{"title":"Plowshares: The Career of a Biblical Allusion in The New York Times, 1940–1990","authors":"Daniel L. Smith-Christopher","doi":"10.1163/15685152-20211566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nGrowing efforts to digitalize newspapers present biblical scholars, especially those interested in “Reception History” or “Popular Interpretation”, with a potentially rich resource. This experiment analyzes a clear “biblical” term, namely “Plowshare” (including a few variant spellings), with regard to its’ use in the New York Times between 1940 and 1990. The sheer number of uses (over 1200) and the variety of contexts for its’ use, is revealing. What emerges from the heavily politicized use of the term is that (a) it is virtually always understood to be a biblical reference to peace and peacemaking, but (b) there is a wide variety of perspectives as to whether it is an ethical maxim or an unrealistic “fantasy” in the face of hard political “realities”. Finally, using the two terms “swords” and “plowshares” together began to clearly emerge in the 20th century as a pious alternative to “guns and butter”, taking on the same “either/or” interpretation. Thus, studying Biblical interpretation in the popular press may offer an important tool in assessing “popular ideas” in specific contexts of world events or cultural contexts.","PeriodicalId":43103,"journal":{"name":"Biblical Interpretation-A Journal of Contemporary Approaches","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biblical Interpretation-A Journal of Contemporary Approaches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-20211566","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Growing efforts to digitalize newspapers present biblical scholars, especially those interested in “Reception History” or “Popular Interpretation”, with a potentially rich resource. This experiment analyzes a clear “biblical” term, namely “Plowshare” (including a few variant spellings), with regard to its’ use in the New York Times between 1940 and 1990. The sheer number of uses (over 1200) and the variety of contexts for its’ use, is revealing. What emerges from the heavily politicized use of the term is that (a) it is virtually always understood to be a biblical reference to peace and peacemaking, but (b) there is a wide variety of perspectives as to whether it is an ethical maxim or an unrealistic “fantasy” in the face of hard political “realities”. Finally, using the two terms “swords” and “plowshares” together began to clearly emerge in the 20th century as a pious alternative to “guns and butter”, taking on the same “either/or” interpretation. Thus, studying Biblical interpretation in the popular press may offer an important tool in assessing “popular ideas” in specific contexts of world events or cultural contexts.
期刊介绍:
This innovative and highly acclaimed journal publishes articles on various aspects of critical biblical scholarship in a complex global context. The journal provides a medium for the development and exercise of a whole range of current interpretive trajectories, as well as deliberation and appraisal of methodological foci and resources. Alongside individual essays on various subjects submitted by authors, the journal welcomes proposals for special issues that focus on particular emergent themes and analytical trends. Over the past two decades, Biblical Interpretation has provided a professional forum for pushing the disciplinary boundaries of biblical studies: not only in terms of what biblical texts mean, but also what questions to ask of biblical texts, as well as what resources to use in reading biblical literature. The journal has thus the distinction of serving as a site for theoretical reflection and methodological experimentation.