MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2092500401 · doi:10.1353/crv.2006.0018

"Through a Glass Darkly": Typology in Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon

2005· article· en· W2092500401 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Judy Pocock

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueThemes in Literature Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAllusionLiteratureEpigraphNarrativeMetaphorNephew and nieceTypologyRepetition (rhetorical device)Old TestamentReading (process)HistoryPhilosophyArtLinguistics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

"Through a Glass Darkly":Typology in Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon Judy Pocock (bio) In a 1981 interview, Morrison told Charles Ruas that "the Bible wasn't part of my reading, it was part of my life" (97). In her use of structure, language, and concepts-her use of metaphor, repetition, and reiteration-the Bible resonates throughout Toni Morrison's novel, Song of Solomon. Erich Auerbach describes the Bible as a text "fraught with background" (qtd. in Alter, "The Old Testament" 22); the Song of Solomon is a text fraught with the background of the Bible. Here, I concentrate on Morrison's use of biblical names. The novel's epigraph-"The fathers may soar and the children may know their names"-signals the central role names will play in the novel. Over and over again, characters and places are named, renamed, or misnamed, and more often than not, the Bible is at the centre of this process. The title of the novel and the names of almost all the women and some of the men come from the Bible. Each one of these names evokes complex biblical characters, allusions, metaphors, and narrative cycles that resonate back and forth throughout the text, and each name signals a parallel with, reversal of, or contradiction with a given biblical allusion. Buried in the text is a hint that those who know their Bible well will have special access when they read Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon. When Pilate goes to the police station to get her nephew, Milkman, and his friend, Guitar, out of jail, she impresses Milkman and the jail guards with her knowledge of the Bible by quoting verbatim Matthew 21.2: "Bible say what so e'er the Lord hath brought together, let no man put asunder" (207). A reader well-versed in the Bible would realize that the verse Pilate is referring to is not the verse she quotes out loud. Matthew 21.2 actually quotes Jesus directing his followers to "Go into the village [End Page 281] and . . . straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them and bring them unto me,"1 a Bible verse implying a far more appropriate metaphorical allusion to the matriarch's demand that the guards hand over the two reckless and selfish young men. In this playful example, we can see how Morrison uses the Bible to juxtapose implied narratives, images, and symbolic motifs to heighten contradictions and conjure up meaning. In the way that she uses biblical imagery and combines this with African and Afro-American folkloric elements, Morrison engages in what African American theologian Osayande Obery Hendricks describes as "guerrilla exegesis": Exegesis, from the Greek term signifying a narrative, a description, an explanation, an interpretation; a process of bringing out/leading out/teasing out meanings and significance heretofore obscured or hidden from view. Guerrilla exegesis, then, is the bringing or leading out of oppressed/suppressed/ don't-get-no-press meanings by sabotage subversion or other non-traditional appropriations of hegemonic renderings. . . . a theology of new categories and old (and emergent) structures of feeling: a double-voiced theology. (2-3) In operating as a guerrilla exegete, Morrison appropriates the methodology of Christian typology, and her primary strategy is to mobilize the typological power of biblical names. Typology, throughout the history of Christian exegesis, has been used as a key to clarifying the meaning of the Bible. This is how Northrop Frye explains typological interpretation of the Bible: The general principle of interpretation is traditionally given as "In the Old Testament the New Testament is concealed; In the New Testament the Old Testament is revealed." Everything that happens in the Old Testament is a "type" or adumbration of something that happens in the New Testament . . . Paul speaks of Adam as a typos of Christ (Romans 5:14) . . . What happens in the New Testament constitutes an "antitype," a realized form, of something foreshadowed in the Old Testament. In 1 Peter 3:21 Christian baptism is called the antitypos of the saving of mankind from the flood of Noah. Typology . . . moves in time: the type exists in the past and the antitype in the present, or...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,881
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,953

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,027
Tête enseignante GPT0,305
Écart entre enseignants0,278 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Review of American StudiesMême sujetThemes in Literature AnalysisTravaux en français237 207