Nothing New Under the Sun

I am beginning to understand why it is important to trace literary theory all the way back to the Classical Period. I tend to indulge a degree of chronological snobbery, to use Lewis’ term, in the way that I love contemporary literary theory. Feminist, Multicultural, Postcolonial, and Deconstruction theories excite me, but the things that I appreciate about them do not belong to our age alone. Derrida's sense of multiplicity of meaning originates in the Jewish literary interpretation of the Scriptures. Now, while reading Christine de Pizan I realize that feminist scholarship and criticism has existed since females began to learn and write. Solomon was right: there truly is nothing new under the sun.

I think we also have a degree of reverse chronological snobbery in our society. Some people tend to praise Plato and Aristotle to the degree of gods in their understanding of education and metaphysics. Whether or not we value their contribution to our intellectual history, it is important to understand their mortality and read their works critically. They are simply part of the conversation that has been happening since the beginning of the written word, or maybe even before. I do, however, find their contributions valuable, particularly when they are set in opposition.

I may be straying from my original train of thought here, but I am also interested in discussing the more specific ideas of Biblical (or Scriptural) hermeneutics for Augustine and Maimonides. At one point during my reading of Augustine’s On Christian Teaching (specifically when he said that the pride of human disunity was signified by the famous tower of Babel), I found myself wondering if his use of “signified” meant that he did not think there was a literal tower of Babel. In my understanding of the Bible, it does not matter to me whether there was a literal tower that acted as a sign, or whether it was an invention of the writer to imply this pride of disunity. The meaning of the tower is in its symbolism, whether it was a physical symbol or not. There are cases where is simply does not matter if meaning is literal or not so long as we engage the full weight of the metaphor.

As I read Maimonides’ The Guide of the Perplexed, I see a similar sort of fluidity in discerning meaning. Sometimes we must let contradictions be so that the spirit can help tease out the truth from the tangle. Some things cannot be known or comprehended and to be perplexed is better than to speculate. I believe that, but does anyone else feel a little unnerved by the authority he claims when he said “I claim to liberate that virtuous one from that into which he has sunk, and I shall guide him in his perplexity until he becomes perfect and he finds rest?” I know he’s Jewish, but it sounds like he’s trying to be the Holy Spirit.