Can the Women Speak?: A Symptomatic Reading of the Women’s Silence in the Markan Ending
In: Biblical InterpretationSearch for other papers by Sunhee Jun in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Two prevalent interpretations of the women’s silence in the Markan ending—the silence as failure and as a religious response—share the assumption that the silence is the subjective action of the women. However, such interpretations fail to see the way in which the Markan women characters are constructed in the narrative, which is already colored by an androcentric and patriarchal lens. In this paper, I propose a symptomatic reading of the silence with a question “Can the women in Mark speak?” which is inspired by Spivak’s article “Can the Subaltern Speak?” (1999). An analysis of women’s speech in Mark shows how their voices are silenced in/by narrative. The women’s silence symptomatically appears from the Markan contradiction. On the one hand, Mark portrays the women positively on the surface; but soon after, Mark unconsciously dismisses the women from the narrative because of internalized androcentrism on the other.
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
-
Abdalkafor, O. 2015. Gayatri Spivak: Deconstruction and the Ethics of Postcolonial Literary Interpretation (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing).
-
Althusser, L. 2005. For Marx (trans. B., Brewster; London: Verso).
-
Althusser, L. 2016. Reading Capital: The Complete Edition (trans. B., Brewster and D., Fernbach; London: Verso).
-
Bartels, A, L., Eckstein, N., Waller, and D., Wiemann. 2019. Postcolonial Literatures in English: An Introduction (Berlin: J.B. Metzler).
-
Bauckham, R. 2002. Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
-
Beard, M. 2009. The Roman Triumph (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
-
Boring, M. E. 2006. Mark: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press).
-
Catchpole, D.R. 1977. “The Fearful Silence of the Women at the Tomb: A Study in Markan Theology,” JTSA 18: 3–10.
-
Choi, J.Y. 2015. Postcolonial Discipleship of Embodiment: An Asian and Asian American Feminist Reading of the Gospel of Mark (Postcolonialism and Religions; New York: Palgrave Macmillan).
-
Collins, A.Y. 2007. Mark: A Commentary (Ed. H.W., Attridge; Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press).
-
Cotes, M. 1992. “Women, Silence and Fear (Mark 16:8),” in George J., Brooke (ed.), Women in the Biblical Tradition (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press): 150–66.
-
Cotter, W. 2001. “Mark’s Hero of the Twelfth-Year Miracles,” in A.-J., Levine (ed.), Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 54–78.
-
Dewey, J. 1997. “Women in the Synoptic Gospels: Seen but Not Heard?,” BTB 27: 53–60.
-
Dewey, J. 2004. “Let Them Renounce Themselves and Take up Their Cross: A Feminist Reading of Mark 8:34 in Mark’s Social and Narrative World,” BTB 34. 3: 98–104.
-
Dewey, J. 2006. “Women in the Gospel of Mark,” WW 26. 1: 22–29.
-
Donahue, J.R. and D.J., Harrington. 2002. The Gospel of Mark (ed. D.J., Harrington; Sacra Pagina series, 2; Collegeville, MI: Liturgical Press).
-
Graham, S.L. 1991. “Silent Voices: Women in the Gospel of Mark,” Semeia 54: 145–58.
-
Hare, D.R.A. 1996. Mark (Westminster Bible Companion; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press).
-
Hurtado, L.W. 2009. “The Women, the Tomb, and the Climax of Mark,” in Z., Rodgers and M.D., Denton (eds.), A Wandering Galilean: Essays in Honour of Sean Freyne (Leiden: Brill): 427–50.
-
Jeanneau, A. and R., Perron. 2005. “Symptom-Formation,” in Alain, de Mijolla (ed.), International Dictionary of Psychoanalysis (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA): 1716–18.
-
Kim, S.H. 2010. Mark, Women and Empire: A Korean Postcolonial Perspective (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press).
-
Kinukawa, H. 1994. Women and Jesus in Mark: A Japanese Feminist Perspective (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books).
-
Lane, W.L. 1974. The Gospel of Mark (NICNT, 2; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
-
Liew, T.B. 2016. “Haunting Silence: Trauma, Failed Orality, and Mark’s Messianic Secret,” in T.B., Liew and E., Runions (ed.), Psychoanalytic Mediations between Marxist and Postcolonial Readings of the Bible (Semeia Studies, 84; Atlanta: SBL Press): 99–127.
-
Macherey, P. 2006. A Theory of Literary Production (trans. G., Wall; London: Routledge).
-
Malbon, E.S. 1983. “Fallible Followers: Women and Men in the Gospel of Mark,” Semeia 28: 29–48.
-
Mann, C.S. 1986. Mark: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 27; New York: Doubleday).
-
Miller, S. 2004. “‘They Said Nothing to Anyone’: The Fear and Silence of the Women at the Empty Tomb (Mk 16.1–8),” Feminist Theology 13. 1: 77–90.
-
Mishra, V. 2000. “Review of Gayatri Chakraborty Spivak, A Critique of Postcolonial Reason,” Textual Practice 14. 2: 412–21.
-
Moloney, F.J. 2002. The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson).
-
Munro, W. 1982. “Women Disciples in Mark?,” CBQ 44. 2: 225–41.
-
Nash, B. 2015. “Point of View and the Women’s Silence: A Reading of Mark 16:1–8,” Restoration Quarterly 57. 4: 225–32.
-
O’Collins, G. and D., Kendall. 1987. “Mary Magdalene as Major Witness to Jesus’ Resurrection,” TS 48. 4: 631–46.
-
Osiek, C. 1997. “The Women at the Tomb: What Are They Doing There?,” HTS Teologiese Studies 53: 103–18.
-
Phillips, V. 2001. “The Failure of the Women Who Followed Jesus in the Gospel of Mark,” in A.-J., Levine (ed.), Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 222–34.
-
Phillips, V. 2011. “The Other Instance of Women’s Silence in the Gospel of Mark,” CBW 31: 129–42.
-
Rhoads, D., J., Dewey., and D., Michie. 1999. Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2nd edn).
-
Sabin, M. 1998. “Women Transformed: The Ending of Mark Is the Beginning of Wisdom,” Cross-Currents 48: 149–68.
-
Schottroff, L. Let the Oppressed Go Free: Feminist Perspectives on the New Testament. (trans. A.S., Kidder; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press).
-
Schüssler Fiorenza, E. 1994. In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins (New York: Crossroad, 10th anniversary edn).
-
Selvidge, M.J. 1983. “And Those Who Followed Feared (Mark 10:32).” CBQ 45. 3: 396–400.
-
Setzer, C. 1997. “Excellent Women: Female Witness to the Resurrection,” JBL 116. 2: 259–72.
-
Spivak, G.C. 1990. The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues (ed. S., Harasym; New York: Routledge).
-
Spivak, G.C. 1994. “Can the Subaltern Speak?,” in P., Williams and L., Chrisman (ed.), Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory: A Reader (New York: Columbia University Press): 61–111.
-
Spivak, G.C. 1999. A Critique of Postcolonial Reason: Toward a History of the Vanishing Present (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
-
Sugirtharajah, R.S. 1991. “The Widow’s Mites Revalued,” ExpTim 103. 2: 42–43.
-
Taylor, V. 1981. The Gospel According to St. Mark: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes, and Indexes (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2nd edn).
-
Tolbert, M.A. 1989. Sowing the Gospel: Mark’s World in Literary-historical Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress).
-
Tolbert, M.A. 1998. “Mark,” in C.A., Newsom and S.H., Ringe (eds.), Women’s Bible Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, Expanded edn): 350–62.
-
Topel, J. 2012. “What Were the Women Afraid Of? (Mark 16:8),” JTI 6. 1: 79–95.
-
Waetjen, H.C. 1989. A Reordering of Power: A Socio-political Reading of Mark’s Gospel (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).
-
Williams, J.F. 1999. “Literary Approaches to the End of Mark’s Gospel,” JETS 42. 1: 21–35.
-
Williamson, L. 1983. Mark (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press).
-
Wright, A.G. 1982. “The Widow’s Mites: Praise or Lament?—A Matter of Context,” CBQ 44: 256–65.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 705 | 121 | 22 |
| Full Text Views | 136 | 12 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 311 | 39 | 0 |
Can the Women Speak?: A Symptomatic Reading of the Women’s Silence in the Markan Ending
In: Biblical InterpretationSearch for other papers by Sunhee Jun in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Two prevalent interpretations of the women’s silence in the Markan ending—the silence as failure and as a religious response—share the assumption that the silence is the subjective action of the women. However, such interpretations fail to see the way in which the Markan women characters are constructed in the narrative, which is already colored by an androcentric and patriarchal lens. In this paper, I propose a symptomatic reading of the silence with a question “Can the women in Mark speak?” which is inspired by Spivak’s article “Can the Subaltern Speak?” (1999). An analysis of women’s speech in Mark shows how their voices are silenced in/by narrative. The women’s silence symptomatically appears from the Markan contradiction. On the one hand, Mark portrays the women positively on the surface; but soon after, Mark unconsciously dismisses the women from the narrative because of internalized androcentrism on the other.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 705 | 121 | 22 |
| Full Text Views | 136 | 12 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 311 | 39 | 0 |