research question, is the socio-rhetorical approach.

1.5.4.1 Rhetorical criticism

The practice of classical rhetoric was a known phenomenon in ancient Greece and Rome and influenced people like the Church fathers and, for example, Augustine. However, the application of rhetorical criticism to the Bible was promoted by James Muilenburg in 1968 with his presidential address at the Society of Biblical Literature. He argued that scholars should move beyond form criticism.

Muilenburg (1969:8) has the following to say:

What I am interested in, above all, is in understanding the nature of Hebrew literary composition, in exhibiting the structural patterns that are employed for the fashioning of a literary unit, whether in poetry or in prose, and in discerning the many and various devices by which the predications are formulated and ordered into a unified whole. Such an enterprise I should describe as rhetoric and the methodology as rhetorical criticism.

25

Davies’ (2013:107) observation of what Muilenburg attempted to promote was the view that the rhetorical arrangement of the texts should be examined as well as how the various components are configured together to achieve the optimal rhetorical effect.

Rhetorical criticism is interested in the interactions between the author, the text and the audience (Tate 2011:286). This would imply attention to the formal aspects of the composition of the text, but also attention to its artistic character in its attempt to promote some ideas or thoughts to persuade listeners and readers to accept them (cf. Davies 2013:108). It boils down to paying attention to the artistic aspects of the text as well as its communicative ability. Davies (2013:108) declares, “Thus, rhetorical criticism is not simply a study of the writer’s style, but the techniques that they used to manipulate their readers, to argue the case, and to persuade their audience of the validity of their argument.” In turn, Sawyer (2009:225) refers to the following aspects of importance pertaining to rhetorical criticism: the structuring of a literary unit, the stylistic techniques applied, the purpose of the literary unit and who the addressees are. One should also revert back to the classical view of Aristotle on what rhetoric entails. The following aspects should be considered in rhetorical analysis: how the argument is presented, the style in which it is presented and the composition of the demarcated section (cf. Ricoeur 1977:8–9). Kessler (1982:2) also has a high regard for Aristotle’s view on rhetoric and states, “An obvious advantage of this definition is that it brings together the formal and functional aspects.”

Of importance, therefore, is the demarcation of text units, the structuring of the specific text unit, the genre, stylistic devices employed as text strategy and the communicative elements to persuade its implied audience and other readers of the text (cf. Mitchell 2006:622; Barker 2012:681).

26

Clines (1995:64) states that rhetorical criticism studies “the way the language of texts is deployed to convey meaning. Its interests are in the devices of writing, in metaphor and parallelism, in narrative and poetic structures, in stylistic figures.” This description is in line with what literary criticism attempts to do. Botha admits that there is a close relationship between literary criticism and rhetorical criticism, but points out that rhetorical criticism has a more determined aim. He notes: “Discourse is studied as argumentation, as interaction, and not only as communication, or the transmission of information” (Botha 1994:133). Brueggemann, a student of Muilenburg, takes it one step further by arguing that language not only describes what is happening, but has the persuasive power to appeal to the imagination to create alternative realities (Brueggemann 1998:15). The effect of the text on readers/listeners should be considered as well and this is achieved by how the text is communicating and appealing to it audience.

As Clines has rightly indicated, some of the stylistic techniques that are employed as part of the rhetoric are metaphors, parallelisms, repetition, binary patterning, circular structures and imagery, to name only a few (cf. Jones & Peccei 2004:45– 52; Ryken et al. 1998:720–727). This discussion indicates that there is general mutual agreement amongst scholars on which aspects should be addressed when rhetorical criticism is employed. The differences, for the most part, are only matters of emphasis.

It is important to note that rhetorical criticism is done by using multiple methodologies to determine the intentions of the author or speaker of the text and further also to come to grips with the intended style and structure of the text and the responses of the audience (Tate 2011:287). It is however, not always easy or even possible to determine who the authors/redactors or the audience are and how the audience responds. At times, the text under analysis would imply who the audience is, but when there is clear evidence of redactional activity, then the determination of the audience is unclear and it becomes more speculative.

27

1.5.4.2 Socio-criticism

Besides paying attention to the rhetorical aspects of the text, the social aspects should also be attended to. Language is a social activity and was created to serve a specific purpose (Gowler 2010:194). All texts are embedded in a social context, but it is not always easy to address the social location and the relation of ancient texts to a particular society. Scholars have developed social-scientific models by engaging relevant social disciplines such as cultural anthropology, sociology and psychology (cf. Carter 2005:36-57). In an effort to combine the contributions of literary approaches that regard language as a social phenomenon with the insights of social-scientific research, Robbins developed an approach he called socio-rhetorical analysis (cf. Robbins 1996). This approach is a multidisciplinary and multi-methodological approach that regards the text as a tapestry consisting of various text textures (Robbins 1996:24). Many studies emerged that followed or commented on this integrated approach and even commentaries on books of the New Testament are based on this approach (cf. Combrink 1999:18-30; 2002:1060114; Gowler 2010:191-206).

However, not everyone is convinced of the viability of the multi-methodological approach suggested by Robbins. One such critic is Craffert (1996:52) who argues that this methodology fails philosophically, epistemologically and methodologically. He expresses the view that:

The alternative to multiple interpretations that can all be embraced is not one best interpretation but the acknowledgement that different interpretations do different things to the same document and can therefore be mutually exclusive (Craffert 1996:53).

This approach is valuable with regard to it alerting interpreters of the text to be aware of the multi-facetted nature of the process when engaging in analysis, interpretation and understanding of the text (cf. also Tuppurainen 2006:54). Accordingly, Gowler (2010:195) comments, “when we explore the text from

28

different angles, we see multiple textures of meanings, convictions, values, emotions and actions.”

When texts are studied with an interest in social aspects, there should be an awareness of aspects such as “social class, social systems, personal and community status, people on the margins, and people in positions of power” (Robbins 1996:1). Two of the textures that relate directly to matters of social concern are social and cultural texture, on the one hand and ideological texture, on the other hand. Gowler (2010:195) summarises these two aspects as follows:

Social and cultural texture is where the text interacts with society and

culture by sharing in the general social and cultural attitudes, norms and modes of interaction that are known by everybody in a society, and by establishing itself in the relationship with the dominant cultural system as either sharing, rejecting or transforming those attitudes, values and dispositions.

Ideological texture concerns the particular alliances and conflicts nurtured

and evoked by the language of the text and the language of the interpretation as well as the way the text itself and interpreters of the text position themselves in relation to other individuals and groups. Readers should recognize and interpret the ideological point(s) of view texts evokes, advocates and nurtures, as well as their own ideological point(s) of view as readers.

A study of prophetic texts concerned with social aspects should take note of the social contexts. Some text sections refer to social matters within that passage itself. In Jeremiah 23:9-22, certain cultural and societal aspects are accepted as common knowledge, for instance, what a prophet is and what a prophet does, the importance of the temple and what takes place in and at the temple. Ideological aspects are sometimes less obvious in texts, but they do exist and interpreters should identify and discuss them. Culpepper (1998:75) remarks, “Ideological texture recognizes the presence of an ideological point of view in texts, in authoritative traditions of interpretation, in intellectual discourse, and in individuals and groups.” Ideology often relates to the exercise of power (cf.

29

Combrink 2002:116). In this regard, Clines (2009:24) comments, “Since there is almost always a dissymmetry of power in relations between people and groups of people, an ideology tends to support and enhance the power of its adherents.” In the passage of concern, the royal/Zion ideology plays a crucial part and with it, the power struggles of rival prophets. A final point, there should be an awareness of and honesty about one's own social, cultural and ideological position and its possible impact on one's interpretation (Combrink 2002:117 referring to Patte 1995).

Interpreters of texts should acquaint themselves with social and cultural matters that might be present in the text. For instance, a passage may refer to the temple in Jerusalem and thereby create a referential context emanating from the text. However, a text that forms part of a collection or a cycle as is the case with Jeremiah 23:9-40 has a social context where the redactors are situated. The reconstructions of social contexts are challenging and remain speculative exercises. The use of the social sciences in this regard can be of great help and can render less speculative results (cf. Robbins 1996:1).

1.5.4.3 Relevance for this study

Approaching the demarcated texts in Jeremiah with mindfulness about the social and rhetorical aspects of this text corpus will entail attention to the compositional, the persuasive and the social aspects respectively of the text. By analysing Jeremiah 23:9-22 in the manner outlined above, the possibility arises to notice various aspects of the text that might go unnoticed. This approach will not only enable the interpreter to detect the inner structure of a particular text unit, but also the connection of the components of the particular text unit with other text units not part of the immediate textual context. A further benefit will be an appreciation of the type of text that is analysed and perhaps even the exposure of some theological or ideological aspects by what is communicated in the text or deliberately not communicated. A further aim of this approach is also to achieve

30

some understanding of the social context reflected in the text or the context in which a particular text originates and perhaps cultural aspects that are revealed in the course of the interpretive process (cf. Tuppurainen 2012:38-45).

As a result of the close reading of the text and an awareness of not only the social context alluded to by the text content, the literary context of the various text units in Jeremiah 23:9-40 will also be highlighted.