Changing things around: Dramatic aspect in the &lt;i&gt;Pericope Adulterae&lt;/i&gt; (Jn 7:53–8:11)

Piet Van Staden

doi:10.4102/hts.v71i3.3071

Abstract

In this article the transactional model of narrative as expounded by Louise Rosenblatt, supported by an analysis in terms of dramatic aspect, is employed to show how the interpolated scene in John 7:53–8:11 (known as the Pericope Adulterae and hereafter referred to as PA) functions as a pivot of power in the gospel. The content of the scene, as well as its placement within the gospel, serves to promote an aesthetic reading that focusses attention on the experience during the reading event. Awareness of sensations, images, feelings and ideas from past experiences, as well as the sounds and rhythms of the words become important. The reader responds to the aesthetic transaction, the various elements of total experience, rather than simply to the text, during and after the reading event.

Highlights

TextsThe one constant in the work of the Bible interpreter is the text
Against the accusation that this approach allows the reader to derive any meaning from whatever point of view from the text, Rosenblatt (1988) refers to John Dewey’s precept of ‘warranted assertibility’ in scientific investigation: Such a position makes possible agreement concerning the most defensible interpretation according to the shared criteria of evidence, but leaves open the possibility that alternative interpretations for the same facts may be found, or that different criteria or paradigms may be developed. (n.p.)
This concept of role is derived from the theater and refers to the parts played by actors on the stage

Summary

Introduction

The one constant in the work of the Bible interpreter is the text. It is the focal point of our scholarly endeavour and expectations. Establish the dating, authenticity, authorship, revision, setting, and purpose; in short, any relevant background relating to the text that could aid in its interpretation They warn, one must beware of the fallacy of origins (genetic fallacy), suggesting that a literary work can only be understood in terms of its origins. There is what he calls the cost of consciousness, due to an ‘iron law of perspective’ (Carney 1975:34) By that he means that a model blinkers the interpreter, not allowing for other possibilities in interpretation. A second problem is strategic mischoice in selecting or building a model due to the subjective bias of the interpreter (Carney 1975:35–36) If this happens the http://www.hts.org.za results produced by the application of the model are necessarily skewed, and so in all probability the conclusions drawn from those results. Because of this natural and organic link between narrative text and theatre, I employ a dramaturgical model to interpret the text

Summary

15. Result

Findings and conclusions

Concluding remarks