Reconstructing Realities from Biblical Utopias
Alien Readers and Dystopian Potentials
In: Biblical InterpretationSearch for other papers by Frauke Uhlenbruch in
Current site
Google Scholar
This article addresses two specific issues in reading the Hebrew Bible drawing on utopian theory: the possibility of reconstructing historical reality by reading a text as a utopia, and the variable of changing audiences throughout time and their impact on utopian readings.
Suvin’s and Roemer’s definitions of utopia are used, but it is acknowledged that no one definition of utopia is necessarily more correct than another. Approaching the concept of utopia as a flexible ideal type, rather than with a strict definition, is advocated. Utopia is seen as a specific response by the author(s) to a perceived reality; therefore it has been suggested that reading biblical texts as utopia can offer insight into social realities at the time of the text’s creation. This notion is examined critically, drawing on Holquist’s comparison of utopia to the abstraction of chess. While it is possible to make some statements about the social reality at the time of the production of the text by reading the text as a utopian representation, it must always be taken into account that each reconstruction of reality is only one possible interpretation offered by a member of a non-intended audience. A utopia’s relationship to realities is complex, and often aspects of its implied counter-piece, the dystopia, become visible when a transfer of a utopia into reality is attempted.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
1
L. T. Sargent, “The Three Faces of Utopianism Revisited,” Utopian Studies 5, no. 1 (1994), pp. 1–37.
-
2
For example in M. Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (Los Angeles: Roxbury, 2001), p. 55, and in M. Weber, The Methodology of the Social Sciences (New York: Free Press, 1949), p. 80.
-
5
D. Suvin, “Theses on Dystopia 2001,” in T. Moylan and R. Baccolini (eds.), Dark Horizons: Science Fiction and the Dystopian Imagination (London: Routledge, 2003), p. 188.
-
6
D. Suvin, “Theses on Dystopia 2001,” in T. Moylan and R. Baccolini (eds.), Dark Horizons: Science Fiction and the Dystopian Imagination (London: Routledge, 2003), p. 189.
-
13
For example, F. Manuel and F. P. Manuel, Utopian Thought in the Western World (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1979), p. 25; Suvin, Metamorphoses of Science Fiction, p. 11; F. Jameson, “Progress Versus Utopia Or, Can We Imagine The Future?” Science Fiction Studies 9, no. 1 (1982), pp. 147–58.
-
16
L. Marin, Utopics: Spatial Play (Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press, 1984), p. 93.
-
20
M. Holquist, “How to Play Utopia: Some Brief Notes on the Distinctiveness of Utopian Fiction,” Yale French Studies 41 (1968), pp. 106–123 (110).
-
21
M. Holquist, “How to Play Utopia: Some Brief Notes on the Distinctiveness of Utopian Fiction,” Yale French Studies 41 (1968), p. 116.
-
31
W. Bradford, Of Plymouth Plantation (New York: Capricorn, 1962), pp. 63–64.
-
32
Frauke Uhlenbruch, “Promised Land into Real-Life Utopia? Utopian Theory, Numbers 13 and Of Plymouth Plantation,” eSharp, no. 18: Challenges of Development (2012), pp. 26–34.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 216 | 47 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 31 | 5 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 53 | 15 | 1 |
Reconstructing Realities from Biblical Utopias
Alien Readers and Dystopian Potentials
In: Biblical InterpretationSearch for other papers by Frauke Uhlenbruch in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
This article addresses two specific issues in reading the Hebrew Bible drawing on utopian theory: the possibility of reconstructing historical reality by reading a text as a utopia, and the variable of changing audiences throughout time and their impact on utopian readings.
Suvin’s and Roemer’s definitions of utopia are used, but it is acknowledged that no one definition of utopia is necessarily more correct than another. Approaching the concept of utopia as a flexible ideal type, rather than with a strict definition, is advocated. Utopia is seen as a specific response by the author(s) to a perceived reality; therefore it has been suggested that reading biblical texts as utopia can offer insight into social realities at the time of the text’s creation. This notion is examined critically, drawing on Holquist’s comparison of utopia to the abstraction of chess. While it is possible to make some statements about the social reality at the time of the production of the text by reading the text as a utopian representation, it must always be taken into account that each reconstruction of reality is only one possible interpretation offered by a member of a non-intended audience. A utopia’s relationship to realities is complex, and often aspects of its implied counter-piece, the dystopia, become visible when a transfer of a utopia into reality is attempted.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 216 | 47 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 31 | 5 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 53 | 15 | 1 |