Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] Re: Arabists' Challenge to Bailey's *haflat samar* Interpretation

Expand Messages
  • Ken Olson
    Jeffery, If what Joseph says is true, I believe this would mean that Ted need not show that the modern haflat samar is not as Bailey describes it, because
    Message 1 of 16 , Sep 11, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Jeffery,

      If what Joseph says is true, I believe this would mean that Ted need not show that the modern "haflat samar" is not as Bailey describes it, because modern models may not be projected back to the first century in the way Bailey attempts anyway. Whether that was Joseph's intended meaning or not is another thing entirely. I think Joseph may have missed Ted's actual argument that the "haflat samar" does not function as Bailey says it does in modern times, much less in the first century.

      Best,

      Ken

      Kenneth A. Olson
      MA, History, University of Maryland
      PhD Student, Religion, Duke University

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Horace Jeffery Hodges
      To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:18 PM
      Subject: [XTalk] Re: Arabists' Challenge to Bailey's *haflat samar* Interpretation


      Joseph, whose post(s) are you charging with stereotyping and with retrojecting?

      Jeffery Hodges

      "Joseph T. Edmiston, FAICP" <edmiston@...> wrote:
      I'm sorry, but there seems to be a fundamental problem with stereotyping Wisconsin Muslims within an intellectual category that can be retrojected two thousand years back into history as representative of those hearers of the original spoken (chanted) gospels.

      We must realize that the 21st century cannot shed as much light as we would like upon the 1st.

      ----------------------------------------------------------
      Joseph T. Edmiston, FAICP, Hon. ASLA
      edmiston@...
      ----------------------------------------------------------

      University Degrees:

      Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
      (Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in John's Gospel and Gnostic Texts")
      M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
      B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University

      Email Address:

      jefferyhodges@...

      Blog:

      http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/

      Office Address:

      Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
      Department of English Language and Literature
      Korea University
      136-701 Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu
      Seoul
      South Korea

      Home Address:

      Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
      Sehan Apt. 102-2302
      Sinnae-dong 795
      Jungrang-gu
      Seoul 131-770
      South Korea

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • afsegal
      Do you think someone could review the bidding on this controversy. I have been in the hospital and was unable to see the original exchange. Since no one has
      Message 2 of 16 , Sep 12, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Do you think someone could review the bidding on this controversy. I
        have been in the hospital and was unable to see the original
        exchange. Since no one has actually repeated what the positions are,
        everything since then has been pretty much incomprehensible. What
        are the different positions on Haflat samar?

        Best,

        AFSeg./

        Alan Segal
        Barnard College

        --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Ken Olson" <kenolson101@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Jeffery,
        >
        > If what Joseph says is true, I believe this would mean that Ted
        need not show that the modern "haflat samar" is not as Bailey
        describes it, because modern models may not be projected back to the
        first century in the way Bailey attempts anyway. Whether that was
        Joseph's intended meaning or not is another thing entirely. I think
        Joseph may have missed Ted's actual argument that the "haflat samar"
        does not function as Bailey says it does in modern times, much less
        in the first century.
        >
        > Best,
        >
        > Ken
        >
        > Kenneth A. Olson
        > MA, History, University of Maryland
        > PhD Student, Religion, Duke University
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Horace Jeffery Hodges
        > To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:18 PM
        > Subject: [XTalk] Re: Arabists' Challenge to Bailey's *haflat
        samar* Interpretation
        >
        >
        > Joseph, whose post(s) are you charging with stereotyping and with
        retrojecting?
        >
        > Jeffery Hodges
        >
        > "Joseph T. Edmiston, FAICP" <edmiston@...> wrote:
        > I'm sorry, but there seems to be a fundamental problem with
        stereotyping Wisconsin Muslims within an intellectual category that
        can be retrojected two thousand years back into history as
        representative of those hearers of the original spoken (chanted)
        gospels.
        >
        > We must realize that the 21st century cannot shed as much light
        as we would like upon the 1st.
        >
        > ----------------------------------------------------------
        > Joseph T. Edmiston, FAICP, Hon. ASLA
        > edmiston@...
        > ----------------------------------------------------------
        >
        > University Degrees:
        >
        > Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
        > (Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in John's Gospel and
        Gnostic Texts")
        > M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
        > B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University
        >
        > Email Address:
        >
        > jefferyhodges@...
        >
        > Blog:
        >
        > http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/
        >
        > Office Address:
        >
        > Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
        > Department of English Language and Literature
        > Korea University
        > 136-701 Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu
        > Seoul
        > South Korea
        >
        > Home Address:
        >
        > Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
        > Sehan Apt. 102-2302
        > Sinnae-dong 795
        > Jungrang-gu
        > Seoul 131-770
        > South Korea
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • Asegal@aol.com
        Actually, I take this back. Sorry for bothering the group. As soon as I accessed the website I was able to reread the whole controversy. I made the
        Message 3 of 16 , Sep 12, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Actually, I take this back. Sorry for bothering the group. As soon as I
          accessed the website I was able to reread the whole controversy. I made the
          mistake of thinking I was still signed in and that there was no history. Sorry
          for that.

          Best,

          AFSeg./

          In a message dated 9/12/2006 9:31:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
          Asegal@... writes:




          Do you think someone could review the bidding on this controversy. I
          have been in the hospital and was unable to see the original
          exchange. Since no one has actually repeated what the positions are,
          everything since then has been pretty much incomprehensible. What
          are the different positions on Haflat samar?

          Best,

          AFSeg./

          Alan Segal
          Barnard College

          --- In _crosstalk2@yahoogrocrossta_ (mailto:crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com) ,
          "Ken Olson" <kenolson101@ken>
          wrote:
          >
          > Jeffery,
          >
          > If what Joseph says is true, I believe this would mean that Ted
          need not show that the modern "haflat samar" is not as Bailey
          describes it, because modern models may not be projected back to the
          first century in the way Bailey attempts anyway. Whether that was
          Joseph's intended meaning or not is another thing entirely. I think
          Joseph may have missed Ted's actual argument that the "haflat samar"
          does not function as Bailey says it does in modern times, much less
          in the first century.
          >
          > Best,
          >
          > Ken
          >
          > Kenneth A. Olson
          > MA, History, University of Maryland
          > PhD Student, Religion, Duke University
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: Horace Jeffery Hodges
          > To: _crosstalk2@yahoogrocrossta_ (mailto:crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com)
          > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:18 PM
          > Subject: [XTalk] Re: Arabists' Challenge to Bailey's *haflat
          samar* Interpretation
          >
          >
          > Joseph, whose post(s) are you charging with stereotyping and with
          retrojecting?
          >
          > Jeffery Hodges
          >
          > "Joseph T. Edmiston, FAICP" <edmiston@..e> wrote:
          > I'm sorry, but there seems to be a fundamental problem with
          stereotyping Wisconsin Muslims within an intellectual category that
          can be retrojected two thousand years back into history as
          representative of those hearers of the original spoken (chanted)
          gospels.
          >
          > We must realize that the 21st century cannot shed as much light
          as we would like upon the 1st.
          >
          > ------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
          > Joseph T. Edmiston, FAICP, Hon. ASLA
          > edmiston@...
          > ------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
          >
          > University Degrees:
          >
          > Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
          > (Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in John's Gospel and
          Gnostic Texts")
          > M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
          > B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University
          >
          > Email Address:
          >
          > jefferyhodges@ je
          >
          > Blog:
          >
          > _http://gypsyscholarhttp://gypsyschttp_
          (http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/)
          >
          > Office Address:
          >
          > Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
          > Department of English Language and Literature
          > Korea University
          > 136-701 Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu
          > Seoul
          > South Korea
          >
          > Home Address:
          >
          > Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
          > Sehan Apt. 102-2302
          > Sinnae-dong 795
          > Jungrang-gu
          > Seoul 131-770
          > South Korea
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >







          Alan F. Segal
          Professor of Religion
          Ingeborg Rennert Professor of Jewish Studies
          Barnard College, Columbia University
          3009 Broadway
          219 Milbank Hall
          New York City NY 10027-6598

          asegal@...
          asegal@...


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Theodore Weeden
          ... Thank you, John. I hope to be able to get it finished and in publication. ... Thank you for drawing my attention to Naddaff s work and the Miquel quote
          Message 4 of 16 , Sep 12, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            John Poirier wrote on September 08, 2006:

            > Ted,
            >
            > I look forward to reading your finished article.

            Thank you, John. I hope to be able to get it finished and in publication.

            > Your reference to the *samar* roots of the 1001 Nights reminded me of a
            > book
            > that I read years ago: Sandra Naddaff's *Arabesque: Narrative Structure
            > and
            > the Aesthetics of Repetition in 1001 Nights* (Evanston, IL: Northwestern
            > Univ. Press, 1991). On p. 65 of that book, Naddaff writes:
            >
            > One should begin at the beginning, in this case, outsdide the text,
            > and
            > remember that the earliest version of the *1001 Nights* was an aurally
            > intended work perrformed before a live audience. André Miquel notes
            > that it was possibly told as part of the *samar*, "cette pratique
            > quasi
            > institutionnêlle de la culture arabo-musulmane classique: la
            > conversation
            > nocturne. . . . Le *samar* est d'ordinaire ce qui clôt la journée
            > active,
            > avant le repos nocturne, et l'on a toutes raisons de penser que c'est
            > de
            > ce type-là que relève le *samar* du conteur, qu'on l'imagine au milieu
            > d'un groupe restreint ou sur la place publique." The storyteller
            > nightly
            > tells his story about a woman who nightly tells her stories and who,
            > like
            > him, depends upon the approval of her audience in order to continue
            > the narrative act and, ultimately, in order to stay alive. The
            > pattern
            > persists.
            >
            > The French quotation is from André Miquel, *Ajib et Gharib: Un conte des
            > "Mille et une nuits"* (Paris, 1978) 225-26.

            Thank you for drawing my attention to Naddaff's work and the Miquel quote
            with reference to *samar*. This all is consistent with what Arabic
            authorities and Middle East people I have interviewed have shared with me
            with respect to the historical character and purpose of *haflat samar*.

            > As for how or why Bailey fudges the description of what a *samar* is, I
            > think that you're seeing an almost subconscious mechanism by which the
            > proponents of a particular theory smuggle their views into their offered
            > readings of a body of knowledge that they calculate their audience to hold
            > no expertise in.

            [snip]

            I am not prepared to say why and how Bailey arrived at a different
            interpretation of the character and purpose of a *haflat samar* than appears
            to be widely held by others. Naddaff and Miquel are yet two more examples
            of this widely held view. For all the reasons I have cited in posts
            regarding this thread, it is difficult for me to understand how oral
            societies in Southern Egypt would, per Bailey, hold such a radically
            different and extraordinarily atypical view of their *hafalat samar*,
            namely, as almost nightly meetings with the indispensable agenda of
            preserving the historical authenticity of their oral tradition about John
            Hogg, their missionary founder. Largely illiterate, it is difficult for me
            to understand how such societies would draw a connection, as Bailey does,
            between the Hebrew *shamar* ("preserve") and the Arabic *samar*, and thus
            arrived at an idiosyncratic meaning of *haflat samar* as a "party for
            preservation," per Bailey.

            > This happens all the time when preachers, with no seminary
            > education and no facility in Hebrew or Greek beyond their ability to use
            > Strong's concordance, smuggle their pet readings into the biblical
            > lexicson,
            > creating ridiculously long and theologically technical definitions of
            > Hebrew
            > and Greek words There is no doubt that they are smuggling their views
            > into
            > those words, yet I would venture that very few of them that do that sort
            > of
            > thing are at all aware of what they are doing. It's as if one side of
            > their
            > brain is fooling the other side. (Unfortunately, his sort of thing also
            > happens at the highest levels of academia--e.g., it is the most generous
            > explanation for the postliberals' revisionist history of hermeneutics.
            > All
            > one needs to do to deflate Hans Frei's claims about pre-Enlightenment
            > hermeneutics is to read the hermeneutical programs of pre-Enlightenment
            > figures.)

            What you describe can and does happen, unfortunately. Not only should we
            be cognizant and wary of such with respect to others, but we need to remain
            vigilant and self-critically honest with respect to ourselves on this issue.

            Ted Weeden
            Theodore J. Weeden, Sr,
            Fairport, NY
            Retired
            Ph.D., Claremont Graduate University
            Theodore
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.