Note: In talking with a few friends about this brief paper that I wrote for my Genesis class last quarter, someone suggested I post it to my blog. So, here's a small piece of my thinking here at seminary. The original paper included Hebrew text, however I have not figured out how to include such here on blogger, so it has been removed.
First appearing ‘together’ in Genesis 16:1, Hagar and Sarai represent for many feminist theologians a touchstone for understanding the historical and present-day relations between Jewish, Christian, and Muslim believers.[1] And yet the reality is that in many studies of the book of Genesis limited attention is given to these two women individually (and when attention is given it is leaning more towards Sarai as the ‘dominant’ woman) and to their relationship as women within the society and traditions in which they are found. Thus I see this paper as a starting point for a much needed conversation, by specifically looking to the positioning of Hagar and Sarai by the biblical writers, positioning within the text itself (Gen. 16:1), and positioning within Hagar and Sarai’s relationship with each other.
Positioning Within the Text
Within the text itself, both of these women are positioned in relation to who owns them or to whom they belong. In Sarai’s case she is introduced as Sarai, the wife of Abraham. This understanding of Sarai is heard in unison with the understanding within her culture - that a woman was only as good as her womb, and thus she is seen only in relation to the one who will fertilize that womb, her husband. Hagar on the other hand is positioned in relation to her being a slave to Sarai, that is, she is introduced into this story only through her relationship with Sarai, the woman who owns and controls her, as her slave.
Positioning Within Relationship
Looking at this verse (16:1) in relation to the positioning of these two women in relationship with each other, Phyllis Trible points to the emphasis on Hagar and Sarai’s relationship as evidenced in the very structure of the Hebrew text. “Reversing the usual Hebrew word order, it places before the verb her [Sarai] name as subject,” and then it is only after the statement of the problem (Sarai’s lack of offspring) that Hagar is introduced.[2] These two women, through this positioning by the biblical writer in the textual structure, are placed in opposition to each other, surrounding Abraham as that which stands in between them.
This positioning is further noted in the understanding of their positions within society. In addition to what was noted regarding ownership, other factors are clearly evident. Sarai is pictured as “married, rich, and free” all characteristics and attributes which within that society would have made one powerful. However, she is also noted as being a woman as well as “old and barren,” which would have made her dependent upon the men in her world (either father or husband.) Hagar, on the other hand is imaged as a woman who is “single, poor, and bonded” while at the same time being “young and fertile.” [3] At once the positioning of these two women within the text, within the society, and within their relationship with each other we see a tension. For at first glance we see Sarai as being the one who is powerful and taking action, while Hagar is seen as powerless and an object of Sarai’s action. But on second glance, the power differential is shifted as Hagar is the one ‘on top,’ for she is young and fertile, while Sarai’s position is diminished due to her age and barrenness.
First appearing ‘together’ in Genesis 16:1, Hagar and Sarai represent for many feminist theologians a touchstone for understanding the historical and present-day relations between Jewish, Christian, and Muslim believers.[1] And yet the reality is that in many studies of the book of Genesis limited attention is given to these two women individually (and when attention is given it is leaning more towards Sarai as the ‘dominant’ woman) and to their relationship as women within the society and traditions in which they are found. Thus I see this paper as a starting point for a much needed conversation, by specifically looking to the positioning of Hagar and Sarai by the biblical writers, positioning within the text itself (Gen. 16:1), and positioning within Hagar and Sarai’s relationship with each other.
Positioning Within the Text
Within the text itself, both of these women are positioned in relation to who owns them or to whom they belong. In Sarai’s case she is introduced as Sarai, the wife of Abraham. This understanding of Sarai is heard in unison with the understanding within her culture - that a woman was only as good as her womb, and thus she is seen only in relation to the one who will fertilize that womb, her husband. Hagar on the other hand is positioned in relation to her being a slave to Sarai, that is, she is introduced into this story only through her relationship with Sarai, the woman who owns and controls her, as her slave.
Positioning Within Relationship
Looking at this verse (16:1) in relation to the positioning of these two women in relationship with each other, Phyllis Trible points to the emphasis on Hagar and Sarai’s relationship as evidenced in the very structure of the Hebrew text. “Reversing the usual Hebrew word order, it places before the verb her [Sarai] name as subject,” and then it is only after the statement of the problem (Sarai’s lack of offspring) that Hagar is introduced.[2] These two women, through this positioning by the biblical writer in the textual structure, are placed in opposition to each other, surrounding Abraham as that which stands in between them.
This positioning is further noted in the understanding of their positions within society. In addition to what was noted regarding ownership, other factors are clearly evident. Sarai is pictured as “married, rich, and free” all characteristics and attributes which within that society would have made one powerful. However, she is also noted as being a woman as well as “old and barren,” which would have made her dependent upon the men in her world (either father or husband.) Hagar, on the other hand is imaged as a woman who is “single, poor, and bonded” while at the same time being “young and fertile.” [3] At once the positioning of these two women within the text, within the society, and within their relationship with each other we see a tension. For at first glance we see Sarai as being the one who is powerful and taking action, while Hagar is seen as powerless and an object of Sarai’s action. But on second glance, the power differential is shifted as Hagar is the one ‘on top,’ for she is young and fertile, while Sarai’s position is diminished due to her age and barrenness.
Taking Notice
Beginning to take notice of this positioning, both within the Hebrew text itself, as well as within their relationship with and to each other, Hagar and Sarai present to us, as their narratives unfold (16:1-16; 21:9-21), models of how women have and continue even now to respond to positioning that is oppressive and/or liberating. For as they both are seen as oppressed (barren or slave) they also both seek to liberate themselves from said oppression, but in different ways. Hagar seeks to be freed from her oppression by literally running away from it (16:6), while Sarai seeks to be liberated from her oppression by living into the ways and expectations of the patriarchal society in which she lives (16:2).
I believe Trible is right in highlighting the positioning that appears within the Hebrew text of Genesis 16:1, for within the structure of this simple verse, there is a grander story to be told. I also believe that within the positioning that is being ‘done’ to these women individually, there is an opportunity for all women (and all humanity) to resist assumed positioning, or to make ourselves aware of this very active positioning and how it plays out in both our biblical interpretation, but also our faithful living as children of God.
[1] Trible, Phyllis & Russell, Letty M., eds. Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press. 2006. p. 1.
[2] Trible, Phyllis. Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1984. p.10.
[3] Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment