 |
| "Judith with the head of Holofernes" (Cristofano Allori, 1613) |
Then think about the recent female characters we've discussed: Deborah, Ruth, Esther, Judith, and others.
Do you see a shift in the view of women? The representations of women? The interactions of women with men? With other women?
Compare one of the earlier female characters with one of the more recent characters. Using textual evidence (book, chapter, verse), create a strong statement for how you see the characterizations either remaining static or changing as the texts progress over time.
You can compare whatever narrative details are most pertinent to your observations and argument.
Posts are due by Friday, Oct 6 at midnight.
Yes there is a significant change between women of the bible, the most important thing to discuss about the change in the view of women is that, women are now placed on the same pedestal as men, if not more. Recent women of the bible such as Esther and the likes of her, were fulfilling a purpose of making sure that Gods chosen people, who are the Israelites or Jews are saved from destruction and delivered unto the said promise land as we see in the Book of Esther, even though there were prominent male figures that played important role such as Mordechai, Haman and King Xerxes and to also mention Queen Vashti as well.
ReplyDeleteFirst female character where, fulfilling a purpose in a sense, but it was in subjection to the rule of the male figure in most cases except Eve; where Adam was tricked and ate the apple, but all other women where all part of the general plan of procreation with non almost been placed at the same height as men where, almost to say a form of God supporting Patriarchy, when we examine the curse God placed on Adam and Eve "The women shall want to control the man, but the man shall be the head" in the book of Genesis.
The change in the portrayal and interactions of women from the earliest books in the bible to the more recent ones are very significant! Take for instance when Dinah was raped - she very obviously was not treated with respect and care. It was an example of how women were often portrayed as being objectified and disrespected in the earlier accounts. (Genesis 34:1-4)
ReplyDeleteLater on in the Book of Ruth (Ruth 4:13) the story tells how Boaz waited to marry Ruth until the arrangements were set - not rape now, look for marriage later like in the story of Dinah.
Even though all examples of objectification are not necessarily in the earlier books (Esther 1:11) there are not as many instances in the later accounts. The theme that I read through the later books was that of the women gaining more independence and mastery to become stronger leaders and advocates.
There is most definitely a shift in the representations of women. Comparing Rachel to Judith for example, shows the contrast between the two women. Rachel often acted out of jealousy, as she was competing for her husband with her sister Leah. For example, she gave her servant to Jacob (her husband) because she was jealous her sister was having children (Genesis 30:4). It even flat out says that Rachel was jealous of her sister in verse 1 of chapter 30. I viewed her as doing things not for others but for herself.
ReplyDeleteJudith was the opposite of Rachel, as she acted to save her people. She also was not motivated by a man. She had a strong essence of female agency. Judith goes to the enemy grounds and cuts the head off of her enemy (Holofernes) to save her people (Judith 13:9).
I would like to compare Potifar's wife with Judith. As we have heard in class and talked about a lot, there is clearly a change in the role a woman plays in many of these stories. However, my argument is that these two characters prove that there is a change in motive from selfish to selfless. Potifar's wife was trying to sleep with Joseph, for no other reason than desires from herself. She uses her power to try to seduce him, and in Genesis 39:10 we see: "And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her." Potifar's wife has a full desire for Joseph, but it is rooted in nothing but personal gain. Judith, however, is doing everything for her people. Like Potifar's wife, she seduces Holfrenes, but does it not to be with him, but to overpower him and bring back peace to her people. We've been seeing the character of God change, but recently we are seeing it in his people, who are created in his image!
ReplyDeleteLooking at how widowed women are represented both in Genesis and in Ruth indicate that there is a slight shift in how women are represented. Primarily, the most noticeable shift is in regards to social ethics, going from merely wanting to continue the family lineage to upholding what that lineage stands for.
ReplyDeleteI looked briefly at how Tamar's actions and Ruth's actions as widows showed these types of shifts. In Ruth 2.10-12, Ruth asks why she is notable to which Boaz responds "All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told to me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. The LORD repay you for what you have done, and a full reward be given you by the LORD, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to take refuge" (ESV). Here, it can be implied that it is Ruth's repeated willingness to uphold these new values of her family after marriage and the death of her husband that make her special. She is able to be an example of how faith before action is now what is the greater take away. Additionally, Ruth is willing to be a more passive character in allowing others to not only influence but also dictate how her life turns out. Another area is that there is a distinct lack of sexual motivation from Ruth for her to continually seek out an individual, like Boas, and only does so once she has positive reinforcement from Naomi. Though, like we've discussed in class the 'threshing floor' is more sexual than at surface level for modern audiences, nothing other than what is meant at face value takes place there. This contrasts greatly with how sexually imperative Tamar's actions are.
Of course, it is easy to note that Tamar is more self-motivated because she has been promised something and her faith in that promise has not been rewarded by familial acknowledgement unlike Ruth (ESV Gen. 38.6-14). As well, what is most interesting is that Tamar's character is questioned within the text. When she is discovered to be pregnant but people don't know yet that Judah is the father they remark to him that "Tamar your daughter-in-law has been immoral. Moreover, she is pregnant by immorality" (ESV Gen. 38.24). Here, the use of the term immoral is key to the main take away from the story as a whole. Tamar's actions can be seen as a cautionary tale about what happens when faith is not sustained by the character and other necessities (here being the need to carry on Judah's descendant line) weighs out. Sex here is necessary for Tamar to continue being both the best family member she can be along with being religious through tradition; whereas with Ruth it is not. Thus, noting a key aspect of earlier female representation were actions to uphold faith take precedent over mere faith alone when it comes to social ethics.
Ultimately, it doesn't surprise me that there are some shifts between the different representations of women because the bible is made for a human audience. Not everyone is going to be the same throughout the bible or the value in the text would not carry the weight that it does. Especially for women, it highlights how a character can provide differing takeaways for the needs of addressing shifts in how people regard themselves and others.
In the earlier entries of the Bible, women often played roles that reduced them to passive child-bearers. They are written to be more submissive to men and typically non-aggressive; following the social structure of the time.
ReplyDeleteThroughout Genesis women such as Sarah, Lot's daughters, Rebekah, Leah, Rachel, and Tamar each subvert their subjugation by instigating trickery (as I discussed in my oral presentation). However, later on in the Bible women begin to take more active roles within the stories and are treated differently.
In general, there is a more badass vibe to the women in the later portions of the Old Testament. There are three women who each have their own book; Ruth, Esther, and Judith. The rest are each powerful individuals in their own right, demostrating advanced agency. Deborah acts as a Judge and the Jael who is the first woman to execute a man in the Bible. Their agency continues to grow.
This transition is intriguing, especially when analyzing it from a modern feminist perspective.
It is apparent that the Bible is well-known for having stories that appear misogynistic and oppressive to women. From the start of Genesis, woman’s punishment for committing sin was immediately to have their desire be to her husband, who would rule over her (Gen 3:16 ). From there, the stories that follow with the ones we have discussed all involve instances of rape, incest, adultery, and abuse. The treatment of women in the narrations of these stories are considerably antiquated, yet they still reflect moments of feminism in the way these women contradict and operate within this. After hearing today’s presentations, I now have a clearer understanding of how all these women relate and juxtapose each other when it comes to representing female power. Skyler and David’s presentations work hand in hand describing the women’s intentions and amount of agency they have to fulfill them. It is apparent that with Eve, Lot’s daughters, and Sarai and Hagar that their feminism comes through in the form or trickery to preserve their name. They do what they must to preserve their lineage in the name of the Lord. While this is arguably contested as being antifeminist and rather immoral, these characters are still dynamic in the way they are able to achieve their goal for a greater good. From Judges to Ruth, Deborah, Ruth, Esther, and Judith all embody feminism in their independence from men to unselfishly do what is best for nation. It is these characters who show the most progression and maturity, reflecting God's growth as well. They both however, retain the same nurturing aspects, just directed in different ways. With Alicia’s presentation, it was interesting to hear how we as a progressive society have imposed our views of female empowerment on stories which was most likely written to condemn this behavior in the time period. Yet, without these dynamic female characters and ones having their own books because of this agency, the bible would not be what it is today.
ReplyDeleteThe general attitude towards and of women seem to have evolved from the first book of the Bible, Genesis, to Ruth. According to Gen. 3:6, “when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat.” When this story is juxtaposed with Ruth’s story, one could name many similarities and differences.
ReplyDeleteSimilarities:
1.) Ruth knew that Boaz was good for food (to put it bluntly) because he was willing and able to provide her and Naomi basic necessities. Naomi pointed this out to her. Eve wanted the apple because it was “good for food.”
a. Both wanted food.
2.) Naomi told Ruth to make herself pleasant to the eyes of Boaz. Ruth said she would “do everything [she said].” Another reason Eve wanted the apple is because it was “pleasant to the eyes.”
a. Both were drawn to things pleasant to the eyes.
3.) Naomi desired for Ruth to marry Boaz in order to carry on the lineage. In the end, they got married. Eve ate the apple to gain wisdom.
a. Both used something or someone to accomplish their personal desires.
Differences:
1.) Ruth was not willing to go against God’s will and simply allow Boaz to impregnate her; she wanted to be redeemed. Eve wanted to go against God’s will, and was willing to listen to the serpent.
a. Eve was naïve and listened to the snake. Ruth was independent and made her own decisions based off of her personal beliefs.
2.) Eve suffered negative consequences for her choice to eat the fruit, and these choices continue to affect all women (childbirth, men ruling, enmity... Gen. 3:16). Ruth gained positive outcomes from marrying Boaz (they had a baby and carried on the lineage, and Naomi felt whole again… Ruth 4:13-17).
a. Eve suffered from her choices. Ruth rejoiced from her choices.
Overall, it is clear that there has been a shift in the view of women. Although God cursed women because of Eve, he blessed Ruth with a baby. Not only that, but it is apparent that women now feel more independent and are not as easily influenced (by snakes and such). The overall attitude towards women seems more upbeat, and their action’s outcomes are positive (in comparison to curses from God).
It is clear that in the earlier stories of the Bible, women played a different role than the ones whom we've recently read about (Ruth, Esther, Judith, etc).
ReplyDeleteThe two characters that I see a big difference in is between Lot's daughters and Ruth. Both Lot's daughters and Ruth were left without men and had no way of continuing their family line. The daughters wanted to be like everyone else (Genesis 19:31) and get married. Because of their desire to do so, it caused them to sleep with their father. They were willing to do this just to be similar to those around. Contrary, Ruth was also put in a position with her husband dead that she was no longer able to carry on the family tree. When told to go back to her parents' home she insisted she stay with Naomi(1:14). This not only breaks the expectation of what everyone else does in this situation, but is also harder because Orpah doesn't stay with Naomi either. Ruth clearly is not concerned with what others will think of her, unlike Lot's daughters.
These young women are put in situations that are respectively different, but are handled completely different by each of the women. Ruth did not follow the status quo unlike Lot's daughters.
In certain instances between the women of Genesis and those in and after Judges, there are examples that the role and representation of women in the Bible have changed. In Genesis 3:16, part of god’s punishment to the woman was “...you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you.” This is an example of how the Bible presented the women to be lower in an intrinsic power structure than men. Later in Judges 4, Deborah resides over Israel as its judge. This grants her power over men and is the first example of a woman being in charge directly because of God’s will. The women get greater esteem in Judges after Deborah’s exchange Barak that comes true. (4:9) “Very well,” she said, “I will go with you. But you will receive no honor in this venture, for the Lord’s victory over Sisera will be at the hands of a woman.” This came to pass after Jael hammered a tent peg into Sisera’s head. This is also an example of a woman doing something that is sexually or domestically expected of them.
ReplyDeleteYes there is a drastic change in the view of women from earlier on in the babble as opposed to now. For instance Judith, Esther, Ruth, and Deborah are now almost seen as super heros as how they act. For the instance for the other women they almost play the role as background or secondary characters. I like to think that Deborah is an actual superhero in the way that she reacts to almost anything and is able to kill anyone through deceit. I just think that overall, women are depicted in a brighter and stronger spotlight as how they ought to be.
ReplyDeleteWomen in the Old Testament are consistently seen as needy people whose lives depend on their husbands. Their main duty in life was to have children to carry on their husband’s family name. A woman who wasn’t married often lived a life of poverty and separation, being an outcast in society. We continually see that women were seen as merely helpers to their husbands, and if they weren’t married, they were seen as helpless.
ReplyDeleteThe first example we see of this is in the narrative of Sarah and Abraham. Sarah cannot have children (Genesis 16:1), and is seen as helpless. To ensure she would be of some worth to her husband, she told Abraham to sleep with their servant, Hagar (16:2). She knew if she couldn’t bear children of her own, she must find a way to further Abraham’s family name. When Sarah sees that Hagar is in fact pregnant, Sarah despises her (16:4). Perhaps Sarah was jealous that Hagar was able to fulfill her duty as a woman when Sarah couldn’t. Later in Genesis, Sarah is relieved when God follows through with his promise and grants her a son. After the birth of Isaac, Sarah feels that her self-worth is restored; she fulfilled her main duty as a woman. Because Isaac could now carry on Abraham’s family name, Sarah drives Hagar away, because Sarah now had a son of her own and her worth was restored (21:10).
Fast forward, and the same cultural connotations can be seen in the book of Ruth. The book starts by telling us that both Ruth and Naomi’s husbands had died (Ruth 1:3-5). When both the women became widows, they lost their worth completely. Naomi urged Ruth to go back to her people to take a new husband (1:9), because maybe then she would add some value to society. Naomi even explicitly said the only way she would have hope was if she married again and bore sons (1:12). As widows, Ruth and Naomi both lived in poverty. They were forced to glean the fields in order to survive (2:3). It is clear that people had no regards for women who had lost their husbands. The story ends with a “happily ever after” conclusion as Ruth remarries, has a son, and finds worth in society again (4:13).
Through these two stories, we can see that women in the Old Testament cannot live on their own. They are very much dependent on men and find their worth in their ability to bear children.
You can see a large shift in the women characters we read about in Genesis to the ones we are studying now. The first thing you notice right off the bat is the power and independence the women now have compared to the ones from Genesis. Many of the actions the women displayed in genesis was to please men and or their actions were motivated by men. But women like Judith and Esther seem to be much more independent and the decisions they make are not to please men. The women in genesis never seem to be to heroic or powerful, and most pf what they do seems to be for personal gain. But Judith and Esther and others do things that take bravery and they do them to help other people.
ReplyDeleteIn Genesis, there are multiple instances where women were given away along with other possessions. This might have imposed a stereotypical image of lacking autonomy on early women characters. However I would argue that the women characters all had strong autonomy, a strong motif based on their standards. They did not just do thing because they were told to or they were expected to. Although lacking freedom and authority, they utilized their gift and strength to accomplish the decisions they made.
ReplyDeleteIn Genesis 27: 5, "But Rebekah overheard what Isaac had said to his son Esau." She then arranged the fraud all by herself an instructed her son all the steps. She had herself cooking the food to ensure that everything is right. And she did this for a strong motif. In Genesis 26:35, it says, "But Esau's wives made life miserable for Issac and Rebekah." Although not directly told, but we could easily sympathize her preference of Jacob and her potential disapproval for Esau. Therefore Rebekah used her (cooking) skill and her knowing of her husband to make a plan that fulfills her own motif.
In comparison, it might seem like Esther was following Mordecai's orders and was sort of under his control, in fact, she also had strong autonomy and was making decisions on her own. In Ester 4:11, Ester makes it clear that whoever appear before the king in his inner court without being invited is doomed to die. Although Mordecai warns her that she may not escape death even if she's the queen, it is clear that entering the king's inner court is a more for sure a deadly decision. Esther also says that she hasn't been called for 30 days, so she might have already lost favor in the king's eyes. Keep hiding her identity and keep quiet was actually the safest way, and Mordecai's persuasion in verse 14 isn't really appealing. Esther simply made the decision by herself that she wants to save her family and her people. She is also the one who made the plan and ordered Mordecai what to do.
The role of women within the Bible from Genesis to Jonah have
ReplyDeletedefinitely changed. They were seen as pretty much baby-making machines in the beginning, as shown throughout pretty much all of Genesis. But as the stories progressed, their roles changed. They engaged more, and had more duties, such as with Ruth, Deborah, Esther, and Judith. Esther helped save the Jews from mass genocide at the hands of Haman and the king, and Deborah who was the first prophetess, and told a man to lead an attack on the forces of Sisera and Jabin king of Canaan, as seen in Judges 4:6-7. Judith pretty much rebukes those who molded God into their own image of him, rather than the other way around, and hacks the head off of her enemy, Holofernes, as shown in Judith 13:1-10. They were able to come from such a stoic position to being able to pursue more active roles in such a patriarchal society. It's impressive, because you think that women back then weren't given the chance to do so, but with these women, we see examples that they were able to take the reigns of their own lives.
There is no doubt that the role of women has changed throughout the Bible. There is a shift from an attitude of passive deception with evil outcomes to active manipulation for God's glory. This difference is very clear when looking at the difference between Eve and Esther.
ReplyDeleteEve falls in the category of passive deception. In Genesis 3:6, Eve is deceived by the serpent and eats the forbidden fruit. I say this is passive because she did not decide one day, "I think I will go disobey the Lord today." She was led astray. However, she then proceeded to deceive her husband. This set the precedent for many OT women to be viewed negatively and as a source of sin.
Later on, women begin to change. Specifically, Esther shows us a different perspective. As opposed to Eve's passiveness, Esther takes charge. Whenever she desires something she approaches the king and states her request preceded by, "if it pleases the king." (as in Esther 5:4) This gives the illusion of being submissive, but at the same time she was aware of the fact that the king would grant any wish she had. Additionally, her plans were according to God. She saved the innocent from a terrible fate and struck down the proud.
It does seem the women of the bible that we have read about this far have become more powerful, held more influence, and affect the overall story in a positive way far more. You can see this between Eve and Judith. For example Eve is a woman who is created for Adam and is the villain in the story. By eating and sharing the apple with Adam she becomes a villain by disobeying God and getting Adam in trouble. Eve never really holds any good power as well, Adam names all of the animals and talks directly to God often. Judith is very different from Eve because she is very respected from the get go and it is through her a very good thing occurs. Judith enters the war camp and is greeted and treated very well. Ultimately she also defeats a whole army by beheading the leader. While both characters affected the story in a big way Eve brought bad results and Judith seemed to be a savior.
ReplyDeleteI am going to argue that although much of what we see in the women in the Bible has stayed the same (e.g. motives, thoughts, tact), there is a shift in the means by which women accomplish their goals from deceit to honesty. A comparison that shows this is Tamar and Ruth.
ReplyDeleteBoth women are widows with no prospect of a future husband. Both women are proactive in their pursuit of a secure future...both for themselves and for the family line. With very similar situations and motives, the difference lies in the actions of the women. Whereas Tamar used trickery to sleep with Judah and secure her future (Gen. 38:13-19), Ruth acted with much purity (or naïveté). She didn't seduce Boaz, but rather was honest and humbly requested that he redeem her (Ruth 3:6-13).
The development of women remains static in many respects, but the one progression is found in increasingly pure and upright actions in an effort to achieve the same (or very similar) outcomes.
I definitely think there has been a clear shift in the views and representations of women throughout the stories of the Old Testament that we’ve read so far. I will compare Tamar (from the book of Genesis) and Ruth (from the book of Ruth, duh) to illustrate my opinion.
ReplyDeleteSomething we’ve discussed countless times in class is the idea that women in the Bible seem to go from being portrayed as objects only useful for procreation, to being portrayed as actual individuals with ideas, feelings, power, etc. Well, towards the beginnings of both stories, Tamar and Ruth are both widows without any children. When Tamar is without a husband, she’s pissed off and uses trickery to get revenge on her father-in-law Judah (the person in charge of providing her with a husband), and takes matters into her own hands in order to have a child and pass on her family name (Gen 38:14). But when Ruth is without a husband, instead of searching for a new husband or being angry/upset with her mother-in-law Naomi (the person in charge of providing her with a husband), she is loyal to Naomi and loves her (Ruth 1:16). This difference from Tamar demanding a husband to Ruth seeming to accept ‘the single life’ shows that the representation of women is transitioning to have more of a purpose than simply getting married and having children. In addition, the story of Tamar and Judah ends in Tamar bringing lots of shame to Judah and his reputation, while Ruth brings honor to Naomi and her family. While it could be argued that Tamar and Ruth are women of very different character and that is why they are portrayed so differently as biblical women, I would argue that they both are dealt very similar cards and God/the authors of the stories simply chose to use them to represent/teach different lessons.
I think that there has been a shift in the characterization of women from the beginning of the Bible to what we have read not. The women in the beginning were seemingly disposable. Genesis 19:8 describes Lot offering up his daughters to be taken and used how the surrounding villagers see fit so as to protect the men/angels that had come to Lot. In more of the recent stories, Judith is at the forefront of the fighting and takes it upon herself to decapitate the opposing army’s leader. Judith 13:8 shows Judith single handedly killing someone of stature, let alone a male. The progression from disposable to quintessential is evident and while it may seem hasty in the Bible, I often forget that this happened after several hundreds of years. Something that hasn’t changed is the deception of women to pursue personal motives. Genesis 27:10 describes Rebekah, Isaac’s wife, telling Jacob to deceive his father for the blessing intended for his brother. Then in Judith 10:12 describes Judith telling people that she is fleeing the people who are going to become the prey when in fact she is there to kill the leader and return to her people. This is the theme consistent while the other theme of women standing up to men and becoming a model for other women is showing up more frequently.
ReplyDeleteThe role of women has changed since the beginning chapters we read in class. Women's representation in the earlier books we read were much more reserved and very much subservient to their male counterparts. The best example of women's subservience is in Genisis when Sarah cannot bear children for Abraham (Gen 16:1) and permits/tells her husband to have sex with her servant Hagar (Gen 16:2) in order to have children. This depicts women in their least powerful. It was clear that both of these women were nothing to Abraham other than a way to bear children. This is a vastly different depiction of woman than in Ester where a woman can not only be queen but also have self-respect enough to deny men wishes. In addition to this, woman are also later depicted as those with superior morals such as in Ruth when she stays true to her beliefs and stays pure instead of giving her body away to Boaz as suggested by Naomi. Then an even more different depiction of women is that of Judith. Where a woman could be a widow that not only denies men but can call men to her whims. Judith is also depicted as someone with not only social and financial power but also physical power when she decapitates her enemy. These examples from the more recent chapters we read show that woman's depictions have advanced from quite and obedient to their male counterparts to independent and power wielding members of their societies.
ReplyDeleteThere is a very obvious shift in women in Genesis to the women we see now. Women in the beginning of the bible really were not developed at all. Then we get to Judith, which she is so powerful and takes the fate of Bethulia into her own hands. Her character is developed and given depth, unlike Eve or Leah. Women that are written about later in the Old Testament are seen as heroes. Esther is the first woman in the bible that we see is given a position of power and a voice. In chapter 7 of Esther, Queen Esther presents the horrible plans Haman has for the Jewish population to the King. He gives the her a chance to speak up for what she wants and Queen Esther uses it to save her people. Early women in the bible are often have the main purpose to give their husbands babies. They also are very submissive and have little no voice.
ReplyDeleteEvaluating the women in the beginning of the bible, as opposed to the ones mentioned closer to the middle of the old testament, it is clear that there is a shift in how women are viewed and portrayed. For example in Genesis 3 when we are shown Adam and Eve in the garden, a lot of the blame falls on Eve’s shoulders for taking fruit from the tree of good and evil. Showing someone who was reading with not much background of the story, that women could be at fault for sin and curses entering the world. However, in Judges the shift of how we view women completely changes when we are able to recognize and respect the power of Deborah. She ruled over the entire nation of Israel and was known for her incredible leadership. Throughout the bible, the women evolved over time, from being just a part of a scene to being the main characters of entire books, it is evident there was a shift of focus in the old testament.
ReplyDelete