Interpretation. A Journal of Bible and Theology April 2010

112 Pages·2011·0.81 MB·English

by  DEBRA REAGAN

In This Issue Volume 64 Number 2
April 2010
The Book of Ruth
115 EDITORIAL
117 NARRATIVE AND POETIC ART IN THE BOOK OF RUTH•TODLINAFELT
Although the Book of Ruth is in many respects a classic example of biblical Hebrew narrative,
there are two examples of formal poetry in the book (1:16–17 and 1:20–21). Biblical poetry works
with a very different set of literary conventions than narrative,and by taking note of those con-
ventions,we can see the distinctive contributions made by these poems to the book as a whole.
130 THE ICONOGRAPHY OF THE BOOK OF RUTH(cid:129) MARTINO’KANE
Although absent from early Christian iconography,Ruth has been a popular figure in both
Christian and Jewish art from the medieval period onward. In depicting scenes from the Book of
Ruth,artists have been sensitive to the nuances and subtleties of the biblical narrative and
have interpreted her story visually in many original and distinctive ways.
146 MORE THAN THE LOVE OF MEN:RUTH AND NAOMI’S STORY IN MUSIC (cid:129) HELENLENEMAN
This essay introduces and discusses four musical works that extensively treat Ruth and Naomi’s
relationship: two late nineteenth-century oratorios,and two twentieth-century operas. Both music
and librettos are treated as midrash—a creative retelling through both altered text and in the lan-
guage of music.
162 FROM RUTH TO THE “GLOBAL WOMAN”:SOCIAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS(cid:129)ATHALYABRENNER
In this short study,the Scroll of Ruth,and especially Ruth’s undisclosed motives for following her
mother-in-law,are read alongside the situation of foreign,female migrant workers in contemporary
Israel—and vice versa. This allows a bi-directional reading that supplies a possible context both
for the biblical text and for the evaluation of today's issues.
BETWEEN TEXT & SERMON Major Book Reviews
182 The Sword and the Stylus: An Introduction toWisdom in
170 Ruth 1:6–22 the Age ofEmpiresby Leo G.Perdue
– Jessica Tate – Christine Roy Yoder
174 Ruth 2 186 Luke by Richard B.Vinson
– Martha Moore-Keish – Sharon H.Ringe
178 Ruth 4 188 Christian Worship: 100,000 Sundays ofSymbols and
Rituals by Gail Ramshaw
– Thomas W.Mann
– Paul Galbreath
190 No Ordinary Angel: Celestial Spirits and Christian
Claims about Jesus by Susan R.Garrett
– Jeffrey L.Sumney
194 The Child in the Bible edited by Marcia Bunge,Terence
E.Fretheim & Beverly Roberts Gaventa and The Vocation
ofthe Child editedby Patrick McKinley Brennan
– Karen-Marie Yust
198 Short Book Reviews and Notes
OFFICE STAFF DEBRAREAGAN
Managing Editor
WILLAJACOB
Subscription Manager
NAROLAAOMCFAYDEN
Editorial Fellow & Office Assistant
INDEXED BY Academic Abstractions
Arts & Humanities Citation Index
Arts & Humanities Search
ATLA Religion Database
Book Review Index
Current Contents/Arts and Humanities
Guide to Social Science and Religion in Periodical Literature
Humanities Index
Index ofArticles on Jewish Studies
Index to Book Reviews in Religion
International Bibliography ofBook Reviews ofScholarly Literature on the
Humanities and Social Sciences
International Bibliography ofPeriodical Literature on the Humanities and
Social Sciences
Internationale Zeitschriftenschau für Bibelwissenschaft und Grenzgebiete
New Testament Abstracts
Old Testament Abstracts
Theologische Literaturzeitung
PUBLISHER Union Theological Seminary–Presbyterian School ofChristian Education
3401 Brook Road
Richmond,Virginia 23227
EDITORIAL OFFICE [phone]
SUBSCRIPTIONS [phone]
TOLL-FREE (U.S.) [phone] ext.297
WEBSITE www.interpretation.org
E-MAIL [email protected]
ADVERTISING Address advertising correspondence to:
Charles A.Roth,Jr
CA Roth,Jr.,Inc.
86 Underwood Rd.
Falmouth,ME 04105-1418
mobile:[phone] fax:[phone]
[email protected]
PRINTING OFFICE Carter Printing Co.
2007 N.Hamilton Street
Richmond,Virginia 23230
Abbreviations used in Interpretation can be found in The SBL Handbook ofStyle (Peabody,Mass.:
Hendrickson,1999).
Copyright 2010,by Union
Theological Seminary– Subscriptions: U.S. Non-U.S. U.S. Library Non-U.S.Library Interpretation (ISSN 0020-9643) is published (January,April,
Presbyterian School of 1 Year $29.00 $40.00 $48.00 $ 55.00 July and October) by Union Theological Seminary–Presbyterian
Christian Education. All School ofChristian Education.3401 Brook Road,Richmond,
2 Years $52.00 $74.00 $91.00 $104.00
rights reserved. Published Virginia 23227.Periodicals postage paid at Richmond,Virginia.
in the United States of 3 Years $70.00 $97.00 $112.00 $128.00 Postmaster:Send address changes to Interpretation,3401 Brook
America. Single copies $8.00 $ 10.50 $ 13.50 $ 15.00 Road,Richmond,Virginia 23227.RETURN POSTAGE GUAR-
ANTEED.
Interpretation 115
Editorial
“Where you go,I will go;where you lodge I will lodge;your people shall be my people,
and your God my God”(Ruth 1:16).For many readers,this single verse summarizes the
plot and the meaning ofthe Book ofRuth.Yet,as this issue demonstrates,Ruth’s story is
both more complex and therefore more generative oftheological reflection than any simple
summary can convey.
Tod Linafelt examines the narrative artistry ofRuth,noting that its economical prose
seldom gives readers access to the interior thoughts,feelings,and emotions ofthe characters.
Why was Ruth committed to Naomi? Why did Naomi fail to understand Ruth's commit-
ment? Linafelt discerns answers to these questions in two brief,easily overlooked,pieces of
poetry (1:16–17;1:20–21) that are crucial to the book’s plot.
Martin O’Kane notes that the “iconic aspects ofthe literary narrative”have inspired
artists ofdifferent periods to paint pivotal aspects ofthe text in order “to convey quite spe-
cific theological thoughts.”With careful exegesis ofillustrations from the medieval (Bible
Moralisée),Renaissance (e.g.,Poussin’s The Four Seasons),and contemporary periods (e.g.,
William Blake and Marc Chagall),O’Kane shows how artists provide interpretive insights
that enable us to “engage afresh the text.”
“What can music add to our understanding ofthe book ofRuth?”Helen Leneman tracks
the answer to this question by analyzing four musical works that deal extensively with the
relationship between Ruth and Naomi (Otto Goldschmidt,Ruth,A Sacred Pastoral;Georg
Schumann,Ruth;Joseph Rumshinsky,Ruth: A Biblical Opera;and Sir Lennox Berkeley,Ruth,
Opera in Three Scenes).With clear exposition ofthe librettos,Leneman demonstrates that
“music has the power not only to read between the lines and fill in the gaps,but also to
create an inner world ofthe heart and mind.”More intense and more immediate than
merely reading a text,music “offers us new and unfamiliar lenses through which to read a
familiar story.”
Interpreters often romanticize Ruth’s relationship to Naomi,Athalya Brenner argues,
but Ruth is “a dead man’s wife”;there is nothing romantic about being a fugitive who must
seek economic asylum in a foreign country.Brenner reads Ruth’s story alongside the situa-
tion offoreign female workers migrant workers in contemporary Israel.Careful attention
to governmental data makes clear that the legal and social status ofmigrant workers in
Israel is precarious at best.Modern Israel’s situation is but a parable for thinking carefully
about human rights globally.“Look around you and ask,”Brenner says,“What do we do
concerning migrants? How do we treat them? What are our terms for accepting or rejecting
them?”Her final question is an apt conclusion to this issue,one we trust will return our
readers to the Book ofRuth with renewed focus:“Will it not be beneficial ... not only to
read the Bible as an exemplum ofour own ‘reality,’whatever that might be,but also to read
our reality as a guide for reading the Bible?”
116 Interpretation APRIL 2010
CONTRIBUTORS
TODLINAFELTis Professor ofBiblical Literature since 2001 has lived in England,Italy,and
in the Theology Department at Georgetown Uni- Switzerland.Leneman is currently writing
versity in Washington,D.C.,and a recent holder another book for Sheffield Phoenix about
ofthe Cardin Chair in the Humanities in the musical works based on the books ofSamuel.
English Department at Loyola College in Maryland.
He holds graduate degrees from Emory University, ATHALYABRENNER(Ph.D.,Manchester Uni-
the University ofOxford,and Columbia Theolog- versity,England) is Emeritus Professor of
ical Seminary.His work focuses on the literary Hebrew Bible/Old Testament at the Univer-
resources and the cultural influence ofthe Bible. sity ofAmsterdam,and currently teaches at
Current projects include a commentary on the Tel Aviv University.She is the editor ofthe
Song ofSongs for the Abingdon Old Testament Feminist Companion to the Bible Series 1 and 2
Series and a volume on reading the Bible as liter- (1993–2001,to be reprinted by Continuum).
ature for Oxford University Press’series ofVery Brenner is currently editing,along with
Short Introductions. Archie Lee and Gale Yee,the Hebrew Bible
portion ofa major new series called Texts@Con-
MARTINO’KANEis Senior Lecturer in Biblical texts (Fortress).Brenner’s main teaching and
Studies at the University ofWales,Lampeter.He research interests are Hebrew semantics,fem-
is a graduate ofthe L’École biblique et archéo- inist biblical criticism,reception history,and
logique française,Jérusalem,and gained his Ph.D. the Bible as a cultural force in contemporary
from the University ofEdinburgh,Scotland.In cultures.She lives in Haifa and in Amsterdam.
addition to teaching a number ofcourses on the
Old Testament,he is also director ofthe research
center,The Bible and the Visual Imagination
(www.imagingthebible.org).He is author of
Painting the Text:The Artist as Biblical Inter-
preter(Sheffield Phoenix,2008) and Biblical Art
from Wales (Sheffield Phoenix,2010).
HELENLENEMANhas written and lectured exten-
sively in the United States and Europe on musical
interpretations ofbiblical women's narratives.
Her book,The Performed Bible:The Story of
Ruth in Opera and Oratorio(Sheffield Phoenix),
was published in 2007.Other recent publications
include essays on the biblical and musical repre-
sentations ofRuth,Ruth and Boaz,and Deborah
and Jael.In addition to her professional cantorial
training at Hebrew Union College,Leneman com-
pleted her Ph.D.at the University ofAmsterdam
with Prof.Athalya Brenner.Leneman has worked
for many years as a professional singer and pianist
and has offered concerts with commentary,such
as “Finding their Voices: Musical Settings of
Biblical Women,”both in the United States and
Europe.She is fluent in several languages and
Narrative and Poetic Art in
the Book of Ruth
TOD LINAFELT
Professor ofBiblical Literature
Georgetown University
Although the Book of Ruth is in many respects a classic example of bibli-
cal Hebrew narrative,with its stripped-down style and the opaqueness of
its character's inner lives and motivations,there are two examples of for-
mal poetry in the book (1:16–17 and 1:20–21). Biblical poetry works with
a very different set of literary conventions than narrative,and by taking
note of those conventions,we can see the distinctive contributions made
by these poems to the book as a whole.
T
o speak about the literary art ofthe Bible is really to speak more specifically about
its narrative artor its poetic art,since biblical narrative and biblical poetry each
works with a very different set ofconventions and techniques–—with different
literary toolkits we might say.A literary approach to the Bible,then,means more than just
close reading,as it is so often understood.It also means becoming familiar with and attend-
ing to the distinctive and specific workings ofnarrative texts and poetic texts.It seems clear
that the ancient authors were very much aware ofthe differing conventions and possibilities
associated with narrative and with poetry,respectively,and that their audiences would have
responded differently to these two primary literary forms.The better we understand these forms,
the better we are as readers.
The book ofRuth is,ofcourse,composed primarily ofnarrative:it tells a story.But there
are two passages—Ruth’s speech to Naomi in 1:16–17 and then Naomi’s speech to the women
ofBethlehem in 1:20–21—that are marked as poetry:they take the form ofverse,and may be
set offin lines.By keeping in mind the distinctive literary resources ofbiblical narrative and bib-
lical poetry,then,we can appreciate not only the artfulness ofthe book ofRuth as a story,but
also begin to discern the function ofthe two poems that the book employs in the first chapter.
NARRATIVE
Perhaps the single most distinctive characteristic ofbiblical Hebrew narrative is its rigor-
ous economy ofstyle.That is,biblical narrative tends to evince a drastically stripped-down
118 Interpretation APRIL 2010
manner ofstorytelling,making use ofa fairly limited vocabulary and pretty consistently avoiding
metaphors and other sorts offigurative language.Indeed,biblical narrative tends to avoid descrip-
tion ofany sort,metaphorical or otherwise.It is striking how rarely we are told what either people
or objects in biblical stories look like.What do Adam and Eve look like? We do not know.Abra-
ham? Sarah? Moses? We do not know.Occasionally,a certain quality is ascribed to some person or
object:we are told that Eve perceives that the tree ofknowledge is “a delight to the eyes”(Gen 3:6),
and likewise we are told that Joseph is “handsome and good-looking”(Gen 39:6).But as a rule
such minimal notations are given only when necessary to introduce some element that is impor-
tant to the development ofthe plot.The attractiveness ofthe tree ofknowledge leads,ofcourse,to
the eating ofits fruit,and Joseph’s attractiveness leads,in the next verse,to the sexual aggression of
Potiphar’s wife and thus indirectly to Joseph’s imprisonment.And even here we are not told what
it is that makes the fruit lovely to look at or just what physical qualities make Joseph so attractive.
Beyond a lack ofphysical description in the biblical stories,one notices,too,that descrip-
tions ofpersonal qualities are largely absent.Characterization in biblical narrative,in other words,
is rarely explicit,but rather must be teased out ofthe narrative based on what characters do and
what they say.We know Jacob is cunning and deceptive,for example,not because we are told so,
but because we see him trick his brother,his father,and his brother-in-law Laban,and we hear
him lie to them.As a rule,it is the actions and the dialogue ofthe characters that leads to the
readers’judgments about them,rather than explicit commentary or moral evaluation on the part
ofthe narrator.
The Book ofRuth exhibits this same sort ofreticence in describing its characters.Although
readers often assume that Boaz is an older man,for example,the fact is that we are never told his
age.There is the hint,in Boaz’s words to Ruth in 3:10 (“you have not gone after the young men
[9habbah9u=rîm],whether poor or rich”) that he does not consider himselfa young man,but that
still leaves us with a range of,say,twenty to seventy years old (although the average lifespan would
have been closer to forty or fifty years).The only information that might count as a direct descrip-
tion ofBoaz is his designation by the narrator in 2:1 as “a prominent rich man”()is\h gibbo<r h9ayil).
But this is clearly an indication ofhis public,social status,and not any sort ofmoral evaluation.It
characterizes Boaz,in other words,as the kind ofman whose workers are quick to answer his
brusque queries (as in 2:4–7) and whose fellow citizens are quick to assent to whatever Boaz
demands ofthem (as in 4:1–2).But such a designation gives no indication ofwhether Boaz is a
good or bad person,a patient or impatient man,honest or deceptive,etc.In other words,we as
readers have to decide for ourselves what sort ofman we think Boaz might be.
THE BOOK OF RUTH Interpretation 119
So also with Ruth herself,we are given only minimal description and a sense ofhow she is
perceived publicly.The latter is striking,because Ruth is repeatedly called “the Moabite”or
described as having recently returned “from Moab.”Thus,when Boaz inquires after Ruth’s
attachments in ch.2 (“Boaz said to his servant who was in charge ofthe reapers,‘To whom does
this young woman belong?’”[v.5]).His servant replies,“She is the Moabite who came back with
Naomi from the country ofMoab”(v.6).This reference to Ruth’s nationality is placed in the
mouth ofa character,but the narrator had earlier made a similar statement at the end ofch.1:
“So Naomi returned together with Ruth the Moabite,her daughter-in-law,who came back with
her from the country ofMoab”(1:22).What do these social and familial designations convey?
The narrator’s statement in 1:22 is almost certainly meant to be read ironically.Ifreferences to
Moabites (and especially to Moabite women) in other biblical texts are any indication,the
Bethlehemites who witness Naomi’s return (see 1:19),and perhaps the original audience for the
book,are likely to have a very negative view ofRuth as a Moabite.1 At the same time,and by way
ofironic counterpoint,the narrator seems to give a hint—though hardly more than that—ofa
more positive evaluation ofRuth’s character,since after all Ruth is the daughter-in-law who
“came back with her”when Naomi was destitute and could not understand why anyone would
want to stay with her.By the time the plot has worked itselfout,the women ofBethlehem can
state this positive evaluation ofRuth explicitly (“your daughter-in-law who loves you,who is
more to you than seven sons”[4:15],with no mention ofher Moabite origins),though we notice
that the typically reticent narrator never does.
The emphasis on Ruth’s Moabite identity by Boaz’s foreman in 2:6,unlike the narrator’s,
would seem to hold no ironic double meaning.The boss has asked for information and the ser-
vant gives it:the young woman is not attached to any man and,being Moabite,is fair game.The
possible allusion to the proverbial promiscuity ofMoabite women constitutes no irony coming
from the mouth ofthe foreman,since it only reinforces his message ofRuth’s sexual availability.
It is difficult to say with certainty that the servant’s words are intended to hold such an allusion
to Moabite sexuality,but it seems at least that Boaz takes them that way,since he immediately
turns to Ruth,without answering the servant,and instructs her to stay in his field to glean and
furthermore to “keep close to my young women,”and since he has to warn the young men away
from her (2:9,15).
In the same way that readers often assume that Boaz is an older man,so,too,they often
assume that Ruth is both young and beautiful,though there is little explicit evidence for the
former and none for the latter.It is true that Ruth is referred to as a na(a\ra< (often translated as
“young woman”) by Boaz and the foreman in their exchange in 2:5–6 and again by the
1The land ofMoab and the Moabites are freighted with animosity in Israel’s memory.See,for example,Num
21:29–30;Num 22;Amos 2:1–3;Jer 48:1–9.For the association ofMoabite women with illicit sexuality,see the
story ofLot’s daughters in Gen 19:30–38 and ofthe incident at Baal-Peor in Num 25:1–5.
120 Interpretation APRIL 2010
woman ofBethlehem in 4:12,but we must keep in mind that Ruth had been married for ten years
(1:4) before the death ofher husband Mahlon,so she can hardly be all that young (and the life-
span for women would have been even less than for men).And in the dialogue between Boaz and
the foreman,the term na(a\ra<functions primarily to associate Ruth with the workers in the field,
who are also called “young women”(ne \(a3ro\t) and “young men”(ne \(a3rîm).As far as her beauty
goes,well,who knows? We are simply never told anything about her looks,although biblical
authors have been known to specify a woman’s beauty (or a man’s for that matter,as we saw with
Joseph and Potiphar’s wife above) ifit is thought to be crucial to the plot:thus Rachel (Gen 29:17),
Bathsheba (2 Sam 11:2),Vashti and Esther (Esth 1:11 and 2:7),and Job’s daughters (Job 42:15).
In the book ofRuth,then,as is the case with biblical narrative in general,we encounter
an economical narrative style that works with little explicit description ofcharacters or their
essential qualities,though we do get a handful ofpotentially important public and social desig-
nations.It would be a mistake,however,to take this economy ofstyle as an indicator ofthe
simplicity or primitiveness ofbiblical narrative or ofthe book ofRuth.Indeed,it is primarily
this terseness that lends biblical narrative its complexity as literature.By not directly revealing
the qualities ofcharacter ofthe actors in the narrative,the narrator puts the onus ofinterpreta-
tion on the readers,who must work out on their own—albeit with hints given—what they think
ofthese characters.This is not the absenceofcharacterization,but is a certain modeofcharac-
terization and,in fact,a fairly complex mode at that.
Moving beyond the question ofwhat characters might look like or what sort ofpeople they
might be,we may best see the complexity ofthis mode ofcharacterization when it comes to the
inner lives ofthe characters.Readers ofWestern literature—both classical and modern—are
used to having access in one form or another to the thoughts,feelings,and motivations ofliterary
characters.But in biblical narrative,we are only rarely told what a character might be thinking or
feeling at any given moment.What are Eve and Adam thinking when they reach for the fruit
from the tree ofthe knowledge ofgood and evil in the garden ofEden? What is God thinking in
forbidding that fruit? (Despite Christianity’s long tradition oforiginal sin,the answer to neither
ofthese questions is immediately clear,and both prove quite interestingly complex iftaken seri-
ously.) What goes through Abraham’s mind when God demands,in Gen 22,that he sacrifice his
son Isaac? (The inner calm ofabsolute faith? Perhaps.But perhaps also anger,disbelief,or even
disgust—with God for demanding such a sacrifice,or with himselffor failing to protest.) Why
does Moses kill the Egyptian who is beating a Hebrew slave in Exod 2? (It is not clear whether
Moses,raised an Egyptian,knows that he was born a Hebrew;and so his motivation might range
from an elemental sense ofjustice,unrelated to ethnicity,to a specifically ethnic identification
THE BOOK OF RUTH Interpretation 121
with the victim.) What is going through Aaron’s mind when his two sons are burned alive with
fire from God in Lev 10? (The narrator reports only that “Aaron was silent.”Does this indicate
mute acceptance? Crippling grief? A barely controlled anger? Pure shock?) As these examples
show—and there are many more that we could bring to bear—biblical narrative exploits to great
effect a genuine inner life and a complex,private subjectivity.2In other words,biblical narrative is
essentially “realistic”in its portrayal ofhuman characters,since in real life,we do not have direct
access to the inner lives ofthose we encounter,learning to rely instead on hints we receive about
what people are really thinking or feeling,and basing our sense ofwhat sort ofpeople they are on
what they do and what they say,on actions and dialogue.3
How does this narrative style play out in the book ofRuth then? To my mind,one ofthe
most important consequences ofthe convention in biblical narrative ofrendering the inner lives
ofcharacters opaque is that it tends to leave open,in a literarily fruitful way,the question of
character motivation.Ifwe are given only very limited access to the thoughts and feelings ofthe
characters about whom we read,then it follows that the motivation behind what they do and
say is also largely obscure.And the question ofcharacter motivation is paramount for interpret-
ing the book ofRuth,as it is with most narratives.Naomi,for example,is nearly always charac-
terized by interpreters as a model ofloving,motherly concern.But ifthat is the case,why does
she allow Ruth to go offinto the fields to glean at the beginning ofch.2 without so much as a
word ofwarning (again,that the situation is potentially dangerous is shown by Boaz’s advice to
Ruth in 2:9 and his warning to the young male workers in 2:15),and then exhibit an exaggerated
motherly care at the end ofthe chapter,after seeing the interest that Boaz has shown in Ruth?
And is it possible that her strenuous attempts to dissuade Ruth and Orpah from returning with
her from Moab resulted from a desire not to be burdened with two Moabite women (and two
more mouths to feed) in Judah? Does she even imagine that these Moabite women might well be
the source ofsome killing curse,since both her sons died after marrying them (as for example
Judah admits to thinking about Tamar in Gen 38)? The fact is that we just do not know what
Naomi is thinking,about these or other issues;but our reaction to Naomi and to the developing
plot depends on filling these gaps in our knowledge.
So also with Boaz,there is real ambiguity in his approach to Ruth in ch.2,when he first spies
her in his field.Clearly,he displays a keen interest in her,but what is the source and nature ofthat
interest? Is it familial and altruistic,as he implies in his statement in 2:11–12? Or is it sexual or
romantic,as the exchange with his foreman (with its emphasis on her Moabite identity) earlier in
the chapter might imply? Or are we even to imagine that Boaz himselfis not entirely aware ofhis
motivations—after all,at what point does one “realize”that one is interested in another romanti-
2To be sure,one can find instructive counter-examples that prove the rule:Jacob’s love for Rachel,for example
(“So Jacob served seven years for Rachel,and they seemed to him but a few days because ofthe love he had for her”
[Gen 29:20]),or the transparency ofSaul’s machinations against David in 1 Sam 18.These examples seem intentionally
to flaunt the rule,though they are few and far between,and usually very limited.
3The classic modern statement on the terseness ofbiblical narrative style and its importance for characteriza-
tion,and still the best place to begin thinking about biblical narrative,is Erich Auerbach’s “Odysseus’Scar,”pub-
lished as the first chapter ofhis book Mimesis: The Representation ofReality in Western Literature(trans.Willard R.
Trask;Princeton:Princeton University Press,1953),3–23.
122 Interpretation APRIL 2010
cally? And ofcourse such interest does not preclude other interests and motivations.And in ch.3,
what is Boaz thinking when he awakes—half-drunk and half-clothed—in the middle ofthe night,
with a woman at his feet? The awkward,rambling syntax ofhis response to Ruth in 3:10–13 (which
seems to mirror the awkward,rambling syntax ofJoseph’s response to Potiphar’s wife as he tries to
escape her unwanted sexual advances in Gen 39) shows us that he is flustered,though we are not
told the source and nature ofhis unease.It is entirely possible,even likely,that he himselfis unaware
ofjust what has transpired with this woman—who at first he does not recognize—and what sort
oftrouble he might have gotten himself(and her) into.As we wonder what Boaz might be think-
ing here,we are apt to wonder too about his motivations for “acquiring Ruth the Moabite”(4:10)
as wife.
The scene in private at the threshing floor in ch,3 is in many ways the climactic scene ofthe
book,setting up the final,public resolution ofthe plot that follows in ch.4.So it is particularly
striking that the scene turns not only on the unstated knowledge and motivations ofBoaz but also
and especially on those ofRuth.There is,in the first place,the question ofwhat exactly Ruth
intends to be doing in the scene.When she says to Boaz,“spread your cloak over your servant,for
you are next-of-kin”(3:9),is she making an offer ofbetrothal,as many commentators argue,or is
she making an offer ofher sexual favors,as a few others have suggested?4And when,in her speech
to Boaz,Ruth links their relationship with the duties ofa “next-of-kin”(go3)e3l ),what does she
intend?5Beyond the question ofwhat Ruth is doing,there is the question ofwhy is she doing it?
Does she actually care for Boaz;does she desire him for herself? (The book is often read in this
romantic light.) Does she desire to have a child,and take Boaz for a likely father? Or is she acting
primarily on behalfofNaomi,in order to give Naomi the heir she needs to secure her legal rights
in Judah? Or is it all a strategy for keeping together herselfand Naomi,as perhaps suggested by the
linking oflevirate with next-of-kin duties,since the former apply more to Ruth and the latter to
Naomi? The narrator refuses to tell us the answers to any ofthese questions,although we must
surely wonder about them;and the way we as readers choose to answer them determines in no
small way how we understand the plot movement and resolution,and to a certain extent I think
“the meaning”ofthe book.
A fuller analysis ofthe narrative art ofthe book ofRuth would pay attention not only to these
issues ofcharacterization and character motivation,but also—among other things—to the strate-
gic use ofrepetition (such as repeated keywords),to larger structuring patterns,and to the artful
use ofdialogue as a means ofadvancing plot.The book ofRuth certainly rewards such study,but
it will have to wait for another time,since I want to turn now to the book’s use ofpoetry.
4For the former interpretation,see,e.g.,Edward F.Campbell,Jr.,Ruth: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary(AB7;Garden City,NY:Doubleday,1975),123;Paul A Kruger,“The Hem ofthe Garment in Marriage:
The Meaning ofthe Symbolic Gesture in Ruth 3:9 and Ezek.16:8,”JNSL12 (1984):79–86;Kristin Nielsen,Ruth: A
Commentary(OTL;Louisville:Westminster John Knox,1997),73;and Victor H.Matthews,Judges and Ruth(NCBC;
Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2004),234.For the latter,see especially Danna Nolan Fewell and David M.
Gunn,Compromising Redemption: Relating Characters in the Book ofRuth(LCBI;Westminster John Knox,1990),102.
5The duties ofa go3)e3l (“next-of-kin,”or “redeemer”) are primarily economic in nature (see Lev 25:25).The
duties ofthe levir(“brother-in-law”),on the other hand,have to do with marrying the widow ofa brother who
has died without children (see Deut 25:5–6).It seems that neither duties are really incumbent upon Boaz,since
Mahlon was not his brother and since there is a go3)e3l closer than he (3:12;4:1),but he essentially assumes the role
ofeach by the end ofthe book.It is Ruth,however,who first ties the roles together in the plot ofthe book,here in
ch.3.