David Rosenberg (1) (1943–)

The Book of J
Translated from the Hebrew by David Rosenberg
Interpreted by Harold Bloom

I started my quest to read “Bloom’s Western Canon“ two years or so ago. Along the way, I took a few detours from the western canon itself to read books that helped me better understand those classic works. I mainly buy my books at the annual used book sales conducted by my hometown libraries. Over the years, I’ve collected many books that, as luck would have it, supplement what I’m reading in the western canon. One of those books is called The Book of J, by Harold Bloom himself. Bloom, a literary critic, wrote an influential book, called The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. I have not read The Western Canon, however, I am familiar with its famous list. I was interested in reading The Book of J not only because I wanted to read something by the man himself, but because it tied into my reading of the Bible and other books about Biblical times.

The Book of J is both a translation and an interpretation. First - the translation. “J”, which stands for Yahwist (Yahweh starts with the letter J in German) is one of the original authors (some would say scribes) of the first five books of what Christians call the Old Testament and what Jews call the Torah. There are other authors/scribes as well - all of whom have been “discovered” through close reading of surviving scrolls that have been studied for centuries. Some of the others are “E” for the Elohist, “P” for the Priestly scribe, and “R” for the Redactor. J got his (or her - as we shall see from Bloom’s intentionally controversial theory) moniker because of his focus on Yahweh as the protagonist of the first five books. David Rosenberg translates what we know of J’s writings from the Hebrew. What you get is a summary of the Torah with the focus being on Yahweh. We read of his creation of the world, how Adam and Hava (Eve) came to be, Noah, Abram (Abraham), Jacob (later Israel), Joseph (my personal favorite), Judah, Moses, and a host of interesting supporting figures. I really enjoyed Rosenberg’s translation and learning more about Yahweh’s relationship with these famous people.

Unfortunately, I was disappointed in Bloom’s interpretation. Besides his intentionally controversial contention that J may have been a woman - and possibly King David’s granddaughter, there were things about his interpretation that just plain irritated me. (I don’t care about the woman part but I do care about his intentional controversy just because he could.) He claimed that J was really writing about David and the entire “Book of J” was a sort of metaphor for the eventual glory of David’s reign and Yahweh’s love for him. In other words, J was a post-Davidic courtly writer who used themes from an archaic, prehistoric form of Judaism to glorify her supposed grandfather’s reign. I don’t mind controversial interpretations of anything but what irritated me was that Bloom gave no reason or research that explained how he came to his conclusions. He did say that, as a literary critic and not a Biblical scholar, he was interpreting the book purely as literature. Even still, literary critics typically cite sources or explain their reasoning.

Bloom, being such a widely read person and so steeped in literary theory, may not have felt the need to cite anything because he simply “knew” stuff. His interpretation felt more like a journal than a critique. It was as if he was writing his thoughts in preparation for publishing a more scholarly book but never got down to the scholarly part. The reader is left with no bibliography, no index, and nothing to go on other than to see what mysterious connections Bloom would make next.

After I finished the book, I searched some of my other books to see what Biblical scholars thought of Bloom’s interpretation. Robin Lane Fox, a favorite of mine, summed up my feelings pretty well: “Harold Bloom… builds extravagantly on R. Friedman [‘s book] Who Wrote the Bible… the dating, “irony”, sex, political message, and “covenant” of Bloom’s J are all unconvincing.” Extravagant is a great word for it.

I recommend The Book of J for Rosenberg’s translation, but not for Bloom’s interpretation. I’ll stick to relying on him for the canonical list and leave it at that.… (mais)

A worthy attempt to look at part of the early Bible as a literary, as opposed to a religious, work. However, it depends a bit too much on Bloom's evocation of his authority as a critic to assert that it's a work of literary genius, rather than depending on his ability to let us see what he does. Mostly, it uses the standard device that critics use when they trust an author; any apparent infelicities become evidence of irony rather than actual problems. Still, useful as a way to jolt some newness into this text.… (mais)