University Press of America, Inc.

The Invention of Monotheist Ethics, Volume I: Exploring the First Book of Samuel

admin — Sat, 29 May 2010 00:00:00 +0000

But the wicked will be put to silence in darkness; For not by power shall man prevail. Samuel 2:2

The Invention of Monotheist Ethics, Volume I is the first in a two-volume series exploring the Book of Samuel and its significant role in the evolution from a largely pagan society to a monotheistic one. The book is especially geared towards readers who are new to studying the Bible.

Why study the Book of Samuel, and not start at the beginning, in Genesis? First, Millgram argues, it is a highly accessible biblical text. Samuel’s characters are dynamic and deal with matters very similar to our own. Furthermore, states Millgram, the characters are in constant activity, “there is rarely a dull moment.”

Second, the book is diverse in contents, characters, and issues. It is one of the only books in the Bible with several prominent female characters. The very first character we are introduced to is Hannah. At the beginning of the narrative Hannah is childless, and miserable because of it. One night in act of desperation Hannah prays, promising God that if he blesses her with a child she will dedicate the life of the child to him. Hannah gives birth to Samuel shortly after and eventually becomes the mother of six children.

Despite accessibility and diversity, readers may be most interested in Millgram’s most provocative argument; he is convinced that the Book of Samuel was written by a woman. One clue is that women’s roles in the book are not circumstantial (such as being mentioned only as the wife of a male character) but essential to the moral messages of the book. While the historical aspects of the narrative may not be damaged by removing the female characters, the book’s meaning, its moral components, require the presence of the female players.

To give further credit to his argument, Millgram provides details on the daily lives of women in ancient Israel and debunks certain misnomers, such as the belief that most women in ancient Israel were illiterate. The formation of Israel in fact coincided with the adaptation of the alphabet script, and it is not at all unlikely that more women were involved in writing the Bible than believed.

Throughout the book Millgram takes it for granted that the author of Samuel was written by a woman, an approach that is unique and noticeable to those who have previously studied the Bible. Given the manner that Bible stories permeate American society, such an approach can have an enormous positive impact on the psyche of American women, Christian or otherwise.

My favorite story from Volume One was the David and Goliath narrative. Because the story is largely seen as mythical, it is compelling to have the facts of the story articulated, including insights into the consciousness of David and the other main players.

While the book does in fact make the Book of Samuel more accessible to readers, there are long sections dealing with the politics and wars of ancient Israel that are dense and less accessible than other portions of the book. The Invention of Monotheist Ethics is also printed in a format that is academic and unfriendly to the more lay reader.

Unfortunately the volume ends before the introduction of Bathsheba, one of the most memorable women of the Bible. Her story and the rest of King David’s reign are included in Volume Two. However the book is a wonderful introduction to the Bible and a great source for those looking for an unorthodox approach to the book.

Written by: Janice Formichella, May 28th 2010

Resolving the Paradox of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Sexual Politics

admin — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:05:00 +0000

By Tamela Ice

University Press of America, Inc.

Professor Ice begins her book with what she calls a paradox within philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau's social philosophy. In her words, “Rousseau's views on women sits [sic] in tension with his philosophy of freedom and equality.” That is, Professor Ice refers to the apparent discrepancy between Rousseau's vision of freedom for men and his endorsement of subordination for women. In the first chapter, Ice begins by exploring Rousseau's identity and sexual politics to determine Rousseau's definition (description would be better) of “woman.” Next, in the second chapter, she discusses what she considers Rousseau's overarching philosophical project—“the restoration of a sense of equality among men as men.” Thus, the question becomes: Does Rousseau's sexual politics undermine his larger project of restoring this sense of equality among men? In chapter three, Professor Ice moves to a discussion of the depiction of psychological alienation in literature to describe what happens to women when they are psychologically dependent and living in bad faith. In chapter four, Professor Ice directly employs selections from Simone de Beauvoir's oeuvreas a lens for refocusing interpretations of Rousseau.

I am sympathetic to the desire to connect Rousseau and Beauvoir. Indeed, stylistically, they are mutually sympathetic. Both Beauvoir and Rousseau have been lambasted by (some) feminists and other critics for insisting upon a status quo which they merely (brilliantly, feelingly) describe. It is not the case that there is no connection to be made between Rousseau and Beauvoir, it is simply that Ice never justifies her comparison. She never tells her reader why she chooses Beauvoir as a foil for Rousseau; she never explains why “bad faith” is something about which we ought to worry; she never explains why and how it is she justifies her anachronistic application of a twentieth century existentialist concept to an eighteenth century Enlightenment philosophy. Even if the reader were to set aside the lack of justification (and the regrettable editing errors), she must still contend with Ice's interpretation of Rousseau's sexual politics and social philosophy. Ice notes the masculine language Rousseau uses to discuss the civil “man,” but never looks at Rousseau's moral project (or even appears to recognize a moral project in Rousseau's work).

One might note a sort of progression in Rousseau's genealogy of human social development: wild, natural, civil, moral. The moral person is the culmination of Rousseau's project and the moral person comprises a man and a woman: in Emile, Rousseau claims that the community created by a woman and a man “produces a person...” (emphasis added). There is no moral humanity without women; men alone, as men, cannot be taken as the measure for (full) humanity.

Unfortunately, although Ice attempts a revision of Rousseau scholarship, there is nothing revisionary in her tired invocation of an illicit major premise: all men are human, no woman is a man, therefore, no woman is human. Rousseau doesn't take man, by himself, for the measure of humanity and doesn't measure women against men. When feminist academics employ such faulty logic, they disadvantage their scholarship and often miss subtleties that can be more fruitfully explored.

Written by: kristina grob, November 18th 2009

Success and Solitude: Feminist Organizations Fifty Years After The Feminine Mystique

admin — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 00:07:00 +0000

By Sarah Maxwell

University Press of America, Inc.

Much ado has been made over the fact that an increasing number of women do not identify themselves with the feminist movement, but there has been little consensus over why this is so. Why, in an era where girls grow up being told “you can be anything you want to be,” do many women reject affiliation with feminism? Author Sarah Maxwell attempts to answer this question in Success and Solitude: Feminist Organizations Fifty Years After The Feminine Mystique. In a meticulously researched book, Maxwell discusses the changing identity of the feminist movement by tracing the identity and numbers of women who have joined feminist organizations since Betty Friedman published The Feminine Mystique in 1963. Specifically, she explores the ways in which conflicting demands upon women have shifted their political allegiances and social identifications, which in turn has shifted the face of feminism itself.

Maxwell points to changes in access to education, professional opportunities, and politics as reasons for why the feminist movement’s numbers have dwindled. With the playing field leveled by increased opportunities for women, Maxwell reasons, the amount of inequality women perceive has drastically declined, even though actual inequalities may be just as present. With lower levels of inequality perceived, Success and Solitude asserts that fewer women feel a need to join feminist organizations or support their mission. Maxwell leaves it up to the reader to decide if this is good or detrimental. Success and Solitude, an academic text, was made more enjoyable by Maxwell’s careful efforts to make her research more than just facts and figures to the reader. However, Maxwell spends too much time defining the terms she uses in her research, and not enough time actually discussing how these terms play out in real women’s lives. This means that, all too frequently, Maxwell belabors the point she is trying to make, without ever making it at all. The real gems in Maxwell’s writing come in the latter part of the book, when she begins to piece together her arguments in an articulate and authoritative manner. It is a shame that just as she seems to be gathering steam in Success and Solitude, the book reaches its end.

Like any good researcher, Maxwell steers clear of giving her personal opinion and does not try to lead the reader to a particular conclusion. Therefore, the reader is left to answer Maxwell’s most pressing question: does the success of American women necessarily lead to an abandonment of women’s rights organizations? Maxwell’s research suggests that the answer to this question may be more complicated than a simple “yes” or “no.”

Written by: Gwen Emmons, August 7th 2009