Last week we discussed the dynamic between an author’s voice in a literary work and readers bringing their own assumptions to a piece. I think a literary work that epitomizes the controversy and difficulty in determining how to balance the two sides is the Bible. How does or should one read the Bible, which is automatically presuming there is a correct way to read it? In the West Wing clip, Dr. Jacobs believes that the Bible should be read and interpreted strictly–the letter of the law. President Bartlett points out, however, that following that method leads to many modern day scenarios with which she would not agree. Who is the author(s) of the Bible and should it be read with their intentions in mind or should it be adapted to readers’ modern day values?
I personally think that some of the controversy surrounding how to read the Bible comes from the fact that we do not know who actually wrote it. While many devout followers of Christianity believe that the Bible is the word of God written through man, others believe there was no spiritual influence. This in turn affects how the text is analyzed. Because we do not know the real author(s), it is impossible to know the intentions behind the work, nor do we have any context with which to place the authors. This information would help modern-day readers interpret the Bible and possibly lessen some of the controversy and anger that results from these arguments regarding how to read the text.
Though I can only speak from anecdotal experience, let me say a word or so on the authorship of the Bible. Though the real life authors are contested, many a Christian (in my own experience) acknowledges that it was indeed written by literate followers of Christ; it is not the word of God. (Contrast this, with the Qu’ran, direct words from God to His illiterate prophet, or the Hebrew Bible, a collection of contrasting and equally acceptable interpretations of mythic [narrative] texts). However, since the Bible is taken to be the best interpretation of the Christian God, the authors become obscured, subordinate to the message. I think back to Foucault and Barthes and wonder the position of the author in interpreting the Bible. This brings up questions of validity and agenda on the part of the author. And it certainly calls into question where the sacred lies in the Bible – in the messenger, the author, or the text?