This paper engages the five cave narratives of the Hebrew Bible: Lot and his daughters (Genesis 19), the cave of Machpelah (Genesis 23), Joshua and the five Amorite Kings (Joshua 10), Saul and David’s cave encounter (1 Samuel 24), and Elijah’s theophany at Horeb (1 Kings 19). Biblical caves are significant and symbolic places. Frequently, the cave is associated with concealment, providing a hiding place for people and taboo practices and things. The cave is also a space of resistance, both within the text and as part of a larger critique of futurity. Biblical caves are likewise significant to the analysis of gender. While the caves of Genesis simultaneously imitate and displace the female body, other biblical caves are wholly masculine spaces, acting as both shelters and prisons for men. Attending to the caves thus yields insight to questions of gender, futurity, and the function of space in literary reading.
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 Plato, The Republic (trans. C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2004), pp. 208–215 [7.514a–521d].
F. Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future (trans. Walter Kaufmann; New York: Vintage, 1966), p. 229.
For example, D. Stronach, “The Garden as a Political Statement: Some Case Studies from the Near East in the First Millennium B.C.,” Bulletin of the Asia Institute 4 (1990), pp. 171-80; M. Novák, “The Artificial Paradise: Programme and Ideology of Royal Gardens,” in S. Parpola and R.M. Whiting (eds.), Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriolgique Internationale, Helsinki, July 2-6, 2001 (Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2002), pp. 443-60; W.P. Brown and J.T. Carroll, “The Garden and the Plaza Biblical Images of the City,” Int 54 (2000), pp. 3-11; J. Delumeau and M. O’Connell, History of Paradise: The Garden of Eden in Myth and Tradition (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2000).
F. Uhlenbruch, The Nowhere Bible: Utopia, Dystopia, Science Fiction (Boston: de Gruyter, 2015); Y.C. Klangwisan, Jouissance: A Cixousian Encounter with the Song of Songs (BMW, 56; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2015); M. Foucault, “Of Other Spaces,” Diacritics 1 (1986), pp. 22-27.
R. Polhemus, Lot’s Daughters: Sex, Redemption, and Women’s Quest for Authority (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2005), p. 9. We will return to the question of children and futurity with a turn to L. Edelman’s No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive (Series Q; Durham: Duke University Press, 2004) subsequently in this paper, though his treatment is quite different from that offered by Polhemus.
See L. Irigaray, Speculum of the Other Woman (trans. Gillian C. Gill; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985), pp. 293-94.
Sherwood, “And Sarah Died,” p. 269. There is a possible linguistic connection that highlights this parallel. The ram which takes Isaac’s place upon the sacrificial altar is described as being “caught (אחז) in the thicket by its horns” (Gen. 22:13). The cave and land that Abraham purchases for Sarah in Genesis 23 are described as a “burial property/possession (אחזה)” (23:4, 9, 20).
See J. Kristeva, Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection (trans. L.S. Roudiez; New York: Columbia University Press, 1982), p. 71. The other type of polluting element is menstrual blood, which stands for the danger issuing from within the identity. Both types of defilement, however, stem from the maternal and/or the feminine.
A. Dundes, “Earth-Diver: Creation of the Mythopoeic Male,” American Anthropologist 64 (1962), pp.1032-1051.
L. Bersani, “Is the Rectum a Grave?” October 43 (1987), pp. 197-222 (211).
L. Irigaray, This Sex Which Is Not One, (trans. C. Porter and C. Burke; New York: Cornell University Press, 1985), p. 30.
D.M. Gunn, The Fate of King Saul: An Interpretation of a Biblical Story (JSOTSup; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1980), p. 94.
T.W. Jennings, Jacob’s Wound: Homoerotic Narrative in the Literature of Ancient Israel (New York: Continuum, 2005), p. 24; R. Boer, Knockin’ on Heaven’s Door: The Bible and Popular Culture (New York: Routledge, 1999), pp. 22, 30.
I. Pardes, The Biography of Ancient Israel (Berkeley: University of Californa Press, 2000), pp. 62-64, 107-108.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 6884 | 2389 | 187 |
Full Text Views | 159 | 21 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 237 | 54 | 1 |
This paper engages the five cave narratives of the Hebrew Bible: Lot and his daughters (Genesis 19), the cave of Machpelah (Genesis 23), Joshua and the five Amorite Kings (Joshua 10), Saul and David’s cave encounter (1 Samuel 24), and Elijah’s theophany at Horeb (1 Kings 19). Biblical caves are significant and symbolic places. Frequently, the cave is associated with concealment, providing a hiding place for people and taboo practices and things. The cave is also a space of resistance, both within the text and as part of a larger critique of futurity. Biblical caves are likewise significant to the analysis of gender. While the caves of Genesis simultaneously imitate and displace the female body, other biblical caves are wholly masculine spaces, acting as both shelters and prisons for men. Attending to the caves thus yields insight to questions of gender, futurity, and the function of space in literary reading.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 6884 | 2389 | 187 |
Full Text Views | 159 | 21 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 237 | 54 | 1 |