Abstract
This essay responds to a question Prof. I.J.J. (Sakkie) Spangenberg asked the author at the 2015 meeting of the OTSSA with regard to the use of the Old Testament in current South African discourse, that is, why is the figure of Cain used to illustrate perpetrator discourse? The author argues that the figure of Cain draws attention to the responsibility of South African whiteness towards apartheid and its after effects and explores the respons(e)-ability of ordinary (white) bible readers in this regard. There are good reasons or warrants for focusing on Cain as perpetrator by accepting or adhering to the advice fostered firstly by post-Holocaust hermeneutics in Germany and secondly by archetypal criticism of myths in the cultural archive. In framing this responsibility and respons(e)-ability, firstly a leaf is taken from the German socio-political and religious discourse after the Holocaust. Secondly, the value of Cain as archetype in the cultural archive will be discussed. Thirdly, Fernan Cormon’s painting, Cain (1880) as part of the cultural archive will be analyzed as a heuristic key to interrogate evil.
Highlights
This essay responds to a question Prof
J. (Sakkie) Spangenberg asked the author at the 2015 meeting of the OTSSA with regard to the use of the OT in current South African discourse
It pertained to the use of an OT text in a context that is historically and culturally removed from the story: why is the figure of Cain used to illustrate perpetrator discourse in postapartheid society? The author argues that the figure of Cain draws, on the one hand, attention to the responsibility of South African whiteness towards apartheid and its after effects, and explores, on the other hand, the respons(e)-ability of ordinary Bible readers in this regard
Summary
At the annual OTSSA meeting in September 2015, in response to my paper “A Hermeneutic of Vulnerability: Redeeming Cain?”2 Sakkie Spangenberg asked me why I use the figure of Cain to illustrate perpetrator discourse 422 Snyman, “Figuring out Cain,” OTE 30/2 (2017): 421-442 relates to the impact the OT might have on values in the current South African context, especially with regard to ecology, sexism, homophobia, and racism.3 His question was a caution to remember that the OT’s context and narratives differ from our (postapartheid) context and the stories we tell. There are good reasons or warrants for focusing on Cain as perpetrator by listening to and accepting the advice fostered firstly by postholocaust hermeneutics in Germany and secondly by criticism of archetypal myths in the cultural archive In framing this responsibility and respons(e)-ability, firstly a leaf is taken from the German socio-political and religious discourse in the third generation after the Holocaust. It will utilise as a heuristic key Fernand Cormon’s Cain as part of the cultural archive
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
