Jonah Studies—Genre
How is the book of Jonah to be understood?
The fact that it contains events of a
supernatural character (i.e., the fish) tends to cause some to refer to the
work as “parabolic” in nature or an example of “didactic fiction.”
Old Testament specialist T. Desmond
Alexander took up this issue of the genre of Jonah in an important article:
“
Jonah and Genre” in the Tyndale Bulletin.
In what follows I summarize Alexander’s
discussion (in-text pages numbers refer to Alexander’s article).
1.
Jonah should not be labeled a “parable”
a.
“Parable” is an imprecise term (p. 39)
b.
It doesn’t match Old Testament passages usually
labeled “parabolic” (Judges 9.8-15; 2 Samuel 12.1-4; 14.6-7; 1 Kings 20.39-40;
2 Kings 14.9).
2.
Why was Jonah labeled a parable?
a.
A parable has been defined (broadly) as a story
with a didactic point. Since Jonah
evidences a concern to press home a didactic point it tends to get labeled with
the designation “parable.”
b.
The use of “parable” was preferred over
“didactic fiction” for polemical or pastoral reasons.
3.
Key issue is that of authorial intention. What did the author intend—how did he
expect his writing to be understood?
4.
We need to beware of the fallacy that “all
literary works which narrate some historical event must belong to a single
genre.” (p. 41) [More below]
5.
How do we determine authorial intention? Through the use of textual
signals—“generic signals” (p. 42)
6.
There are two views: (a) the entire work of
Jonah is a result of the author’s imagination; this is what the writer intended
his audience to deduce; or (b) the author intended the events underlying the
account in Jonah to be seen as really having taken place. (p. 44)
7.
View (a): author’s imagination or didactic
fiction. What are the “signals”
alleged to show this?
a.
Historical improbability of the accounts in
Jonah. Response…
i. Distinguish
between ancient man’s and modern man’s “improbability”
1.
Elements of the Kings narrative (1-2 Kings) have
miracles and other things certain modern conceptions of the universe find
“improbable” but no one denies the authorial intention of these works is
leading one to affirm the historical nature of the events in question.
2. Beware
of smuggling David Hume into the ancient world. *Note: that’s my wording
and thought; not Alexander’s!
b.
Jonah shows elements of exaggeration and
surprise. Response…
i. This
element is itself exaggerated.
ii. Quotes
author (Licht) who states: “It should be noted that the wonders in his tale
(especially about the fish), which have greatly exercised the imagination of
many readers, are told very briefly, in a low key.” (p. 49)
c.
Jonah shows dependence on other works (Genesis,
1 Kings, Joel, Jeremiah).
Response…
i. There
is a difficulty in dating Jonah and the borrowing of material may have gone the
other way (i.e., Joel utilizing Jonah’s material).
ii. Even
if there use of previous sources this doesn’t settle the genre question.
d.
Jonah evidences a symmetrical structure which
leads to considering it an “imaginative product.” Response…
i. “This
argument, however, must be treated with extreme caution. Our assessment of the historicity of a
narrative cannot depend solely upon its structure.” (p. 52)
ii. We
recognize that Old Testament authors shaped their narratives by certain
literary structures (i.e., chiastic structures).
iii. “At any rate, our
present limited know- ledge of narrative writing ought to preclude us from
making sweeping statements concerning the relationship between structure and
history.” (p. 53)
e.
The didactic nature of Jonah shows that it was
never intended to be read as history.
Response…
i. No
disputing that the book is didactic—it intends to teach a moral point.
ii. But
it is a false disjunction (an elementary error of logic!) to argue that a
writing must be historical in nature or didactic. The writing can be both!
iii. Jonah
can be a didactic narrative shaped around historical events.
iv. The
didactic constraints determine and shape the form of the narrative.
v. This
point is crucial to grasp. Here it
is in Alexander’s words:
“Here, however, a quite false distinction is
drawn between 'historical' and 'didactic' works; because Jonah is obviously
didactic, according to Licht, it cannot be historical. Such a conclusion,
however, need not follow; the possibility cannot be ruled out that the author
of Jonah may have shaped his didactic narrative around actual historical
events.
“Clearly it is the author's intention to make an
impact upon the mind of his reader. However, to achieve this it is not merely
sufficient for him to narrate an interesting story about a reluctant prophet;
rather he must involve his reader in the story to such an extent that by the
end of his account the reader too finds him- self being challenged, as Jonah
was, by God's concluding remarks. Thus the didactic nature of the book explains
best why the author ends his narrative as he does, and why no other information
is supplied concerning Jonah's ultimate response.
“This naturally raises an important
consideration: does the author's didactic concern influence other parts of the
narrative? Could it be, for example, that the king of Nineveh remains
anonymous, not because he is fictitious, but because his name has no particular
bearing on the author's intended purpose? Similarly, is it not likely that for
didactic reasons the author of Jonah deliberately omits any explanation for
Jonah's flight until Chapter 4? Had he wished he could certainly have
introduced this information earlier (cf. 4:1, 'Is this not what I said
when I was still at home?'). Yet this would have obviously taken away from the
climax which is reached in Chapter 4. Further speculations are possible. These,
however, highlight the fact that didactic constraints may have played an
important part in determining the form of the narrative.
“In the light of these observations the possibility
arises that some historical details may have been deliberately omitted from the
story because of its didactic emphasis. This, however, need not mean that the
author had no regard for historical accuracy. Rather it reflects the fact that
on occasions didactic considerations may have determined not only how the
material was presented but also what was incorporated into the account.” (pp. 54-55)
8.
View (b): events underlying the account really
took place. What are the textual
signals that show this?
a.
The narrated historical setting.
i. Author
intends to link Jonah with the history of 2 Kings 14.25.
ii. The
style of the opening verses is like other recognizable historical narratives
(cf. 1 Kings 17.8-9).
·
Note: Alexander considers this “signal” that the
book is historical as “most important” (p. 56) and of “prime consideration” (p.
57).
b.
Seeing Jonah as a historical narrative is the
traditional understanding.
i. Viewing
“Jonah as fictional is a relatively recent development.” (p. 57)
ii. “Such unanimity cannot be easily dismissed, especially when
considering authorial intention. The fact that generations of scholars and
writers were convinced that the author of Jonah did not intend to write fiction
argues against the modern view that the form or style of the narrative conveys
this very impression. Were these earlier generations completely blind to
features which we are asked to believe are immediately apparent? Did these
earlier writers not live and study in an environment much closer to that of the
author of Jonah than we do? And if so, would they not have been more attuned to
the generic signals of an ancient narrative? With these factors in mind, we
must surely expect good reasons for ignoring or rejecting the traditional
appraisal of Jonah.” (pp. 57-58)
c.
God is the central character in Jonah—“is it not
highly improbable that a Jewish author of the period 780 to 350 BC would have
dared create a fictional account with God as a central character?” (p. 58)
9.
It is probable that the author of Jonah intended
his work to be read as didactic history and not as didactic
fiction.
