Last month, the Bible and Interpretation website published an op-ed piece in which Roland Boer comes out ‘against “reception history”’ (and, implicitly, the Blackwell Bible Commentaries series for popularizing the term; see footnote 1). Ironically, the occasion for this criticism seems to be Boer’s completion of Cave Droppings: Nick Cave and Religion (to be published by Equinox in 2012), a book that those of us involved in the Blackwell Bible Commentaries might consider an exercise in reception history to the extent that ‘Cave has written novels, plays, poetry and, above all, music which often engages with the Bible in creative ways’ (Boer). Whence the disconnect between Boer’s attention to ‘Nick Cave and his interpretations of the Bible’ and his stance ‘against “reception history”’?
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- The straw men come out to play … with reception history | Church Ministry Center on In defense of reception history
- The straw men come out to play; or, wtf is reception history? « Stalin's Moustache on In defense of reception history
- Biblical History on In defense of reception history
- Around the Blogosphere | Exploring Our Matrix on In defense of reception history
- Higgaion » In defense of reception history on In defense of reception history
Archives
Categories
Meta
