In this paper, I argue that there are many opportunities for queer readings of texts based on the technical issues of language, manuscripts, and translations with which text criticism is concerned. In some cases, traditional methods can be used to highlight queer aspects of Biblical Hebrew and textual attestations. In others, I challenge traditional text critical assumptions and methods in order to open up a space for queer perspectives and queer interests. I argue that text criticism grants too much authority to ancient communities, and I argue for an approach that protects the interests of the queer community. I draw on Erin Runions’ concept of hybridity to sketch a possible aim for queer text criticism, I offer examples of queer emendations, and I give several cases in which scholars’ unacknowledged heteronormative assumptions have led them to use traditional methods to straighten queer moments in the biblical text(s).
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
See Tov, Textual Criticism, p. 265. For an alternative definition that raises a different set of problems, see A.E. Housman, “The Application of Thought to Textual Criticism,” in J. Carter (ed.), Selected Prose (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1961), pp. 131–150.
For a related example, see S. MacWilliam, Queer Theory and the Prophetic Marriage Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible (Sheffield: Equinox, 2011), pp. 84–96.
B. Waltke, “Aims of OT Textual Criticism,” WTJ 51 (1989), pp. 93–108.
See, for instance, Tov, Textual Criticism, pp. 263–265; A. van der Kooij, “Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Its Aim and Method,” in S.M. Paul, R.A. Kraft, L.H. Schiffman, and W.F. Fields (eds.), Emanuel: Studies in Hebrew Bible Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel Tov (Leiden: Brill, 2003), pp. 729–740; R.W. Klein, “Textual Criticism: Recovering and Preserving the Text of the Hebrew Bible,” in J.M. LeMon and K.H. Richards (eds.), Method Matters: Essays on the Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Honor of David L. Peterson (Atlanta: SBL, 2009), pp. 44–96; R.S. Kawashima, “Sources and Redaction,” in R. Hendel (ed.), Reading Genesis (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 51.
T.M. Law, “How Not to Use 3 Reigns: A Plea to Scholars of the Books of Kings,” VT 61 (2011), pp. 280–297 (281); E. van Staalduine-Sulman, “Isaiah 44:5: Textual Criticism and Other Arguments,” TC 16 (2011), pp. 1–10 (10).
See A. Aejmelaeus, “Levels of Interpretation: Tracing the Trail of the Septuagint Translators,” in On the Trail of the Septuagint Translators: Collected Essays (Leven: Peeters, 2007), pp. 295–312; J.W. Wevers, “The Interpretive Character and Significance of the Septuagint Version,” in M. Sæbø, Hebrew Bible, Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996), vol. I, pp. 49–66.
G. Martin, Multiple Originals: New Approaches to Hebrew Bible Textual Criticism (Atlanta: SBL, 2010). For a different perspective, see H. Ausloos, “Canticles as Allegory? Textual Criticism and Literary Criticism in Dialogue,” in H. Ausloos, B. Lemmelijn, and M. Vervenne (eds.), Florilegium Lovaniense: Studies in Septuagint and Textual Criticism in Honour of Florentino García Martínez (BETL 224; Leuven: Peeters, 2008), pp. 35–48.
R.E. Murphy, The Song of Songs: A Commentary on the Book of Canticles or the Song of Songs (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990), pp. 56, 84, 134.
S.D. Moore, God’s Beauty Parlor: And Other Queer Spaces in and Around the Bible (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2001), pp. 21–89.
D. Barthelemy, Studies in the Text of the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (trans. S. Pisano and P.A. Pettit [vol. 1], J.E. Cook and S. Lind [vol. 2] and S. Lind [vol. 3]; Textual Criticism and the Translator 3; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2012), pp. 92–96. (This text is the English translation of Barthelemy’s Introductions to volumes 1, 2, and 3 of Critique Textuelle De L’Ancien Testament.)
B. Albrektson, “Translation and Emendation,” Text, Translation, Theology: Selected Essays on the Hebrew Bible (SOTS Monographs; Farnham, England: Ashgate, 2010), pp. 95–106.
B. Albrektson, “Masoretic or Mixed: On Choosing a Textual Basis for a Translation of the Hebrew Bible,” Text, Translation, Theology, pp. 121–134.
Holladay, “Text Criticism and Beyond,” pp. 179, 182. I argue, with Tov (Textual Criticism, p. 281), that most of textual criticism is an art.
See Barr, Comparative Philology, pp. 188–222. It is important to note that Barr directs his argument against those who disregard the Masoertic vocalization because they view it as an arbitrary and late addition to the consonants, as opposed to those who respect the tradition in general but who sometimes propose mistakes.
D.R. Hillers, Micah: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Micah (Heremeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), p. 38.
B.K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind: Eisenbrauns, 1990), pp. 95–99.
M. Holmes, Intersex: A Perilous Existence (Selinsgrove, Pa.: Susquehanna Press, 2008).
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 313 | 47 | 6 |
Full Text Views | 253 | 2 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 129 | 9 | 0 |
In this paper, I argue that there are many opportunities for queer readings of texts based on the technical issues of language, manuscripts, and translations with which text criticism is concerned. In some cases, traditional methods can be used to highlight queer aspects of Biblical Hebrew and textual attestations. In others, I challenge traditional text critical assumptions and methods in order to open up a space for queer perspectives and queer interests. I argue that text criticism grants too much authority to ancient communities, and I argue for an approach that protects the interests of the queer community. I draw on Erin Runions’ concept of hybridity to sketch a possible aim for queer text criticism, I offer examples of queer emendations, and I give several cases in which scholars’ unacknowledged heteronormative assumptions have led them to use traditional methods to straighten queer moments in the biblical text(s).
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 313 | 47 | 6 |
Full Text Views | 253 | 2 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 129 | 9 | 0 |