Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
North Point Press (1988), Paperback, 176 pages
Description
The theme of The Book of Job is nothing less than human suffering and the transcendence of it: it pulses with moral energy, outrage, and spiritual insight. Now, The Book of Job has been rendered into English by the eminent translator and scholar Stephen Mitchell, whose versions of Rilke, Israeli poetry, and the Tao Te Ching have been widely praised. This is the first time ever that the Hebrew verse of Job has been translated into verse in any language, ancient or modern, and the result is a triumph.
User reviews
LibraryThing member gbill
A fantastic translation and introduction by Stephen Mitchell for one of the more profound books of the Bible, which also reminds me of the Bhagavad Gita. It deals with the question believers wrestle with: how could God let this happen? I have been a good person and do not deserve to suffer, so why
As Mitchell points out, a part of God’s response in this book is to show the vastness and the grandeur of the cosmos. We are so small, and there is no answer to "why me" because it's the wrong question. Mitchell writes: "The physical body is acknowledged as dust, the personal drama as delusion. It is as if the world we perceive through our senses, that whole gorgeous and terrible pageant, were the breath-thin surface of a bubble, and everything else, inside and outside, is pure radiance. Both suffering and joy come then like a brief reflection, and death like a pin."
All of our memories, the tender moments and drama, everything that makes up our life, is so fleeting. We cannot possibly comprehend God or the meaning of the universe, and should only simply love everything around us and be kind. As an atheist, what I find incredibly interesting and spiritual about it is that even if I don't believe, I come to these same conclusions. It's one of those things where both paths, seemingly so contradictory, take one to the same place.
Show More
me? Or in a larger sense, questions like it for all of humanity's sufferings in the apparent absence of a god.As Mitchell points out, a part of God’s response in this book is to show the vastness and the grandeur of the cosmos. We are so small, and there is no answer to "why me" because it's the wrong question. Mitchell writes: "The physical body is acknowledged as dust, the personal drama as delusion. It is as if the world we perceive through our senses, that whole gorgeous and terrible pageant, were the breath-thin surface of a bubble, and everything else, inside and outside, is pure radiance. Both suffering and joy come then like a brief reflection, and death like a pin."
All of our memories, the tender moments and drama, everything that makes up our life, is so fleeting. We cannot possibly comprehend God or the meaning of the universe, and should only simply love everything around us and be kind. As an atheist, what I find incredibly interesting and spiritual about it is that even if I don't believe, I come to these same conclusions. It's one of those things where both paths, seemingly so contradictory, take one to the same place.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Clif
This is a very readable translation of The Book of Job. However, the reader should be aware that Stephen Mitchell omits the hymn in praise of wisdom and the speech of the young man Elihu. Elihu is the fourth friend of Job's who speaks following the three cycles of speeches by the 'Three
The following is an analysis of the book of Job that I prepared for the Great Books KC group. It applies to the traditional content of book. Most of the comments below regarding discrepancies and structure are borrowed from Bart Ehrman's book, God's Problem. The final paragraph titled, 'My Musings,' are strictly my own conclusions.
DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PROSE AND NARRATIVE PARTS OF JOB
Some of the basic discrepancies between the prose narrative with which the book begins and ends (just under three chapters) and the poetic dialogues (nearly forty chapters) can be summarized as follows:
1. The writing styles are different between the two genres, the prose folk tale and the poetic dialogues.
2. The names of the divine being are different in the prose (where the name Yahweh is used) and the poetry (where the divinity is name El, Eloah, and Shaddai).
3. The portrayal of Job differs in the two parts of the book: in the prose he is a patient sufferer; in the poetry he is thoroughly defiant and anything but patient.
4. Job is commended in the prose but rebuked in the poetry.
5. The prose folktale indicates that God deals with his people according to their merit, whereas the entire point of the poetry is that he does not do that --- and is not bound to do so.
6. The view of why the innocent suffer differs between the two parts of the book: in the prose narrative, suffering comes as a test of faith; in the poetry, suffering remains a mystery that cannot be fathomed or explained.
7. The style of Hebrew used in the dialogue with Elihu (see discussion of structure below) is different from the other dialogues. (This observation is from Elizabeth Vandiver, not Bart Ehrman.)
OVERALL STRUCTURE OF THE POETIC DIALOGUES
The poetic dialogues are set up as a kind of back-and-forth between Job and his three 'friends.' Job makes a statement and one of his friends replies; Job responds and the second friend replies; Job responds again and then the third friend replies. This sequence happens three times, so that there are three cycles of speeches. The third cycle, however, has become muddled, possibly in the copying of the book over the ages: one of the friend's (Bildad's) comments are inordinately short in the third go-around (only five verses); another friend's (Zophar's) comments are missing this time; and Job's response at one point appears to take the position that his friends had been advocating and that he had been opposing in the rest of the book (chapter 27). Scholars typically think that something has gone awry in the transmission of the dialogues at this point.
But the rest of the structure is clear. After the friends have had their say, a fourth figure appears; this is a young man named Elihu who is said to be dissatisfied with the strength of the case laid out by the other three. Elihu tries to state the case more forcefully: Job is suffering because of his sins. This restatement appears to be no more convincing than anything the others have said, but before Job can reply, God himself appears, wows Job into submission by his overpowering presence, and informs him that he, Job, has no right to challenge the workings of the one who created the universe and all that is in it. Job repents of his desire to understand and grovels in the dirt before the awe-inspiring challenge of the Almighty. And that's where the poetic dialogues end.
MY MUSINGS
In addition to the preceding comments about discrepancies, it is my understanding that some scholars see indications that the writing style of the dialogue with the fourth figure, Elihu, is different from the rest of the poetic dialogue. This could be an indication that it is an insert by a later writer (perhaps by the same writer who got the third cycle of dialogues muddled up). Scholars have noted that the term Yahweh (Jehovah) is consistently used in the parts of the Hebrew scriptures that reflect the early southern traditions of the Kingdom of Judah. Likewise, the term Elohim (El and Eloah are the singular forms) is consistently used in texts that reflect the early northern traditions of the Kingdom of Israel. Based upon the differing terms used for the divine in the two parts of Job, it can be supposed that the folk tale portion of Job originated in Judah, and the writer of the poetry was from the northern kingdom.
Actually, it's my theory that the writer of Job was a Hebrew poet living in Babylon during the captivity period who spliced his poetry into a folk tale from Judah. He used the language style from the north for his poetry because his ancestral roots were from the north. Or perhaps the northern style of Hebrew was considered to be more appropriate for epic poetry (sort of like King James style of English is to us). I think the writer who later inserted the character of Elihu was a scribe back in Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity who did it because he perceived that there were some missing lines of text in the third cycle.
Show More
Comforters.' The author explains in a note to the reader that he's left them out because he (and many scholars) regard those parts as later additions to the book of Job. I agree that those parts may be later additions, but in this case we're talking about additions made about 2,500 years ago. I guess I'd prefer to keep all the parts together in the manner that it's been copied and saved over these past thousands of years. Based on these observations I have switched to the translation by Raymond P. Scheindlin.The following is an analysis of the book of Job that I prepared for the Great Books KC group. It applies to the traditional content of book. Most of the comments below regarding discrepancies and structure are borrowed from Bart Ehrman's book, God's Problem. The final paragraph titled, 'My Musings,' are strictly my own conclusions.
DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PROSE AND NARRATIVE PARTS OF JOB
Some of the basic discrepancies between the prose narrative with which the book begins and ends (just under three chapters) and the poetic dialogues (nearly forty chapters) can be summarized as follows:
1. The writing styles are different between the two genres, the prose folk tale and the poetic dialogues.
2. The names of the divine being are different in the prose (where the name Yahweh is used) and the poetry (where the divinity is name El, Eloah, and Shaddai).
3. The portrayal of Job differs in the two parts of the book: in the prose he is a patient sufferer; in the poetry he is thoroughly defiant and anything but patient.
4. Job is commended in the prose but rebuked in the poetry.
5. The prose folktale indicates that God deals with his people according to their merit, whereas the entire point of the poetry is that he does not do that --- and is not bound to do so.
6. The view of why the innocent suffer differs between the two parts of the book: in the prose narrative, suffering comes as a test of faith; in the poetry, suffering remains a mystery that cannot be fathomed or explained.
7. The style of Hebrew used in the dialogue with Elihu (see discussion of structure below) is different from the other dialogues. (This observation is from Elizabeth Vandiver, not Bart Ehrman.)
OVERALL STRUCTURE OF THE POETIC DIALOGUES
The poetic dialogues are set up as a kind of back-and-forth between Job and his three 'friends.' Job makes a statement and one of his friends replies; Job responds and the second friend replies; Job responds again and then the third friend replies. This sequence happens three times, so that there are three cycles of speeches. The third cycle, however, has become muddled, possibly in the copying of the book over the ages: one of the friend's (Bildad's) comments are inordinately short in the third go-around (only five verses); another friend's (Zophar's) comments are missing this time; and Job's response at one point appears to take the position that his friends had been advocating and that he had been opposing in the rest of the book (chapter 27). Scholars typically think that something has gone awry in the transmission of the dialogues at this point.
But the rest of the structure is clear. After the friends have had their say, a fourth figure appears; this is a young man named Elihu who is said to be dissatisfied with the strength of the case laid out by the other three. Elihu tries to state the case more forcefully: Job is suffering because of his sins. This restatement appears to be no more convincing than anything the others have said, but before Job can reply, God himself appears, wows Job into submission by his overpowering presence, and informs him that he, Job, has no right to challenge the workings of the one who created the universe and all that is in it. Job repents of his desire to understand and grovels in the dirt before the awe-inspiring challenge of the Almighty. And that's where the poetic dialogues end.
MY MUSINGS
In addition to the preceding comments about discrepancies, it is my understanding that some scholars see indications that the writing style of the dialogue with the fourth figure, Elihu, is different from the rest of the poetic dialogue. This could be an indication that it is an insert by a later writer (perhaps by the same writer who got the third cycle of dialogues muddled up). Scholars have noted that the term Yahweh (Jehovah) is consistently used in the parts of the Hebrew scriptures that reflect the early southern traditions of the Kingdom of Judah. Likewise, the term Elohim (El and Eloah are the singular forms) is consistently used in texts that reflect the early northern traditions of the Kingdom of Israel. Based upon the differing terms used for the divine in the two parts of Job, it can be supposed that the folk tale portion of Job originated in Judah, and the writer of the poetry was from the northern kingdom.
Actually, it's my theory that the writer of Job was a Hebrew poet living in Babylon during the captivity period who spliced his poetry into a folk tale from Judah. He used the language style from the north for his poetry because his ancestral roots were from the north. Or perhaps the northern style of Hebrew was considered to be more appropriate for epic poetry (sort of like King James style of English is to us). I think the writer who later inserted the character of Elihu was a scribe back in Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity who did it because he perceived that there were some missing lines of text in the third cycle.
Show Less
LibraryThing member raizel
In the introduciton, Mitchell mentions "The only parallel to it in Western literature is Whitman's 'Song of Myself.' [p. xxiii].
Among the notes at the back is a list of verses deleted or omitted. In his 'A note on the text,' he explains why.
Among the notes at the back is a list of verses deleted or omitted. In his 'A note on the text,' he explains why.
LibraryThing member b.masonjudy
What to say? It's the Book of Job, certainly the best translation I've read. Stephen Mitchell is meticulous in his introduction and lingers over his insights and ideas of his translation. I found the dialogue between Job and his friends to be particularly lucid and the divisions of the text
Show More
helpfully positioned the reader within each section of the work. Show Less
LibraryThing member Elizabeth80
This is the most coherent translation of this Old Testament book that I have read. The poetry moves both emotionally and lyrically AND makes sense. Bravo to Steven Mitchell.
LibraryThing member ms_rowse
Still digesting this translation. I've always been confused by the King James version; this translation helps a little bit. Read this for my class at Amherst College.
LibraryThing member rubyman
magnificent! the LORD gave and the LORD has taken away
Language
Original publication date
1986
Physical description
176 p.; 8.1 inches
ISBN
0060969598 / 9780060969592
Local notes
READIN, lr table